Norwegian management

Norway has implemented a comprehensive range of preventive safety measures in its coastal waters by establishing and operating maritime infrastruc­

ture and services and has instituted a government oil spill response system to prevent or limit nega­

tive impacts of incidents and accidents at sea. The maritime infrastructure consists of lighthouses, buoys, signs and the physical improvement of channels to keep them clear and safe. The mari­

time services include the pilot service, traffic sur­

veillance and control, electronic navigation aids, charts and notification and information services.

Traffic regulation and surveillance, reporting systems and extensive international cooperation to improve maritime safety are among the most important accident prevention measures for mari­

time transport. In view of the growing transit of oil tankers to and from Northwestern Russia, a man­

datory routeing and traffic separation scheme was established with effect from 1 January 2004 in Norway’s territorial waters off the coast of Finnmark. Previously, ships carrying dangerous or polluting cargo could sail through these territo­

rial waters close to the baseline. A minimum dis­

tance from the coast has now been set for these ships. The traffic lanes are positioned as far out towards Norway’s new 12-nautical-mile territorial limit as practically possible.

The Norwegian authorities are working within the framework of international law to move trans­

port of dangerous and/or polluting cargo outside Norway’s territorial waters between Vardø and

Røst (i.e. from eastern Finnmark to the southern tip of the Lofoten Islands). In response to a white paper on maritime safety and the oil spill response system published in 2005 and the subsequent Storting debate, the Government has given high priority to establishing a mandatory routeing and traffic separation scheme outside territorial waters between Vardø and Røst. The Government will submit an application to the IMO as early as possible in 2006. The Norwegian Coastal Admin­

istration has circulated the proposal for comment, see box 4.3.

Bilateral cooperation with other countries is also of great importance to Norway. Cooperation has already been established between the Norwe­

gian and Russian authorities in the fields of mari­

time safety and emergency response for acute pol­

lution, with a view to preventing prevent acute oil spills and establishing a stronger emergency response system in the High North.

A number of risk-reducing measures have already been implemented in Norway:

– Traffic surveillance by the vessel traffic ser­

vice centres in Horton, Brevik, Kvitsøy, Fedje (and from 2007 onwards in Vardø) in order to prevent dangerous situations and accidents.

– In 2005 AIS coverage of Norwegian waters was established along the entire coast out to about 30 nautical miles from land. Det Norske Veritas estimates that AIS on board vessels combined with other electronic navigation instruments can reduce ship collisions by 20 per cent. Traf­

fic surveillance and the use of AIS are very important risk-reducing measures for the waters between Vardø and Røst.

– A traffic separation scheme has been intro­

duced for vessels sailing inside Norway’s terri­

torial limit between Vardø and Røst. Det Nor­

ske Veritas has estimated that this combined with AIS will reduce the number of ship colli­

sions by 40 per cent.

– In 2003, government emergency tugboat ser­

vices were established for maritime transport off Finnmark, Troms and the Lofoten Islands.

Det Norske Veritas considers that this, com­

bined with traffic surveillance and regulation of traffic out to Norway’s territorial limit, will considerably reduce the number of ground­

ings following engine failure. An increase in the level of petroleum activity will normally mean that the tugboat service is also scaled up.

– Today, surveillance is efficient and a rapid response can be mounted in the event of acci­

dents involving vessels in the management

Box 4.3 Mandatory routeing and traffic separation scheme

The establishment of mandatory routeing and Maritime Organization (IMO). This is in accor­

traffic separation schemes is an important traffic- dance with the white paper on maritime safety regulating measure, which contributes significan- and the oil spill response system published in tly to the reduction of the risk of acute oil pollu- 2005 and the subsequent Storting debate and tion from ships. On 1 January 2004, Norway recommendations. The Government plans to sub-extended the breadth of its territorial sea from mit the proposal to IMO in the course of spring four to 12 nautical miles. At the same time, a man- 2006.

datory routeing and traffic separation scheme was The proposed position of the traffic lanes is established in the territorial waters between about 30 nautical miles from the coast. This Vardø and the North Cape for vessels carrying means that the ships will still be within the cover-polluting cargo. These traffic lanes are positioned age area of the Coastal Administration’s AIS sys­

as far out towards the new territorial limit as tem. The establishment of the scheme, combined practically possible. with AIS coverage by the vessel traffic service

Given the estimates for future transport of centre in Vardø, will provide an integrated system petroleum and petroleum products from Russia, for regulation and control of the traffic.

the authorities have concluded that further mea- Safe maritime transport is also in the interest sures are needed to ensure that this transport of the oil and gas and fisheries industries. In takes place in the safest possible way. With the determining the exact position of the routeing anticipated increase in the volume of traffic, regu- scheme, consideration will therefore be given to lation will be needed to shift the traffic farther petroleum activities and to the areas where fish-away from the coast. ing is most intensive, in addition to safety and

The Government has therefore resolved to environmental concerns. Rules will be drawn up submit a proposal for a mandatory routeing and for fisheries and petroleum activities within the traffic separation scheme outside the territorial area covered by the scheme.

limit between Vardø and Røst to the International

Figure 4.3 Proposed mandatory routeing and traffic separation scheme outside territorial waters between Vardø and Røst

