- Email: [email protected]
Environmental management of offshore oil and gas activities in Canada
Environmental Management of Offshore Oil and Gas Activities in Canada Robert H. Bailey and F. Rainer Engelhardt Robert H. Bailey is Senior Environmental Advisor for the Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration office in Halifax, Nova Scotia. F. Rainer Engelhardt is Director, Biological Environment for COGLA in Ottawa, Ontario. In response to almost a decade of turmoil in world oil and gas markets, ttle Government of Canada promulgated a National Energy Program (NEP) on October 28, 1980. This comprehensive program was designed to promote security of supply, to create opportunities for Canadians to participate in the exploration, development and production of hydrocarbons, and to ensure that all Canadians share in the benefits derived from such activities. A major part of this program focused on the m a n a g e m e n t of oil and gas activities on "Canada lands," lands falling directly under the jurisdiction of the Government of Canada. For the purposes of this discussion, Canada lands are defined as those lands lying north of the provinces and all lands lying within the offshore economic zone excluding internal waters under provincial jurisdiction (see Figure 1). Generally, mineral resources (including oil and gas) lying on lands within provincial boundaries are owned by the provinces. Mineral resources lying both on land and offshore north of tile areas under provincial jurisdiction are owned by the federal government. T h e ownership of offshore mineral resources adjacent to the provinces has not y e t been resolved completely, with both the provinces and the federal government claiming jurisdiction. T h e fact that the jurisdictional aspect has not been resolved is relevant to this ;discussion only insofar as, in some instances, it affects the consistency of the offshore management regime in waters adjacent to the provinces. With the caveat that jurisdictional uncertainty has created unique management regimes in certain parts of the country, the purpose of this paper is to outline the general federal management framework for offshore oil and gas as it relates to environmental protection. E n ' , i r a n m e n ~ l fmlxlct Assessmem Re,dew. 'VA. N..~-4
o / o s~.oo,o oz9s-o.s~/s3.12oo.os.s
EIA REVIEW
4/3-4 523
THE CANADA LANDS
Figure 1.
The Canada Lands lie north of the provinces and within the offshore economic zone excluding internal waters under provincial jurisdiction.
At the time that the federal g o v e r n m e n t a n n o u n c e d its National Energy Program, oil and gas exploration and d e v e l o p m e n t activities were administered by two separate g o v e r n m e n t agencies. Areas lying north of the provinces were m a n a g e d by the D e p a r t m e n t of Indian Affairs and Northern Development; areas lying south of this line were administered by the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. In order to p r o m o t e consistency in the m a n a g e m e n t of all Canada lands as well as to effect the efficient d e p l o y m e n t of g o v e r n m e n t expertise, the Ministers responsible for the Departments of Energy, Mines and Resources and Indian Affairs and Northern Development signed a M e m o r a n d u m of U n d e r s t a n d i n g in 1981, which established the Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration (COGLA). T h i s action in effect a m a l g a m a t e d those sections of the two departments that were responsible for m a n a g i n g oil and gas activities on Canada lands, a l t h o u g h it left with the Department of Indian Affairs and Noi-thern Development the responsibility for providing e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice to C O G L A on northern oil and gas issues. T h e specific mandate of C O G L A was confirmed on March 5, 1982 with the p r o c l a m a t i o n by P a r l i a m e n t of the Canada Oil and Gas Act. T h e a m a l g a m a t i o n also served to provide industry with a "single wind_ow" on government. In this context, C O G L A a t t e m p t s to ensure that industry complies with the statutory and administrative requirement of federal and, where relevant, provincial agencies, w i t h o u t i n f r i n g i n g u p o n the statutory mandates of these institutions. 524 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
T h i s function is particularly i m p o r t a n t to the administration of e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters in the offshore, where a n u m b e r of g o v e r n m e n t agencies have key regulatory and advisory roles. C O G L A is a u n i q u e organization a m o n g Canadian federal institutions. It receives f u n d i n g from the two parent departments, and its chief administrator reports to both Deputy Ministers. C O G L A is primarily an operational agency with its policy direction c o m i n g from a Policy Review C o m m i t t e e comprised of senior officials from the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. T h e Administration is comprised of five technical branches and a Policy Analysis and C o o r d i n a t i o n Division and functions t h r o u g h Ottawa headquarters and regional offices. Ifi brief, the L a n d Management Branch is responsible for a d m i n i s t e r i n g matters p e r t a i n i n g to the allocation of rights to hydrocarbon resources on Canada lands. T h e ~ngineering Branch is responsible for regulating a n d m o n i t o r i n g offshore exploratory drilling, d e v e l o p m e n t and p r o d u c t i o n activities. T h e Resource Evaluation Branch administers matters pertaining to geophysical and geological programs conducted by industry as well as m a n a g i n g the evaluation of i n f o r m a t i o n from these programs. T h e Canada Benefits Branch is responsible for p r o m o t i n g Canadian participation and distribution of benefits for all activities conducted on Canada Lands. T h e Environmental Protection Branch is responsible for ensuring that all activities conducted in the offshore are carried out in an environmentally safe and acceptable manner. A l t h o u g h the r e m a i n d e r of this paper emphasizes the activities of C O G L A in environmental protection of offshore areas, it should be noted also that C O G L A has an i m p o r t a n t administrative role in p r o m o t i n g the protection of offshore operations from environmental elements. A safe operation protected from e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors such as heavy seas, strong winds or ice will not only minimize the loss of life and property, but also decrease the potential for negative impacts on the natural e n v i r o n m e n t . Several offshore e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues are of concern in the Canadian c o m m u n i t y . T h e following section outlines these issues as a basis for reviewing the ways and means whereby the current e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t regime responds to them. Issues
Canada is a large, culturally diverse country and, as one m i g h t expect, the concerns about environmental issues associated with offshore oil and gas vary from one region of the country toanother. However, these variations are to a large extent differences in degree rather than kind. Whether or not loss of well control is caused by the collision of a drilling unit or p r o d u c t i o n platform with an iceberg in the north o r a n oil tanker in the south, the major environmental concern centers on the EIA R E V I E W 4/3-4
525
accidental release of hydrocarbons a n d its potential effects on the local e n v i r o n m e n t . T h e degree of importance that is attached to such impacts is frequently p r o p o r t i o n a l to the effects that they may have on social activities and the i m p o r t a n c e of these activities in the regional e c o n o m y a n d culture. In the Arcdc, for example, local environmental concerns focus principally on the impact that oil and gas activities may have on marine m a m m a l s , birds, caribou and fish, because tile harvesting of these resources is central to the i n d i g e n o u s cultural and economic milieu. A l t h o u g h e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues are i m p o r t a n t in both northern and southern Canada, i n p u t from public meetings on a variety of proposed major development projects strongly suggests that social issues, such as impacts on traditional lifestyles a n d cultures, and access to e m p l o y m e n t and economic benefits are of equal importance to e n v i r o n m e n t a l concerns. Certainly, in Nova Scotia the public's general reaction to tile proposed development of gas from the Venture structure on the Scotian Shelf suggests to many observers that there is more interest in the o p p o r t u n i t i e s for upstream a n d downstream economic benefits associated with offshore oil and gas development than there is with potentially adverse e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects. Most segments of tile fishing industry itself, which w o u l d be tile principal recipient of many of the alleged potential negative effects from oil and gas development, have expressed s u p p o r t for this project, provided that acceptable c o m p e n s a t i o n schemes for losses can be established. Perhaps the most clearly defined issues in Canada are associated with the potentital interaction between the oil and gas industry a n d the fishery. Specifically, the issues relate primarily to direct damage or loss of fishing gear caused by seismic and supply boat activity, debris or oil spills, as well as to c o m p e n s a t i o n schemes for covering such losses. T h o s e involved in the fishery have also expressed concern about possible secondary effects from oil and gas activities such as fish tainting from oil or condensate spills, loss of access to fishing g r o u n d s d u r i n g exploration or development, and the potential consequent curtailment of the operation of onshore processing plants because of a reduced fish supply. Further, the possible defection of trained a n d experienced navigators from the fishing sector to high paying jobs in the petroleum industry is an i m p o r t a n t issue, particularly in N e w f o u n d l a n d where the fishery is a major c o m p o n e n t of both the economic and the social fabric. In some regions, representatives of small fishing villages have expressed concern that intensive offshore d e v e l o p m e n t could result in the displacement of fishing vessels by supply boats because of limited wharfage. Virtually all of the above externalities have more of a social c o n n o t a t i o n than an environmental one in the sense that they are not caused by i m p a i r m e n t to the natural resource base. T h e more traditional environmental issues are also related to the fin a n d shellfish fisheries, but are, in addition, relevant to the protection of marine 526 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
m a m m a l s a n d seabirds. These include: oil p o l l u t i o n arising from the loss of well control; the effects of explosives used d u r i n g seismic surveys i n a s m u c h as these effects may influence future harvests; the effects of drilling m u d s on biological productivity, especially associated with the use of oil-based drilling muds; the discharge of rig wastes from drilling units; and the chronic release of oil and gas into t h e marine e n v i r o n m e n t from a variety of other exploratory, d e v e l o p m e n t and operational activities. A l t h o u g h each of these individual issues has been the focus of some considerable interest, the overriding preoccupation at the present time lies with the long-term cumulative effects on biological productivity of all p o l l u t i o n sources related to offshore oil and gas activity. T h i s concern is greatest in the Arctic e n v i r o n m e n t , where there is little world-wide experience to draw u p o n and where there is a h i g h degree of uncertainty about chronic p o l l u t i o n and resultant c u m u l a t i v e impacts.-This type of perceived potential e n v i r o n m e n t a l degradation is also a major concern to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans with respect to loss of fish habitat, and to the Department of E n v i r o n m e n t with respect to e n v i r o n m e n t a l quality in general. T h e siting of offshore facilities in potentially active geological zones, such as zones of sediment transport, mass m o v e m e n t or earthquake activity, is an environmental safety issue in some offshore areas of Canada. Some groups have expressed concern that geological activity in these zones could affect the functional integrity of offshore oil and gas drilling, p r o d u c t i o n or transportation facilities, and thereby cause the release of hydrocarbons and possibly other toxic substances into the marine environment. All identifiable interfaces between oil and gas activities and the natural and h u m a n e n v i r o n m e n t are assessed for potential impacts by C O G L A and its advisory bodies. Both recognized and suspected issues are addressed t h r o u g h the legislative and administrative mechanisms that are reviewed in the following section.
