Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime - TP 14539

Report to Parliament 2006 - 2011

Downlaod PDF

Original Date Issued: August 2014                   Date Revised:

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Transport, 2014.
Permission is granted, by Transport Canada, to copy this TP 14539E as required. While use of
this material has been authorized, Transport Canada shall not be responsible for the manner in which the information is presented, nor for any interpretations thereof. This TP 14539E may not be updated to reflect amendments made to the original content. For up-to-date information, contact Transport Canada.

TP 14539E
(04/2014)

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

Title	Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime Report to Parliament 2006-2011
TP No.	14539E	Edition	RDIMS #8649327 v4
Catalogue No.	T34-25/2011E	ISBN	978-0-662-06615-6
Originator	Navigation Safety & Environmental Programs AMSE Tower C, Place de Ville 330 Sparks Street, 10th Floor Ottawa, Ontario  K1A 0N8	Telephone	1-855-859-3123 (Toll Free) or 613-991-3135
		Fax	613-993-8196
		E-mail	marinesafety-securitemaritime@tc.gc.ca
		URL	http://www.tc.gc.ca/marinesafety/

REVISIONS

Last Review

Next Review

Revision No.	Date of Issue	Affected Pages	Author(s)	Brief Description of Change

Introduction

This Report covers the operations of Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime (the Regime) for the period August 15, 2006 to August 15, 2011. The Canada Shipping Act, 2001 (CSA 2001), part 8, section 173 requires that the Minister of Transport  review the operations of sections 167 to 172 of CSA 2001 (which establish the Regime) and report the results of this review to Parliament every five  years. August 15, 1995, marks the proclamation of these sections of the previous Canada Shipping Act (CSA), hence August 15 also defines the reporting period.

In the previous CSA, the Minister was directed to report to Parliament biennially. This is the first report to cover a five year period following the implementation of CSA 2001 that came into force on July 1, 2007.

The following points summarize the main focus of each Report submitted to Parliament since the inception of the Regime. As required by the legislation, every past Report includes a clause-by-clause review of sections 660.1 to 660.10 of the previous CSA and this Report includes a clause-by-clause review of sections 167 to 172 of CSA, 2001.

• The first Report to Parliament, submitted in 1996, provided a review of the Regime’s first year of operations.
• The second Report covered the period 1996 to 1998 and focused on the initial certification and fee-setting process, which had resulted in several objections and a lengthy resolution process.
• The 1998 to 2000 Report included a review of Regime governance issues. A thorough consultation process resulted in a high level industry approval for the proposed improvements to Regime governance as embodied in Bill C-14 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session, which received Royal assent on November 1, 2001.
• The 2000 to 2002 Report highlighted the work to improve the legislation through the CSA 2001 and Bill C-35 (Bill C-35 was left on the order paper at the end of the 36th session of Parliament and reintroduced as Bill C-14).
• The 2002 to 2004 Report reviewed ongoing regulatory reform, as well as activities related to the transfer of certain responsibilities from Fisheries and Oceans Canada to Transport Canada.
• The 2004 to 2006 Report incorporated legislation and regulation changes, the CSA 2001 reform project continued to dominate the agenda, as it did for 2002 to 2004 reporting period.  Bill C-14 – An Act Respecting Shipping and Navigation was granted Royal Assent on November 1, 2001. The entire regulatory regime of the old Act needed modernization to fit under the new Act and as such, CSA 2001 did not come into force until July 1, 2007, as time was needed to review existing regulations, develop new regulations, and consult with wide range of marine stakeholders. These activities have been a major focus of federal government activity related to the Regime over the reporting period.

This Report to Parliament is submitted pursuant to Section 173 of CSA 2001 and provides an overview of activities that occurred within the reporting period.

International Occurrences

There are approximately 14,000 reported oil spills a year around the world.  Many are small, easily contained and cleaned up.  These do not receive a great deal of attention and are usually not noted by the media outside the local area.  Other, larger spills may not become the subject of media scrutiny and worldwide public attention if they occur in remote areas and do not threaten affluent populations or valuable corporate resources.

During the period of this current report, the world attention was focused on two major marine oil spills.

In early December 2006 a crane barge being towed by a tug collided with the anchored Hong Kong registered crude carrier Hebei Spirit, carrying 260,000 tonnes of crude oil. The incident occurred near the port of Daesan on the Yellow Sea coast of Taean County. The barge was floating free after the cable linking it to the tug snapped in the rough seas.  The collision punctured three of the five tanks aboard the Hebei Spirit and resulted in the leaking of some 10,800 tonnes of oil.

The spill occurred near Mallipo Beach (in Taean County), considered one of South Korea's most beautiful and popular beaches. The region affected by the spill is home to one of Asia's largest wetland areas, used by migratory birds, and also contains a national maritime park and 445 sea farms.

The South Korean government declared a state of disaster in the region. The cost of cleanup has been estimated at 300 billion South Korean won (US$330 million).  Experts from both Environment Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard travelled to the site to train both South Korea’s government employees and volunteers in shoreline clean up techniques.

The second devastating spill was the Deepwater Horizon oil spill also known as the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.  It was an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico on the BP operated Macondo Prospect, considered the largest accidental marine oil spill in the history of the petroleum industry, estimated to be between 8% and 31% larger in volume than the earlier Ixtoc oil spill. Following the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, a sea-floor oil gusher flowed unabated for 87 days, until it was capped on 15 July 2010. The total discharge is estimated at 4.9 million barrels (210 million US gal; 780,000 m³).

A massive response ensued to protect beaches, wetlands and estuaries from the spreading oil utilizing skimmer ships, floating booms, controlled burns and 1.84 million US gallons (7,000 m³) of Corexit oil dispersant.

In May 2010, Transport Canada’s National Aerial Surveillance Program (NASP) Dash 8 plane and aircrew were deployed to Houma, Louisiana, for 11 weeks to assist in the response of the Deep Water Horizon (MC252) Oil Spill Incident. The aircrew flew a total of 297 patrol hours, which equated to 63 reconnaissance missions. In this incident, aerial surveillance was deemed critical in the coordination mechanism for the response operations. Daily missions were imperative in order to keep track of the rapidly changing conditions of the location and conditions of the oil.

After several failed efforts to contain the flow, the well was declared sealed on 19 September 2010. Occasional news stories continued to follow the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Coverage of the ongoing and emerging impacts on the fishing and tourism industries provide reminders of the long term consequences of marine oil spills.

On June 24, 2010, the TC - NASP Dash 8 crew received a Certificate of Appreciation Award from the United States Coast Guard for their hard work, dedication and expertise during the response operations in that oil spill incident.

National Overview

With respect to legislative and regulatory work, the CSA 2001 reform project continued to dominate the agenda, as it did for previous reporting periods. The regulations and standards pertaining to Part 8 of the Act have been have updated and public consultations completed during this report period. The regulations and standards continue to go through the regulatory process. In 2008 the Environmental Response Arrangement Regulations came into force. This short regulation was necessary in order to comply with paragraph 182(e) of the CSA 2001.

In Canada, Arctic sovereignty has become a significant emerging issue with many implications for the federal government. The potential for opening up shipping routes through Canada’s northern waters, and the possibility of new port facilities in the North, may have implications for the development of the Regime in future years. Currently there are fewer than 150 vessels plying Canada’s Arctic waters each year, with tankers accounting for less than 10 per cent of these vessels.

During this Report period Environmental Response National Review Board has twice completed the process of certifying Canada’s four Response Organizations. They were issued certificates of designation in the fall of 2007 and 2010 in compliance with CSA 2001, Section 169. (See page 9)

In the fall of 2010 the Office of the Auditor General of Canada released a report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the House of Commons on Oil Spills from Ships in Canadian waters. (See page 36)

In 2006, Transport Canada (TC) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) (Coast Guard) commissioned a study to quantify the present and future risks of oil pollution in Canadian waters off the south coast of Newfoundland due to the marine traffic transiting this area. The study included both the key components of risk and the probability of an oil spill occurring and the consequences of the spill should it occur. In 2010 TC and DFO released an assessment of proposals related this study. (See page 31).

During this reporting period there were no major marine ship-source spills in Canadian waters.

Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime – Historical perspective

Public Review Panel on Tanker Safety and Marine Spills Response Capability

The federal government established the Public Review Panel on Tanker Safety and Marine Spills Response Capability following the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989. The Panel’s 1990 report recommended across-the-board improvement of preparedness and response measures, outlining a total of 107 recommendations. While the Panel was created primarily to investigate spills from tankers, the report noted that the smaller, more-frequent spills at land-based oil handing facilities (OHFs) were compounding the damage to the marine environment. From its inception, the Regime has required that both vessels and certain OHFs be prepared to handle spills and contribute their share towards response readiness.

Building a partnership between industry and government

Throughout the process of developing the Regime it had been recognized that spill preparedness should be undertaken as a partnership between government and the private sector. The principle of polluter responsibility asserts that industry must be accountable for taking adequate preventative actions and for ensuring that effective response plans are in place. It is the obligation of the federal government to assure that the public interest is satisfied.

Working in concert with government a private-sector task force, the Marine Environmental Protection Plan Task Force, developed a regime model that proposed industry would operate and fund the operational elements of the preparedness regime, while the government would have responsibility for the legislative and regulatory framework, including standards, overseeing and monitoring response activities, and enforcement.  The task force recommendations submitted to the Minister of Transport in 1993 received the Minister’s support and form the basis of the preparedness regime that is in place today.

Creating the legislative framework

To create the legislative framework for this industry-government approach to marine oil spill preparedness and response it was necessary to amend the Canadian Shipping Act (CSA).  By 1993 these amendments were completed and introduced in the House of Commons.  The amendments received Parliamentary approval in June 1993, but were left unproclaimed until the necessary regulatory guidelines could be developed and approved over the next two years.
In August 1995 the regulations were approved by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans allowing the CSA amendments to be proclaimed.  In brief, potential polluters have a legal responsibility, entrenched in the CSA, to undertake preparedness measures and to pay for repairing or mitigating damage to the marine environment.^{Footnote 1} Certain ships and oil handling facilities (OHFs) are required to have an arrangement in place with a government-certified response organization (RO).  ROs are Canadian-based, private-sector organizations that must earn their certification from the federal government by demonstrating their ability to effectively prepare for and respond to marine ship source oil pollution incidents. These requirements carry over into the current CSA, 2001.

