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

teia.conv@unece.org

Colonel Vitali MUTAF

Ministry of Internal Affairs Republic of Moldova

Civil Protection and Emergency Situations Service Deputy Head of Civil Protection Directorate

vmutaf@mail.ru

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