The Offshore Environmental. Management Regime C O G L A routinely screens all applications to conduct oil and gas activities in order to determine if these proposals will have adverse effects on the h u m a n or natural environment. On the basis of available i n f o r m a t i o n and expert i n p u t from both internal staffand interagency advisory bodies, proposed activities are assessed and may be denied, approved or permitted to proceed with modifications designed to protect the environment. In the event that a proposal has a potential for significant i m p a c t which cannot be fully evaluated on the basis of available information, the project may need to undergo a more formal e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment process under the aegis of the federal E n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review Process (EARP). T h i s process is referred to briefly later in this paper and forms the subject of tile article in this special issue by Harrison and Rothschild. EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
527
Legislative Basis T h e principal a u t h o r i t y under which C O G L A manages the resolution of environmental issues is found in the Canada Oil and Gas Ac0, the Canada Oil and Gas Production Act, 2 a n d their allied regulations. 3 It is i m p o r t a n t to note that this legislative package is not the exclusive i n s t r u m e n t for addressing e n v i r o n m e n t a l Problems. Rather, it c o m p l e m e n t s a variety of federal statutes ~, which confer e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t responsibilities u p o n a n u m b e r of "agencies such as the D e p a r t m e n t of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of the Environment. The Canada Oil .and Gas Act is primarily an allocative i n s t r u m e n t in the sense that it provides the basis for g r a n t i n g exploration, d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p r o d u c t i o n rights, as well as defining h o w tile benefits from offshore p r o d u c t i o n will be distributed between g o v e r n m e n t and industry. Under this Act, the Governor-in-Council can withdraw lands'from exploration for any reason, i n c l u d i n g "an e n v i r o n m e n t a l or social problem of a serious nature" [Section 6(b)]. Section 49 provides the C O G L A Ministers with tile authority to establish two Environmental Studies Revolving F u n d s - - o n e for the area north of the line of administrative convenience, a n d one for the area south of it. These funds were established for tile p u r p o s e of f i n a n c i n g environmental or social studies, the results of which would help the Ministers "to decide whether or not to authorize exploration or d e v e l o p m e n t activities under t h i s Act or any other Act of Parliament." T h e Oil and Gas P r o d u c t i o n and Conservation Act is the basic i n s t r u m e n t for regulating the nature 0f activities associated with offshore o p e r a t i o n s , a n d c o n t a i n s p r o v i s i o n s r e s p e c t i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t a l safety of operations. Under Section 3.2 of this Act, the Minister authorizes each work or activity proposed by the operator, subject to "such approvals, requirements or deposits as may be prescribed in the regulations, including: a) requirements related to liability for loss, damage, costs or expenses; b) requirements for carrying out e n v i r o n m e n t a l programs or studies." Section 19 of this Act prohibits the deliberate discharge of oil and gas and establishes the liability of the operator for damages arising from u n i n t e n t i o n a l spills as well as responsibility for i m p l e m e n t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e c o u n t e r m e a s u r e s . R e g u l a t i o n s derived f r o m this legislation require the operator to prepare contingency plans which contain elements of environmental assessment. T h e environmental c o m p o n e n t of these plans is discussed below. T h e C a n a d a Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations, which were p r o m u l g a t e d under authority of the Canada Oil and Gas P r o d u c t i o n a n d Conservation Act, establish provisions for m a n a g i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact of oil and gas activities. T h e y require both the 528 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
identification of natural conditions which may affect the safety of the operation, such as weather, sea conditions and ice hazards, arid the assessment of the natural e n v i r o n m e n t which may be affected by the oil a n d gas activity. For example, when an application is made to drill a well, ttle operator must identify the oceanographic and meteorological factors which may influence rig operations, as well as the means by w h i c h the natural e n v i r o n m e n t will be protected d u r i n g the operation. T h e powers to manage tile resolution of e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues that are conferred u p o n the Ministers by this legislative package are comprehensive and cover all aspects of the exploration, development, p r o d u c t i o n and a b a n d o n m e n t p l a n n i n g processes. T h e y not only p e r m i t the control of the e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact of all offshore activities, but also provide the basis for identifying where and when offshore operations will be permitted or excluded. Administrative Processes
Advisory Bodies. As noted previously, one aspect of C O G L A ' s e n v i r o n m e n t a l responsibilities is to p r o m o t e a coordinated review of offshore oil a n d gas activities a m o n g g o v e r n m e n t regulatory a n d / o r resource agencies. Several advisory bodies are involved. At the national level, this co-ordination is expedited t h r o u g h the Resource M a n a g e m e n t E n v i r o n m e n t a l Committee (RMEC), comprised of agencies representing oceanographic, atmospheric, fishery, wildlife, national parks, e n v i r o n m e n t a l protection and navigation services, which are located in the National Capital Region (Ottawa). T h e R M E C is responsible for providing advice on e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters to C O G L A and for the exchange of i n f o r m a t i o n about existing and anticipated activity in the offshore. It meets regularly to review the e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t s of e m e r g i n g policy a n d regulatory requirements, as well as to confer on specific issues related to offshore oil and gas activities. In the Nova Scotia offshore region, e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice is g e n e r a t e d t h r o u g h the C a n a d a - N o v a Scotia E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee (ECC). T h e ECC was created by m u t u a l agreement of the Canada and Nova Scotia Governments to provide technical advice on e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters to the C O G L A regional office in Halifax, Nova Scotia. As part of its duties, tlle regional office is responsible for p r o v i d i n g administrative support to the CanadaNova Scotia Offshore Oil and Gas Board, a federal/provincial body established under the Canada-Nova Scotia Agreement on Offshore Management and RevenueSharing. T h e Board carries o u t m a n y of the legislated managerial responsibilities of the federal Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. T h e EEC m e m b e r s h i p includes representatives from the regional offices of R M E C m e m b e r agencies, and, in addition, has representation from relevant resource and regulatory agencies in tlle province of Nova Scotia. In the north, e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice is provided as a service to C O G L A by the Northern Affairs Program in the D e p a r t m e n t of Indian EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
529
Affairs and Northern Development, and two major interagency committees, the Arctic Waters Advisory Committee, and the Interdepartmental Environmental Resource Committee.
Exploration Agreement. Conceptually, the administrative process begins with the identification by either COGLA or industry of offshore lands which appear to have oil and gas potential. T h e practice of identifying lands for tender includes not only a consideration of their h y d r o c a r b o n potential, but also an e v a l u a t i o n of possible environmental sensitivities. If the perceived risk to sensitive environmental resources is unacceptably high in certain areas, then these areas will be excluded from calls for proposals. Such exclusions may be permanent, at least for the foreseeable future, or they may be temporary. Areas may be temporarily excluded from exploration activity in order to provide sufficient time for government a n d / o r i n d u s t r y to generate the i n f o r m a t i o n that will assist the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in d e t e r m i n i n g the n a t u r e a n d extent of environmental sensitivities. Upon completion of the identification process, the Minister then calls for proposals from companies that may be interested in c o n d u c t i n g e x p l o r a t o r y work. T h e proposals are reviewed, negotiations conducted with interested parties, and Exploration Agreements signed with successful candidates. Subject to certain legislative requirements, an Exploration Agreement confers upon the c o m p a n y the right to explore for hydrocarbons, and the exclusive right to drill and develop for production on specified Canada lands over a specified period of time, usually for five years. In exchange for these rights, the c o m p a n y must agree to undertake a work program to evaluate the oil and gas potential on the area covered in the Agreement. Such an undertaking usually consists of a comprehensive seismic survey and the drilling of one or more exploratory wells. T h e Exploration Agreement generally does not contain provisions that relate directly to environmental management. At this stage, environmental matters are considered to be non-negotiable in the sense that an Exploration Agreement cannot contain provisions that exclude the operator from accounting for the impact of activities on sensitive resources during subsequent approval processes. However, in cases where information on social or environmental resources at risk is assessed and determined to be inadequate for decision-making purposes, the Exploration Agreement may require the operator to conduct certain environmental studies or to undertake a consuhative process with c o m m u n i t y interests such as t h e f i s h i n g industry or native people, before proceeding with exploration activities. In other instances, w h e r e exploratory activities will be conducted in hostile physical environments, the Agreement may specify the period during which a c o m p a n y is permitted to operate. 530 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
All major activities of an operator in possession of an Exploration Agreement require approval by COGLA. Some of these require formal application, review and approval; others can be approved through less formal written communication. T h e major exploration activities requiring approval are geological and geophysical surveys and the drilling of wells.