Early challenges for the Regime

A system of fees was established to fund the preparedness activities of the ROs.  Initially, the fees were regional and were set based on the volume of oil shipped in a particular region.  The power to collect these fees was delegated to the ROs.  Under the regulations, the fees charged by the ROs are private contracts; they are a matter of government interest only if there is a dispute.  In September 1995 the RO fees were published in the Canada Gazette for the first time, and were immediately disputed by 31 objectors.  Failure to find a resolution led to the appointment of an Investigation Panel, to examine the fairness and equity of the proposed fees.

The Investigation Panel reported in August 1996, leading to the 1998 announcement by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans of an amended fee structure and a comprehensive review of the financing and governance of the Regime.  By this time it was acknowledged that Canada was much better prepared to respond to a major oil spill than it had been a decade earlier; however, it was also recognized that significant improvements were necessary to strengthen the Regime.

Consultations aimed at addressing the financial issues associated with the Regime were carried out in 1998.  The primary objectives were in achieving consensus on a fee formula and standards for transparency, and recommending a speedier process for resolving fee-related issues.  This open process helped stabilize the Regime and improve relations among the stakeholders.

The new governance proposals emerging from the consultations built on the structures and principles of the existing Regime, with the aim of addressing the recognized deficiencies through some regulatory change, a stronger accountability structure and clear management guidelines.  The governance proposals included in CSA 2001 were broadly supported by most stakeholders.

The Canada Shipping Act, 2001

The consultations and review process led to the revised CSA Bill C-35, An Act Respecting Shipping and Navigation and received first reading on June 8, 2000.  Royal Assent was given to CSA 2001 on November 1, 2001, marking the first of two steps in the modernization process.

The second stage was the development of the regulations needed to support the new Act.  CSA 2001 did not come into force until several years after it was proclaimed as time was needed to review existing regulations to ensure compliance with the new Act, develop new regulations, and consult with a wide range of marine stakeholders. Many of the new regulations were implemented during this report period and are more concise, easily understood than those previously in effect and are fully responsive to the present and future needs of Canadians.  The regulatory project was a major focus during the period of this Report.  Details are included in the section “Improving the Regime”.

The CSA 2001 came into effect on July 1, 2007.  It replaced the Canada Shipping Act ( CSA ) as the principal legislation governing safety in marine transportation and recreational boating, as well as protection of the marine environment.

Review of the current Regime

Overview of the current Regime

The industry-funded and managed Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime is a unique entity that was designed to ensure that the industry has the capability, under the leadership of Transport Canada (TC), to clean up its own spills.  Under the Regime, industry is required to maintain a 10,000 tonne response capability, covering marine regions south of 60° N latitude in Canada.

CSA 2001requires that certain vessels and oil-handling facilities (OHFs) have arrangements in place with a TC certified response organization (RO) to ensure this 10,000 tonne response capability.  In addition, certain vessels must have oil pollution emergency plans on board; and certain OHFs must have emergency plans as well as equipment and resources on-site to immediately contain and control a spill incident at the facility.

As a complement to the industry Regime capability, the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) also maintains considerable preparedness capacity.  CCG’s capacity serves as a “safety net” that can provide immediate response capability where required, as well as a response capability for offshore spills and the responsibility for responding to marine spills north of 60° N latitude.

With respect to the Regime itself, TC is responsible for ensuring that ROs and certain OHFs meet the standards set out in the regulations, and for monitoring the thoroughness of RO and certain OHFs operations and the effectiveness of the regime.  As part of its regulatory capacity, TC ensures the adequacy of the planning standards and regulations.

Legislative and regulatory structure

Canada Shipping Act, 2001

Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime is established in law by section 165 through 172 of CSA 2001.  It was the intention of the legislators to create a legislative framework to allow for the incorporation of evolving standards within regulations.  This approach allows for regulatory changes to be effected in a timely manner without recourse to legislative amendments.

While the CSA 2001 came into force on July 1, 2007, the Response Organizations and Oil Handling Facilities Regulations SOR/95-405, published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on August 15, 1995 are the regulations currently being used throughout this reporting period with one exception.   In order to comply with CSA 2001 the Environmental Response Arrangements Regulations SOR/2008-275 came into force on September 5th, 2008.  These regulations prescribe the class of vessels required to have an arrangement with a response organization in respect to the amount of oil that the vessel carries (both as cargo and as fuel), where the vessel navigates or engages in marine activities.  The regulations also prescribe the class of OHFs required to have an arrangement with a response organization in respect to the amount of oil the facility receives and where it is location.

Regulations

Since the establishment of the regime in 1995, the Response Organizations and Oil Handling Facilities Regulations has not changed. The regulations relating to Part 8 of the Act have been updated and public consultations have taken place during this reporting period. The Environmental Response Arrangements Regulations was introduced in 2008.

Standards

Since the publication of the RO Standards and the OHF Standards in 1995, only the RO Standards have been modified.  This change, which was made in 1998, reflects the de-designation of Nanticoke, Ontario as a designated port and the creation of a new Enhanced Area of Response (ERA) Niagara/Welland for that region of the country.  These standards relating to Part 8 of CSA 2001 have been updated and public consultations have taken place during this reporting period.

Requirements for vessels and Oil Handling Facilities

VESSELS

Under the Environmental Response Arrangement Regulations, vessels are defined as oil tankers of 150 gross tonnage or more and any vessel of 400 gross tonnage or more that carries oil as cargo or as fuel and groups of vessels that are towed or pushed, are of 150 gross tonnage or more in total and carry oil as cargo. These vessels conducting business in Canadian waters south of 60° N latitude are required to have an arrangement, for which they pay fees, with a certified RO. They are also required to have on board a shipboard oil pollution emergency plan and a declaration that identifies the ship’s insurer, confirms the existence of an arrangement with a certified response organization, and identifies every individual authorized to invoke both the arrangement and the shipboard oil pollution emergency plan.

Approximately 4,000 arrangements are currently in place between these vessels and one or more of the four certified ROs, depending on their area of operation. As a matter of course, CCG’s Marine Communication and Traffic Service operators question a vessel with respect to an arrangement as it enters Canadian waters south of 60° N latitude. Transport Canada’s Marine Safety Inspectors inspect foreign vessels on a sample basis for compliance with a range of safety requirements, including the requirement to have an arrangement. No charges have been laid under this provision to date.

OIL HANDLING FACILITIES (OHF)

Section 168.(1) requires that certain OHFs have an arrangement, with a certified RO in respect of any quantity of oil that is, at any time involved in being loaded or unloaded to or from a vessel at the OHF. In addition, OHFs must have an oil pollution emergency plan in place to respond immediately to an incident. Also required is an on-site declaration that describes the manner in which the operator will comply with the regulations, confirms that an arrangement with an RO is in place and identifies every individual authorized to invoke both the arrangement and the oil pollution emergency plan. Transport Canada employees inspect these facilities to ensure that the required arrangements and emergency plans are in place. Since the creation of the Regime in 1995, no OHF has been charged with failing to comply with the regulations. These OHFs are also required to take reasonable measures to implement their oil pollution emergency plans in the event of an oil spill.  Once the new regulations come into force, OHFs will also be required to have a pollution prevention plan on site.

Requirements for Responsibility Organizations (RO)

RO Certification

Section 169 allows the Minister of Transport to issue a certificate of designation to an RO. In order to obtain this certificate, an RO must submit a response plan to TC Marine Safety demonstrating that they meet the requirements as set out in the regulations and standards (i.e. a 10,000 tonne oil spill response capability and providing coverage in all Canadian waters, south of 60° N latitude). ROs are currently certified for a three-year period.

The following four organizations met the requirements and were certified by Transport Canada for the three-year period October/November 2010 to October/November 2013.

Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (WCMRC), covering primarily the Pacific coast, was the first RO to be certified in Canada on October 3, 1995.

Eastern Canada Response Corporation (ECRC), was first certified on November 9, 1995.^{Footnote 2} The Geographic Area of Response (GAR) for ECRC covers the waters south of 60°N Latitude for all the provinces of Canada with the exception of British Columbia, the port of Saint John, New Brunswick, and Point Tupper, Nova Scotia and their associated Primary Area of Response (PAR).  ECRC’s GAR includes the St. Lawrence River; Gulf of St. Lawrence and coastal waters of Atlantic Canada; James Bay; Hudson Bay; Ungava Bay; Canadian Great Lakes system and connecting channels; Lake Winnipeg; Athabasca River from Fort McMurray to Lake Athabasca; and the waters of Lake Athabasca.

Atlantic Emergency Response Team (ALERT) Inc., covering primarily the area surrounding the Port of Saint John, New Brunswick, was first certified on November 9, 1995 (ALERT’s 10,000 tonne capability is achieved through a mutual aid agreement with ECRC).

Point Tupper Marine Services (PTMS), covering primarily the area of Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia, was first certified on November 9, 1995 (PTMS’ 10,000 tonne capability is achieved through a mutual aid agreement with ECRC).

During this reporting period, no certificate was revoked pursuant to Section 169(6) of CSA 2001.

RO capability is to meet the arrangements required by vessels and OHFs.

Under Sections 167(1)(a) and 168(1)(a), certain vessels and OHFs are required to have an arrangement with a certified RO. ROs receive certification from Transport Canada following a review of the response plan submitted as part of their application.  The response plan provides detailed information on the RO’s procedures, equipment and resources to meet the tiered response capabilities set out in Section 2 of the Response Organization Standards which specify the time within which an RO must respond to a spill of a specified quantity, as set out below:

TIERS	QUANTITY OF OIL	RESPONSE TIME REQUIREMENTS
Tier 1	150 tonnes	6 hours (for equipment to be deployed on-site)
Tier 2	1,000 tonnes	12 hours (for equipment to be deployed on-site)
Tier 3	2,500 tonnes	18 hours (for equipment to be on-site)
Tier 4	10,000 tonnes	72 hours (for equipment to be on-site)

The standards also set out the number of metres of shoreline to be treated each day during a response operation and the number of days required to complete on-water recovery operations.