Source: Norwegian Coastal Administration

Box 4.4 Northern Maritime Corridor (NMC) – an Interreg IIIB project This project is funded by two Interreg IIIB pro­

grammes, the Northern Periphery and North Sea programmes, and was started in 2002. Inter-reg is an EU initiative to promote transnational and regional cooperation. The project is coordi­

nating activities involving central and regional authorities in 20 regions in eight countries in the fields of logistics and transportation, maritime safety, regional business development and “busi­

ness to business” cooperation. The project part­

ners include all Norwegian coastal municipali­

ties from Vest-Agder to Finnmark, the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland, the E12 Alliance (counties and municipalities in Sweden), the Barents Secretariat, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Highland Council, the Shetland Islands Council, the Orkney Islands Council, Archangel and Murmansk counties, Aberdeen­

shire Council, Amsterdam Port Authority, Gro­

ningen Seaports, the province of West Flanders and the City of Cuxhaven.

The two Northern Periphery and North Sea programmes focus on the same topics and will cooperate closely on the Northern Maritime Corridor project. They share the same overall objective for this project, which is to develop an efficient, safe and sustainable maritime corridor for maritime transport between the North Sea region and the Barents region and to bring busi­

nesses in the two regions closer together to pro­

mote industrial development.

The overall budget for the Northern Mari­

time Corridor project is about EUR 5 million.

Russia’s interest in the project arises from its work on the Northern Sea Route.

In Norway, a central coordinating group has been set up with representatives from eight ministries, headed by the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development.

plan area. The Coastal Administration works closely with the Norwegian Defence Forces on surveillance and rapid response in order to pre­

vent incidents involving vessels from causing acute oil pollution. Following the establish­

ment of the Defence Forces’ coastal emer­

gency response and on-scene command (KYBAL), risk-reducing oil spill response mea­

sures can be initiated immediately by the Defence Forces on behalf of the Coastal Administration.

– In 2004, in accordance with the IMO guide­

lines, a procedure was established for interven­

tion and action by the Coastal Administration when Norwegian or foreign ships in need of assistance constitute a danger to safety and the environment. The aim is to ensure that deci­

sions on ports of refuge are made quickly. The procedure is based on fast interaction between central and local government agencies and pri­

vate actors, where the Coastal Administration is responsible for decision-making.

– The Coastal Administration’s notification and information system, “ShipRep”, is linked to a number of registers containing information about vessels.

Unlike the oil industry, the shipping industry is not required to provide oil spill response equip­

ment. The governmental emergency response system for acute pollution is therefore mainly designed to prevent and limit damage from inci­

dents involving ships. In addition to its responsi­

bility for the private emergency response system and operations, the Coastal Administration there­

fore has operational responsibility for the govern­

mental emergency response system for acute pol­

lution targeted at maritime transport as well as the responsibility for ensuring that damage-reduc­

ing measures implemented by other bodies are adequate. In 2005, the Coastal Administration drew up new plans including procedures for coor­

dination of the whole coastal emergency response system, operational emergency response services and all available expertise. The Norwegian Mari­

time Directorate acts as advisor to the Coastal Administration on the handling of vessels that represent an acute pollution hazard. An advisory group for acute pollution, consisting of members with environmental, fisheries and marine engi­

neering expertise, has also been set up under the leadership of the Coastal Administration.

Figure 4.4 Cleaning up the beach at Bleiknstranda near Haugesund after the Green Ålesund accident

Source: Norwegian Coastal Administration

The Norwegian Maritime Directorate is responsible for ensuring compliance with regula­

tions and standards for ships. Its work is impor­

tant in increasing safety levels. The directorate cooperates with the maritime industry through­

out the country, other countries’ maritime author­

ities and international fora. Work is based on experience from accidents and near-accidents, research and risk analyses. Norway’s marine acci­

dent database, DAMA, plays a vital role here.

Every ship must have contingency plans for emer­

gencies.

The Directorate has three key tasks:

– To ensure that Norwegian ships and shipown­

ers meet the highest safety and environmental standards,

– To ensure that seamen on Norwegian ships are well-qualified and have good employment and living conditions,

– To ensure that foreign ships in Norwegian water and ports comply with international rules for vessel standards, equipment and man­

ning.

There is already a comprehensive national frame­

work for risk management in the form of statu­

tory requirements, management principles, trend monitoring projects, follow-up and control mecha­

nisms, and a broad range of possible sanctions.

The existing framework is based on extensive knowledge and experience of risk management and is being further developed in response to new knowledge, experience, trend monitoring results and feedback from the parties. The existing framework for risk management should be used as a basis in developing a more integrated man­

agement regime for the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. Cooperation between the authorities should be strengthened and translated into practical terms in order to increase their contribution to the prevention of oil spills, improvement of emer­

gency response systems and continuous monitor­

ing of risk in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area.

The international legal framework for liability and compensation for damage caused by oil pollu­

tion from ships has been considerably strength­

ened in recent years. New limits for compensation and the establishment of funds also apply to acci­

dents in the Barents Sea–Lofoten area. In addi­

tion, flag states are responsible for control and compliance for vessels flying their flag.

4.6 Onshore activities of particular

In document Report No. 8 to the Storting (2005–2006) (sider 53-56)