Geological and Geophysical Surveys. All geological surveys, whether undertaken as part of an Exploration Agreement, or as a separate activity, require approval from COGLA. T h e operator must submit information on a n u m b e r of items, including the location of the work, the dates of c o m m e n c e m e n t a n d completion, the type of vessels involved, and the characteristics of the energy source that will be used. T h e operator's application must also contain confirmation that other relevant federal departments have been notified of the work proposal. This procedure ensures that these agencies have an opportunity to identify marine resources or uses which may be at risk or in conflict with the proposed survey. As part of the total C O G L A review, the Environmental Protection Branch of C O G L A examines the applications for geological and geophysical work. In its review, the Branch staff pays particular attention to the location of the survey with respect to sensitive environmental resources or other marine activities, the nature of the seismic energy source, and advice from other government agencies. T o date, geological and geophysical activities have not created major environmental issues in the offshore waters of Canada. There have been instances where seismic boats or their e q u i p m e n t have interfered with fishing activity or have caused damage to fishing equipment, but these events have been infrequent. In the event that an operator makes application to conduct seismic work in an area subject to intensive fishing, C O G L A has the authority to ensure that such activity proceeds only d u r i n g periods when the potential for conflict between the two resource activities is minimal. T h e use of chemical explosives in the conduct of seismic work has been the source of some controversy in Canada. T h e Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans, under authority of the Canada Fisheries Act, does not normally permit any activity that will cause damage to fish or fish habitat, and clearly the detonation of chemical explosives in marine environments can kill fish. On the other hand, there are instances where the use of such a method is the only means whereby oil and gas companies can obtain geological information. Under such exceptional circumstances, COGLA, as a coordinating agency in environmental matters related to oil and gas development on Canada lands, works with other regulatory agencies through such mechanisms as the RMEC and the EEC, as well as with the operator, to determine if an acceptable trade-off between fishery loss and oil and gas information gains can be achieved, and, if so, the circumstances under EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
531
which the activity may proceed. Terms and conditions may include presurvey experimental studies to determine the effect of explosives on indigenous species, as well as to monitor the impact of the survey on fish and wildlife inhabiting the area. Drilling Programs. Before proceeding with any drilling activity on areas under Exploration Agreements, companies must develop a drilling program for approval b y COGLA. Drilling Program Approvals (DPA) authorize companies to drill within a specific area, with a specific drilling unit, for a specific period of time not exceeding three years. Information for the DPA review process is comprehensive. T h e operator must submit information on: the geological characteristics of the well; performance and safety characteristics of the drilling unit and support craft; and the logistics of the drilling program. In addition, a substantial a m o u n t of environmental information is required, including a descrip,fion and assessment of: surficial and near surface geological features; oceanographic and meteorological conditions; biological and socio-economic resources or resource uses which may be at risk or in conflict with the proposed program; and an emergency response plan, including oil spill contingency measures. In most cases, c o m p a n y officials support the operator's application with an oral presentation before representatives from the various branches and relevant regional offices of COGLA. This provides the operator with an opportunity to clarify specific aspects of proposed program. T h e operator may be required to provide additional information before the review process can be completed and approvals issued. From an environmental perspective, information contained in the application for a DPA enables C O G L A staff to assess the capability of companies to meet the regulatory requirements of both COGLA and other federal regulatory agencies. In particular, the companies must demonstrate capabilities to manage control of the drilling unit in heavy weather conditions; to operate meteorological observation and forecast programs; to dispose of sewage, grey water, deck washings, drilling muds, and cuttings in an environmentally acceptable manner; to protect sensitive marine and shoreline areas in the event of a spill; and to provide financial compensation for damage to the environment a n d / o r dependent users such as fishermen. COGLA's review process includes consultation with other federal and provincial agencies through advisory bodies such as the RMEC or ECC, as well as reviews by COGLA's in-house staff. Well Site Surveys. Before any drilling unit is placed on site, the operator is required to conduct a site specific survey of the sea floor. T h e information in this survey usually consists of shallow seismic data, photographs of the ocean floor, and samples of sea-bottom substrate. It-must be sufficient to identify the nature of the sea floor for engineering purposes and operational safety requirements. In cases 532
EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
where there is reason to expect a significant hazard to the natural environment, the operator may be required to analyze the biological setting at the proposed wellsite. T h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i n f o r m a t i o n collected d u r i n g this predrilling administrative phase is used primarily to assist COGLA and other government agencies in assessing tlle significance of potential impacts. It also aids them in ensuring that required mitigative measures are implemented during the construction of a well. Authority to Drill a Well. Specific approval must be given by COGLA for each well that an operator proposes to drill. An operator applying for authority to drill a well must provide information on the precise location of the well, its cost, estimated start-up date, length of time on site and engineering information such as the depth of the well and specific details on well construction. From an environmental assessment perspective, this information is reviewed by COGLA regional offices to c~etermine if the drilling operation will be taking place during a particular period when its presence or related activities could adversely affect a natural resource or create conflict with traditional resource uses. T h e physical presence of a rig combined with supply boat activity has been a real or perceived concern of fishermen in a n u m b e r of instances. In these circumstances, the operators may be requested either to adjust the timing or pattern of activities in order to reduce conflicts with the fishermen, or to meet with representatives of the fishing industry to allay concerns when these appear to be unfounded. Inspection and Monitoring. C O G L A staff conduct inspections of drilling rigs before drilling programs are approved and at regular intervals, usually once every two weeks, during drilling operations. These inspections include examinations of systems for treating a n d / o r disposing of sewage, grey water, deck washings, solid waste and drilling m u d to ensure that pollution loading in the marine environment is confined to an acceptable level. Where such disposal or treatment systems do not meet regulatory requirements, the operator must take steps immediately to remedy the situation or face the possibility of a shut-down in operations until the problem is corrected. Inspections of the drilling unit also entail a review of the operator's environmental monitoring program. In particular, the deployment and calibration of e q u i p m e n t such as anemometers, barometers, and thermometers for measuring various meteorological parameters are inspected by technical staff from either COGLA or the federal Department of the Environment twice a year. These inspections also include a review of the observation procedures and the methods used for keeping records of these observations. Well History Reports. During drilling, operators supply COGLA with daily reports containing a summary of current operations and related information, including weather and sea states. After a well has been completed, the operator must submit a final well report to COGLA. EIA REVIEW
't/3-4
533
Well reports are required to contain such i n f o r m a t i o n as the location and nature of the well, a resum~ of operations at the wellsite, i n f o r m a t i o n on the formations penetrated, and a s u m m a r y of results. T h e environmental data, as well as the e n v i r o n m e n t a l implications of other data in the reports serve to verify c o m p l i a n c e with any environmental terms and conditions that may have been placed u p o n the operator. T h i s data also validates the assessments of potential impacts made d u r i n g the approval phase before the well was drilled. Development Phase T h e d e v e l o p m e n t phase of offshore oil and gas m a n a g e m e n t is in its infancy in Canada. T o date, none of Canada's offshore reserves have been b r o u g h t into production. A l t h o u g h the regulatory framework is in place to provide guidance to offshore development, there has not been a " s h a k e - d o w n " period of sufficient time to fully crystallize all aspects of the admiuistrative process. Consequently, the details of how this f r a m e w o r k will e v e n t u a l l y f u n c t i o n in e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t cannot be defined with as m u c h precision as those for tile exploration phase. COGLA's experience with the offshore development phase is limited primarily to three proposed projects: one by Dome Petroleum Ltd., et al., in the Beaufort Sea-MacKenzie Delta Region of northern Canada and two by MobiI Oil Canada, Ltd., et al., on tile Scotian Shelf and tile Grand Banks of eastern Canada. All project proposals are at the conceptual stage of d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n n i n g . Prior to finalizing plans for developing offshore oil and gas reserves, interest owners must prepare an e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact assessment, which is then reviewed in public by a panel established by the federal or, in offshore areas under joint federal and provincial m a n a g e m e n t regimes, by both the federal and provincial Ministers of E n v i r o n m e n t . It is noteworthy that this evaluation of projected impacts is required at the front end of the d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n n i n g process in order to identify at the earliest possible stage those e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues which must be resolved in subsequent stages of the p l a n n i n g process. U p o n the c o m p l e t i o n of a development plan, the interest owner must then proceed t h r o u g h approval procedures for the design and construction of p r o d u c t i o n structures and facilities, for l a u n c h i n g and transporting them to the site, for installation a n d actual p r o d u c t i o n and operation, and for subsequent maintenance. C O G L A is in the process of finalizing e n v i r o n m e n t a l guidelines a n d regulations for tlle a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of these approvals. T h i s process is being carried out in consultation with other g o v e r n m e n t agencies t h r o u g h committee structures such as the R M E C a n d the ECC. C O G L A is also developing an e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects m o n i t o r i n g strategy for the p u r p o s e of p r o v i d i n g an early w a r n i n g system to identify significant effects arising from oil and gas activities, and thereby to be in a position to 534 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
