Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Maritime Studies

Kashubsky, Mikhail --- "Marine Pollution from the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry: Review of Major Conventions and Russian Law (Part I)" [2006] MarStudies 31; (2006) 151 Maritime Studies 1

• Marine Pollution from the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry: Review of Major Conventions and Russian Law (Part I)
• ABSTRACT
• Introduction
• Marine Pollution From Offshore Operations
• Geological Surveying
• Exploration and Production
• Decommissioning
• Accidents and Intentional Acts
• Summary of Environmental Impacts
• International and Regional Conventions
• UNCLOS 1982
• London Convention 1972
• MARPOL 73/78
• OPRC 1990
• AFS Convention 2001
• Draft Offshore Units Convention
• OSPAR Convention 1992
• Barcelona Convention 1976
• Kuwait Convention 1978
• Helsinki Convention 1992
• Other Relevant Legal Instruments
• Summary of the Global Regime
• ENDNOTES

Marine Pollution from the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry: Review of Major Conventions and Russian Law (Part I)

Mikhail Kashubsky^[1]

ABSTRACT

This article discusses provisions of major international and regional conventions that regulate marine pollution arising from offshore petroleum exploration and production, and examines the Russian environmental regime for offshore oil and gas operations. The article analyses existing federal environmental legislation in Russia, its application to the offshore petroleum industry, and the Russian administrative structure overseeing the ecological regime. The article also briefly discusses sources of marine pollution from offshore activities, and provides an overview of the Russian offshore industry and offshore hydrocarbon resources on the Russian continental shelf. The purpose of this article is to introduce readers to the legal framework for environmental and offshore petroleum regulation in Russia, determine whether Russian law adequately deals with pollution from offshore operations, and provide an update on the present position of international law on this issue. The international regime is discussed in Part I of the article and the Russian regulatory system will be examined in Part II.

Introduction

The increasing global demand for energy resources and major advances in technology have resulted in a transformation of the oil and gas industry. In recent years, there has been a significant shift of petroleum operations from land to offshore locations. Areas that once were beyond human reach are now becoming the centres of large-scale energy projects.^[2] The industry has developed a diversity of offshore platforms and drilling rigs, which are now a common feature of many continental shelves around the world.^[3]

The constant growth of the offshore petroleum industry has raised many important questions, including its impact on marine ecosystems and biological resources. Different views exist on this issue. Some believe with confidence in the industry’s environmental safety, while others totally disagree and offer the darkest forecasts.^[4] Considering the potential adverse impacts on the marine environment, a greater level of environmental protection may be required. This can be achieved through effective international or regional regulation, supported by appropriate national laws.

The general trend towards offshore oil and gas production can be seen in Russia as well, because the potential recoverable hydrocarbon resources of the Russian continental shelf are enormous.^[5] As a petroleum-producing country with intensively progressing offshore developments, Russia faces a real threat of increasing pollution of its marine environment resulting from offshore activities. Therefore it is critical for Russia to have an effective domestic regulatory regime for the offshore industry that would provide satisfactory environmental protection to its coastal ecosystems. In addition, Russia needs to address this important issue by actively participating in the development of international and regional legal instruments on conservation of the marine environment.

Marine Pollution From Offshore Operations

The offshore oil and gas industry currently accounts for only one to two per cent of total marine pollution, which is quite low compared to other sources of marine pollution.^[6] However, there is a risk that pollution levels will increase due to the rapid expansion of offshore operations. Although the industry has maintained a relatively good pollution record to date, it still remains a high-risk industry with potential to cause serious damage to the marine environment.^[7] In fact, marine pollution can be linked to all activities at any stage of an offshore oil and gas development.^[8]

Geological Surveying

The impact on the marine environment starts during the first stage of offshore operations – geological surveying of the seabed. Many marine animals possess hearing organs designed to detect low-frequency sounds.^[9] Intense seismic wave impulses may destroy or harm sound detection organs of marine animals, or alter their important behaviours involving sound production.^[10] Electro-surveys may also cause harm to the marine environment, but they are not as common as seismic exploration.^[11]

