Within the Environmental Impact Assessment of an offshore 3D Seismic Survey in Southern Adriatic Sea, a comprehensive approach to address potential underwater noise impacts was developed to protect marine fauna. The study was based on applicable international guidelines about underwater noise such as ACCOBAMS, JNCC, and IAGC. The approach allowed to define, and agree with local authorities, consistent mitigation measures to protect marine fauna species in the study area. Primary data on marine mammals, sea turtles and fish species were collected and integrated with secondary data from literature. An underwater sound propagation model based on the Range dependent Acoustic Model (RAM), producing 3D sound maps, was used to simulate the noise propagation of the 5085 cu. in. seismic array, consisting of 24 airguns at a depth of 8 m. Broadband metrics of cumulative SEL (Sound Exposure Level) and SPL (Sound Peak Level) were used to assess the distance from the source within which TTS (Temporary Threshold Shift) and PTS (Permanent Threshold Shift) might have occurred. The simulation considered potential impacts on cetaceans, sea turtles, pinnipeds and fish species, based on internationally recognized sound thresholds for TTS and PTS (i.e. NOAA ). The model indicated an exclusion zone of 700 m to be implemented around seismic sources to avoid permanent injuries or deaths of the considered species. A model sensitivity analysis as well as a measurement test in the field were performed prior to the commencement of the seismic survey in order to validate the calculated exclusion and verify the validity of the model in other periods of the year. The field validation test was performed prior to the survey by recording airguns emissions along a 7 km streamer. The measured sound levels were lower than those predicted confirming the validity of the previously identified 700 m exclusion zone. Targeted mitigation measures were implemented in line with all considered guidelines, including Marine Fauna Observers and Passive Acoustic Monitoring. Starting from a deep analyisis of the international guidelines for the protection of the marine fauna, the selection of the most suitable mitigation measures was then driven by the local operational context and the national legislation. Local authorities and scientific bodies were involved in the mitigations design process; an Emergency Response Plan, including a Stranding Action Plan, was drafted and approved by competent authorities to prevent and manage potential incidents. The novelty of this study lies in the use of a robust modelling tool as a basis to define a series of mitigation measures based on a rigorous precautionary approach, such as the development of an Emergency Response Plan and a Stranding Action Plan. This approach was developed in close collaboration with in-country authorities and scientific bodies. The consistency of the approach reassured local and international stakeholders regarding the mitigation of potential underwater noise impacts of the seismic survey on marine fauna species in the area.

Remote sensing data has been increasingly used for environmental monitoring in recent years. The International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP) has recognized this trend and created a Task Force to develop a document to provide good practices and lessons learned for the oil and gas industry. The objective of the document is to provide clear guidance to the environmental professional on how remote sensing may be applied to the range of common use cases encountered across the asset life cycle. The good practice document development and content was informed by peer-reviewed publications, reports and direct input from oil and gas member company examples. A series of seven online and face to face presentations from key groups that develop remote sensing data for environmental monitoring were also shared. These included presentations from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the European Space Agency (ESA) and the United Nations Environment Program World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC). The scope of the document was defined to include satellite, manned airborne and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) platforms across a broad range of sensors and spectral wavelengths. The resultant document covers six chapters. Three of the chapters covers the use cases and are delineated by target application; Land, Marine and Coastal and Atmospheric applications. Each of these chapters are further divided into sections with specific applications relevant to the oil and gas industry, including where in the asset life cycle the application may apply to, potential platforms and sensors, final deliverables and potential challenges. For example, Habitat Mapping, captured as a subsection under Land applications, is often completed during development of an asset to define a baseline for specific habitat types. Ongoing monitoring is also typical after construction, especially if any critical habitats are identified. Remote sensing platforms used to provide habitat data range from medium to high spatial resolution satellite data through to very high spatial resolution UAV data. For either satellite or airborne data, the spectral data used for habitat mapping includes visible and infrared data. The remaining three chapters provide a state of knowledge of environmental remote sensing, the business case for the oil and gas industry and how to develop a scope for an environmental remote sensing project, a review of existing remote sensing platforms and sensors available for environmental monitoring. This paper will provide practical guidance for operators on the current applications of the latest remote sensing technology for environmental monitoring in oil and gas projects; it will include actual industry use cases throughout the asset life cycle and lessons learned, together with good practices for the consideration, acquisition and stewardship of geospatial data. It will serve as a useful link between the environmental professional and remote sensing specialist.