Among other things, the ROs’ response plans must describe:

• the training provided to employees and volunteers who may be involved in responding to a spill;
• the oil spill exercise program which they are required to hold within their three-year certification period to demonstrate their effectiveness;
• a listing of the response equipment, including bird-scaring equipment; and,
• the measures they will take to protect and treat environmentally sensitive areas and to support the wildlife rehabilitation efforts of third parties.

Summary of RO activities

WESTERN CANADA MARINE RESPONSE CORPORATION (wcmrc)

WCMRC participates in training exercises as well as offering training courses to its personnel, contractors, members of the Fishermen’s Oil Spill Emergency Team (FOSET) mutual aid partners and government agencies. WCMRC trainers continue to provide oil spill response training to both members and non-members.

1) Training 2006-2011

Types of training provided	Number of training sessions provided	Total number of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Number of volunteers trained	Others who have received training
Foset/ Contractor	36	781	100	656	0	25
NWSCC *	6	17	13	0	0	4
Basic Spill Responder	16	28	38	240	0	6
Vessel Specific	27	46	11	454	0	0
Incident Command System	8	172	150	10	0	12

* NWSCC - Northwest Spill Course is a United States Coast Guard sponsored course.

2) Supporting wildlife activities 2006-2011

Types of training provided to organization (name organizations)	Types and number of equipment to support wildlife response activities
Basic Wildlife Hazing (WCMRC)	45 ft Wildlife Trailer with assorted rehab equipment
Basic Wildlife Hazing (Contractors)	20 ft Wildlife Trailer with assorted rehab equipment
	Hazing equipment for each WCRMC location

3) Exercises 2006-2011

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercises (Certification)
34	Notification
6	150 Tonne Equipment Deployment
6	1,000 Tonne Tabletop
8	2,500 Tonne Equipment Deployment
2	10,000 Tonne Tabletop

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercises (Other)
5	Mutual Aid
18	Member Tabletop/Equipment Deployment
3	Cross Boarder (other than Mutual Aid)
8	Government Agencies

4) Spill Response Activities 2006-2011

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2, 3)
79	Tier 1

Eastern CANADA RESPONSE CORPORATION (ecrc) LTD.

ECRC participates in training exercises and offers training courses to its personnel and contractors.

1) Training 2006-2011

Year training provided	Number of training sessions provided	Total number of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Number of volunteers trained	Others who have received trained
2006	200+	720	33	578	0	109
2007	200+	618	34	481	0	103
2008	200+	659	35	534	0	90
2009	200+	624	37	514	0	73
2010	200+	693	38	557	0	98
2011	200+	623	38	488	0	97

ECRC offers 15 different training courses, outlined in the following tables:

Responder Courses / Modules:

2) Spill-response exercises 2006-2011

Year	Number of Exercises	Type of Exercises
2006	34 internal / 29 external	Tiers 1, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF
2007	36 internal / 45 external	Tiers 1, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF
2008	35 internal /35 external	Tiers 1, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF
2009	35 internal / 28 external	Tiers 1, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF
2010	36 internal / 42 external	Tiers 1, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF
2011	39 internal / 54 external	Tiers 1, 2, 3, 4 & Notification & OHF

3) Support for wildlife activities 2006-2011

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types and number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
ECRC trains contractors to deploy hazing equipment.	Breco buoys – 8 Propane cannons – 5 Phoenix wailer – 1 Starter pistols – 14

4) Spill Response Activities 2006-2011

Spill-response activity: Year	Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
2006	30	Tier 1
2007	25	Tier 1
2008	19	Tier 1
2009	19	Tier 1
2010	23	Tier 1
2010	20	Tier 1

Atlantic Emergency Response Team (ALERT) Inc.

ALERT primarily covers the area surrounding the Port of Saint John, New Brunswick (the Bay of Fundy).

2006

1) Training 2006

Type of training provided	Number of training sessions provided	Number of employees trained	Number of ERT members trained	Number of contractors trained	Total number of people trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	2	1	4	9	14
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	1	3	2	12	17
ICS-Incident Command System	1	1	0	7	8
Nofi- V-Sweep	1	0	1	7	8
OHF – Basic Oil Spill Response	4	1	6	33	40
WHMIS	1	0	4	0	4
Wildlife and Oil Spill Response	1	1	0	0	1

2) Exercises 2006

Type of exercises	Number of exercises
Table top	1
Operational	1
Operational ALERT/CCG	1
Internal notification	3
External notification	1

3) Spill Response Activities 2006

Number of spills responded to	Quantity
0	0

4) Support for wildlife activities 2006

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

2007

1) Training 2007

Types of training	Number of training sessions provided	Total number of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of ERT members trained	Number of contractors trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	1	18	0	5	13
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	1	12	4	4	8
ALERT 1 22’ JBF	1	5	0	2	3
ALERT 1 45’ JBF	1	2	0	1	1
Boom Deployment/Skimmer Operation	3	13	0	2	11
SCAT	1	13	1	1	11
OHF & Shoreline Workers H & S	4	39	0	4	35
MED A	1	1	0	0	1
MED A3	1	15	0	1	14
MSROC	1	1	0	0	1
Basis Oil Spill Response & Shoreline Workers H&S	1	13	0	0	13
Oilmap Oil Spill Trajectory Modeling	2	13	8	0	5
On-Scene Commander	1	8	0	1	7
Small Vessel Operator Proficiency	2	32	1	4	27
Incident Command System	2	18	1	4	13
Port Facility Security Officer	1	11	1	1	9

2) Exercises 2007

Type of Exercises	Number of Exercises
ALERT Tabletop	1
ALERT Operational	1
Oïl Handling Facility	2
Canuslant Tabletop	1
Internal Notification	3
External Notification	1

3) Spill Response Activities 2007

Number of Spills Responded to	Quantity
2	Tier 1

4) Support for wildlife activities 2007

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

2008

1) Training 2008

Types of training	Number of training sessions provided	Total number of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of ERT members trained	Number of contractors trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	1	21	2	7	12
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	1	18	4	0	14
ALERT 1 45’ JBF	1	7	0	3	4
V Sweep	2	19	0	4	15
OHF & Shoreline Workers H&S	3	39	0	3	36
Basic Oil Spill Response, Shoreline Workers H&S	1	19	0	1	18
Hiab Crane Lift Operator Training Course	1	8	2	4	0
Wildlife Capture Training Course	1	25	2	1	22

2) Exercices 2008

Type of Exercises	Number of Exercises
ALERT Tabletop	1
ALERT Operational	1
OIL Handling Facility	2
Internal Notification	4
External Notification	0

3) Spill Response Activities 2008

Number of Spills Responded To	Quantity
1	Tier 1

4) Support for wildlife activities 2008

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

2009

1) Training 2009

Types of Training	Number of Training Sessions Provided	Total Number of People Trained	Number of Employees Trained	Number of ERT Members Trained	Number of Contractors Trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	1	22	1	2	19
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	1	21	4	2	15
Current Buster Training	1	22	1	4	17
V-Sweep Fundy Responder	1	10	0	2	8
OHF	2	37	0	2	35
Med A3	3	29	0	0	29
Pleasure Craft	1	12	0	0	12
Industrial Lift Truck Operator Safety Course	1	4	0	2	2

2) Exercises 2009

Type of Exercises	Number of Exercises
ALERT Tabletop	1
ALERT Operational	1
Oil Handling Facilities	2
Internal Notification	4
External Notification	1

3) Spill Response Activities 2009

Number of Spills Responded To	Quantity
1	Tier 1

4) Support for wildlife activities 2009

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

2010

1) Training 2010

Types of Training	Number of Training Sessions Provided	Total Number of People Trained	Number of Employees Trained	Number of ERT Members Trained	Number of Contractors Trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	1	30	0	3	27
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	1	24	5	1	18
OHF & Shoreline Workers H&S	3	43	0	3	40
Current Buster & Boom Vane	1	4	1	2	1
MSROC	1	4	1	0	3
Spill Management Training	1	37	4	7	26
MED A3	2	11	0	0	11
Marine Spill Operations Course	1	2	0	0	2
Pleasure Craft	2	15	0	0	15
Oil Spill Map Management	1	2	1	0	1

2) Exercises 2010

Types of Exercises	Number of Exercises
ALERT Tabletop	1
ALERT Operational	1
Oil Handling Facility	2
ALERT/CCG Operational	1
Internal Notification	2
External Notification	2

3) Spill Response Activities 2010

Number of Spills Responded To	Quantity
2	Tier 1

4) Support for wildlife activities 2010

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

2011

1) Training – 2011

Type of Training	Number of Training Sessions Provided	Total Number of People Trained	Number of Employees Trained	Number of ERT Members Trained	Number of Contractors Trained
ALERT Operations Exercise	2	22	2	2	18
ALERT Tabletop Exercise	3	42	15	0	27
SCAT	1	5	1	0	4
OHF, Shoreline H&S	4	62	2	0	60
H2S Awareness	1	7	4	0	3
Wildlife Capture & Rehab	2	8	4	0	4
On Water Liquid Storage	1	5	3	0	2
6” Salvage Pump	2	11	2	0	9

2) Exercise – 2011

Type of Exercises	Number of Exercises
Tabletop	150 T Spill Incident
Operational	Operational Field Exercise
Tabletop	1000 T Spill
Tabletop	2500 T Spill
Oil Handling Facility	2
Internal Notification	2
External Notification	2

3) Spill Response Activities 2011

Number of Spills Responded To	Quantity
1	Tier 1

4) Support for wildlife activities 2011

ALERT maintains a wildlife box which includes an inventoried list of equipment and supplies, including a response trailer, a diesel generator, a bird scaring cannon, bird scaring pistols and blank cartridges, folding tables, galvanized wash tubs, shower heads, a weigh scale, landing nets, a transport net for sea mammals, and various medical supplies.

Point Tupper Marine Services CO. (PTMSC)

PTMS primarily covers the area of Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia.

