Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
APPENDIX ~ POSITIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND TlIE OIL INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION FORUM ( Exchange of Correspondence ) 76
/tr~ 6 . DIE SECR ETAR Y OF DEf EASE w^5~1 NGSo - . T~ D'S~R'CT oF ALUM I Hr . Char Me ~ . DIBona American Petroleum Snat$tute ~ 2 20 L Street, H. W. Washington, D. C. 2000S J/^ Dear tin DiB~ 2 2 Ells 19~ AUG ~ ? RECK - //~7 INSOLES J. Oi8Ol~ Shank you for your letter of July 27, l9B4 regarding the need for appropriate international ·tenderde for the removal of abandoned offshore ·tructures. As you noted, because of it. triplications for nevigat$on, this issue is of particular Importance to us. Maritime mobility ts vitel to the V.~. national security, and our submerged forces are ~ critice1 component in our efforts to ensure strategic deterrence. From a global perepective, the proliferation of nonpro- ducing offshore structures could seriously degrade the mobility and flexibility of our ·eaborne forces . Therefore, we agree fu l ly that international removal ·tendarde are required . To be effective. the resoo~1 ·tandarde must be binding, a" coastal state discretion must be - inimised. Without these elements, coastal states could come to their own conclus$one as to what is ~ressonable., which would defeat the very purpose of unt formity that internationa ~ standlar~le are want to serve . Only globally established standards, which carefully delimit minimum and maximum depths for rental, can protect against abuse by other countries. For this reason ~ here recommended the attached draft standerde for interagency con~t~eration. The draft standards have been carefully crafted to ensure that writhe mobility will be protected, while providing industry with a more fIesible alternative to the current Entirely remove. standard. Your input ~ ill be extremely helpful In fine-tuning our proposal be fore it ts submitted to the International 1laritime Organisa- tion. ~ welcome your offer to work closely with my staff on thi s important tes ue . My replies entat ive for Ocean Pol icy Affable, Mr. Hugh O'Nelll (694-~7}, will be contacting you for that purpose. Attachment Si~f9el', , ~G:
proposed Minimum Standards for the Removal of Offshore Structures and Installations - All fixed structures utilized in the EEZ or on the continental shelf shall. as an essential component of their design, provide for their effective and expeditious removal. - It shall be the obligation of the coastal state to require that the corporate entity, individual or government under whose control the structure existed to ensure that it is removed and disposed of when no longer used for hydrocarbon recovery. - In order to maintain an environment suitable for all forms of navigation and other uses of the sea, removed shall be to within 5 meters above the sea floor in waters less than 400 meters' to within 15 meters above the sea floor in waters less than 2000 meters and greater than 400 meters. - All structures not entirely removed shall at ~ minimum be modified to the above height and depth standards, shell be indicated on marine charts prepared by ache coastal state and, under guidelines provided by IMO, appropriate publicity shell be Siven regarding the depth, position, and dimensions of any installations or structures not entirely removed. - When removing structures and installations components may remain or be installed in or on the sea floor as necessary to protect the environment or prevent interference with other uses of the sea. Components remaining or installed for this purpose must not exceed the distance above the sea flog: stated above. - Nothing shall preclude any coastal stance depositing concer~trations of removed structures in special areas for living resource sanctuaries or related purposes so long as such placement does not interfere with navigational and other non-fishing acacia ities. - Except in archipelegic sealanes and in international straits, nothing shall preclude the coes~cal stance, in its territorial sea {up to ~ limit not exceeding 12nm) or in waters less then 20 meters in depth, from permitting exemptions from these provisions. - Nothing shall preclude the cosste1 state from imposing more stringent removal standards for new or existing fixed structures. - Structures existing prior to the adoption of these standards may be grandfa~hered into the new standards' thereby avoiding the restively removed. 1958 Geneva standard.