Effective minimization of environmental footprint can be achieved through the timely and systematic application of innovative approaches such as the Mitigation Hierarchy (MH) along O&G project lifecycle. This ensures the presence of biodiversity and sensitive areas (such as protected areas, critical habitats and threatened species) and good management practices properly inform project activities that depend and may impact on natural environment. The MH is a framework designed to maximise impact prevention over restoration and offset, balancing development priorities with the sustainable use of natural resources. Consisting of a sequence of two preventive (avoid and minimise) and two corrective measures (restore and offset), it is adopted by the extractive sector, development banks and financial institutions as the current best available tool for achieving measurable performance objectives such as no net loss or net positive impact. However, its timely and systematic application along project lifecycle can be challenging, particularly for companies with a complex, diversified and global asset portfolio. In line with company Policy on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (BES), we apply the MH as early as possible in the project lifecycle. To effectively minimise project environmental footprint, we prioritize preventive over corrective measures following a risk-based approach which accounts for the complexities of each project and the natural and social environment it interacts with. Along the project lifecycle, we have faced internal and external challenges in the practical implementation of the mitigation hierarchy. Internal challenges included aligning the project engineering and financing timelines with the BES baseline and impact assessment timeline, while external challenges include balancing demands of local communities and other stakeholders, the diverse operational contexts and regulatory frameworks aligned with or lacking mitigation best practices. Innovative and collaborative approaches are therefore necessary to effectively communicate or build capacity on company science-based BES management practices. Early exploration and development phases correspond with best opportunity to identify BES priorities and apply the preventive steps of the MH. Applications include evaluating new opportunities, spatial placement or relocation of facilities and linear infrastructure, and project scheduling. During the development phase, a suite of GIS-based tools and BES assessments provide a supportive framework to apply the MH in concept selection, definition and execution. Subsequently in the operational phase, Action Plans are used to ensure the delivery and iterative evaluation of impact mitigation and the continuous improvement of BES performance. Through practical examples spanning different phases of the project lifecycle and sites located in biodiversity rich and sensitive areas (e.g. United States, Myanmar, Ghana, Egypt and Ecuador), this paper will illustrate how challenges can be overcome starting from early exploration phase (evaluation of new ventures), in project development (design and construction), and during production. We will also reflect on the contribution of the MH to value creation from operations in sensitive areas.

The produced water management represents an important issue for the Oil&Gas industry. This paper illustrates the development and testing of a Life Cycle Assessment-based, phased methodology employable to various offshore contexts for the comparative assessment of alternative produced water management options (such as injection versus sea discharge), based on their potential effects on the environment. The first phase of the assessment consists in the quantification and the comparison of global environmental pressures resulting from produced water management processes (facilities installation, use of materials, energy consumption, discharges) through the application of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), in compliance with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The second phase consists in the local impacts assessment. It starts with the definition of biodiversity and ecosystem services values (biodiversity screening) in the Project area using secondary data, such as global and local datasets and scientific bibliography, with the objective to relate the sensitive receptors eventually occurring in the area. This phase continues with the Biodiversity Impact Assessment, which is conducted through a matrix approach that evaluates the significance of the impacts on the related receptors. The approach is based on a combination of the following aspects. The sensitivity of local biodiversity to the defined impact categories. The magnitude of the local impacts. The third and final phase of the process entails a detailed dispersion modelling of the produced water discharges into the sea. The discharges into the sea were identified as the most impactful produced management solution in the previous phases. The whole methodology aims at introducing a complete and quantitative assessment to select the most sustainable design for produced water management, shifting from a broader perspective (LCA considers global impact categories), to a local perspective (focused on the natural context of the Project area).