Exploration and Production

The most adverse environmental impacts usually occur during the exploration and production stages. Offshore activities such as platform emplacement (Figure 1), dredging, pipe-laying, and construction of support facilities cause physical disturbances and produce various emissions and discharges of pollutants into the sea.^[12]

Pollution hazards also come from disposal of sewage and garbage from offshore platforms, flaring of natural gas, and discharges of produced formation waters into the sea.^[13] However, the greatest pollution hazard comes from offshore drilling. Drilling operations are always associated with discharges of drilling fluids, muds and drill cuttings.^[14] Discharges of various substances into the sea pose a significant ecological threat because they may have chronic and deteriorating effects on the marine environment.^[15]

Decommissioning

Abandoned offshore installations may also create environmental hazards and interference with navigation.^[16] There is always the risk that a decommissioned platform will shift from its original position at some future time.^[17] The removal of fixed offshore platforms weighing thousands of tons is very difficult and virtually impossible without using explosive materials. Undoubtedly, explosions created during the removal process have negative impacts on the marine environment.^[18]

Accidents and Intentional Acts

The significance and potential magnitude of pollution resulting from accidents should not be underestimated. Pollution may be caused by events such as oil spills from offshore installations damaged by storm or by ships, leakages from ruptured pipelines, oil well blowouts, as well as accidental fires and explosions.^[19] Although the risks of an accident occurring during offshore operations have been reduced due to state of the art technology employed by the industry,^[20] when major accidents do occur they may result in the loss of human life, injury, destruction of expensive equipment, and serious pollution with catastrophic long-term impacts on marine ecosystems.^[21] In addition to accidental pollution, environmental harm may be caused by intentional discharges of oil from offshore platforms,^[22] or by unlawful acts such as terrorist attacks, sabotage, or arson.^[23]

These illegal activities also pose a significant pollution risk to the marine environment.

Summary of Environmental Impacts

Unless major improvements are made in energy efficiency, the offshore industry will continue to grow, together with levels of pollution associated with the industry.^[24] To solve these environmental problems, it is necessary to create conditions that would allow the maximum recovery of hydrocarbons with minimal disturbance of the marine environment.^[25] As stated above, the solution may be achieved through effective regulation at international, regional, and national levels. The next section of this article examines international and regional conventions that regulate marine pollution from offshore petroleum exploration and production.

International and Regional Conventions

International law plays a significant role in the rational use of marine resources and protection of the marine environment from pollution. In customary international environmental law there is a fundamental obligation for states not to pollute the surrounding environment.^[26] Today, apart from customary international legal principles, the issue of marine pollution is addressed through international and regional conventions, as well as other legal instruments.^[27] However, only a limited number of legal provisions dealing with pollution from offshore installations can be found in international conventions.^[28]

UNCLOS 1982

UNCLOS^[29] authorises coastal states to build offshore installations on the continental shelf and in the exclusive economic zone, and exercise jurisdiction over these installations.^[30] The convention contains a number of general and specific provisions relating to protection of the marine environment from harmful effects of activities such as construction, operation, and maintenance of offshore platforms.^[31] In particular, the convention requires states to take steps to minimise marine pollution from offshore installations,^[32] make efforts to implement national laws and standards regulating seabed activities,^[33] cooperate globally and regionally in formulating international rules and standards for protection of the marine environment,^[34] enforce effective international standards,^[35] and establish adequate compensation for damage caused by pollution to the marine environment.^[36] It also refers to pollution prevention and control measures, practices of dealing with emergencies, as well as safety of the design, construction, and operation of offshore installations.^[37] UNCLOS establishes a comprehensive general international framework with respect to prevention of marine pollution resulting from seabed activities such as exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. However, it does not set any definite or specific standards, but instead, encourages coastal states to develop national laws.^[38] There are also uncertainties as to whether UNCLOS authorises the extension of general national environmental legislation to the exclusive economic zone and extended continental shelf.^[39]