ensure that appropriate mitigative measures are i m p l e m e n t e d to limit negative impacts. C o m p l e m e n t a r y Administrative Arrangements In addition to a d m i n i s t e r i n g the individual c o m p o n e n t of the review process associated with offshore oil a n d gas activities, C O G L A also administers a n u m b e r of other activities w h i c h s u p p o r t the assessment and review processes. T h e most i m p o r t a n t of these are the E n v i r o n m e n t a l Studies Revolving Fund, Emergency Response P l a n n i n g , a n d Liability and Compensation. Environmental Studies Revolving Funds. As noted, Section 49 of the Canada Oil and Gas Act contains provisions for the establishment of E n v i r o n m e n t a l Studies Revolving Funds (ESRF). T h e primary purpose of the Funds is to p r o m o t e the d e v e l o p m e n t of i n f o r m a t i o n that is directly related to i m p r o v i n g the effectiveness of m a n a g i n g the environmental aspects of oil and gas exploration a n d development. Over the past several years, the oil and gas industry has carried out n u m e r o u s e n v i r o n m e n t a l and social studies that have been instrumental in developing an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the relationship b e t w e e n offshore d e v e l o p m e n t a n d the n a t u r a l a n d social e n v i r o n m e n t s in which these developments take place. T h e scientific i n f o r m a t i o n generated by such studies was usually either confined in space by the small scale, site specific nature of the study, or in time by the short duration of larger scale study programs. T h e costs of generating this information, particularly in frontier areas such as the offshore, was generally borne by the pioneer operators, whereas the benefits accrued not only to these operators, but to all w h o followed. One of the principal functions of the ESRF is, therefore, to p r o m o t e the efficient and equitable f u n d i n g of studies which have the appropriate spatial and temporal d i m e n s i o n s for effectively addressing those issues that relate specifically to oil and gas d e v e l o p m e n t on Canada lands, i n c l u d i n g offshore areas. T h e Funds, a m o u n t i n g to several million Canadian dollars, are financed by levies applied against companies h o l d i n g oil and gas rights to Canada lands. T h e levies for any one c o m p a n y are based on the area of land which it holds in p r o p o r t i o n to the total area under lease to the industry as a whole. A l t h o u g h the Funds can a m o u n t to as m u c h as thirty million Canadian dollars, they are in practice limited to the estimated budget for projects d u r i n g any single year. 5 At least once a year, a set of priority subjects for study is established t h r o u g h a consultative process involving both g o v e r n m e n t and the petroleum industry. D e p e n d i n g u p o n informational requirements at any particular time, the priority subjects could embrace studies of, for example natural, physical, chemical or biological processes affecting e q u i p m e n t and operations; interactions of living organisms and industry-related activities; mitigation methods and related technologies; m o n i t o r i n g methods and related EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
535
technologies; demography, e m p l o y m e n t , education, and associated considerations; industrial a n d business operations, and infrastructural needs; and traditional life styles and renewable resource use. In order to address the informational a n d analytical needs identified in these subjects, study proposals are invited from private c o n s u l t i n g firms, universities, private interest groups, the oil and gas industry and 9government. In order to be eligible for funding, it is imperative that the study proposals address the m a n a g e m e n t issues that are clearly related to the oil and gas industry and their regulators. In addition, the studies must be regional or national in scope and must be c o m p l e m e n t a r y or s u p p l e m e n t a r y to g o v e r n m e n t activities. In general, neither studies that are relevant to meeting the m a n a g e m e n t needs of a specific offshore operator, nor studies that are required to further the general m a n d a t e of a particular g o v e r n m e n t agency, are eligible for funding. Emergency Response Planning. Under regulations established p u r s u a n t to the Can;~da Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act, offshore operators are responsible for m a n a g i n g the resolution of emergency events i n c l u d i n g oil a n d / o r gas spills. As noted previously, operators m u s t submit comprehensive contingency plans to C O G L A under the Drilling P r o g r a m Approval process, and similar requirements will exist for approval of d e v e l o p m e n t plans. In turn, C O G L A solicits c o m m e n t s from members of the R M E C and the regional committees such as the Canada-Nova Scotia ECC. These plans contain considerable detail on biological, physical and cultural resources. Coastal features such as beaches, wetlands, bird colonies, fishing areas, marinas, a q u a c u l t u r e locations and other natural or cultural resources potentially affected by exploration activity and particularly an oil spill, must be cartographically displayed. O c e a n o g r a p h i c and meteorological i n f o r m a t i o n relevant to the safe operation of the drilling unit must be summarized on a m o n t h l y basis. In addition, this latter i n f o r m a t i o n is combined with other data on the physical marine e n v i r o n m e n t in order to plot estimates of oil spill trajectories for each m o n t h of the year. These trajectories are then related to the cartographic data on natural and cultural resources to provide a basis for establishing priority areas for protection or cleanu p in the event there is a loss of well control. Once the plans have been approved, the operators are required to test them at least once a year. In the event of a spill, C O G L A is responsible for closely m o n i t o r i n g the event and the m a n n e r in which the operator responds to it. Where circumstances warrant, C O G L A staff will provide advice a n d instructions. If an operator c a n n o t cope with a spill, C O G L A has the legal authority to arrange for the provision of sufficient assistance to bring the event to a satisfactory conclusion. T h i s authority permits C O G L A to assume or delegate responsibility for the m a n a g e m e n t of the drilling unit, and other activities such as c o n t a i n m e n t and cleanup efforts. In_order to provide an administrative framework in which tO exercise this authority, C O G L A prepares b o t h national and compatible regional emergency response plans. 536 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
Liability and Compensation.
T h e question of liability and compensation, particularly as it relates to the interaction between the oil and gas and fishing industries, is a major issue in the offshore areas. T h e level of acceptability of risk to the environment by the resource user is undoubtedly influenced by the existence of an adequate compensation scheme. Under the Canada Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act, interest owners have absolute liability for environmental damages arising from oil, gas and debris pollution associated with offshore exploration and development. With respect to this liability, COGLA requires all offshore operators to provide proof of financial responsibility before it authorizes well construction. As part of its approach to the administration of liability and compensation matters, C O G L A not only develops its own guidelines, but also encourages the oil and gas industry to work with other users of the marine environment in aB attempt to develop mutually a c c e p t a b l e compensation schemes. For example, on the east coast of Canada, oil and gas companies are actively working with the fishing industry to formulate a private scheme for compensating fishermen for certain types of damage that may arise from offshore oil and gas exploration and development. Summary T h e legislative framework for m a n a g i n g offshore oil and gas development in Canada provides the basis for developing a flexible and comprehensive administrative approach to the problem of identifying and resolving environmental issues. This approach is flexible in the sense that it incorporates a broad range of administrative i n s t r u m e n t s i n c l u d i n g n e g o t i a t i o n , a u t h o r i z a t i o n , inspection, enforcement, c o o r d i n a t i o n , advisement, a n d research. It is comprehensive from three perspectives. First, it covers the entire offshore region of Canada. Second, and more importantly, it includes all aspects of development planning, ranging from the evaluation of offshore lands to determine their environmental suitability for permitting exploration, to the final abandonment of a production field. Third, it provides access to the expertise of all principal environmental resource agencies in both the federal and provincial governments. With the possible exception of the nuclear power industry, it is unlikely that any other industrial sector, including urban, commercial or industrial land development, agriculture, or forestry is so intensely scrutinized and administered from an environmental point of view. T h e administrative process as it relates to the management of offshore oil and gas is in an accelerated evolutionary stage as it responds to relatively recent changes in government p o l i c y , legislation, and institutional arrangements. T h e legislative_ basis provides strong support for promoting the maintenance of an environmental administrative process that should remain dynamic. This, in .turn, should discourage the propensity for logical EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
537
inconsistencies and irrelevancies to become entrenched in the administrative process thereby rendering it incapable of responding to the emergence of new perceptions of the offshore e n v i r o n m e n t as these perceptions may affect ways and means of m a n a g i n g oil and gas activities to minimize the level of environmental disruption. Specifically, the establishment of the Environmental Studies R e v o l v i n g Funds with their focus on generating problem-solving information in both the social and environmental fields will be particularly useful in this regard.
Acknowledgments T h e authors wish to thank Mr. Michael Bell, Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration, Ottawa; and Mr. Howard Windsor, Nova Scotia Department of the Environment, Halifax for their critical 9 reading of the manuscript and their helpful suggestions. This paper expresses the experience and o p i n i o n of the authors and is not intended as a statement of environmental policy on part of the Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration.