Oil spill risk assessments are carried out in different ways, depending on the background for and the purpose of the analysis. One reason for these differences is the fact that oil spill risk assessment is a discipline at the interface between the technical/statistical analysis in Quantitative Risk Assessments (QRAs) and the biological/socio-economic analysis in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). As a consequence of the EU Offshore Safety Directive (2013/30/EU), the risk of major environmental accidents shall now be included in QRAs for offshore oil & gas installations. Environmental Critical Elements (ECEs) shall be defined, in parallel to the Safety Critical Elements (SCE), which are analysed in QRAs. Moreover, limit values need to be defined for oil spill risk. Whereas including oil spill risk in QRAs has only been carried out systematically the latest few years, it has for many years been included in EIAs. But the extend of such analysis has varied significantly, also for the same type of projects in the same environmental settings. This paper reviews the background for the oil spill risk analysis in QRAs and EIAs, and outlines how the approaches used differs, where the QRAs analyse the likelihood component most detailed, and the EIAs analyse the consequence component most detailed. The reason for these differences is mainly historical. QRAs have traditionally been carried out focused on safety risk for people, calculating the likelihood of accidental scenarios and the consequences in terms of number of fatalities. Also, QRAs have been carried out with the aim of identifying which elements of the system should be improved in order to reduce the likelihood of accidental events, and to identify mitigation measures that can be applied when the likelihood has been reduced as much as reasonably practicable. In contrast, EIAs has mainly focused on the consequences of oil spills which are taking place; oil dispersion is modelled, and the biota, fishery and beaches possibly being impacted are being identified and assessed. The analysis has to a large degree been qualitative in contrast to the quantitative analysis in the QRAs; partly because the consequences of oil spills are so diverse, but probably also because EIAs typically are authored by biologist mainly focusing on qualitative analysis of the impacts on the marine life, whereas QRAs are mainly authored by engineers focused on the quantitative aspects. By highlighting the background for and the difference between oil spill risk analysis carried out in QRAs and EIAs, respectively, it is the ambition to provide a more enlightened basis for selecting methods and level of detail in oil spill risk analysis for various types of projects, and to establish a closer connection between oil spill risk analysis carried out for QRAs and oil spill risk analysis carried out for EIAs.

Local content optimization is one of ExxonMobil's global best practices. Once oil was discovered in Guyana, ExxonMobil Guyana made the unprecedented decision of initiating local supplier development before Final Investment Decision (FID) and contractually mandated prime contractors to work to support a robust local content regime. Initial steps taken included: Establishing local content requirements in the prime contractor contracts and hiring DAI Global (DAI) to establish the Centre for Local Business Development to provide a mechanism to engage local businesses. Contracting DAI Global to analyze the Guyanese business environment, identify early opportunities for local content, develop fit-for-purpose development programs, and plan for long-term sustainability of the Centre. Modifying standard procurement practices to facilitate local supplier entry into the oil and gas market through supplier forums, unbundling and supplier mentoring activities. The Centre for Local Business Development (Centre) was conceptualized and announced months before FID. The Centre provides fit-for-purpose local supplier development programs based on the evolving needs of local businesses to enter the oil and gas supply chain. The Centre focuses on three key areas: supplier engagement and registration, general business support, and supplier development. Engagement and registration focuses on allowing businesses to garner the necessary information to make strategic investment decisions. General business support aims to build a pool of businesses compliant international standards. Supplier development utilizes mentoring programs to enable businesses to make the transition into the oil and gas supply chain and potentially win tenders. Optimizing local content in countries where industrial development is limited requires understanding the local supply chain and implementation of fit for purpose interventions as early as possible; testing initiatives; and adapting to the needs of local suppliers, operator and prime contractors. This paper outlines how early intervention in local capacity building enables local companies in a developing market (inadequate business infrastructure and systems) to successfully transition into the oil and gas value chain.

This paper describes how an oilfield services companies worked with remote communities in the Latin American region to improve access to healthcare through the use of mobile healthcare units. In remote regions, limited access to local healthcare services makes seeking healthcare in larger towns the only viable option. This is not always feasible due to the long distances needed to travel between the communities and the towns. This paper describes how the company supported a mobile healthcare unit in rural communities in Latin America to improve availability and accessibly to healthcare services such as pediatrics, general medicine, basic dentistry, optometry, and laboratory examinations. Partnering with the operator and the country's Ministry of Health, the mobile healthcare units promote health initiatives and provide medical services. This has increased the availability of both preventive and curative healthcare in remote areas. Data from each unit is used by representatives of the Ministry of Health to coordinate follow-up visits with patients with chronic diseases such as anemia and trypanosomiasis in children and hypertension in adults. The data is also used to develop health profiles for specific communities to adapt the healthcare services to better meet their particular needs. Health promotion and disease prevention contributes to improved community well-being as well as improved health performance for the company's local personnel as they also have access to the healthcare units. The paper demonstrates how a multi-stakeholder initiative can increase access for remote communities to healthcare services and raise awareness of health issues to benefit the indigenous population as well the company's local workforce.

