-
Enhancing hazard and crisis management and cross border
cooperation between The Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Romania in
the Danube Delta
Colonel Vitali MUTAF Deputy Head of Civil Protection
Directorate
UNECE Project on hazard and crisis management in the Danube
Delta
Lessons learned after man-made disasters and their main
reasons
-
Characteristics Danube area
• Length of Danube river = 2600 km • Outflow in Danube Delta •
Delta is important biological filtering system
for the Black Sea • Oil terminals with high risks of spills •
Oil terminals on 135 km of Delta • Risks for negative impact on
Delta by spills
Effective cross-border cooperation on industrial safety in the
Danube area is crucial, because hazardous industries are located at
transboundary watercourses with an outflow trough the Danube Delta
into the Black Sea.
-
CONTRIBUTION OF THE ACCIDENTAL POLLUTION
Petroleum Chemicals Farming Others product
-
14/10/2016
POLLUTION CHARACTERISATION (Danubian level)
Transboundary impact contribution compared to all accidental
pollutions recorded by the AEWS-Danube
-
Accidental pollution Hot spots in the Danube Hydrographical
Basin
Note: Map produced by the AEPWS experts group of the ICPDR
-
UNECE Danube Delta project Why it started
Analysis done by The Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Romania
shows that: • Cross border cooperation is insufficient •
Information and notification on hazard sources needs to be improved
• Insufficient preparedness and response mechanisms to emergency
situations
Hazard and crisis management needs improvement • Cooperation
needs to be formalized
Project carried out under the UNECE Industrial Accidents
Convention's Assistance Programme
-
Danube Delta project 2011 - 2015
The general objective of the project was to improve cooperation
between the three Danube area countries (Republic of Moldova,
Ukraine and Romania) on hazard and crisis management. Therefore the
project was focused on: • Improving the cooperation between
authorities and private sector • Enhancing industrial safety •
Enhancing the hazard and crisis management • Reducing the risks of
spills (oil and chemicals) • Reducing the threat of a negative
impact on the quality of the (aquatic)
environment
-
Hazard Management • harmonising procedures on prevention and
safety standards • drafting an agreement on hazard and
crisis management • drafting safety guidelines for oil
terminals • training of inspectors • a seminar for exchange of
information • a joint visit to major hazardous facilities •
workshops to discuss and draft documents • joint training sessions
• development joint contingency plan
Crisis Management • working on cooperation in case of an
emergency • working on requesting and receiving mutual
assistance • reviewing emergency plans • a seminar to compare
emergency plans • a top-table exercise to test procedures • an
in-field exercise to test procedures and mutual
assistance • a workshop to evaluate and work on improvement •
development agreement cross border
cooperation
Danube Delta project 2011 - 2015
Objective to be achieved through:
-
As introduction: Indicators industrial accident
• The element of surprise • Short decision time • Situation
materializes unexpectedly • Decisions are required urgently •
Urgent demands for information are received • Sense of loss of
control • Demands are made to identify someone to blame •
Reputation suffers • Specific threats like damage human health and
environment • Communications are increasingly difficult to
manage
So: pro-action – prevention – preparedness – response – after
care
-
Focus on oil terminals
Reni (Ukraine) Giurgiulesti (Moldova) Galati (Romania)
-
The Safety Chain Concept
• Three components: o Hazard management; o Crisis management; o
Aftercare management.
• Each component has two subcategories:
o Pro-action and prevention for hazard management;
o Preparedness and response for crisis management;
o Damage review and follow-up for aftercare management.