Notes 1. Canada Oil and Gas Act (Bill C-48). An Act to regulate oil and gas interests in Canada Lands and to amend the Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act; passed by the House of C o m m o n s of Canada, December 9, 1981. (Available from the Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Supply and Services Canada, Hull, Quebec, Canada KIA 0S9). 2. T h e Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act is an Act respecting the production and conservation of oil and gas. It was passed in 1968-69 and amended in 1981 by the Canada Oil and Gas Act. (Available as in 1). 3. See for example, Canada Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations. Regulations respecting the exploration and drilling for and the conservation of oil and gas and the measures to ensure the safety of such operations; November 1980, presently under revision. (Available as in I). 4. Other major federal legislation of the Government of Canada which has relevance to environmental assessment and protection with respect to offshore oil and gas activities includes: 9 Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act; 9 Canada Shipping Act; 9 Canada Wildlife Act; 9 Environmental Contaminants Act; 9 Fisheries Act; 9 Migratory Birds Convention Act; 9 National Energy Board Act; 9 National Parks Act. 5. In April 1984, one US dollar equalled 1.25 Canadian dollars; one British p o u n d sterling equalled 1.83 Canadian dollars. 538 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
o / o s~.oo,o oz9s-o.s~/s3.12oo.os.s
EIA REVIEW
4/3-4 523
THE CANADA LANDS
Figure 1.
The Canada Lands lie north of the provinces and within the offshore economic zone excluding internal waters under provincial jurisdiction.
At the time that the federal g o v e r n m e n t a n n o u n c e d its National Energy Program, oil and gas exploration and d e v e l o p m e n t activities were administered by two separate g o v e r n m e n t agencies. Areas lying north of the provinces were m a n a g e d by the D e p a r t m e n t of Indian Affairs and Northern Development; areas lying south of this line were administered by the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. In order to p r o m o t e consistency in the m a n a g e m e n t of all Canada lands as well as to effect the efficient d e p l o y m e n t of g o v e r n m e n t expertise, the Ministers responsible for the Departments of Energy, Mines and Resources and Indian Affairs and Northern Development signed a M e m o r a n d u m of U n d e r s t a n d i n g in 1981, which established the Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration (COGLA). T h i s action in effect a m a l g a m a t e d those sections of the two departments that were responsible for m a n a g i n g oil and gas activities on Canada lands, a l t h o u g h it left with the Department of Indian Affairs and Noi-thern Development the responsibility for providing e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice to C O G L A on northern oil and gas issues. T h e specific mandate of C O G L A was confirmed on March 5, 1982 with the p r o c l a m a t i o n by P a r l i a m e n t of the Canada Oil and Gas Act. T h e a m a l g a m a t i o n also served to provide industry with a "single wind_ow" on government. In this context, C O G L A a t t e m p t s to ensure that industry complies with the statutory and administrative requirement of federal and, where relevant, provincial agencies, w i t h o u t i n f r i n g i n g u p o n the statutory mandates of these institutions. 524 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
T h i s function is particularly i m p o r t a n t to the administration of e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters in the offshore, where a n u m b e r of g o v e r n m e n t agencies have key regulatory and advisory roles. C O G L A is a u n i q u e organization a m o n g Canadian federal institutions. It receives f u n d i n g from the two parent departments, and its chief administrator reports to both Deputy Ministers. C O G L A is primarily an operational agency with its policy direction c o m i n g from a Policy Review C o m m i t t e e comprised of senior officials from the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. T h e Administration is comprised of five technical branches and a Policy Analysis and C o o r d i n a t i o n Division and functions t h r o u g h Ottawa headquarters and regional offices. Ifi brief, the L a n d Management Branch is responsible for a d m i n i s t e r i n g matters p e r t a i n i n g to the allocation of rights to hydrocarbon resources on Canada lands. T h e ~ngineering Branch is responsible for regulating a n d m o n i t o r i n g offshore exploratory drilling, d e v e l o p m e n t and p r o d u c t i o n activities. T h e Resource Evaluation Branch administers matters pertaining to geophysical and geological programs conducted by industry as well as m a n a g i n g the evaluation of i n f o r m a t i o n from these programs. T h e Canada Benefits Branch is responsible for p r o m o t i n g Canadian participation and distribution of benefits for all activities conducted on Canada Lands. T h e Environmental Protection Branch is responsible for ensuring that all activities conducted in the offshore are carried out in an environmentally safe and acceptable manner. A l t h o u g h the r e m a i n d e r of this paper emphasizes the activities of C O G L A in environmental protection of offshore areas, it should be noted also that C O G L A has an i m p o r t a n t administrative role in p r o m o t i n g the protection of offshore operations from environmental elements. A safe operation protected from e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors such as heavy seas, strong winds or ice will not only minimize the loss of life and property, but also decrease the potential for negative impacts on the natural e n v i r o n m e n t . Several offshore e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues are of concern in the Canadian c o m m u n i t y . T h e following section outlines these issues as a basis for reviewing the ways and means whereby the current e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t regime responds to them. Issues
Canada is a large, culturally diverse country and, as one m i g h t expect, the concerns about environmental issues associated with offshore oil and gas vary from one region of the country toanother. However, these variations are to a large extent differences in degree rather than kind. Whether or not loss of well control is caused by the collision of a drilling unit or p r o d u c t i o n platform with an iceberg in the north o r a n oil tanker in the south, the major environmental concern centers on the EIA R E V I E W 4/3-4
525
accidental release of hydrocarbons a n d its potential effects on the local e n v i r o n m e n t . T h e degree of importance that is attached to such impacts is frequently p r o p o r t i o n a l to the effects that they may have on social activities and the i m p o r t a n c e of these activities in the regional e c o n o m y a n d culture. In the Arcdc, for example, local environmental concerns focus principally on the impact that oil and gas activities may have on marine m a m m a l s , birds, caribou and fish, because tile harvesting of these resources is central to the i n d i g e n o u s cultural and economic milieu. A l t h o u g h e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues are i m p o r t a n t in both northern and southern Canada, i n p u t from public meetings on a variety of proposed major development projects strongly suggests that social issues, such as impacts on traditional lifestyles a n d cultures, and access to e m p l o y m e n t and economic benefits are of equal importance to e n v i r o n m e n t a l concerns. Certainly, in Nova Scotia the public's general reaction to tile proposed development of gas from the Venture structure on the Scotian Shelf suggests to many observers that there is more interest in the o p p o r t u n i t i e s for upstream a n d downstream economic benefits associated with offshore oil and gas development than there is with potentially adverse e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects. Most segments of tile fishing industry itself, which w o u l d be tile principal recipient of many of the alleged potential negative effects from oil and gas development, have expressed s u p p o r t for this project, provided that acceptable c o m p e n s a t i o n schemes for losses can be established. Perhaps the most clearly defined issues in Canada are associated with the potentital interaction between the oil and gas industry a n d the fishery. Specifically, the issues relate primarily to direct damage or loss of fishing gear caused by seismic and supply boat activity, debris or oil spills, as well as to c o m p e n s a t i o n schemes for covering such losses. T h o s e involved in the fishery have also expressed concern about possible secondary effects from oil and gas activities such as fish tainting from oil or condensate spills, loss of access to fishing g r o u n d s d u r i n g exploration or development, and the potential consequent curtailment of the operation of onshore processing plants because of a reduced fish supply. Further, the possible defection of trained a n d experienced navigators from the fishing sector to high paying jobs in the petroleum industry is an i m p o r t a n t issue, particularly in N e w f o u n d l a n d where the fishery is a major c o m p o n e n t of both the economic and the social fabric. In some regions, representatives of small fishing villages have expressed concern that intensive offshore d e v e l o p m e n t could result in the displacement of fishing vessels by supply boats because of limited wharfage. Virtually all of the above externalities have more of a social c o n n o t a t i o n than an environmental one in the sense that they are not caused by i m p a i r m e n t to the natural resource base. T h e more traditional environmental issues are also related to the fin a n d shellfish fisheries, but are, in addition, relevant to the protection of marine 526 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
m a m m a l s a n d seabirds. These include: oil p o l l u t i o n arising from the loss of well control; the effects of explosives used d u r i n g seismic surveys i n a s m u c h as these effects may influence future harvests; the effects of drilling m u d s on biological productivity, especially associated with the use of oil-based drilling muds; the discharge of rig wastes from drilling units; and the chronic release of oil and gas into t h e marine e n v i r o n m e n t from a variety of other exploratory, d e v e l o p m e n t and operational activities. A l t h o u g h each of these individual issues has been the focus of some considerable interest, the overriding preoccupation at the present time lies with the long-term cumulative effects on biological productivity of all p o l l u t i o n sources related to offshore oil and gas activity. T h i s concern is greatest in the Arctic e n v i r o n m e n t , where there is little world-wide experience to draw u p o n and where there is a h i g h degree of uncertainty about chronic p o l l u t i o n and resultant c u m u l a t i v e impacts.-This type of perceived potential e n v i r o n m e n t a l degradation is also a major concern to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans with respect to loss of fish habitat, and to the Department of E n v i r o n m e n t with respect to e n v i r o n m e n t a l quality in general. T h e siting of offshore facilities in potentially active geological zones, such as zones of sediment transport, mass m o v e m e n t or earthquake activity, is an environmental safety issue in some offshore areas of Canada. Some groups have expressed concern that geological activity in these zones could affect the functional integrity of offshore oil and gas drilling, p r o d u c t i o n or transportation facilities, and thereby cause the release of hydrocarbons and possibly other toxic substances into the marine environment. All identifiable interfaces between oil and gas activities and the natural and h u m a n e n v i r o n m e n t are assessed for potential impacts by C O G L A and its advisory bodies. Both recognized and suspected issues are addressed t h r o u g h the legislative and administrative mechanisms that are reviewed in the following section.