There is a global trend towards the application of risk based assessment (RBA) techniques for assessing and managing environmental risks and considering the potential impacts from discharges of produced water. One of the benefits of RBA is the absence of generic end-of-pipe limits for individual produced water components. Instead, it allows for flexibility to evaluate environmental risks and potential impacts of site-specific discharges on a case-by-case basis. Several global oil and gas operators have developed in-house approaches, guidelines and principles for evaluating these risks for communication to agencies and the public and for decision making. As such, a range of risk endpoints is being applied, each of them based on specific assumptions, input parameters with varying levels of empirical data requirements, and conservatism. This situation hampers straightforward comparison across companies and regulatory frameworks. The International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP) has recognized a need for alignment to support more consistent application and communication of RBA concepts. Therefore, a new IOGP project was sponsored, including formation of a Task Force to define industry good practice for RBA approaches, based on an inventory of methods currently used by member companies together with a review of existing regulatory approaches around the world. Tools have been catalogued and the strengths and weaknesses of the underlying risk principles have been analysed along with the protection goals they support. Two main principles were identified; Uncertainty-implicit and uncertainty-explicit approaches, each with their own application areas. The second phase of the project focused on the development of consensus industry guidance including a common tiered framework for RBA. The main objective of this work is to achieve harmonization in the way operators execute RBA for offshore produced water discharges as this will likely enhance broader understanding and acceptance of RBA techniques internationally. This paper will provide a summary of the inventory of RBA methods and tools collected by the Task Force and will present the main elements of the proposed common RBA framework for produced water discharges. This will include recommendations e.g. on how to characterize produced water composition, how to define appropriate mixing zones, and what data is needed to decide whether risk can be considered adequately controlled.

This paper explores the collective actions operators and oilfield services companies can take with local communities to promote long-term operational stability using a case study from a mature oilfield in the Latin American region. When the current operator became the license holder, it also took ownership of all community-facing responsibilities. In the years that followed, the company signed a long-term commercial agreement to co-manage three blocks with specific project management responsibilities for the preparation of the field development plan, drilling campaigns, and facilities construction. Following social due diligence during the business development phase, the company prioritized allocating time for analysis and planning to establish its own community liaison team. The priority was to align responsibilities and interfaces with the operator, while establishing structured long-term plans for community engagement, local content, and social investment. With an operational footprint covering over 1200 km 2 and over 80 indigenous and settler communities with a diversity of backgrounds, operational activities had to be managed sensitively. In creating its own community liaison team, with limited responsibilities for direct interface with communities, the company focused on implementing fundamental and risk-based controls from its social management system. The company focused on building a culture of respect for communities, mapping areas of potential sensitivity, managing tier 2 contractors’ social and environmental performance, optimizing local content by prioritizing local supplier participation and development and ensuring worker hiring processes are perceived as fair and transparent, and implementing a strategic social investment program along with the operator. Collaboration between the operator and company can lead to improved community well-being, operational stability and improved business performance. The paper highlights the importance of social performance integration across the oil and gas industry value-chain. It provides insights into the practical application of the 2018 IPIECA community liaison officers’ team building and management guidance from a company perspective.

Detection and quantification of gas leakage by infrared technology This article aim to present the technology for detection and quantification of fugitive gas emissions in deep offshore activities of TOTAL E&P Angola (hereafter mentioned as "Company"). Company has been operating in Angola for more than 60 years, totally committed to the environmental sustainability through full compliance to the local regulation, Company standards, and best oilfield environmental practices. Fugitive emissions represent a general set of emission from industrial sources that cannot be connected through controlled means to a definitive emission point. These normally and relatively small and hard-to- detect emissions from valve packing, pump seal, compressor seals and piping connections occur as part of normal industrial operations. They are characterized by a diffused release of VOC (Volatile Organic Compounds: methane, ethane, methanol, etc) or other pollutants into the atmosphere. Methane’s global warming potential is higher than carbon dioxide. Methane emissions in Company’s operated scope stood at 2.3 Mt CO2-eq in 2015 and nearly half or 1.1 Mt CO2-eq were specifically related to gas production. In all, they account for less than 0.5% of Company’s marketed operated production; therefore improving methane measurement and mitigating these emissions are part of climate change strategy of the Company. Reducing oil and gas methane emissions is an essential, low-cost strategy for slowing the accelerated pace of today’s Global Warming. It is a major opportunity for climate progress that cannot be missed. This is why all efforts were centered to join the Climate and Clean air Coalition (CCAC) Oil & Gas Methane Partnership, important step to understand the scope of the company methane emissions. The CCAC Partnership provides companies with a credible mechanism to systematically address their methane emissions and demonstrate this systematic approach to stakeholders.