2006

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
001 PTMSC Orientation site safety	1	7	0	7	0
003 WHMIS	1	3	0	0	3
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	1	7	0	7	0
007 Standard First Aid	3	14	2	0	12
Fork Lift Certification	2	25	3	0	22
Fall Protection	3	25	3	0	22
Confined Space Entry Certification	2	4	4	0	0
Confined Space Rescue	1	2	2	0	0
Fall Protection	1	5	5	0	0
Site Safety & Security Indoctrination	1	1	1	0	0
Persons with Security Responsibility	1	1	1	0	0
Fall Protection & Scaffolding Course	1	2	2	0	0
OHS & Safety Committee Training	1	1	1	0	0
Air Purifying Respirator Full Face	1	1	1	0	0
Reparatory Protection Purified Air	1	1	1	0	0
Shoreline Cleanup & Assessment course	1	2	2	0	0
Site Safety and Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Type of training provided to organizations (name of organizations)	Type of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
One day rehabilitation training with Clean Seas	Equipment associated with triage, washing and medical
Two day rehabilitation training with Tri-state Bird Rescue, CWS & Clean Seas	Equipment associated with triage, washing and medical

3) Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
1	PTMSC Shoreline (Level 1) Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 3 Management/Operational Exercise
4	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters (Level 3) Exercise
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
2	External NuStar ERT Fire Exercise (NFPA)(600)
1	External Exxon Mobil Exercise
1	External NuStar OHF Exercise
1	External Harbour Buster Exercise ECRC/CCG

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2, & 3)
5	Tier 1

2007

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
003 WHMIS	1	3	3	0	0
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	2	26	0	19	7
007 Standard First Aid	2	15	2	0	13
010 Sheltered Waters Operators Course	3	21	4	16	1
011 Unsheltered Waters Operators Course	4	13	3	5	5
BOSROC	1	1	1	0	0
Confined Space Entry Certification	1	3	3	0	0
Confined Space Rescue	1	4	4	0	0
Fall Protection	1	2	2	0	0
Hydrogen Sulphide Awareness	1	3	3	0	0
Air Purifying Respirator Half Face	1	3	3	0	0
Air Purifying Respirator Full Face	1	3	3	0	0
Respiratory Protection Purified Air	1	3	3	0	0
Site Safety & Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0
Sheltered Water Worker	1	2	2	0	0
System Incident Investigation Process	1	2	2	0	0
Transportation of Dangerous Good	1	3	3	0	0
Unsheltered Waters Workers	1	3	3	0	0
Persons with Security Responsibilities	1	2	2	0	0
Occupational Health & Safety Management Training	1	2	2	0	0
Occupational Health & Safety Training	1	1	1	0	0
Respiratory Protection Supplied Air	1	3	3	0	0
Shoreline Cleanup & Assessment	1	1	1	0	0
MSROC	1	1	1	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
Clean Seas Conservation Group Classroom Training	Rehabilitation trailer, hazing and response building

3) Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
4	PTMSC Sheltered Waters (Level 2) Exercise
3	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters (Level 3) Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 4 Management /Operational Exercise
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
1	External NuStar OHF Exercise
1	External Maritime Northeast Pipeline/Exxon Mobil
1	External ECRC Operational Heavy Oil Skimmer Exercise
1	External ALERT Operational Barge Exercise
1	External ERT Fire Exercise (NFPA)(600)

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
4	Tier 1

2008

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
001 PTMS Orientation Site Safety	3	30	3	26	1
002 Oil Spill Basics	3	30	3	26	1
003 WHMIS	3	30	3	26	1
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	1	12	3	8	1
005 Radio Operators Course	4	33	0	33	0
007 Standard First Aid	1	9	0	0	9
008 Small Vessel Operator Proficiency	2	8	0	8	0
009 Marine Emergency Duties – A3	2	13	0	13	0
010 Sheltered Waters Operators Course	5	35	4	30	1
011 Unsheltered Waters Operators Course	1	15	3	11	1
Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Techniques	1	20	1	2	17
NuStar Hand Safety	1	7	7	0	0
Site Safety and Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0
Oil Map	2	8	2	0	6
Asbestos Awareness	1	3	3	0	0
Confined Space Rescue (AR)	1	3	3	0	0
National Fire Prevention Association	1	4	4	0	0
Restricted Radios Operators Course	1	4	4	0	0
Truck Mobile Radio	1	3	3	0	0
Due Diligence for Supervisors	1	2	2	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
Tier 1 PTMS Exercise – Clean Seas Conservation Group Consultations	Tier 1 Exercise – Wildlife Rehabilitation Command Roles
Clean Seas Conservation Group Classroom Training	Rehabilitation Trailer, Hazing and response building
PTMS Exercise – Clean Seas Conservation Group Consultants	Tabletop Exercise – Wildlife Roles
ALERTS Wildlife Training – Clean Seas Conservation Group attendance	Hazing Equipment/Capture

3)  Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
1	PTMSC Shoreline (Level 1) Exercise
2	PTMSC Sheltered Waters (Level 2) Exercise
2	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters  (Level 3) Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 1 Management/Operations Exercise
1	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
1	External NuStar ERT Safety Meeting
4	External NuStar ERT Fire Exercise (NFPA 600)
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Notification Exercise
1	External OHF Exercise
1	External CCG Operational Sheltered Exercise
1	External ALERT Management/Operational Tier 4 Exercise
1	External ALERT Management Tier 1 Exercise

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
6	Tier 1

2009

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
001 PTMS Orientation Site Safety	4	48	0	48	0
002 Oil Spill Basics	3	35	0	35	0
003 WHMIS	3	35	0	35	0
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	1	11	0	10	1
005 Radio Operators Course	2	11	3	7	1
006 Practical Response Equipment Training	1	11	3	6	2
007 Standard First Aid	1	11	0	6	5
008 Small Vessel Operator Proficiency	2	8	0	8	0
009 Marine Emergency Duties – A3	1	23	0	23	0
010 Sheltered Waters Operators Course	3	24	0	24	0
011 Unsheltered Waters Operators Course	1	12	0	10	2
Confined Space Entry Certification	1	3	3	0	0
Confined Space Rescue	1	3	3	0	0
Fire Protection	1	1	1	0	0
Hydrogen Sulphide Awareness	3	3	3	0	0
Occupational Health & Safety	2	2	2	0	0
Marine Spill Response Operations Course	1	1	1	0	0
Advanced First Aid	1	3	3	0	0
Supervisory Skills	1	1	1	0	0
WHIMIS	3	7	7	0	0
Site Safety and Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0
Impact Incident Training	1	2	2	0	0
Certified First Aid	2	5	5	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
Clean Seas Conservation Group Rehabilitation  Training	Rehabilitation Trailer, Hazing Equipment and Response Building
Clean Seas Conservation Group Classroom Training	Response Building Classroom Workshop

3) Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
3	PTMSC Sheltered Waters (Level 2) Exercise
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
1	Joint PTMSC/Canadian Coast Guard Tier 4 Management/Operational Exercise
1	External NuStar OHF Oil Spill Training
1	External ECRC Operational JP Oxley Exercise
1	External ALERT Management/Operations Exercise
1	External CCG Management MSROC Exercise

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
1	Tier 1

2010

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
001 PTMS Orientation Site Safety	3	29	0	29	0
002 Oil Spill Basics	2	19	0	19	0
003 WHMIS	2	19	0	19	0
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	1	9	0	9	9
007 Standard First Aid	1	12	0	11	1
008 Small Vessel Operator Proficiency	2	20	0	20	0
009 Marine Emergency Duties – A3	1	12	0	11	1
010 Sheltered Waters Operators Course	3	15	0	15	0
011 Unsheltered Waters Operators Course	1	17	0	11	6
Fork Lift Certification	1	14	0	11	3
Site Safety and Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0
Transportation of Dangerous Goods	2	3	3	0	0
Due Diligence for Supervisors	2	6	6	0	0
Incident Investigation	1	2	2	0	0
Workplace Inspections	1	4	4	0	0
Job Safety Analysis	5	5	5	0	0
Rescue Boat Training	1	3	3	0	0
Confined Space Entry – Attendant	1	1	1	0	0
Confined Space Entry – authorized Entrant	1	1	1	0	0
Persons with Security Responsibilities	1	2	2	0	0
Joint Occupational Health & Safety Committee	1	2	2	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
Clean Seas Conservation Group Rehabilitation  Training	Rehabilitation Trailer, Hazing Equipment and Response Building

3) Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
3	PTMSC Notifications Exercise
2	PTMSC Sheltered Waters (Level 2) Exercise
1	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters (Level 3) Exercise
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 3 Management/Operational Exercise
1	Joint CCG and RO’s Mirimachi Management/Operational Exercise
1	External ECRC Tier 4 Management/Operational NFLD
1	External ECRC Tier 1 Management Exercise
1	External OHF Exercise
1	External ALERT Operational Exercise
1	External CCG MSROC Presentation
1	External CCG/Response Organizations Operational Exercise
1	External ECRC Operational Offshore Exercise

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
0	PTMSC did not respond to any recordable spills in 2010