Amerlcan Petrotoum Inetltute 1220 L St reef. loots ~ est wsChtnQton D C cantos; ~ 20- 682-8100 ], _ '' t . . ! ~ The HonoraLl e Ca spa r W. heinberger Secretary of Defense The Pentagon Washington, D. C. 20301 July 27, 1984 Re: Appropriate International Standards for the Removal of Abandoned Offshore Structures Dear Mr. Secretary: Over the past several years, both the oi ~ industry and the Department of the Navy have wrestled with the issue of appropriate removal requirements for offshore petroleum structures once they have ceased operations. This matter has arisen, inter alla, in the context of the Department of the ~- Interior~s efforts to implement a ~Rigs to Reefe.' program. See, 48 Fed. - . 31397 (July 8, 1983). The question of removal is particularly important to the Navy because of its implications for navigation. Obviously, the issue of what internatione1 removal standards are or should be is of significant concern to the American petroleum industry, as well as to our counterparts throughout the world. In early 1983 the American Petroleum Institute (API), the National Ocean Industries Association, and several of their member companies met with representatives of the Depar~nents of Defense, State, Interior and Transportation. At that time we expressed our concern about precipitous U. S. action concerning the development of an i nternationa~ removal s tandard . We were assured that no such action was imminent and that a dialogue with industry or. its views regarding an appropriate standard would be encourage_. Over the intervening months industry, through the ESP Forum, has developed a consensus vies on thi s matter . As a member of the For='Ti, API herewith formally submits the views of the E&P Forum to your Department for its consideration (Attachment 1 ) . The recent 'y concluded Convention on the Lax of the Sea includes a provi sio-. which serves to make current the removal requi remeets app] icabl ~ to abandoned offshore structures (Article 60. 3 ~ . The
The Honorable Caspar A'. ~'~inberger July 27, 1984 Page 2 Convention recognizes that appropriate international standards to ensure safes>, of navigation are to be developed by "the competent international organization." Although undefined, it i 6 believed that this term refers to the International Maritime Organization (ICON. Irrespective of the U.S. refusal to sign the Convention on the Law of the Sea and the uncertainty attendant to the Convention ever going into force, we understand that efforts may be mounting to address this issue in the loo, an organizatic~n of which the 1!. S. is a member. Fearful of premature consideration of this issue before the IMO and cognizant of the desirability of industry reaching a consensus on appropriate removal requirements, the EsP Forum began considering this issue in late 1982. The E&P Forum is an international organization comprised of public and private oil companies and trade associations Membership list: Attachment 2~. Significantly, the ELP Forum has consultative status with the IMO. Given the strong possibility that this issue will be discussed at an international level, API supports the prompt development of a coherent Administration position on this issue and bel ieves that the position developed by the E&P Forum would be a useful tool to aid this process. In addition, the Forum will soon finalize a series of background papers that will address: world wide cost implications of various removal scenarios · legal issues · utility of abandoned structures for man-made reefs · water depth requirements of present and future maritime craft · submarine lurking area risks · fisheries concerns · safety aspects of structure removal A composite briefing package containing these materials will be available and forwarded to you in the fall. These materials should be useful in future discussions between governmental agencies and the private sector. The American Petroleum Institute would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter with you or appropriate members of your staff. Although some background materials will not be available for several months to come, the removal standard is of sufficient importance that the development of any administration position in this matte- should include early consideration of industries views. Farther, He solicit any comments you may have on the attached r sp Forur, position paper. The industry presented its views to the Departments of State and Interior G-. July 13, and we look foreyard to an opportunity, to do
The Honorab} e Caspar a;. we i nberger 3u ~ y 2 7, ~ 9134 Page 3 so with your Department· In this vein, we request that your staff contact us to arrange a meeting to <discuss this matter at whatever level you consider appropriate. In thi ~ Stein. Sincerely (/ <~; d The Honorable George P. Shultz, Secretary of State The Honorable William P. Clark, Secretary of the Interior The Honorable James A · McClure, Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Nature ~ Resources The Honorable Walter B. Jones, Chairman, House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries bcc: The Honorable f or Land and The Honorable Economic ana Brian Hoyle J . S seven hater Research GriTe.s, Der~utv Assistant Secretary Richard T. ~lcCorr~ack, Assistant Business Af fair s Bureau Department of State Secretary f or
E&P Forum REMOVAL OF OFFSHORE INSTALLATIONS - AN INDUSTRY POSITION PAPER Whilst every ef fort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication, neither E ~ P Forum, nor any of its members will assume liability for any use made thereof. May 1984
E&P Forum I N T R O D U C T I O N Following the completion of the E ~ P Forum questionnaire and the results of the technical workshop it was clear there was a broad industry consensus on the technical and cost aspects of platform removal. This was recorded in the Fosum's paper "The Development and Promotion of an Industry Position on Platform Removal". Further consideration of the reasons whereby this technical consensus could be translated into satisfactory removal standarts/requirements indicated that two papers were called for: i) Our Legal Committee advise that the international removal standard which it envisages will be developed in IMO should only address the issue of safety of navigation. This has been reflected in the text of Annex 1. ii) The other paper, Annex 2, addressing all other relevant issues should be regarded as a general statement of objectives to be achieved in discussions with coastal states and regional authorities. Hembers may wish to use these papers at thelr discretion when discussing the matter of platform removal with either national or international agencies. May 1384
E&P Forum ANNEX 1 STANDARDS ON REMOVAL OF OFFSHORE INSTALLATIONS FOR SAFETY OF NAVIGATION In order to ensure safety of navigation in the waters of its EEZ and above its Continental Shelf, each Coastal State in considering removal of installations and structures (hereinafter called installations) in such waters upon their abandonment or permanent disuse shall take into account the following standards: Any installation shall be removed, in so far as it protrudes above the seabed, if and to the extent necessary to ensure safety of navigation in the relevant waters, provided that no other means are available which are reasonable in all the circumstances (taking into account inter alla the risk and cost of removal) to achieve the same without removing such installation or part thereof and further provided that, if on the basis of the foregoing removal is necessary, in water depths of more than 40 metres measured at lowest astronomical tide such removal shall ensure an unobstructed water column of at least 40 metres measured as aforesaid . 2. 3. Removal shall be performed as soon as reasonably practicable after abandonment or permanent disuse of such installation. Removal operations shall be performed in such a way that they cause no significant adverse effects upon navigation. 4. The above standards do not apply to pipelines. In addition the Coastal State concerned shall ensure that the position, depth and dimensions of each installation which has not been wholly removed after abandonment or permanent disuse is marked on charts maintained by the appropriate international maritime bodies.