Repsol Exploración Perú (Repsol E&P), in accordance with its environmental strategic lines for E&P, has been developing a plan to become certified as a responsible water user in its operations in Block 57. The certification is a recognition granted by the State (National Water Authority - ANA) through a seal or mark called "Blue Certificate". To obtain the certificate it is necessary to comply with 3 steps: Assessment of the Water Footprint Reduction of Water Footprint. Development of a shared value project. By obtaining the Blue Certificate contributes to the sustainability of the business, relationships with key stakeholders such as the State and the communities in the area of influence are maintained and improved. It also manages to optimize the processes that demand water resources in the operations; at the same time, the company is positioned within the sustainable business on water issues in the country.

Drilling operations produces drill cuttings, which need to be managed to minimize their potential environmental impacts. Nowadays, legislation worldwide moves towards limiting discharge at sea to decrease impacts on ocean. But cuttings must still be managed, and alternatives are not necessarily more environment friendly. In this article, three approaches of cutting management environmental impacts were compared. Modeling studies were compared to field data, to assess the relevance of these modeling studies in the evaluation of drilling discharge acceptability. The results of monitoring campaigns conducted on three offshore field in Myanmar, Congo and Angola were collected and analyzed. Lastly, a comparative attributional life cycle analysis (or LCA) of drill cuttings management options was conducted, comparing discharge at sea, reinjection into a disposal well, onshore landfill containment and onshore thermo-desorption. Environmental risk calculation through discharge modeling is robust and constitutes a good tool to evaluate the drilling discharge strategy, but it focuses on the sole discharge at sea option. Results from monitoring campaigns shows that fifteen to twenty years after drilling operations, decreasing trends are observed for drill cutting tracers. For other metals, concentration levels are similar to those of the baseline. Slight impacts on benthic macrofauna community keep on being observed, and processes of initial diversity recovery are in progress locally. At the scale of the entire fields, biodiversity has recovered almost similar levels as initially. With current practices, impacts can be estimated to last around ten years. The LCA was hampered by a lack of standardized indicators for marine compartment impacts and poor characterization of some drilling muds additives in LCA reference databases. Considering these limitations, the results and their interpretations state a higher impact of onshore management with thermo-desorption on most indicators. Discharge at sea has the biggest initial impact on marine ecotoxicity. Onshore landfill has the biggest impact on freshwater eutrophication, freshwater ecotoxicity, human carcinogenic toxicity and land use. This study shows that given current practices, impacts of drill cuttings discharge at sea are well predicted and last around 10 years. Alternative management options have impacts as well, mainly on human health, land use and non-marine environmental compartments. Decision-makers must balance the impacts on each compartment to choose the better management option given the context they face. This study highlights the interest of using life cycle analyses to compare management options rather than focusing on the impacts of only one option. To be able to do so, there is a need of developing LCA methodology on marine compartments.

In recent years many companies within the oil and gas industry have begun looking outward, to other high risk and highly reliably industries for benchmarking opportunities to improve safety performance. One of the realizations that has come from research on failures and this benchmarking is the need to improve our understanding of Human Factors and all the aspects that entails. The SPE is working on the publication of a technical report "Getting to Zero and Beyond: The Path Forward" that highlights the need for more work on Human Factors and there is a standing Technical Section on that area as well. With this in mind, a mid-size international oil and gas company operating in the Canadian oil sands (Company) recognized the need to further develop their operational and safety leadership in preparation for an upcoming well campaign. Early in 2017, a multi-day Wellsite Risk Management Improvement Workshop was conducted in advance of a summer Drilling and Completions campaign involving wells in the Alberta oil sands. The objective of the workshop was to provide wellsite leadership personnel with tools and techniques for improving the assessment and management of risk at the wellsite, including those arising from Human Factors and Human Error. The ultimate goal was to decrease the likelihood of at-risk behaviors in the performance of both routine and non-routine tasks. The workshop was conducted in Calgary and was attended by both Company and Contractor personnel. Some aspects of the workshop were challenging to the personnel attending, in particular those involving appropriate handling of Human Error and Human Failure. As the well campaign started up, site visits to the field were undertaken to assess uptake and continued implementation of the tools and techniques trained during the workshop, and to determine what additional coaching and guidance was needed. The first stage of the evaluation process entailed observing work being conducted on site over several days to get a sense of typical work practices. Examples of the full continuum of safe and at-risk behaviors were observed, both non-enabled and enabled. Further actions were developed and implemented to habituate the trained concepts. This paper will describe the training conducted, the monitoring and mentoring processes used and the overall findings and outcomes of the Wellsite Risk Management Improvement project.