2011

1) Training

Type of training provided	No. of Training sessions provided	Total no. of people trained	Number of employees trained	Number of contractors trained	Others who have received training
001 PTMS Orientation Site Safety	2	21	3	17	1
002 Oil Spill Basics	1	14	3	10	1
003 WHMIS	1	14	3	10	1
004 Shoreline Workers Safety Course	1	7	0	7	0
005 Radio Operators Course	1	10	0	10	0
006 Practical Response Equipment Training	1	8	0	8	0
007 Standard First Aid	1	11	0	11	0
010 Sheltered Waters Operators Course	1	12	3	9	0
011 Unsheltered Waters Operators Course	1	14	3	10	1
Radar Navigation Course	1	12	4	8	0
Fork Lift Certification	4	28	0	6	22
Advanced 1st Aid, AED, Medical Oxygen – Canadian Red Cross	1	3	3	0	0
HAZWOPER Refresher	3	4	4	0	0
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act	3	4	4	0	0
NuStar Business Ethics: A Leader’s Guide	3	6	6	0	0
Confined Space Entry Life Critical Skills-Level 1 Entrant & Attendant	7	8	8	0	0
H2S Life Critical Skills – Level 1 Awareness	4	4	4	0	0
Hot Water Life Critical Skills –  Awareness and Permitting	4	4	4	0	0
Lockout/Tag out Life Critical Skills – Level 1 Affected	4	4	4	0	0
Premating Life Critical Skills – Level 1 Awareness	4	4	4	0	0
Employee Safety Orientation	4	4	4	0	0
Respiratory Protection	4	4	4	0	0
Prep Exercise-Equipment Deployment	1	2	2	0	0
Confined Space Rescue	2	2	2	0	0
Powered Industrial Truck Training	3	3	3	0	0
High Angle Rescue Technical Rope Rescue	1	1	1	0	0
Maintaining a Respectful Workplace	2	7	7	0	0
Site Safety & Security Orientation	1	8	8	0	0
Health & Safety Refresher (16Hr)	5	6	6	0	0
Jetty Operator	1	1	1	0	0

2) Support for wildlife activities

Types of training provided to organizations (names of organizations	Types of number of equipment available to support wildlife response activities
Clean Seas Conservation Group Rehabilitation Training	Rehabilitation trailer, hazing equipment and response building
Clean Spills Conservation Group Classroom Training	Classroom Training Workshop
Clean Seas Conservation Group Rehabilitation Training	24ft Work Boat – Field Training
Clean Seas Conservation Group Rehabilitation Training	Hands on Training

3) Exercises

Number of Exercises	Type of Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 1 Management/Operational Exercise
1	PTMSC Tier 2 Management Exercise
2	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters (Level 2) Exercise
1	PTMSC Unsheltered Waters (Level 3) Exercise
4	Joint NuStar/PTMSC Quarterly Notification Exercise
1	External NuStar OHF Exercise
1	External ALERT Tier 1 Management
1	External ECRC Tier 4 Operational/Management Exercise
1	External ALERT Tier 3 Management Exercise

4) Spill Response Activities

Number of spills responded to	Quantity (Tier 1, 2 & 3)
2	Tier 1

Improving the Regime

TRANSPORT CANADA ACTIVITIES 2006-2011

Regional Advisory Councils

The Regional Advisory Councils ( RAC ) are established under Part 8, section 172(1) to section 172(7), of CSA 2001.

These councils are regional committees in which the parties involved in and/or impacted by marine oil spills and the oil spill response regime can meet, identify, discuss and realize opportunities.  The first RAC meetings took place in 1995.

The RACs are purely advisory bodies, with no authority to make policy, direct operations, approve plans, or resolve disputes. They may, however, make recommendations on the full range of policy issues affecting regional preparedness and response. RACs may request information from the Response Organizations (RO), Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) in the Arctic and TC with respect to plans and resources, preparedness capacity, fees and response data for their region.  Their mandate is significant, and through their ability to report to the Minister of Transport, they have the power to make their voices heard.

The primary objective of the RACs on Oil Spill Response is to share and address issues of mutual concern to the membership. The RACs serve as an advisory body to the Minister of Transport and shall advise and may make recommendations related to marine oil spill preparedness under Part 8 of the CSA 2001.

There are currently six RACs representing the different marine regions across the country.  These RACs serve the geographical areas of the Arctic, Maritimes, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Quebec and Pacific.

Each RAC comprises a maximum of seven members who represent the various sectors affected by the legislation.  RAC members represent a balance of communities and interests that might be affected by an oil spill in their respective areas.  Members are appointed by Transport Canada, for a term of not more than three-years and may request renewal to continue as a RAC member once their three-year term ends.

Members elect a president; and Transport Canada acts as secretariat to the council.  The council forms an integral part of the ongoing partnership approach to preparedness and response in Canada.

Additional information on the Regional Advisory Councils is now available on the Transport Canada Web site at http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/oep-ers-racs-menu-718.htm

National Advisory Council

The National Advisory Council (NAC) on Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime is a national forum represented by the Presidents of the six RACs and Marine Safety, Transport Canada regional and headquarters personnel.

This council was established by Transport Canada in 2007.  With a mandate to ensure Canada is prepared to respond to a major oil spill, the Council meets annually to review national issues of preparedness and response.  The Council is co-chaired by Transport Canada and a Regional Advisory Council President.  Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Coast Guard also participate at these meetings.

The NAC provides a means of bringing together representatives from each region to look at common issues and concerns with respect to the regime as identified in Part 8 of the CSA 2001.

The NAC also provides the opportunity for RACs, TC and specified other Government Departments to study Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Response Regime in an atmosphere of co-operation.  This is accomplished by sharing ideas beneficial to the Regime through collegial and effective meetings.

The objective of the NAC is to ensure that Canada's Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime functions effectively as intended and to continually search for improvements that will enhance Canada's spills prevention, preparedness and response functions.

ARCTIC COUNCIL – EMERGENCY PREVENTION, PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE (EPPR) WORKING GROUP

Transport Canada is an active member of the EPPR Working Group.  This working group reports to the Arctic Council, which is a high-level forum for cooperation, coordination and interaction between Arctic states, indigenous communities and other Arctic residents.

EPPR addresses various aspects of prevention, preparedness and response to environmental emergencies in the Arctic. Members of the Working Group exchange information on best practices and conduct projects to include development of guidance and risk assessment methodologies, response exercises, and training.  The goal of the EPPR Working Group is to contribute to the protection of the Arctic environment from the threat or impact that may result from an accidental release of pollutants or radionuclides. In addition, the Working Group considers questions related to the consequences of natural disasters.

Members of the Arctic Council are Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden and the United States of America and representatives of the Arctic Indigenous Peoples.

During this reporting period Transport Canada has participated in many EPPR projects including the Guidelines and Strategies for Oily Waste Management in the Arctic Regions, Interactive Maps and Environmental Information from Arctic Council Programs on the Web, Behavior of Oil and other Hazardous Substances in ArcticWaters (BoHaSA), Shoreline Clean-up Assessment  Technology (SCAT) Manual update.  Further information on the Arctic Council and EPPR Working Group can be found at http://www.arctic-council.org/eppr/

Environmental Oil Spill Risk Assessment for the South Coast of Newfoundland

 In 2006, Transport Canada (TC) and the Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) (Coast Guard) commissioned a study to quantify the present and future risks of oil pollution in Canadian waters off the south coast of Newfoundland due to marine traffic transiting this area. The study area included but was not limited to Placentia Bay. The approach of the study included assessing both of the key components of risk: the probability of an oil spill occurring and the consequences of the spill should it occur.

The risk study included the following key elements:

• Stakeholder Consultation: relevant organizations and the general public were consulted for their concerns on spill risks in the region;
• Oil Spill Frequency: the likelihood of oil spills within the area was estimated based on historical spill rates and the level of marine traffic within the area;
• Environmental Impact Assessment: the potential effect of oil spills was estimated for key species;
• Economic Impact Assessment: the potential economic consequences of various spill scenarios were estimated;
• Risk Results and Conclusion: the elements of probability and consequence were combined to produce an estimate of the overall risk in the region; and
• Area Specific Factors and Future Trends: potential changes in marine activity over the next 10 years were estimated to assess the likelihood of changes in the spill frequency estimations.

The consultation process was held over the period of June to September 2006, and included: Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada / Canadian Coast Guard, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Environment and Conservation, Environment Canada, and the Regional Advisory Council (RAC), and was open to citizens and organizations in local communities that could be financially harmed by a spill.

One of the key findings of the risk assessment project indicated that the most probable area for a spill is in inner Placentia Bay and a spill in the range of up to 10,000 barrels or 1,590 tonnes is estimated to occur once every 27 to 33 years there. Compared with previous national studies and analysis, this risk has decreased over the years, primarily due to increased preventative measures that have been implemented, including the phase-in of double-hulled tankers, the requirement to have contracts with response organizations and increased monitoring and inspections. The findings also noted that while Placentia Bay may be among the busiest ports in Canadian terms, the vessel traffic density is low relative to other areas of the world.

In September 2007, a condensed version of the report, Synopsis Report - Environmental Oil Spill Risk Assessment for the South Coast of Newfoundland, was circulated among the stakeholders.

This report can be found on the TC Website at http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/tp-tp14740-menu-1294.htm

THE REPORT DESCRIBES:

• Stakeholder Consultation – Relevant organizations and the general public were consulted for their concerns on spill risks in the region.
• Area of Interest (AOI) — A description of the key geographical and environmental hazards within the study area.
• Marine Traffic in AOI — A description of the marine traffic within the area;
• Oil Spill Frequency — An estimated of the frequency of oil spills within the area based on historical spill rates;
• Representative Oil Spill Scenarios — A description of several oil spill scenarios meant to represent credible events in the area;
• Environmental Impact Assessment — An estimate of the potential effect of oil spills on key species;
• Economic Impact Assessment — An estimate of the potential economic consequences of a significant oil spill;
• Risk Results and Conclusion — An estimate of the overall risk in the region, combining elements of probability and consequence; and
• Area Specific Factors and Future Trends — A description of potential changes in activity over the next 10 years that could lead to changes in the spill frequency estimations.

Comments were solicited from Stakeholders on the conclusions and on possible changes to the prevention and response regime. As a result, local and regional interests in the area made some 25 proposals.

A report entitled, “Assessment of Proposals Related to Oil Spill Risk for the South Coast of Newfoundland,” was released in March 2010. This was intended to provide background discussion for each of the 25 proposals and where applicable, a description of the status quo, and a rationale for implementing, or not implementing the proposal in whole or in part. The proposals were grouped into four broad categories of: Prevention, Response, Research, and General. TC, CCG, EC (according to their individual mandate) have reviewed and addressed the 25 issues identified in this report.

This assessment can be found on the TC Website at http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/tp-tp15039-menu-3103.htm

Environmental Prevention and Response National Preparedness Plan

In 2010 TC established the Environmental Prevention and Response National Preparedness Plan.  The purpose of the Plan is to establish the national preparedness capacity of the marine spill response regime under Transport Canada's (TC) regulatory role.  This plan is intended to provide a clear and consistent understanding of the preparedness capacity of the marine spill response regime and to ensure mechanisms are in place to provide an adequate preparedness capacity.