London Convention 1972

The 1972 London Convention^[40] is a very important convention that addresses prevention of marine pollution. It prohibits dumping of wastes or other matter listed in [its] Annex I, and requires a prior permit for the dumping of all other wastes or matter.^[41] The Convention covers dumping from offshore platforms and other man-made structures including any deliberate disposal of offshore platforms, but does not cover disposal during normal operations of platforms.^[42] Under this Convention dumping may be conducted where it is necessary to minimise the likelihood of damage to human or marine life.^[43] The 1996 Dumping Protocol,^[44] which recently entered into force and superseded the 1972 London Convention,^[45] is more restrictive than the Convention as it adopts a ‘precautionary approach’ and a ‘reverse list approach’. The precautionary approach requires that appropriate preventive measures are taken when there is reason to believe that wastes or other matter introduced into the marine environment are likely to cause harm, even when there is no conclusive evidence establishing a link between inputs and their effects.^[46] The reverse list approach prohibits all dumping unless it is explicitly permitted in the approved list.^[47] This effectively limits a range of waste materials that may be disposed of at sea, and presents a new approach to regulating the use of the sea as a depository of wastes.^[48]

In addition, the definition of ‘dumping’ in the 1996 Protocol has a wider coverage than its earlier version.^[49] [Figure 2 lists parties to the 1972 London Convention and the 1996 London Protocol.]

Figure 2: Parties to the 1972 London Convention and the 1996 London Protocol

Source: The London Convention (2006) <http://www.londonconvention.org> viewed 21 November 2006

MARPOL 73/78

MARPOL 73/78^[50] is primarily concerned with ships, but it also applies to fixed and floating offshore platforms when they are in mobile configuration.^[51] MARPOL requires offshore structures to be equipped with the same pollution control devices required for ships of 400 gross tonnes and above, including oil discharge monitoring and controlling systems, as well as oily-water separating equipment and sludge tanks.^[52] The convention prohibits the discharge of sewage into the sea,^[53] and discharge of oil in mixtures greater than fifteen parts per million in certain areas.^[54] It also requires a record to be kept of all operations.^[55] Although MARPOL generally applies to offshore platforms in mobile configuration it does not address many other operational aspects of offshore oil and gas exploration and production which may cause harm to the marine environment.^[56]

OPRC 1990

OPRC 1990^[57] sets out the requirements for pollution emergency plans that vessels, offshore drilling units, production platforms, and onshore facilities must have.^[58] The OPRC defines offshore units comprehensively to include both floating and fixed structures engaged in exploration, production, loading, and unloading of oil.^[59] State parties to the OPRC must require offshore unit operators to report discharges.^[60] The convention encourages states to cooperate and establish national, as well as regional systems for oil pollution preparedness and response.^[61] It also covers requirements relating to mutual assistance and international cooperation in matters such as the exchange of information on the capabilities of states to respond to oil pollution incidents, preparation of oil pollution emergency plans, the exchange of reports on incidents of significance that may affect the marine environment, as well as research and development aspects of combating oil pollution.^[62] This convention contains very specific and detailed provisions, which efficiently deal with the prevention of marine pollution from offshore installations. Because of the lack of a specific convention, the OPRC is probably the most important international legal document that regulates pollution of the marine environment resulting from offshore oil and gas activities.^[63]

AFS Convention 2001

Another international convention worth mentioning is the AFS Convention.^[64] When the AFS Convention enters into force, it will prohibit the use of harmful organotins in anti-fouling paints and will establish a mechanism to prevent the potential future use of other harmful substances in anti-fouling systems.^[65]

The convention applies to ships and offshore platforms, both fixed and floating. It provides that, after 1 January 2008, offshore installations will not be allowed to bear organotin compounds on their external parts and surfaces, or they will be required to have a special sealer coating that creates protection from such compounds.^[66] Offshore units that have not been in dry-dock since 31 December 2002, are exempt from this requirement.^[67]