A key objective for any oil spill response effort is to minimize the impacts to ecological, socio-economic and cultural resources at risk. To that end, the contingency planners and incident managers have traditionally utilized a formal or informal Net Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA) for selecting the most appropriate response option(s) to minimize spill impacts and promote recovery. The processes used to conduct a NEBA have varied considerably between industry operators, though the outcomes in terms of response strategy development have been similar. This variation in NEBA approaches can lead to challenges with communicating the underlying basis of response strategies to stakeholders. The oil industry published updated guidance in 2015 to explain the general principles of the NEBA process and facilitate stakeholder involvement. However, with industry's increasing reliance on NEBA to enhance the transparency of response strategy development, a consistent methodology for conducting formal NEBAs was required. In response to the above issue key industry associations collaborated on developing a qualitative NEBA methodology that was renamed Spill Impact Mitigation Assessment (SIMA). This methodology is designed to give a consistent approach to larger or higher consequence oil spill scenarios, where multiple spill response options are being considered and a formal SIMA/NEBA is warranted. Several industry spill response specialists and an independent expert participated in this project, resulting in the development of ‘Guidance on Implementing Spill Impact Mitigation Assessment’. The SIMA methodology is described, representing a tool that identifies the response option(s) that will best mitigate the overall impacts of an oil spill.

There is significant value in understanding the detail around potential events, which could occur as a result of a pipeline release. Modelling of spills can provide opportunity to optimize response, improve response time and effectiveness and reduce environmental impact. Such work provides real cost benefits. Oil spill modelling tools have been developed to help companies storing hazardous materials to better evaluate where the liquids might go and to assess their interactions within the environment. Predictive simulations on these processes can provide operators with the means to more effectively respond to an incident. Different tools exist to make predictions for overland migration, movement of liquids in surface waters or its fate and transport through the vadose and saturated zones of underlying soils. The question is will these plans actually assist in a response or will the responders always need to think on their feet and make calls in the field based on limited observations and under challenging conditions? This paper will outline the principles of the modelling approaches and sets out why the availability of high quality input data is now able to support detailed models of the fate of these liquids. To highlight why model outputs used in response plans can be trusted the paper will then present two real world examples from the same operator. In one instance, an attempted theft led to the contamination of an area of ground, which required remediation. Modelling was used to identify the plausible extent of contamination so that an appropriate investigation could be undertaken and the correct area of contaminated soils removed. In the second example, a third party impact on the same buried pipeline led to a release of kerosene into a nearby stream. In this example, responders were equipped with maps presenting model simulations, which illustrated the potential extent of the oil in the stream. The responders were able to station recovery systems rapidly and in the right locations. Without the simulation plans the extent and environmental impact of the spill would have been much more significant. The operator's response plans have stood up to two very different incidents and in both cases were supported by output from a range of modelling simulations. The response has undoubtedly saved significant costs by enabling the operator to respond quickly and appropriately to both events. To help in the use of the data generated through the modelling the client also has access to the model outputs via a web-GIS system. This technology allows the office, responders, emergency services and regulators to access all of the relevant information at a location to effectively manage the response. This is now being enhanced further with addition of thermal radiation modelling to account for risks should the released product be ignited.

In order to standardize the approach to long-term land acquisition and resettlement in the project areas, the three Joint Venture Partners of a petroleum field to be developed in Uganda in collaboration with the local authorities have formulated a Land Acquisition and Resettlement Framework (LARF). This LARF document proposes a voluntary and consistent approach that is compliant with national legislation, international standards and in particular the International Finance Corporation's (IFC) Performance Standards 5 on Involuntary Resettlement and Land Acquisition, and best practices to further safeguard against social risks. The process began in May 2014 and the document consolidation was facilitated by establishing the first interministerial Resettlement Advisory Committee (RAC). Following the endorsement of the LARF in December 2016, the RAC is actively monitoring and advising the partners on the development of projects. For each project component, local resettlement committees are set-up at district and village level in order to build capacity and enhance a participative approach at all levels. The main outcome was a common goal which is "To secure long term access to land to enable the project to be developed and operated, while addressing displacement impacts and enhancing development impacts by improving the livelihoods and standard of living of Project Affected Persons". This LARF document looks at the twelve key principles which are; 1) Displacement to be avoided and minimised where possible, 2) Resettlement to be integrated into overall project planning, 3) Compliance with laws, standards and policies (corporate, national and international), 4) Active and informed stakeholder participation, 5) Cultural appropriateness to be applied, 6) Publicly disclosed cut-off date to be used, 7) Compensation to be based on full replacement cost, 8) Comprehensive resettlement assistance package to be applied, 9) Informal land rights to be recognized, 10) Vulnerable people to be provided with targeted assistance, 11) Grievance mechanism to be established, and 12) An appropriate monitoring and evaluation to be undertaken. The development of the LARF was a stepping stone for the Government of Uganda when drafting in 2017 the first National Land Acquisition Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy. The participative approach in the development of a common framework is of interest to all who have to deal with various stakeholders including Government to ease and standardize ways of working on sensitive issues while remaining within the remits of the Legislative framework. In addition this process can also be applied in other countries because of the foundation of its purpose and will be useful for the petroleum sector to extractives sector and beyond.

