Memorandum submitted by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Countryside Council for Wales, Natural England and Scottish Natural Heritage (UKOG 8)

 

Summary of key points

 

1. From a nature conservation perspective, we consider that the current framework of regulatory control is generally good with most advice provided by the statutory nature conservation agencies being heeded.

 

2. We consider that DECC should review the current system by which operators can commit to undertake certain environmental protection activities, but then alter these commitments after a licence has been granted. Greater consistency in these commitments between operators should also be sought.

 

3. To ensure that environmental advice is underpinned by a sound evidence base we consider that better information is required on:

 

i. offshore seabird distribution;

 

ii. impacts of developments on benthic communities;

 

iii. impacts of noise from developments.

 

4. We consider that the future strategy for undertaking Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of oil and gas should include a review of the process and a mechanism for updating existing SEAs in the light of new information.

 

1. Introduction

 

1.1 The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) is the statutory advisor to Government on UK and international nature conservation, on behalf of the Council for Nature Conservation and the Countryside, the Countryside Council for Wales, Natural England and Scottish Natural Heritage.

 

1.2 The Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) champions the environment and landscapes of Wales and its coastal waters as sources of natural and cultural riches, as a foundation for economic and social activity, and as a place for leisure and learning opportunities. CCW aims to make the environment a valued part of everyone's life in Wales.

 

1.3 Natural England (NE) conserves and enhances England's natural environment, for its intrinsic value, the wellbeing and enjoyment of people and the economic prosperity that it brings.

 

1.4 Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) is a statutory advisor to Scottish Government. SNH's role is to look after Scotland's natural heritage, help people to enjoy and value it, and to encourage people to use it sustainably.

 

1.5 This memorandum is a co-ordinated response from JNCC, CCW, NE and SNH.

 

2. Background to the Agencies' work in relation to the oil and gas industry

 

2.1 JNCC, CCW, NE and SNH (the 'Agencies') are statutory consultees for oil and gas activities under several pieces of legislation and are consulted for advice by DECC, the regulatory authority, concerning activities within their advisory ambit. CCW, NE and SNH provide advice within their respective territorial waters (out to 12 nautical miles). JNCC provides advice in offshore waters beyond 12 nautical miles, extending to the limit of the United Kingdom Continental Shelf.

 

2.2 JNCC is responsible for the majority of oil and gas advice and it also co-ordinates advice from the country agencies where appropriate. The Agencies have had an advisory role within the steering group for the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) process for oil and gas licensing rounds.

 

2.3 There are some general principles that the Agencies use when advising on oil and gas issues. These are:

 

i. advice should be consistent with the need to protect important habitats and species listed by European Directives, such as the Habitats (92/43/EEC) and Birds Directives (79/409/EEC);

 

ii. advice should be based on the best available scientific information;

 

iii. advice should provide best environmental practice that is proportionate and appropriate, consistent with a risk-based approach to the management of environmental issues;

 

iv. advice to the regulatory authorities and oil and gas operators should be consistent.

 

3. How effective is the current fiscal and regulatory regime in which the industry operates?

 

Effectiveness of current regulatory regime

 

3.1 The Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has an in-house Environmental Management Team that is the main contact point for the Agencies' advice. There is a regulatory requirement for the Agencies to be consulted on all applications that require consent, such as: drilling of wells, Food and Environment Protection Act (FEPA) licences, laying of pipelines, oil spill response, oil spill contingency planning and carrying out of geological surveys. We consider that the Agencies currently have a good relationship with both the industry and the regulator that generally enables effective collaboration in order to address key environmental issues.

 

3.2 From a nature conservation perspective, we consider that the current framework of regulatory control, with advice provided by the Agencies, effectively meets the UK's obligations under the terms of the Habitats and Birds Directives as well as providing the potential to deliver best practice measures.

 

4. What can be done to minimise the environmental impact of exploiting the reserves? How should this be encouraged and/or financed?

 

Regulatory compliance with project-specific conditions

 

4.1 The Agencies believe that compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process that is undertaken for oil and gas activities by the operators has scope for improvement.

 

4.2 It has been our experience that operators and their associated environmental consultants present Environmental Statements for projects that indicate that best practice mitigation measures will be adopted throughout implementation. However, in some cases, once the project has been granted approval, operators have subsequently amended the project and not delivered on initial commitments made in the Environmental Statement, examples being:

 

i. failure to deliver the best available techniques (BAT) as specified in the Environmental Statement;

 

ii. changes in methods of discharging drilling and chemical wastes;

 

iii. unanticipated use of rock to stabilise pipelines;

 

iv. unanticipated flaring of hydrocarbons.

