A Journey to Effective Response: Experience From Kazakhstan

Abstract

The Republic of Kazakhstan has an oil production and transport industry of growing global importance; in 2015 crude oil production averaged 1.67 million bbl/day (74 million m3/year). The growth of the oil industry and a changing risk profile has led to an evolution of oil spill preparedness. The national framework has been amended several times due to legislative and administrative changes. The latest National Oil Spill Contingency Plan was approved in 2012, providing impetus for further development through its implementation. This Plan’s policy embraces risk-based preparedness utilizing the full response toolkit. In terms of realizing national policy, important amendments to the Environmental Code in 2016 addressed the following:– Exemption from emission control regulation; legitimate consequences of the response toolkit (such as adding dispersant and a smoke plume resulting from controlled burning) will not be considered as emissions.– Requirement for specific regulation of oil spill methods i.e. dispersant product approval and use authorization and in-situ burning procedures. Industry worked with the authorities to address and develop effective regulation based on international good practices as promoted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and international oil industry associations. The national association Kazenergy provided a vehicle for aligned support across the local industry. Kazakhstan is a member of the regional agreement to protect the Caspian marine environment. Cooperation in case of major oil pollution is being developed, through the implementation of the Aktau Protocol, which entered into force in July 2016. Kazakhstan is also in the process of ratifying the IMO Conventions relating to oil spill preparedness and response. This paper describes the challenging journey to develop an effective response framework, highlighting that the process:– requires champions within authorities to promote legislative amendments;– benefits from alignment of industry through associations as an efficient means to provide support;– is inevitably slowed by governmental re-organization and it is challenging to achieve consensus across different Ministries and departments;– is enhanced where targeted local oil spill research provides credibility and validation of international inputs. Significant commitment is needed to achieve legislative change but the prize it worth it. The result is a robust framework that mandates effective response using the best options to minimize environmental impacts and promote recovery in case of potential oil pollution.

Kazakhstan experience in adopting NEBA within its legal framework

“…In 2016 the Environmental Code was amended to give a responsibility to develop 'Rules on oil spill response method use' and also made a clear statement that emissions (e.g. air pollution or use of chemicals) associated with authorized oil spill combat methods would Akimat's Decrees be exempt from prosecution or fines (Amanzholova et al, 2017). In 2018, the Subsoil Use Code was revised with reference to the NEBA approach, when considering oil spill response measures.…”