This Plan can be located on the TC Website at  http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/tp-tp13585-procedures-EPRNPP-3091.htm

NATIONAL AERIAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM (nASP)

The Government of Canada continues to have a zero tolerance towards the pollution of Canada’s marine environment. The National Aerial Surveillance Program (NASP) continues to be the primary mechanism for detecting illegal spills waters under Canadian jurisdiction. This program has directly contributed to a reduction in oil spills in our Exclusive Economic Zone and also to a reduction in the rate of mortality of pelagic seabirds. For this reason, TC strives hard to maintain surveillance hours in an effort to support our consistent message to the international marine community that protecting our marine environment is of major concern to Canadian citizens. The NASP continues to maximize each patrol hour by partnering with other departments such as Environment Canada (EC), Department of National Defence (DND), and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). Aerial surveillance activities are performed to enforce several domestic and international laws, and also to collect data to assist in research and development projects.

Over the past 18 years, the NASP has been showing growth and improvement in the program. In comparison with 1992-1993, the program has seen a significant reduction in the total volume of oil detected from 18,282 litres in to 9,296 litres in 2010-2011. This decline has also been seen in the number of spills from 426 in 1992-1993 to 84 in 2010-2011.

FISCAL YEAR	PATROL HOURS	VESSEL OVER-FLIGHTS	TOTAL SPILLS	ESTIMATED QUANTITY (litres)
1992-1993	1,263	6,838	426	18,282
2010-2011	2506	12,365	84	9,296
	98.4% increase	80.8% increase	80.3% reduction	49.2% reduction
Total Number of Spills for Last 18 years				3,156
Total Estimated Quantity for Last 18 years				134,797

In summer 2005, the NASP performed its first Arctic pollution surveillance in partnership with Environment Canada’s Ice Service to visually observe vessels transiting the Arctic. With the technology upgrades on the surveillance aircraft, in summer 2009, the NASP gave birth to routine pollution patrols in the Arctic during the busy shipping season on a permanent basis and augmented the surveillance effort across Canada. For example, the figure below depicts a graphical view of this increase in Vancouver Region before and after the installation of the maritime surveillance system (MSS6000). Therefore, this is a major advancement to the program as waters that were not patrolled in the past are now surveyed.

Another major highlight of the NASP program were the response efforts by the NASP Dash 8 aircrew. In May 2010, they were deployed to Houma, Louisiana, for 11 weeks to assist in the response of the Deep Water Horizon (MC252) Oil Spill Incident. The aircrew flew a total of 297 patrol hours, which equated to 63 reconnaissance missions. In this incident, aerial surveillance was deemed critical in the coordination mechanism for the response operations. Daily missions were imperative in order to keep track of the rapidly changing conditions of the location and conditions of the oil.

The TC - NASP Dash 8 crew received a Certificate of Appreciation Award from the United States Coast Guard for their hard work, dedication and expertise during the response operations in that oil spill incident.

The table below shows the Annual NASP National Statistics for Fiscal Years 2006-2007 to 2010-2011.

Fiscal Year	Patrol Hours	Vessel Over-flights (VOF)	Pollution Sightings	Oil Volume (litres)
2006/2007	1,649	10,063	98	2,107
2007/2008	2,578	13,038	151	3,130
2008/2009	2,340	9,947	183	2,863
2009/2010	2,274	11,262	109	8,111
2010/2011	2,506	12,365	84	9,189

National Places of Refuge Contingency Plan

There have been a number of places of refuge type incidents that have taken place in Canada such as: Kurdistan – 1979; Dodsland – 1987; Trave Ore – 1989; Glenville – 1990; Eastern Power – 2000; Kitano – 2001. In the absence of a formal approach, such incidents were handled in an ad hoc manner, although more recently the Regional Environmental Emergencies Team (REET), port authorities and the provinces have also been engaged in the process.

In recent years, there have been a few high profile international incidents that have resulted in either a ship pollution disaster, or a near miss of one, involving ships that were refused a place of refuge (e.g., Erika in 1999, Castor in 2000, and Prestige 2002). Consequently, the issue of the provision of a place of refuge to a ship in need of assistance has become a priority for governments worldwide.

On December 5, 2003, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted Guidelines on Places of Refuge for Ships in Need of Assistance (resolution A.949(23)). TC is the lead agency for decisions related to a ship in need of assistance and requesting a place of refuge. As such, Transport Canada is responsible for ensuring the IMO Guidelines are taken into account and implemented to the extent possible.

In 2007 TC finalized the National Places of Refuge Contingency Plan. The purpose of the National Places of Refuge Contingency Plan (PORCP) is to establish a national framework and approach which, with associated regional measures, will provide for an effective and efficient response to requests from ships in need of assistance seeking a place of refuge.

The PORCP will help to ensure that a consistent approach is taken across the country to putting in place an effective response plan that will meet both Canada’s national and international responsibilities.

The PORCP provides a decision-making risk assessment tool for Transport Canada which will help to ensure that a thorough and balanced assessment of the risks are made and the best risk control strategy can be decided on and implemented in a timely and safe manner.

The PORCP takes into account International Maritime Organization (IMO) Resolution A.949(23) “Guidelines on Places of Refuge for Ships in Need of Assistance.”

Following the National PORCP each region developed a regional plan consistent with the National Plan. The National Plan can be located at http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/tp-tp14707-menu-1683.htm

Oil Spills from Ships - 2010 Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada completed a report on possible oil spill incidences from ships in Canadian waters.

The objective of the audit was to determine whether Transport Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard (Fisheries and Oceans Canada), and Environment Canada have taken reasonable actions to implement legislated and other measures to prepare for and respond to pollution from ships in Canada’s marine environment.

In support of this objective, the two sub-objectives for the audit were

• to determine whether Transport Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard, and Environment Canada have plans, systems, or protocols to prepare to respond to ship-source spills, including having appropriate emergency plans and the capacity to respond to ship-source spills involving oil and hazardous substances; and
• to determine whether Transport Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard, and Environment Canada have assessed the responses to ship-source spills, including ship-source spills involving oil and hazardous substances.

The following table is a list of recommendations by the Auditor General and the response to these recommendations by the responsible government departments:

Recommendations	Response
Preparing for ship-source oil spills
Building on the risk assessments conducted to date, Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard should conduct a risk assessment related to ship-source oil spills covering Canada’s three coasts. The risk assessment should be conducted in consultation with Environment Canada and the shipping industry. Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard should put in place processes so that risks are reviewed on an ongoing basis and the risk assessment is updated as required. The Canadian Coast Guard should ensure that the risk assessment considers the three roles that it plays (federal monitoring officer, on-scene commander, and resource agency).	Environment Canada’s response. Agreed. The Department will assist Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard by providing scientific expertise and knowledge. Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard will work with Transport Canada to establish a framework facilitating the undertaking of risk assessment related to ship-source oil spills off Canada’s three coasts. Transport Canada’s response. Agreed. Transport Canada has undertaken talks with the Canadian Coast Guard and Environment Canada with a view to reviewing Canada’s national oil spill response regime. We will build on risk assessments of ship-source oil spill preparedness and response regimes of all Canadian waters, including the three coasts. Scoping of this risk assessment will commence this year and be completed by the end of 2011–12.
The Canadian Coast Guard and Environment Canada should update their national emergency management plans and review and update their regional emergency management plans as necessary.	Environment Canada’s response. Agreed. The Department will update these plans after completing its Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP). The SEMP will provide an overall framework for the review and update of all of the Department’s emergency plans, including the national and regional environmental emergencies management plans. Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard is currently developing its National Environmental Response Strategy. This Strategy will be supplemented by the development of a national response policy and associated plans for directing Canadian Coast Guard efforts, including those related to a major incident. The Canadian Coast Guard will establish a periodic review process to ensure its national and regional emergency management plans remain accurate and relevant.
To ensure that emergency management plans remain up to date, Transport Canada, the Canadian Coast Guard, and Environment Canada should establish processes for reviewing their national and regional plans on a regular basis and updating them as required (for example, due to changes in risks, legislation, roles and responsibilities, and/or lessons learned from significant incidents or exercises).	Environment Canada’s response. Agreed. As part of the development of the Strategic Emergency Management Plan (SEMP), the Department will include a maintenance section for the SEMP, which will establish the process for its review/update as well as that of its referenced documents (emergency management plans, business continuity plans, etc.). Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard will establish a periodic review process to ensure its national and regional emergency management plans remain accurate and relevant. Transport Canada’s response. Agreed. Transport Canada recognizes the need for up-to-date emergency management plans and, to this end, in 2010, updated its Environmental Prevention and Response National Preparedness Plan. Transport Canada will build on its current practice by reviewing and updating this plan annually.
The Canadian Coast Guard should update its program for conducting ship-source oil spill response exercises, including the type and frequency of exercises to be conducted (including inter-regional exercises), which organizations should be involved in the exercises, and requirements for documenting exercises. It should also establish procedures for ensuring that recommendations and lessons learned from these exercises are shared among regions and acted upon.	Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard is currently reviewing its program for response exercises, including ship-source oil response exercises, and will develop a revised exercise plan.
The Canadian Coast Guard should assess its response capacity, taking into account the capacity of the private sector, against risks related to ship-source oil spills. This information should be used by the Canadian Coast Guard to inform future investment decisions.	Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The risk assessments discussed in recommendation 1.32 will necessarily inform the Canadian Coast Guard assessment of its response capacity in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic regions, taking into account the existing response capacity of the private sector. Hence, Coast Guard response capacity assessments will be informed by the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic risk assessments related to ship-source oil spills.
In order to ensure the readiness of the Government of Canada’s operational response capacity, the Canadian Coast Guard, with input from Transport Canada, should periodically verify its preparedness to respond to ship-source oil spills (based on predetermined procedures and criteria).	Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard will establish a periodic review process to verify its preparedness for ship-source oil spills. The risk assessments identified and discussed in recommendation 1.32 and the response capacity assessments identified in recommendation 1.57 will necessarily inform the Canadian Coast Guard verification of its level of preparedness for ship-source oil spills in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic regions.
Responding to ship-source spills
The Canadian Coast Guard should implement a quality assurance program for its Marine Pollution Incident Reporting System. The Coast Guard should also establish procedures so that the results of spill responses are consistently documented. The level of documentation on responses should be proportionate to the significance of the incident and, where applicable, contain information on contributions from other entities.	Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard will undertake a review to identify the required characteristics and parameters of a quality assurance program for its reporting systems for marine pollution incidents. The Coast Guard will strengthen its procedures so that the results of spill responses are consistently documented.
The Canadian Coast Guard should review the differences between the Response Management System and Incident Command System, assess whether these differences could affect a multi-party response to a major spill, and address significant differences, if any.	Canadian Coast Guard’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Coast Guard will endeavour to identify the differences between the Response Management System and Incident Command System. This will include whether these differences could affect a multi-party response to a major spill.
Preparing for ship-source spills
In order to facilitate the development of a hazardous and noxious substance regime in Canada, Transport Canada should take the necessary steps to ensure that it has adequate data on the type and quantity of hazardous and noxious substances transported by ship in Canada.	Transport Canada’s response. Agreed. Transport Canada will work with key departments and agencies (including the Canada Border Services Agency, Statistics Canada, and the Canadian Coast Guard) to develop the necessary procedures and systems so emergency responders have access to near real-time information for all hazardous and noxious products transported by ships in Canadian waters. Considering that the Canada Border Services Agency and the Canadian Coast Guard already have systems and procedures in place for obtaining vessel cargo manifest and data, Transport Canada will initiate discussions no later than the spring of 2011 and seek their collaboration to adapt the data and make it available for the proposed Marine Hazardous and Noxious Substances Incident Preparedness and Response Regime.