The Offshore Environmental. Management Regime C O G L A routinely screens all applications to conduct oil and gas activities in order to determine if these proposals will have adverse effects on the h u m a n or natural environment. On the basis of available i n f o r m a t i o n and expert i n p u t from both internal staffand interagency advisory bodies, proposed activities are assessed and may be denied, approved or permitted to proceed with modifications designed to protect the environment. In the event that a proposal has a potential for significant i m p a c t which cannot be fully evaluated on the basis of available information, the project may need to undergo a more formal e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment process under the aegis of the federal E n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review Process (EARP). T h i s process is referred to briefly later in this paper and forms the subject of tile article in this special issue by Harrison and Rothschild. EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
527
Legislative Basis T h e principal a u t h o r i t y under which C O G L A manages the resolution of environmental issues is found in the Canada Oil and Gas Ac0, the Canada Oil and Gas Production Act, 2 a n d their allied regulations. 3 It is i m p o r t a n t to note that this legislative package is not the exclusive i n s t r u m e n t for addressing e n v i r o n m e n t a l Problems. Rather, it c o m p l e m e n t s a variety of federal statutes ~, which confer e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t responsibilities u p o n a n u m b e r of "agencies such as the D e p a r t m e n t of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of the Environment. The Canada Oil .and Gas Act is primarily an allocative i n s t r u m e n t in the sense that it provides the basis for g r a n t i n g exploration, d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p r o d u c t i o n rights, as well as defining h o w tile benefits from offshore p r o d u c t i o n will be distributed between g o v e r n m e n t and industry. Under this Act, the Governor-in-Council can withdraw lands'from exploration for any reason, i n c l u d i n g "an e n v i r o n m e n t a l or social problem of a serious nature" [Section 6(b)]. Section 49 provides the C O G L A Ministers with tile authority to establish two Environmental Studies Revolving F u n d s - - o n e for the area north of the line of administrative convenience, a n d one for the area south of it. These funds were established for tile p u r p o s e of f i n a n c i n g environmental or social studies, the results of which would help the Ministers "to decide whether or not to authorize exploration or d e v e l o p m e n t activities under t h i s Act or any other Act of Parliament." T h e Oil and Gas P r o d u c t i o n and Conservation Act is the basic i n s t r u m e n t for regulating the nature 0f activities associated with offshore o p e r a t i o n s , a n d c o n t a i n s p r o v i s i o n s r e s p e c t i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t a l safety of operations. Under Section 3.2 of this Act, the Minister authorizes each work or activity proposed by the operator, subject to "such approvals, requirements or deposits as may be prescribed in the regulations, including: a) requirements related to liability for loss, damage, costs or expenses; b) requirements for carrying out e n v i r o n m e n t a l programs or studies." Section 19 of this Act prohibits the deliberate discharge of oil and gas and establishes the liability of the operator for damages arising from u n i n t e n t i o n a l spills as well as responsibility for i m p l e m e n t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e c o u n t e r m e a s u r e s . R e g u l a t i o n s derived f r o m this legislation require the operator to prepare contingency plans which contain elements of environmental assessment. T h e environmental c o m p o n e n t of these plans is discussed below. T h e C a n a d a Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations, which were p r o m u l g a t e d under authority of the Canada Oil and Gas P r o d u c t i o n a n d Conservation Act, establish provisions for m a n a g i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact of oil and gas activities. T h e y require both the 528 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
identification of natural conditions which may affect the safety of the operation, such as weather, sea conditions and ice hazards, arid the assessment of the natural e n v i r o n m e n t which may be affected by the oil a n d gas activity. For example, when an application is made to drill a well, ttle operator must identify the oceanographic and meteorological factors which may influence rig operations, as well as the means by w h i c h the natural e n v i r o n m e n t will be protected d u r i n g the operation. T h e powers to manage tile resolution of e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues that are conferred u p o n the Ministers by this legislative package are comprehensive and cover all aspects of the exploration, development, p r o d u c t i o n and a b a n d o n m e n t p l a n n i n g processes. T h e y not only p e r m i t the control of the e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact of all offshore activities, but also provide the basis for identifying where and when offshore operations will be permitted or excluded. Administrative Processes
Advisory Bodies. As noted previously, one aspect of C O G L A ' s e n v i r o n m e n t a l responsibilities is to p r o m o t e a coordinated review of offshore oil a n d gas activities a m o n g g o v e r n m e n t regulatory a n d / o r resource agencies. Several advisory bodies are involved. At the national level, this co-ordination is expedited t h r o u g h the Resource M a n a g e m e n t E n v i r o n m e n t a l Committee (RMEC), comprised of agencies representing oceanographic, atmospheric, fishery, wildlife, national parks, e n v i r o n m e n t a l protection and navigation services, which are located in the National Capital Region (Ottawa). T h e R M E C is responsible for providing advice on e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters to C O G L A and for the exchange of i n f o r m a t i o n about existing and anticipated activity in the offshore. It meets regularly to review the e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t s of e m e r g i n g policy a n d regulatory requirements, as well as to confer on specific issues related to offshore oil and gas activities. In the Nova Scotia offshore region, e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice is g e n e r a t e d t h r o u g h the C a n a d a - N o v a Scotia E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee (ECC). T h e ECC was created by m u t u a l agreement of the Canada and Nova Scotia Governments to provide technical advice on e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters to the C O G L A regional office in Halifax, Nova Scotia. As part of its duties, tlle regional office is responsible for p r o v i d i n g administrative support to the CanadaNova Scotia Offshore Oil and Gas Board, a federal/provincial body established under the Canada-Nova Scotia Agreement on Offshore Management and RevenueSharing. T h e Board carries o u t m a n y of the legislated managerial responsibilities of the federal Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. T h e EEC m e m b e r s h i p includes representatives from the regional offices of R M E C m e m b e r agencies, and, in addition, has representation from relevant resource and regulatory agencies in tlle province of Nova Scotia. In the north, e n v i r o n m e n t a l advice is provided as a service to C O G L A by the Northern Affairs Program in the D e p a r t m e n t of Indian EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
529
Affairs and Northern Development, and two major interagency committees, the Arctic Waters Advisory Committee, and the Interdepartmental Environmental Resource Committee.
Exploration Agreement. Conceptually, the administrative process begins with the identification by either COGLA or industry of offshore lands which appear to have oil and gas potential. T h e practice of identifying lands for tender includes not only a consideration of their h y d r o c a r b o n potential, but also an e v a l u a t i o n of possible environmental sensitivities. If the perceived risk to sensitive environmental resources is unacceptably high in certain areas, then these areas will be excluded from calls for proposals. Such exclusions may be permanent, at least for the foreseeable future, or they may be temporary. Areas may be temporarily excluded from exploration activity in order to provide sufficient time for government a n d / o r i n d u s t r y to generate the i n f o r m a t i o n that will assist the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in d e t e r m i n i n g the n a t u r e a n d extent of environmental sensitivities. Upon completion of the identification process, the Minister then calls for proposals from companies that may be interested in c o n d u c t i n g e x p l o r a t o r y work. T h e proposals are reviewed, negotiations conducted with interested parties, and Exploration Agreements signed with successful candidates. Subject to certain legislative requirements, an Exploration Agreement confers upon the c o m p a n y the right to explore for hydrocarbons, and the exclusive right to drill and develop for production on specified Canada lands over a specified period of time, usually for five years. In exchange for these rights, the c o m p a n y must agree to undertake a work program to evaluate the oil and gas potential on the area covered in the Agreement. Such an undertaking usually consists of a comprehensive seismic survey and the drilling of one or more exploratory wells. T h e Exploration Agreement generally does not contain provisions that relate directly to environmental management. At this stage, environmental matters are considered to be non-negotiable in the sense that an Exploration Agreement cannot contain provisions that exclude the operator from accounting for the impact of activities on sensitive resources during subsequent approval processes. However, in cases where information on social or environmental resources at risk is assessed and determined to be inadequate for decision-making purposes, the Exploration Agreement may require the operator to conduct certain environmental studies or to undertake a consuhative process with c o m m u n i t y interests such as t h e f i s h i n g industry or native people, before proceeding with exploration activities. In other instances, w h e r e exploratory activities will be conducted in hostile physical environments, the Agreement may specify the period during which a c o m p a n y is permitted to operate. 530 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
All major activities of an operator in possession of an Exploration Agreement require approval by COGLA. Some of these require formal application, review and approval; others can be approved through less formal written communication. T h e major exploration activities requiring approval are geological and geophysical surveys and the drilling of wells.