-
Activities Danube Delta Project: Hazard management
Development of Hazard map for the Danube Delta • Identification
of hazardous activities • Evaluation of the water hazard class
of the hazardous substances present
• Preliminary ranking of industrial activities regarding the
risks they represent for the Danube Delta
-
Activities Danube Delta Project
• Technical workshop on hazard management • Joint Visit to the
ports of Galati, Odessa and
Giurgulesti • Hazard and crisis management week • Technical
workshop on crisis management • Field and Table Top exercise on the
Danube Delta • Development and testing Joint Contingency Plan •
Development trilateral agreement
-
Achievements Danube Delta Project
• Identification of hazardous activities • Sharing of good
practices • Accident prevention requirements based on existing
(international) legislation • Identification of deficiencies in
hazard management between the countries • Sharing of information on
national systems for enforcing safety • On-site review of safety
standards with use of safety reports/documents of the ports and
the safety guidelines and good industry practices for oil
terminals • Discuss the environmental impact of and lessons learnt
from past accidents at oil
terminals • Development of safety guidelines and good industry
practices for oil terminals • Evaluation of all activities and
identification of opportunities for development
-
Activities Danube Delta Project: Field and Table Top
Exercise
• Joint training and exercise of the response organizations • To
test and practice:
o emergency procedures for notification, communication,
preparedness and emergency response
o procedures for requests for mutual assistance o the Joint
Contingency Plan, provide feedback and to finalise o command and
control and decision making mechanisms o the assessment capacity
and capabilities o cross-border cooperation
-
14/10/2016
-
14/10/2016
-
Evaluation exercises
Motivation
To identify: • Lessons to be learned and underline strong points
of the
exercises and to further strenghten them • Gaps and to develop
ways to eliminate them • Opportunities for improvement
Evaluation report prepared !
-
Evaluation exercises Its a must! !
• Are fixing wrong behaviour, which can bring us in danger or
even to worsen the accident
• Create a false feeling of safety and efficient operations
• Learn that problem cheating is better then problem solving
• Maintain a huge risk for complacency – which is a critical
root cause for accidents and related wrong approaches and
decisions
By hiding gaps and imperfections, we:
-
Evaluation approach:
• Independent team of external evaluators • Focus on objectives
with a breakdown in
evaluation topics • Observation during exercises • First
feedback after the evaluation • Feedback from players through
discussions • Evaluation report with findings and
recommendations
-
Focus evaluation
• The fulfilment of exercise goals • The notification and
warning system • The procedures leading to the correct
identification of danger and risk
evaluation (assessment of the situation) • Communication and
cooperation between all stakeholders • Command and control system •
Decision making and the quality of it • Quality of (mitigation)
measures • Cross-border cooperation
-
Evaluation results Overall findings
• Excellent preparation of the exercises • Outstanding hosted by
the host country • Realistic scenarios • Impressive operations by
the services of the Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and
Romania • Dedicated staff • Open atmosphere – we all wanted to
learn! • Excellent cooperation with the Giurgiulesti International
Free port • Lessons identified that can/should lead to
opportunities for improvement and
development
-
Evaluation results Notification and communication
• Response to the notification of the accident was in some cases
not sufficient. Information flow was slow.
• Some problems with (international) communication (phone,
internet, different frequencies, language).
• Notification systems (PIAC and UNECE IAN) were activated with
delay. • Insufficient communication between the countries about
sampling,
assessments, analysis, forecasting on potential risks etc. • No
recording/logging of relevant information (as decisions, measures)
• Acoustic warning and alarming signals were not sufficient • A
train passed the accident! Authorities were not informed
-
Evaluation results Command and control
• A sound communication between the 3 countries about the
incident and measures to be taken seemed to be insufficient. This
can hinder adequate coordination and decision-making of response
actions.
• A sound communication between the commanders and the
responsible operational chief could not be observed. In case of an
insufficient communication a coordinated response and important
decision-making can be hindered.
-
Evaluation results: Deployment
• Dedication of all staff was admirable. • Response teams
reported that there is a shortage of response forces and
trained/certified staff who are permanently available for
operations. Example: full equipped boat but not sufficient and
trained staff to operate the boat.
• Procedures and rules of governance in the emergency response
in the Joint Contingency Plan seemed not to be clear for the key
players.
-
Evaluation results In field operations and logistics
• Response units on the site operated efficient and fast and
well coordinated. • The oil booms could not be fixed efficiently
and or they rotated. Leakages and
pollution! • Oil skimmer did not work adequate and the number of
skimmers is not
sufficient. • The amount of protecting devices and equipment for
the personnel on the oil
platform is not sufficient. • Life saving gear on the terminal
was not sufficient, like ropes and such to save
victims that were pushed into the water.