 

The impression given can be that the information provided within the Environmental Statement is solely for the purposes of gaining consent and does not reflect the reality of what will be implemented. In our view, cost-effectiveness is not a suitable justification for changing commitments made within an EIA.

 

4.3 At the moment, Environmental Statements and Petroleum Operations Notices often contain far too much generic data extracted from previous statements. Commitments by operators can be lost within excessive text. The quality of the EIA process would be improved if regulators were able to ensure oil and gas operators make it clear within their applications what measures will be implemented to minimise adverse impacts upon the environment. Ideally, these commitments should be presented as a set of statements within their submissions; amendments to these statements subsequent to gaining consent should be an extreme exception, and subject to a renewed EIA. The Offshore Inspectorate within DECC should be able to check these commitments during inspections and ensure that there is regulatory compliance. Currently, we do not think that the Offshore Inspectorate is provided with enough project-specific information to be able to effectively check compliance with approval consents.

 

4.4 DECC are currently amending the EIA guidance notes for operators, which should lead to improvements. We recommend that DECC should review the current system of ensuring EIA compliance.

 

Importance of up-to-date environmental data

 

4.5 The provision of reliable environmental advice to the oil and gas industry and regulatory authorities is reliant on the information underpinning the advice being up-to-date and accurate. The Agencies promote and share good practice by hosting and contributing to a wide range of initiatives that seek to improve survey techniques and monitoring programmes. The following issues need further investment to ensure that information is fully reliable:

 

i. knowledge of offshore seabird distribution;

 

ii. impact of developments on benthic communities;

 

iii. impacts of noise from developments.

 

4.6 Information on offshore seabird distribution can be used for a number of purposes, including assessing potential impacts of oil spills and oil spill contingency planning; more importantly, it provides an easy guide for the oil and gas industry to plan their activities by highlighting areas and times of the year when any oil spills could have a significant environmental impact. The majority of information in use derives from the 1980s and 1990s, when data collection was funded very effectively by a consortium of relevant Government and industry partners. We recommend that a similar programme be established to update information relevant to oil and gas developments.

 

4.7 There is considerable variability between oil and gas operators in relation to monitoring the impacts of their activities on benthic (seabed) communities. Some operators undertake extensive and comprehensive surveys around their installations, whereas others do not carry out any surveys. Impacts may be chronic in their effect and monitoring is needed in these cases. We recommend that benthic monitoring be carried out by industry to standards set by Government.

 

4.8 A number of oil and gas activities, principally seismic surveys, hammer piling of infrastructure and explosive use in decommissioning activities can generate sounds that can disturb, and in extreme cases injure, marine mammals. Oil and gas operators use best practice guidelines, developed and updated by JNCC, to mitigate the impacts of these sounds. The development and refinement of the best practice guidelines is an adaptive process, reliant upon the latest scientific research and development of mitigation techniques. The oil and gas industry has an extensive research programme in place to examine these effects and to further develop mitigation techniques. Our greatest priority for research or mitigation of the impacts of noise from developments is to improve techniques to monitor marine mammals during night time or periods of poor visibility.

 

Efficacy of the SEA process for future oil and gas licensing rounds

 

4.9 The eighth Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has recently been undertaken for oil and gas licensing and was incorporated within the 'Energy SEA'. There is a long future for the oil and gas industry in the UK, and we would welcome a commitment for there to be future SEAs specific to oil and gas licensing. In order to be confident that any future licensing rounds are based on suitable and up-to-date environmental information, we recommend that the Government commit to undertaking a review of the oil and gas SEA programme after the Energy SEA has been completed.

 

4.10 Future SEAs should be directed at ensuring that the recommendations of the current offshore SEA are still valid, and that sufficient resources have been directed towards addressing any uncertainties, or recommendations made within previous SEAs. A clear explanation of how this fits into the wider context of SEA for other offshore industries (e.g. offshore wind) and Marine Spatial Planning would be helpful. SEAs are also suitable for addressing the cumulative effects of industries and ensuring that these do not have an adverse effect on the marine environment.

 

4.11 We consider that the future strategy for undertaking SEA of oil and gas should include a review of the process and a mechanism for updating existing SEAs in the light of new information, and we recommend that the future strategy for undertaking SEA of oil and gas is clearly articulated to all stakeholders by the regulator.

 

March 2009