Geological and Geophysical Surveys. All geological surveys, whether undertaken as part of an Exploration Agreement, or as a separate activity, require approval from COGLA. T h e operator must submit information on a n u m b e r of items, including the location of the work, the dates of c o m m e n c e m e n t a n d completion, the type of vessels involved, and the characteristics of the energy source that will be used. T h e operator's application must also contain confirmation that other relevant federal departments have been notified of the work proposal. This procedure ensures that these agencies have an opportunity to identify marine resources or uses which may be at risk or in conflict with the proposed survey. As part of the total C O G L A review, the Environmental Protection Branch of C O G L A examines the applications for geological and geophysical work. In its review, the Branch staff pays particular attention to the location of the survey with respect to sensitive environmental resources or other marine activities, the nature of the seismic energy source, and advice from other government agencies. T o date, geological and geophysical activities have not created major environmental issues in the offshore waters of Canada. There have been instances where seismic boats or their e q u i p m e n t have interfered with fishing activity or have caused damage to fishing equipment, but these events have been infrequent. In the event that an operator makes application to conduct seismic work in an area subject to intensive fishing, C O G L A has the authority to ensure that such activity proceeds only d u r i n g periods when the potential for conflict between the two resource activities is minimal. T h e use of chemical explosives in the conduct of seismic work has been the source of some controversy in Canada. T h e Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans, under authority of the Canada Fisheries Act, does not normally permit any activity that will cause damage to fish or fish habitat, and clearly the detonation of chemical explosives in marine environments can kill fish. On the other hand, there are instances where the use of such a method is the only means whereby oil and gas companies can obtain geological information. Under such exceptional circumstances, COGLA, as a coordinating agency in environmental matters related to oil and gas development on Canada lands, works with other regulatory agencies through such mechanisms as the RMEC and the EEC, as well as with the operator, to determine if an acceptable trade-off between fishery loss and oil and gas information gains can be achieved, and, if so, the circumstances under EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
531
which the activity may proceed. Terms and conditions may include presurvey experimental studies to determine the effect of explosives on indigenous species, as well as to monitor the impact of the survey on fish and wildlife inhabiting the area. Drilling Programs. Before proceeding with any drilling activity on areas under Exploration Agreements, companies must develop a drilling program for approval b y COGLA. Drilling Program Approvals (DPA) authorize companies to drill within a specific area, with a specific drilling unit, for a specific period of time not exceeding three years. Information for the DPA review process is comprehensive. T h e operator must submit information on: the geological characteristics of the well; performance and safety characteristics of the drilling unit and support craft; and the logistics of the drilling program. In addition, a substantial a m o u n t of environmental information is required, including a descrip,fion and assessment of: surficial and near surface geological features; oceanographic and meteorological conditions; biological and socio-economic resources or resource uses which may be at risk or in conflict with the proposed program; and an emergency response plan, including oil spill contingency measures. In most cases, c o m p a n y officials support the operator's application with an oral presentation before representatives from the various branches and relevant regional offices of COGLA. This provides the operator with an opportunity to clarify specific aspects of proposed program. T h e operator may be required to provide additional information before the review process can be completed and approvals issued. From an environmental perspective, information contained in the application for a DPA enables C O G L A staff to assess the capability of companies to meet the regulatory requirements of both COGLA and other federal regulatory agencies. In particular, the companies must demonstrate capabilities to manage control of the drilling unit in heavy weather conditions; to operate meteorological observation and forecast programs; to dispose of sewage, grey water, deck washings, drilling muds, and cuttings in an environmentally acceptable manner; to protect sensitive marine and shoreline areas in the event of a spill; and to provide financial compensation for damage to the environment a n d / o r dependent users such as fishermen. COGLA's review process includes consultation with other federal and provincial agencies through advisory bodies such as the RMEC or ECC, as well as reviews by COGLA's in-house staff. Well Site Surveys. Before any drilling unit is placed on site, the operator is required to conduct a site specific survey of the sea floor. T h e information in this survey usually consists of shallow seismic data, photographs of the ocean floor, and samples of sea-bottom substrate. It-must be sufficient to identify the nature of the sea floor for engineering purposes and operational safety requirements. In cases 532
EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
where there is reason to expect a significant hazard to the natural environment, the operator may be required to analyze the biological setting at the proposed wellsite. T h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i n f o r m a t i o n collected d u r i n g this predrilling administrative phase is used primarily to assist COGLA and other government agencies in assessing tlle significance of potential impacts. It also aids them in ensuring that required mitigative measures are implemented during the construction of a well. Authority to Drill a Well. Specific approval must be given by COGLA for each well that an operator proposes to drill. An operator applying for authority to drill a well must provide information on the precise location of the well, its cost, estimated start-up date, length of time on site and engineering information such as the depth of the well and specific details on well construction. From an environmental assessment perspective, this information is reviewed by COGLA regional offices to c~etermine if the drilling operation will be taking place during a particular period when its presence or related activities could adversely affect a natural resource or create conflict with traditional resource uses. T h e physical presence of a rig combined with supply boat activity has been a real or perceived concern of fishermen in a n u m b e r of instances. In these circumstances, the operators may be requested either to adjust the timing or pattern of activities in order to reduce conflicts with the fishermen, or to meet with representatives of the fishing industry to allay concerns when these appear to be unfounded. Inspection and Monitoring. C O G L A staff conduct inspections of drilling rigs before drilling programs are approved and at regular intervals, usually once every two weeks, during drilling operations. These inspections include examinations of systems for treating a n d / o r disposing of sewage, grey water, deck washings, solid waste and drilling m u d to ensure that pollution loading in the marine environment is confined to an acceptable level. Where such disposal or treatment systems do not meet regulatory requirements, the operator must take steps immediately to remedy the situation or face the possibility of a shut-down in operations until the problem is corrected. Inspections of the drilling unit also entail a review of the operator's environmental monitoring program. In particular, the deployment and calibration of e q u i p m e n t such as anemometers, barometers, and thermometers for measuring various meteorological parameters are inspected by technical staff from either COGLA or the federal Department of the Environment twice a year. These inspections also include a review of the observation procedures and the methods used for keeping records of these observations. Well History Reports. During drilling, operators supply COGLA with daily reports containing a summary of current operations and related information, including weather and sea states. After a well has been completed, the operator must submit a final well report to COGLA. EIA REVIEW
't/3-4
533
Well reports are required to contain such i n f o r m a t i o n as the location and nature of the well, a resum~ of operations at the wellsite, i n f o r m a t i o n on the formations penetrated, and a s u m m a r y of results. T h e environmental data, as well as the e n v i r o n m e n t a l implications of other data in the reports serve to verify c o m p l i a n c e with any environmental terms and conditions that may have been placed u p o n the operator. T h i s data also validates the assessments of potential impacts made d u r i n g the approval phase before the well was drilled. Development Phase T h e d e v e l o p m e n t phase of offshore oil and gas m a n a g e m e n t is in its infancy in Canada. T o date, none of Canada's offshore reserves have been b r o u g h t into production. A l t h o u g h the regulatory framework is in place to provide guidance to offshore development, there has not been a " s h a k e - d o w n " period of sufficient time to fully crystallize all aspects of the admiuistrative process. Consequently, the details of how this f r a m e w o r k will e v e n t u a l l y f u n c t i o n in e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a n a g e m e n t cannot be defined with as m u c h precision as those for tile exploration phase. COGLA's experience with the offshore development phase is limited primarily to three proposed projects: one by Dome Petroleum Ltd., et al., in the Beaufort Sea-MacKenzie Delta Region of northern Canada and two by MobiI Oil Canada, Ltd., et al., on tile Scotian Shelf and tile Grand Banks of eastern Canada. All project proposals are at the conceptual stage of d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n n i n g . Prior to finalizing plans for developing offshore oil and gas reserves, interest owners must prepare an e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact assessment, which is then reviewed in public by a panel established by the federal or, in offshore areas under joint federal and provincial m a n a g e m e n t regimes, by both the federal and provincial Ministers of E n v i r o n m e n t . It is noteworthy that this evaluation of projected impacts is required at the front end of the d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n n i n g process in order to identify at the earliest possible stage those e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues which must be resolved in subsequent stages of the p l a n n i n g process. U p o n the c o m p l e t i o n of a development plan, the interest owner must then proceed t h r o u g h approval procedures for the design and construction of p r o d u c t i o n structures and facilities, for l a u n c h i n g and transporting them to the site, for installation a n d actual p r o d u c t i o n and operation, and for subsequent maintenance. C O G L A is in the process of finalizing e n v i r o n m e n t a l guidelines a n d regulations for tlle a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of these approvals. T h i s process is being carried out in consultation with other g o v e r n m e n t agencies t h r o u g h committee structures such as the R M E C a n d the ECC. C O G L A is also developing an e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects m o n i t o r i n g strategy for the p u r p o s e of p r o v i d i n g an early w a r n i n g system to identify significant effects arising from oil and gas activities, and thereby to be in a position to 534 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