Draft Offshore Units Convention

In 1977 the first serious attempt was made to create an international legal document covering not only pollution, but also other important aspects relating to offshore units and their operation. The Comité Maritime International (CMI) at the request of the IMO prepared a draft convention known as the Rio Draft.^[68] The draft was submitted to the IMO for consideration, but the IMO gave priority to other matters of international maritime law which were regarded as more important at the time. Consequently, the Rio Draft was not actively considered until the early 1990s, when the IMO requested the CMI to review the Rio Draft in light of developments that had occurred since 1977.^[69] In 1994 the Rio Draft with certain modifications was presented at the CMI conference in Sydney, and a revised version was adopted, which became known as the Sydney Draft^[70]. The conference concluded that the Sydney Draft was an improvement on the Rio Draft, but it needed further development to become an effective regulatory framework for the operation of offshore units, and the CMI was invited to undertake further study on a comprehensive international convention on offshore units.^[71]

Following the 1994 Sydney conference, the CMI established an international working group to consider the need for and feasibility of a convention on offshore units. The working group initiated consultations with various maritime law associations and other interested parties, and was able to identify a number of topics which were not covered by the Sydney Draft, but needed to be addressed in any future drafts of the proposed convention.^[72] The responses of the consulted parties indicated that there was general support for the development of an international convention.^[73] The working group continued its work and held a number of meetings on that subject. However, in the late 1990s the Maritime Law Association of the United States changed its initial supportive position and challenged the need for a comprehensive international treaty on offshore units.^[74] At the 83rd Session of the IMO Legal Committee in October 2001, the delegates debated whether this subject should continue to be included in the IMO’s long-term working plan, and concluded that it should be removed from the IMO work program.^[75] In light of the IMO’s decision, the CMI also decided to officially cease work on this topic and not incur any additional effort in pursuing it.^[76]

As part of the work done over the years by the CMI working group on offshore units, the Canadian Maritime Law Association (CMLA) produced the Draft Offshore Units Convention^[77] (the Canadian Draft), which is a more comprehensive document than the Sydney Draft. In 2004 the draft document was published in the CMI Newsletter to create wider awareness of this work in the international maritime community and stimulate debate and further work on this subject.^[78]

The Canadian Draft was discussed by the working group in June 2004, at the CMI conference in Vancouver.^[79] Despite strong opposition from the USA, and subsequent removal of this initiative from both the IMO’s and the CMI’s active agendas, the majority of the working group members (with the exception of the USA representatives) continued to support the development of a comprehensive international treaty on offshore structures. At the Vancouver meeting, it was agreed that the working group should remain active and work towards improving the Canadian Draft.^[80] Fortunately, the CMI Executive Council had no objection to the working group remaining in existence.^[81]

The Canadian Draft is a fairly comprehensive document that applies to all types of offshore units, artificial islands, and other related structures, excluding pipelines.^[82] It covers a range of aspects relating to offshore units, including their registration and ownership.^[83] It is important to note that many of the topics covered by this document have never been subject to any clear or uniform international rules.^[84] In terms of environmental regulation, the Canadian Draft contains a number of provisions dealing with the removal of offshore units, and liability for pollution damage arising from offshore activities;^[85] however, other aspects of marine pollution are not addressed in detail. It is suggested that marine pollution should be addressed more fully in any subsequent drafts to cover issues such as environmental impact assessments and pollution emergency plans. The inclusion of detailed environmental provisions into the proposed convention may assist the draft convention in gaining wider international recognition and support.

While there is an evident desire by many interested parties to adopt an international convention, such convention has not yet come into existence. There is also no international organisation directly concerned with offshore units.^[86] Governments have been reluctant to press forward the idea of creating a global regulatory regime that would cover all aspects of offshore oil and gas installations and at present no government wishes to take this initiative.^[87] Regional conventions and agreements are still considered to be an effective way of regulating marine pollution from the offshore petroleum industry.^[88] Some of these regional conventions are discussed below.