The aim of this article is to share the experience of Total E&P Bolivie (hereinafter referred as "TEPBO" or "the Company") on the implementation of an Archaeological management Plan (AMP), which ensured a proper archaeological impact management on the Ipati-Aquio blocks operations. These operations are located whitin the Alto Parepeti Indigenous territory in the Bolivian lowlands region. We base our analysis on field experiences and lessons learned after an incidental archaeological discovery of a pre-Hispanic Cementery during the construction works of the Incahuasi Gas Processing Facility (CPF) located within a Guarani Indigenous Territory. This incidental archaeological discovery triggered public controversies pointing archaeological, social and human rights impacts; with important consequences for the Company, in terms of reputation, relationship with stakeholders and also financial consequences due to the relocation of the planned facility on the archaeological site. In order to ensure the non recurrence of this impact, solve the public controversies and tackle societal risks for future operations, TEPBO implemented an integral strategy leaded by the Social Team and accompanied by Archaeology specialists. It implied, in first order, a set of mitigation measures based on agreements with the Guarani community to address the direct impact on Cultural heritage, ritual and symbolic place of ancestral human burials. On the other hand, in order to address the risks of archaeological impact on future operations, TEPBO designed and implemented an AMP. The AMP is based on preventive measures: i) previous participative social and archaeological assessments; ii) monitoring during the construction phases, in order to identify possible archaeological material; and, if it where the case, ensure the application of the Archaeological finding procedure. This procedure requires going beyond legal and technical archaeological works by ensuring a proper communication, consultation and dialogue. Through close collaboration, the implementation of the Plan helped to rebuild a trusting relationship with the Guarani Community at different levels and with regional authorities. To date, it also helped to prevent recurrence of impacts on Cultural heritage and Indigenous rights, by the non repetition of archaeological impact. Over the last 2 years, the Company and contractors actively integrated archaeological risk management from the early stages of any new project and on during the execution. The AMP thought the Guaraní community about their ancesters and also helped the community to increase- awareness about their cultural heritage. In their Strategic Planning (called Life's Plan) they included Archaeology within its Cultural Heritage Program. As well in latest consultation process during the Envionmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the Guarani community insisted to include not only prevention and mitigation measures for archaeological impact, but also the diffusion in community schools. TEPBO archeological experience thought us that compliance with regulations is necessary, but not sufficient to manage risks adequately. Achieve a proper engagement, consultation and dialogue with communities is crucial in impact management, especially in regard of Cultural Heritage in Indigenous Territories. Archeological findings, especially human burials, are not just a technical issue: it is overall a symbolic, cultural and therefore human rights issue. Mitigation of archaeological impact by granting non recurrence of an impact may allow positive effects on cultural empowerment in communities. The conflict became an opportunity to raise cultural heritage awareness among operational staff, and the guarani embraced their heritage in their Life's Plan.

Working in remote oil and gas operations of PETRONAS Carigali Iraq Operation in Garraf, Iraq presents a multitude of health challenges including significant delays to medical diagnosis and treatment. In addition, remote areas like Garraf are susceptible to significant environmental exposures, predominantly risks of communicable diseases with limited access to basic necessities, extreme temperatures during summer (up to 55°C); limited medical expertise and communication as well as security threats. These factors further post risks to personnel working in the area to suboptimal medical care – including unnecessary and delayed medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) as well as suboptimal care during transport. This paper describes the challenges faced at Garraf Operations as well as the Occupational and Industrial Hygiene (OH/IH) strategies adopted to minimize and manage associated risks. Planning and preventive controls discussed in this paper includes but not limited to, fitness to work, fatigue management, heat stress management, food and water hygiene, health and wellness programmes as well as substance misuse programme. Proactive and comprehensive identification of a country's limitations is essential in determining the most effective and efficient recovery plan. Additionally, site location, situational factors as well as thorough Health Risk Assessment shall be considered when establishing Medical Emergency Response Plan (MERP). In short, plans and strategies adopted by PETRONAS Carigali Iraq Operations in managing OH/IH challenges could be replicated and/or referenced as lessons learnt when operating in remote locations.