E&P Forum ANNEX 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ON REMOVAL OF OFFSHORE INSTALLATIONS In considering removal of installations and structures (hereinaf ter called installations) in such waters of the EEZ and above the Continental Shelf upon their abandonment or permanent disuse, the following shall be taken into account :- 1. In water depths of less than 40 metres any installation shall be completely removed to the extent it protrudes above the seabed except in the following circumstances:- (i) it is manifest that such removal would serve no significant legitimate interest existing or foreseeable at that time, including but not limited to the safety of navigation, the enhancement or protection of the marine environment, the conduct of fisheries, mining operations or the exercise of other legitimate uses of the sea, the seabed or subsoil; or (ii) the adverse effects of non removal are small and the risks and costs of removal are disproportionate in relation to such adverse effects, or (iii) it is proposed that the facility be retained in place for alternative use. Any installations in water depths greater than 40 metres shall be ~ cleared of obst N ction to navigation upon cessation of approved activities in such a way that there is a depth of at least 40 metres of unobstructed water. at lowest astronomical tide (l.a.t.) above any remaining residues, except in the exceptional circumstances specified in 1. The Coastal State shall ensure that such removal operations as are required shall be performed as soon as reasonably practicable after
abandonment or permanent disuse of such installations. 4. Installations or parts thereof which are removed may be disposed of in manners which include:- (i) disposal on site , and (ii) disposal in areas designated by Coastal States as artificial reef sites, provided that there shall, except in the exceptional circumstances specified in paragraph ~ and 4 (ii), be an unobstructed water column at lowest astronomical tide (~.a.t.) of at least 40 metres above anything so disposed and provided further that anything so disposed may not create a significant risk to the marine environment, or cause undue conflict with the interests of other users of the sea. States shall require the owner to ensure that the position and size of any installations remaining after the removal operation shall be marked on navigational charts. 6. States shall require the owner to ensure that removal and disposal operations are executed in such a way that they cause no significant adverse effects on the marine environment, with due regard to fishing activities. 7. Compliance with these and any additional requirements imposed by 8 Coastal State shall be a full discharge of all continuing liabilities and obligations in respect of installations and any parts thereof. B. The above does not apply to pipelines.
Mcmbers of E & P Fon~m and their Represen~tives Member Arp s.p.~. AmeTican Pctrolcum Instirute Amoco Production Compan! Intern~nonal Arabi~n Amcrican Oil Compan' Britoil p.1.c. BP Pctroicum Dcsclopmcnt Limitcd Burm~h Oi] E>;ploration Limited Compa~ic Francaisc des Pct~oles (TOTAL) Chambre Synd~calc dc tz Rccherchc ct dc la Production du Pctroic et du Gaz blaturc] Chevron Pcuoicum (UK) Lunitcd Conoco lnc D~nsk Borescisk~b A/S Exxon Corporation Gulf Arc~ Oi} Companics Murua] Aid Organ~setion (GAOC~AO) Gulf Oi] Corporetion H~sp~nia de Pctroicos S.A. Insotut Franca~s du Pcnolc ]span National Oi! Corporation Kuwait Oi] Comp~ny (K.S.C.) M=athon Oil Company Mobi! Oi] Corporation Norsk Industriforcn~ng for Operatirselskaper (NIFO) NcderIandsc Olic cn Ges Exploratic en Produktic Associetic (NOGEPA) Occidental Pctroleum Corporation Petrofins S.A. Pc~olcos dc Vcnezucia S.A. Phillips Pcuoicum Compan) Shel] Intcrnationale Pc~oicum Maatschappi: B.\'. Socictc Nationalc Elf Aquiraine Sun Oi] Compans Ic>;aco ln~crna~ional Pc~rolcum Comp~n L'~ Offshorc Opcrators Associaric~n Lim.ted (t'};C)OA) U irtschafts~ c. band Erdol- und Erdgas~cu inricng e V. (~ E G ) Countr' ltals USA USA Saudi Arabia UK UK Francc France UK VSA Dcnmark USA Bahr~in VSA Sp3m Fran cc ]ap" Kuwait USA USA Norway Thc Nc~herIands USA Beigium \'cnc~ucia l''SA The Netheriands Prancc L'S.A L'S.A L'L FRG