The full report of this audit can be found on the Auditor General of Canada’s website at: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201012_01_e_34424.html#hd3e

Enforcing Pollution Prevention and Wildlife Legislation

In 2006 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Transport Canada and Environment Canada outlined the co-operation of both parties in enforcing pollution prevention and wildlife legislation for the protection of the marine environment from ship source pollution. The MOU defines the basis on which the two departments agree to cooperate and confirms the commitment of the departments to coordinate efforts in compliance, promotion and enforcement activities such as inspections, investigations and prosecutions.

Canada Shipping Act, 2001

Bill C-35, An Act respecting shipping and navigation (CSA 2001) received first reading in the House of Commons on June 8, 2000. However, with the end of the 36th session of Parliament, it was necessary to re-introduce the Bill once the 37th session commenced.  Now known as Bill C-14, CSA 2001 received first reading on March 1, 2001. The Bill, as amended by the Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations, was reported to the House on May 3, 2001, and was passed by the House of Commons on May 10, 2001. Royal Assent was granted on November 1, 2001. CSA 2001 did not come into force until July 1, 2007, time was needed to review and update existing regulations to ensure compliance with the new Act.

The Canada Shipping Act is the principal legislation governing the activities of Canadian ships and foreign ships in Canadian waters. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans shares responsibility for the Act with the Minister of Transport.

The sections establishing the Regime are found in Part 8: Pollution Prevention and Response, Transport Canada, sections 167 through 173. The legislation includes the requirements for vessels (167) and oil handling facilities (168).  The sections establishing the legal framework for response organizations (169 to 171) have been revised to incorporate a streamlined and clarified response organization fee proposal process. Section 172 addresses the establishment and functioning of advisory councils. The requirement for a Report to Parliament (173) has been revised from every two years to every five years.

The regulatory REFORM PROCESS

Royal assent of CSA 2001, on November 1, 2001, marked the first of two steps in the modernization of the Canada Shipping Act. The second stage is the development of the regulations needed to support the new Act. The CSA 2001 regulatory reform, when completed, will provide Canada with a modern and responsive set of regulations for the marine industry. CSA 2001 did not come into force until July 1, 2007, after the main regulations needed in support of it, were developed and put in place.

Transport Canada Marine Safety is carrying out the regulatory reform work and implementation of the reform will proceed through two phases:

• Phase 1 - regulations that are not compliant with the new Act will be remodelled and reduced in number. In addition, new requirements required by the CSA 2001 will be incorporated.
• Phase 2 - post- implementation of the CSA 2001 will see the regulations that are in compliance with the new Act updated.

Transport Canada established a project team consisting of a number of headquarters’ staff and representation from each region to conduct the development of these regulations.  The mandate of the Environmental Response Project Team is to develop a “Smart” set of Environmental Response Regulations, ensuring currency of publications, and to address all changes under the new legislation. The project team draws from the philosophies referred to in the Federal Regulatory Policy, 1999 to fulfill its mandate.

Public and stakeholder consultations are a critical component in the regulatory development process. Regulatory consultations with stakeholders including Response Organizations, the oil handling facilities and Regional Advisory Councils took place during this reporting period (2006-2011). All stakeholders and concerned members of the public were provided ample opportunity to make their views, concerns and recommendations known.

CANADIAN COAST GUARD ACTIVITIES 2006-2011

Increase Spill Response Capacity in the Arctic

As part of Canada’s commitment to conserve and protect Canadian waters, the Government of Canada, through Budget 2007, provided $2.2 million over three years to CCG to ensure Canada has a capacity to respond to oil spills in the Arctic.

CCG undertook an evaluation of risk and requirements for additional Arctic pollution response equipment, in consultation with key partners and clients, purchased and placed Arctic Response Packs in 19 communities throughout the Arctic.  These Arctic Response Packs provide communities with on-site equipment to use in the event of a small scale pollution incident in their waters.

Reviewed and Updated the National Environmental Response Strategy

Domestic and international obligations require Canada to maintain considerable preparedness capacity for responses to domestic and potential international pollution incidents, as well as act as a strategic reserve for industry south of 60. However, we must assess our current and future ability to deliver on these statutory obligations, especially where there are multiple spills or cleanup might be prolonged.

To ensure an effective, long-term Environmental Response Services program, CCG conducted a review of its National Environmental Response Strategy in 2007-2008. This strategy captures all of the elements necessary for Environmental Response Services to develop, implement, and demonstrate the preparedness, response processes, and response procedures needed to respond to ship-source spills on waters over which Canada has jurisdiction.

During our review of the strategy, CCG drafted revisions of the National Response Policy and National Response Plan. CCG’s review of the strategy pointed to the need to revise the National Contingency Plan, which is an element of the strategy.  CCG consulted with its key partners, including Environment Canada, Transport Canada, other government departments, provincial environmental ministries, members of marine advisory groups.

Training and Exercising

Throughout the 2006-2011 period, CCG provided regular training opportunities to all Environmental Response Staff to ensure they maintain core competencies.  In addition, exercises were conducted in all regions on a regular basis, including CCG-led exercises, participation in Canada-US Coast Guard exercises, as required under the Marine Pollution Joint Contingency Plan.

Re-invigoration of Coast Guard’s Environmental Response Program

In 2010, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development (CESD) audit of Oil Spills from Ships and an internal audit of the Environmental Response Program by DFO highlighted a number of areas for improvement in Canada’s preparedness to respond to oil spills from ships. In particular, the audits noted the need to regularly update risk assessments and emergency management plans, assess CCG’s response capacity in relation to risk and industry capacity, and verify the readiness of the CCG to respond to marine pollution incidents.

In June 2010, the Coast Guard established a new Environmental Response Branch within the Maritime Services Directorate in consideration of the audit findings and changing marine pollution risk profile. The Director, Environmental Response position was created and staffed, with additional personnel to provide a strategic focus for the Program, and to ensure that the CCG is able to fulfill its mandated obligations related to marine pollution preparedness and response.

Improved Interdepartmental Governance and Coordination

Also in 2010, the Interdepartmental Marine Pollution Committee was formed, co-chaired by Coast Guard and Transport Canada, and which reports to the Assistant Deputy Ministers’ Emergency Management Committee. The Committee supports the Government of Canada’s obligations and objectives related to marine pollution, focusing on interdepartmental collaboration to strengthen Canada’s ability in prevention, preparedness, and response and recovery capabilities to marine pollution events. Transport Canada, Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, National Defence, and Public Safety Canada are members of the Committee. The IMPC will collectively address the CESD audit recommendations, and promote a whole of government approach to addressing marine pollution events.

Review of Coast Guard Incident Management System

In response to a Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development recommendation, the Coast Guard’s Environmental Response Program reviewed its incident management system (called the Response Management System) to ensure that CCG is capable of supporting a multi-party response to a major oil spill in Canadian waters.

Transport Canada and Canadian Coast Guard activities

The view forward

National Aerial Surveillance Program

In support of TC’s mandate, in ensuring a safe and efficient transportation system, the NASP continues to work with other government departments to ensure that each hour of surveillance is maximized to the greatest extent possible. The NASP crews observe, analyze, record and report any phenomena detected on the ocean’s surface and share data as required.

As technology advances, the NASP continues to keep abreast of the industry in order to maintain its standard in being a world leader in aerial pollution surveillance and reconnaissance.

Lastly, the NASP seeks long term funding to stabilize the program for years to come. This will ensure the protection of the marine environment which will benefit coastal communities and future generation of Canadians.

Hazardous and noxious substances

Canada has the longest shoreline in the world and some of the most difficult waters to navigate due to extreme conditions, strong currents and very cold water. The amount of hazardous and noxious substances (HNS) that are currently being transported in and around Canada have expanded rapidly in recent years. This trend clearly gives rise to a real and increasing risk of an HNS incident occurring in this country and to the need for a means to address this risk.

In Transport Canada’s Sustainable Development Strategy (2007-2009), high priority is given to the development and implementation of an HNS program that focuses on assuring the safety of the public and the protection of the environment. In particular, it highlights the need to:

• develop the legislative structure required to put an HNS program in place, together with the necessary regulations and standards;
• create the required HNS response mechanism in order to provide a nationally consistent method of responding to, and managing the response to, marine HNS incidents and spills from ships and during the loading and unloading of ships at chemical handling facilities; and
• take the necessary action to permit Canada to accede to the Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to pollution incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 (OPRC-HNS Protocol).