ensure that appropriate mitigative measures are i m p l e m e n t e d to limit negative impacts. C o m p l e m e n t a r y Administrative Arrangements In addition to a d m i n i s t e r i n g the individual c o m p o n e n t of the review process associated with offshore oil a n d gas activities, C O G L A also administers a n u m b e r of other activities w h i c h s u p p o r t the assessment and review processes. T h e most i m p o r t a n t of these are the E n v i r o n m e n t a l Studies Revolving Fund, Emergency Response P l a n n i n g , a n d Liability and Compensation. Environmental Studies Revolving Funds. As noted, Section 49 of the Canada Oil and Gas Act contains provisions for the establishment of E n v i r o n m e n t a l Studies Revolving Funds (ESRF). T h e primary purpose of the Funds is to p r o m o t e the d e v e l o p m e n t of i n f o r m a t i o n that is directly related to i m p r o v i n g the effectiveness of m a n a g i n g the environmental aspects of oil and gas exploration a n d development. Over the past several years, the oil and gas industry has carried out n u m e r o u s e n v i r o n m e n t a l and social studies that have been instrumental in developing an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the relationship b e t w e e n offshore d e v e l o p m e n t a n d the n a t u r a l a n d social e n v i r o n m e n t s in which these developments take place. T h e scientific i n f o r m a t i o n generated by such studies was usually either confined in space by the small scale, site specific nature of the study, or in time by the short duration of larger scale study programs. T h e costs of generating this information, particularly in frontier areas such as the offshore, was generally borne by the pioneer operators, whereas the benefits accrued not only to these operators, but to all w h o followed. One of the principal functions of the ESRF is, therefore, to p r o m o t e the efficient and equitable f u n d i n g of studies which have the appropriate spatial and temporal d i m e n s i o n s for effectively addressing those issues that relate specifically to oil and gas d e v e l o p m e n t on Canada lands, i n c l u d i n g offshore areas. T h e Funds, a m o u n t i n g to several million Canadian dollars, are financed by levies applied against companies h o l d i n g oil and gas rights to Canada lands. T h e levies for any one c o m p a n y are based on the area of land which it holds in p r o p o r t i o n to the total area under lease to the industry as a whole. A l t h o u g h the Funds can a m o u n t to as m u c h as thirty million Canadian dollars, they are in practice limited to the estimated budget for projects d u r i n g any single year. 5 At least once a year, a set of priority subjects for study is established t h r o u g h a consultative process involving both g o v e r n m e n t and the petroleum industry. D e p e n d i n g u p o n informational requirements at any particular time, the priority subjects could embrace studies of, for example natural, physical, chemical or biological processes affecting e q u i p m e n t and operations; interactions of living organisms and industry-related activities; mitigation methods and related technologies; m o n i t o r i n g methods and related EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
535
technologies; demography, e m p l o y m e n t , education, and associated considerations; industrial a n d business operations, and infrastructural needs; and traditional life styles and renewable resource use. In order to address the informational a n d analytical needs identified in these subjects, study proposals are invited from private c o n s u l t i n g firms, universities, private interest groups, the oil and gas industry and 9government. In order to be eligible for funding, it is imperative that the study proposals address the m a n a g e m e n t issues that are clearly related to the oil and gas industry and their regulators. In addition, the studies must be regional or national in scope and must be c o m p l e m e n t a r y or s u p p l e m e n t a r y to g o v e r n m e n t activities. In general, neither studies that are relevant to meeting the m a n a g e m e n t needs of a specific offshore operator, nor studies that are required to further the general m a n d a t e of a particular g o v e r n m e n t agency, are eligible for funding. Emergency Response Planning. Under regulations established p u r s u a n t to the Can;~da Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act, offshore operators are responsible for m a n a g i n g the resolution of emergency events i n c l u d i n g oil a n d / o r gas spills. As noted previously, operators m u s t submit comprehensive contingency plans to C O G L A under the Drilling P r o g r a m Approval process, and similar requirements will exist for approval of d e v e l o p m e n t plans. In turn, C O G L A solicits c o m m e n t s from members of the R M E C and the regional committees such as the Canada-Nova Scotia ECC. These plans contain considerable detail on biological, physical and cultural resources. Coastal features such as beaches, wetlands, bird colonies, fishing areas, marinas, a q u a c u l t u r e locations and other natural or cultural resources potentially affected by exploration activity and particularly an oil spill, must be cartographically displayed. O c e a n o g r a p h i c and meteorological i n f o r m a t i o n relevant to the safe operation of the drilling unit must be summarized on a m o n t h l y basis. In addition, this latter i n f o r m a t i o n is combined with other data on the physical marine e n v i r o n m e n t in order to plot estimates of oil spill trajectories for each m o n t h of the year. These trajectories are then related to the cartographic data on natural and cultural resources to provide a basis for establishing priority areas for protection or cleanu p in the event there is a loss of well control. Once the plans have been approved, the operators are required to test them at least once a year. In the event of a spill, C O G L A is responsible for closely m o n i t o r i n g the event and the m a n n e r in which the operator responds to it. Where circumstances warrant, C O G L A staff will provide advice a n d instructions. If an operator c a n n o t cope with a spill, C O G L A has the legal authority to arrange for the provision of sufficient assistance to bring the event to a satisfactory conclusion. T h i s authority permits C O G L A to assume or delegate responsibility for the m a n a g e m e n t of the drilling unit, and other activities such as c o n t a i n m e n t and cleanup efforts. In_order to provide an administrative framework in which tO exercise this authority, C O G L A prepares b o t h national and compatible regional emergency response plans. 536 EIA REVIEW
4/3-4
Liability and Compensation.
T h e question of liability and compensation, particularly as it relates to the interaction between the oil and gas and fishing industries, is a major issue in the offshore areas. T h e level of acceptability of risk to the environment by the resource user is undoubtedly influenced by the existence of an adequate compensation scheme. Under the Canada Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act, interest owners have absolute liability for environmental damages arising from oil, gas and debris pollution associated with offshore exploration and development. With respect to this liability, COGLA requires all offshore operators to provide proof of financial responsibility before it authorizes well construction. As part of its approach to the administration of liability and compensation matters, C O G L A not only develops its own guidelines, but also encourages the oil and gas industry to work with other users of the marine environment in aB attempt to develop mutually a c c e p t a b l e compensation schemes. For example, on the east coast of Canada, oil and gas companies are actively working with the fishing industry to formulate a private scheme for compensating fishermen for certain types of damage that may arise from offshore oil and gas exploration and development. Summary T h e legislative framework for m a n a g i n g offshore oil and gas development in Canada provides the basis for developing a flexible and comprehensive administrative approach to the problem of identifying and resolving environmental issues. This approach is flexible in the sense that it incorporates a broad range of administrative i n s t r u m e n t s i n c l u d i n g n e g o t i a t i o n , a u t h o r i z a t i o n , inspection, enforcement, c o o r d i n a t i o n , advisement, a n d research. It is comprehensive from three perspectives. First, it covers the entire offshore region of Canada. Second, and more importantly, it includes all aspects of development planning, ranging from the evaluation of offshore lands to determine their environmental suitability for permitting exploration, to the final abandonment of a production field. Third, it provides access to the expertise of all principal environmental resource agencies in both the federal and provincial governments. With the possible exception of the nuclear power industry, it is unlikely that any other industrial sector, including urban, commercial or industrial land development, agriculture, or forestry is so intensely scrutinized and administered from an environmental point of view. T h e administrative process as it relates to the management of offshore oil and gas is in an accelerated evolutionary stage as it responds to relatively recent changes in government p o l i c y , legislation, and institutional arrangements. T h e legislative_ basis provides strong support for promoting the maintenance of an environmental administrative process that should remain dynamic. This, in .turn, should discourage the propensity for logical EIA REVIEW 4/3-4
537
inconsistencies and irrelevancies to become entrenched in the administrative process thereby rendering it incapable of responding to the emergence of new perceptions of the offshore e n v i r o n m e n t as these perceptions may affect ways and means of m a n a g i n g oil and gas activities to minimize the level of environmental disruption. Specifically, the establishment of the Environmental Studies R e v o l v i n g Funds with their focus on generating problem-solving information in both the social and environmental fields will be particularly useful in this regard.
Acknowledgments T h e authors wish to thank Mr. Michael Bell, Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration, Ottawa; and Mr. Howard Windsor, Nova Scotia Department of the Environment, Halifax for their critical 9 reading of the manuscript and their helpful suggestions. This paper expresses the experience and o p i n i o n of the authors and is not intended as a statement of environmental policy on part of the Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration.
Notes 1. Canada Oil and Gas Act (Bill C-48). An Act to regulate oil and gas interests in Canada Lands and to amend the Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act; passed by the House of C o m m o n s of Canada, December 9, 1981. (Available from the Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Supply and Services Canada, Hull, Quebec, Canada KIA 0S9). 2. T h e Oil and Gas Production and Conservation Act is an Act respecting the production and conservation of oil and gas. It was passed in 1968-69 and amended in 1981 by the Canada Oil and Gas Act. (Available as in 1). 3. See for example, Canada Oil and Gas Drilling Regulations. Regulations respecting the exploration and drilling for and the conservation of oil and gas and the measures to ensure the safety of such operations; November 1980, presently under revision. (Available as in I). 4. Other major federal legislation of the Government of Canada which has relevance to environmental assessment and protection with respect to offshore oil and gas activities includes: 9 Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act; 9 Canada Shipping Act; 9 Canada Wildlife Act; 9 Environmental Contaminants Act; 9 Fisheries Act; 9 Migratory Birds Convention Act; 9 National Energy Board Act; 9 National Parks Act. 5. In April 1984, one US dollar equalled 1.25 Canadian dollars; one British p o u n d sterling equalled 1.83 Canadian dollars. 538 EIA REVIEW 4/3-4