-
Evaluation results Assessment (impact) accident
• Sampling of the contaminated surface water at the location of
the oil terminal could not be executed because the pollution was
dispersed and drifted away due the flow speed of the water.
• Poor communication between the countries about the pollution,
measures to be taken
• Conducted assessments, used models, calculations and
assessments methodologies to assess the (potential) risks for the
human health and the environment varied strongly between the 3
countries.
-
Recommendations and lessons learned
• Create awareness at the top management of the industrial
operators as well
within the authorities and at the political level about the
importance of preparedness and response to accidents and the
essential resources.
• Make an inventory of the available and needed resources,
equipment and skills. Develop a plan to improve the situation.
• Develop or review a (existing national) contingency plan and
integrate the variety of incident scenarios, including the needed
structures, processes and resources. Make an action plan.
• Review the decision-making structure at national, regional and
local level as well the roles and responsibilities of the
key-players. Revise where needed the structure and roles based on
the review.
• Train the decision-making structure and processes through
exercises based on a variety of scenarios.
-
Recommendations and lessons learned
• Review and analyze the capacity, equipment and expertise that
is needed to operate adequately in various types and scenarios of
accidents.
• Prepare an action plan and discuss the action plan with the
senior management and the responsible minister.
• Test and train communications between the 3 countries
regarding the response to an accident.
• Review the procedures and equipment of a sound operation in
cases of oil spills (fixing booms, number of skimmers, safety
equipment).
• Review the operational capability of the international
notification systems and appoint a responsible person for the
process.
• Implement the Danube Basin Alarm Model (DBAM) to forecast
pollution behavior and test it between the 3 countries.
-
Recommendations and lessons learned
• Develop a training program for the response services and their
key experts and professionals to various types of accidents and
execute the program systematically.
• Integrate in such a program as well the exercises and
trainings with the neighboring countries.
• Investigate opportunities for mutual assistance and support
regarding sampling and analysis of hazardous substances as well the
exchange of expertise, and train the mutual exchange and
cooperation.
• Develop a set of rules and an action plan to ensure the
implementation of the joint declaration as agreed by the 3
countries.
• Review the evaluation report, discuss it at the national and
international level between the 3 countries and develop an action
plan.
• Revise the current Joint Contingency Plan based on the
findings and actions to be taken.
• And: train, train and train !!
-
Some impressions
-
Thank you for your attention!
http://www.unece.org/env/teia/welcome.html
[email protected]
Colonel Vitali MUTAF
Ministry of Internal Affairs Republic of Moldova
Civil Protection and Emergency Situations Service Deputy Head of
Civil Protection Directorate
[email protected]
Enhancing hazard and crisis management and cross border
cooperation between The Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Romania in
the Danube DeltaCharacteristics Danube areaCONTRIBUTION OF THE
ACCIDENTAL POLLUTIONPOLLUTION CHARACTERISATION (Danubian
level)Slide Number 5UNECE Danube Delta project�Why it startedDanube
Delta project�2011 - 2015Danube Delta project�2011 - 2015As
introduction: �Indicators industrial accidentFocus on oil
terminalsThe Safety Chain ConceptActivities Danube Delta Project:
Hazard managementActivities Danube Delta ProjectAchievements Danube
Delta ProjectActivities Danube Delta Project: �Field and Table Top
ExerciseSlide Number 16Slide Number 17�Evaluation
exercises�MotivationEvaluation exercises�Its a must! !Evaluation
approach:Focus evaluationEvaluation results�Overall
findingsEvaluation results�Notification and communicationEvaluation
results�Command and controlEvaluation results:�DeploymentEvaluation
results�In field operations and logisticsEvaluation
results�Assessment (impact) accidentRecommendations and lessons
learnedRecommendations and lessons learnedRecommendations and
lessons learnedSome impressionsSlide Number 32Slide Number 33