Since 2004, Transport Canada has been the lead regulatory governance agency for preparing for all ship-source oil pollution spills.  With respect to HNS, it is also responsible for the overall design and regulation of an HNS program and to ensure that the appropriate resources are in place for the creation of the national response capacity, as well as ship pollution response plans, handling facility pollution response plans, monitoring response organization exercises, and enforcement and compliance.

Work towards establishing an HNS program will be closely related to the evolution of Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Prevention and Response Regime.  The lessons already learned from the establishment and operations of the Regime will be invaluable resources.  The relationship between the two will be determined as the HNS program develops.  This will be a significant project for Transport Canada over the next several years, particularly in the context of Responsible Resources Development initiatives as part of Budget 2012. Measures were announced to strengthen Canada’s spill preparedness and response capacity which include the creation of a panel of experts on tanker safety that will examine the requirements for hazardous and noxious substances.

Entering a new era with CSA 2001

Now that the first phase of the work associated with the CSA 2001 regulatory reform project has been completed and the new Act proclaimed July 1, 2007, the submission of this Report to Parliament marks the beginning of a new stage for the Regime.

The CSA 2001 reforms provide a solid yet flexible legislative framework that has a high level of approval among stakeholders.  The new legislation improves the Regime’s ability to manage its affairs, while integrating it further into Canada’s national system of preparedness and response.  The Regime has been confirmed as a long-term provider of protection to Canada’s marine environment.

It is clear that Canada’s environment enjoys a greatly improved level of protection against the danger of marine oil spills, compared to the situation prior to the development of the Regime.  The process of developing this industry-funded and operated system of spill preparedness and response has forged a strong government-industry alliance in the interest of environmental protection.

TC is committed to protecting the marine environment through the ongoing development of pollution prevention regulations under the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, active participation at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to continuously improve international standards for safe and environmentally sound shipping, and to overseeing Canada’s Marine Oil Spill Response Regime in the event that a major spill does occur.

TC recognizes the ROs and CCG’s ongoing excellence in responding to and monitoring operational requirements and looks forward to continuing to work together to ensure the protection of the Canadian marine environment.

Annex 1 – Map of response capacity

Annex 2 – RO fees table

Eastern Canada Response Corporation Ltd. (ECRC)

Registration Fee

Applicable To	Annual Fee	Coverage
Member – Oil Handling Facility (OHF)	$450 per OHF	Within the Geographic Area of Response (GAR) of Eastern Canada Response Corporation (ECRC). All regional areas
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$450 per Ship	Applicable to a ship that navigates or engages in a marine activity within a 500-kilometer radius from its home port and within ECRC’s GAR.
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$750 per Ship	Applicable to a ship that navigates or engages in a marine activity: (a) Beyond a 500 kilometer radius from its home port, and within ECRC’s GAR, ALERT’s GAR or PTMS’s GAR; or (b) From a port not within ECRC’s GAR and within ECRC’s GAR, ALERT’s GAR or PTMS’s GAR.

Bulk Oil Cargo Fee (BOCF)

Applicable Area	Period	Product	BOCF Rate
Quebec/Maritime Region	From  Mar 11 to Dec 31 2006	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	17.2¢ per tonne 8.6¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2007 to Feb 24 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	25.3¢ per tonne 12.65¢ per tonne
	From Feb 24 2007 to Dec 31 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	16.0¢ per tonne 8.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2008 to Dec 31 2008	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	19.6¢ per tonne 9.8¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2009 to Dec 31 2009	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	18.0¢ per tonne 9.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2010 to Dec 31 2010	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	25.0¢ per tonne 25.5¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2011 to Dec 31 2011	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	12.0¢ per tonne 6.0¢ per tonne
Great Lakes Region	From Mar 11 2006 – Dec 31 2006	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	36.0¢ per tonne 18.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2007 to Feb 24 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	58.77¢ per tonne 29.38¢ per tonne
	From Feb 24 2007 to Dec 31 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	36.0¢ per tonne 18.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2008 Dec 31 2008	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	34.0¢ per tonne 17.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2009 to Dec 31 2009	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	40.0¢ per tonne 20.0¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2010 to Dec 31 2010	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	57.0¢ per tonne 28.5¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2011 to Dec 31 2011	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	37.0¢ per tonne 18.5¢ per tonne
Newfoundland Region	From Mar 11 2006 to Dec 31 2006	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	7.86¢ per tonne 3.93¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2007 to Feb 24 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	7.35¢ per tonne 3.675¢ per tonne
	From Feb 24 2007 to Dec 31 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	9.45¢ per tonne 4.725¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2008 to Dec 31 2008	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	7.8¢ per tonne 3.9¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2009 to Dec 31 2009	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	9.0¢ per tonne 4.5 ¢ per tonne
	From Jan 1 2010 to Dec 31 2010	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	11.0¢ per tonne 5.5¢ per tonne
	From Jan 31 2011 to Dec 31 2011	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	7.0¢ per tonne 3.5¢ per tonne

Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (WCMRC)

Registration Fee

Applicable To	Annual Fee	Coverage
Member – Oil Handling Facility (OHF)	$600 per OHF	Within the Geographic Area of Response of WCMRC (GAR).
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$600 per Ship	Applicable to a ship that navigates or engages in a marine activity within WCMRC’s GAR.

Bulk Oil Cargo Fee (BOCF)

Period	Product	BOCF Rate
From Jul 1 2006 to Dec 31 2006	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	34.9¢ per tonne 17.5¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2007 to Jun 30 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	67.0¢ per tonne 33.5¢ per tonne
From July 1 2007 to Dec 31 2007	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	57.0¢ per tonne 29.0¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2008 to Jun 30 2008	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	68.0¢ per tonne 34.0¢ per tonne
From July 1 2008 to Dec 31 2008	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	0.0¢ per tonne 0.0¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2009 to Jun 30 2009	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	44.8¢ per tonne 22.4¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2009 to Dec 31 2009	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	0.0¢ per tonne 0.0¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2010 to Jun 30 2010	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	39.6¢ per tonne 19.8¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2010 to Dec 31 2010	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	22.1¢ per tonne 11.1¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2011 to Jun 30 2011	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	38.3¢ per tonne 19.2¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2011 to Dec 31 2011	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	27.4¢ per tonne 13.7¢ per tonne

Capital Asset/Loan Fee (CALF)

The CALF fees that are payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsection 167(1) and 168(1) of CSA 2001.

1. The CALF

   1. is determined on the basis of cost per tonne;
   2. the CALF is calculated by multiplying a capital asset/loan fee rate (CALFR) by the applicable quantity of bulk oil loaded or unloaded within WCMRC’s Geographic Area of Response (GAR) and, where applicable, bulk oil cargo transferred between ships within WCMRC’s GAR;
   3. the CALFR is calculated by dividing the forecast annual Funds Required for Capital Purchases (1) of WCMRC, plus the provision for tax (2) by the forecast Annual Volume (3) of bulk oil cargo to be loaded or unloaded within WCMRC’s GAR (4);
   4. Funds Required for Capital Purchases (1) = Annual Capital Budget plus the annual principal bank loan repayment, less amortization of capital assets (excluding amortization of assets purchased previously with the BOCF);
   5. Provision for tax (2) = (Funds Required for Capital Purchases less amortization of capital assets purchased previously with the BOCF) multiplied by the applicable rate of tax;
   6. Annual Volume (3) = Total volume of bulk oil cargo unloaded + total volume of bulk oil loaded for international destinations and north of 60° north latitude within WCMRC’s GAR and, where applicable, bulk oil cargo transferred between ships within WCMRC’s GAR;
   7. GAR (4) = Geographic area of response for which WCMRC is certified to operate.

2. The CALFR calculated by the above formula is applicable to all products except asphalt. The CALFR for asphalt is 50% of the rate for all other products.

CALF

Period	Product	CALF Rate
From Jul 1 2007 to Dec 31 2007	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	18.2¢ per tonne 36.3¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2008 to Jul 1 2008	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	00.0¢ per tonne 00.0¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2008 to Dec 31 2008	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	15.9¢ per tonne 31.7¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2009 to Jun 30 2009	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	00.0¢ per tonne 00.0¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2009 to Dec 31 2009	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	18.0¢ per tonne 36.0¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2010 to Jul 1 2010	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	00.0¢ per tonne 00.0¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2010 to Dec 31 2010	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	07.0¢ per tonne 13.9¢ per tonne
From Jan 1 2011 to Jul 1 2011	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	00.0¢ per tonne 00.0¢ per tonne
From Jul 1 2011 to Dec 1 2011	Asphalt Products other than Asphalt	04.3¢ per tonne 08.6¢ per tonne

Atlantic Emergency Response Team (ALERT) Inc.

Registration Fee

Applicable To	Annual Fee	Coverage
Member – Oil Handling Facility (OHF)	$450 per OHF	Within the Geographic Area of Response (GAR) of ALERT.
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$450 per Ship	Applicable to a ship that navigates or engages in a marine activity within ALERT’s GAR.
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$750 per Ship	Part of a multi-agreement with ECRC and PTMS to encompass all East Coast Canadian waters.

Bulk Oil Cargo Fee (BOCF)

Period	Product	BOCF Rate
From Jan 1, 2002 to date	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	14.0¢ per tonne 7.0¢ per tonne

Point Tupper Marine Services Co. (PTMSC)

Registration Fee

Applicable To	Annual Fee	Coverage
Member – Oil Handling Facility (OHF)	$450 per OHF	Within the Geographic Area of Response (GAR) of PTMSC.
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$450 per Ship	Applicable to a ship that navigates or engages in a marine activity within PTMSC’s GAR.
Member - Ship Bulk Oil and Ship Non-Bulk Oil	$750 per Ship	Where a ship navigates or engages in a marine activity in PTMSC’s GAR and in the GAR of one or more response organizations.

Bulk Oil Cargo Fee (BOCF)

Period	Product	BOCF Rate
From Jan 1, 2002 to date	Oil other than Asphalt Asphalt	22.50¢ per tonne 11.25¢ per tonne