National law, National Oil Companies (NOC) codes of practice and environmental authority Health, Safety, Environmental Impact Assessment (HSEIA) Instruction stipulate the requirement for waste management, physical environmental damage limitation and anti-pollution procedures. These requirements are well known within the oil and gas industry regardless of geographical location. Emirate of Abu Dhabi National law exists for the protection of the environment and the species therein ( Abu Dhabi 1999a & b ). There also exists the Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi (EAD), established in 1996 for the protection of the environment in the Emirate ( Abu Dhabi 1993 ; Abu Dhabi 2005 ). The Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) has comprehensive, rigorous, and established Codes of Practice (CoP), as substantially revised in 2014. All quality geophysical and seismic acquisition contractors have robust health, safety and environment management systems (HSEMS) which bridge with mandated legislation and client CoPs. Historically, the Emirate's existing marine mammal environmental mitigation used for offshore seismic surveys were loosely based on third party HSEIA requirements and stipulated Joint National Conservation Council (JNCC) guidelines; applicable to deep-water towed streamer operations. The extensive transition zone areas of Abu Dhabi cannot accommodate towed streamer acquisition inside 100+km of the shoreline due to shallow water, islands and shoals. Our opinion was; where mitigation instruction is only partially applicable then contract and HSE complications were likely and this was found to be the case. We hypothesised that thorough and rigorous analysis of environmental data collection, specific mitigation instructions better suited to the acquisition could be formed and made relevant to the survey areas. Further, data collection used for progressive mitigation purposes and used as proof of effect could also enhance environmental knowledge known to be data deficient ( Marsh 2015 ). From 2014 to 2017, 3D transition zone seismic surveys were conducted in the Marawah Marine Protected Area; a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Area, which hosts several environmental sensitivities and protected species. These include the second largest, known population of Dugong (Dugong dugon), nesting sites of the Hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate), and approximately 10% to 12% of the world population of Socotra Cormorant (Phalacrocorax nigrogularis). Each of those species appear on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. We approached the marine environmental mitigation issue to improve existing instruction such that mitigation was applicable, robust, and in a final form could be used as Technical Guidance Notes (TGN) for future shallow water seismic surveys in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. We suggest the value of environmental monitoring during seismic acquisition can extend further than pure compliance and observation of required mitigation. We show the design and application of a comprehensive environmental monitoring program in association with an obliging seismic contractor can bring specific and substantial environmental benefits, extends working relationships with environment agencies and other offshore stakeholders, and brings a heightened environmental awareness within the industry and environmental community.

To meet corporate Process Safety objectives, we first need the right ‘tools’ or techniques to identify hazards and risks. Risk reduction will start to be achieved when these tools are rigorously applied. Frequently used ‘tools’ in the Process Safety toolbox include Hazard Identification (HAZID); Hazard and Operability study (HAZOP) and Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA). Whilst these hazard studies have been in common used for some time there is evidence that deficiencies in the planning, execution or follow up have been a contributing factor in undesired Process Safety events. The objectives of this paper are to i) detail evidence demonstrating a link between deficiencies in these studies and Process Safety incidents ii) introduce the concept of defect elimination and Continuous Improvement and iii) provide examples of how such an improvement process has been systematically applied by one operator in the UAE / ME region to Process Safety studies. The paper begins by providing evidence available within the public domain that indicates possible links between deficiencies in key Process Safety studies and major incidents. Sources include US OSHA and the US Chemical Safety Board (CSB). Through an analysis of this information it possible to not only understand this link but start to identify specific areas of weakness. Following this an introduction to the philosophy of defect elimination and Continuous Improvement (CI) is given. A common method for implementing CI is described. More importantly a demonstration of how such a methodology, developed in a manufacturing environment, can be successfully applied to deliver improvements in Process Safety is given. Finally, the approach taken by one operator in applying CI in this manner is given. This provides insight into some of the focus areas identified; the previous practices and detail changes that have been implemented. In summary the paper concludes that we should not become complacent with our current performance but must look to continuously improve. With leadership support and commitment organisations can readily make systematic, sustainable improvements to the application of key hazard studies. These improvements will support the goals of accident elimination and, as a result, safeguard corporate reputation and licence to operate.