OSPAR Convention 1992

The 1992 OSPAR Convention,^[89] which covers the North-Atlantic region, regulates marine pollution arising from various sources including exploitation of offshore hydrocarbons.^[90] It applies to both fixed and floating offshore platforms, and addresses the prevention of pollution arising from the offshore petroleum industry in some detail. Under the Convention, contracting parties are required to take all possible steps to prevent and eliminate pollution from offshore activities.^[91] In particular, the Convention calls for the use of ‘best available techniques’ and ‘best environmental practice’, and requires states to adopt programs and measures for the prevention of pollution from the offshore industry.^[92] The Convention prohibits dumping of wastes and other matter from offshore installations.^[93] It also prohibits dumping of disused platforms without proper permit.^[94] Discharges and emissions from offshore platforms and pipelines are not prohibited;^[95] however, the use, discharge or emission of substances that may affect the marine environment is subject to authorisation and strict regulation by the competent authority.^[96] The OSPAR Convention also covers reporting of any suspected contraventions of its provisions.^[97]

Barcelona Convention 1976

The 1976 Barcelona Convention^[98] deals with the prevention of marine pollution in the Mediterranean region. It represents one of the earlier regional attempts to establish a mechanism for protection of the marine environment from pollution. One of the objectives of this convention is the combating of pollution resulting from offshore activities.^[99] The 1994 Madrid Protocol^[100] to the Barcelona Convention sets out a comprehensive legal regime that covers various aspects of offshore petroleum exploration and production. It provides that states should take necessary safety measures with respect to design, construction, operation, and maintenance of offshore installations.^[101] Similarly to the OSPAR Convention, the 1994 Madrid Protocol contains provisions relating to measures to combat and control pollution, the use of the best available environmentally effective techniques,^[102] environmental impact assessment,^[103] discharges of sewage and garbage from offshore platforms,^[104] and plans for removal of platforms.^[105] There are also a number of specific provisions for operational discharges of oil, oily mixtures, and drilling fluids.^[106] These provisions generally take into account internationally accepted standards.

Kuwait Convention 1978

The 1978 Kuwait Convention,^[107] which addresses the Persian Gulf area, has a set of well-developed standards for environmental protection. In 1989, the contracting parties adopted the 1989 Kuwait Protocol,^[108] which deals with pollution from seabed activities. The Protocol requires the contracting states to take all appropriate measures for the prevention and control of pollution from offshore exploration and production.^[109] For example, it provides that the coastal state shall not allow any offshore operations to begin unless an operator completes an environmental impact assessment.^[110] The coastal state is required to take all practicable measures to ensure that offshore operations, including their safety procedures, equipment, and overall maintenance, are conducted in accordance with good industry practice.^[111] Amongst other things, the Protocol regulates discharges of oil and oil-based drilling fluids from platforms, and the disposal of garbage and sewage.^[112] It also covers the use of chemicals in offshore operations and requires operators of offshore platforms to prepare a chemical use plan.^[113]

Helsinki Convention 1992

The 1992 Helsinki Convention,^[114] which applies to the Baltic Sea, is another important regional treaty dealing with marine pollution from various sources. It contains detailed provisions on measures concerning the prevention of pollution from land-based sources,^[115] ships,^[116] and offshore activities.^[117] The convention also regulates the dumping of wastes and other matter in the Baltic Sea area,^[118] and completely prohibits incineration of ship-generated wastes and other matter at sea.^[119] Contracting parties are also required to eliminate and prevent pollution caused by harmful substances from all sources.^[120] The Convention defines ‘harmful substance’ as any substance that may cause pollution if introduced into the sea,^[121] and provides a list of harmful substances including substances banned for all final uses.^[122] In addition, the 1992 Helsinki Convention requires state parties to adopt ‘best environmental practices’ and ‘best available technology’, sets out criteria for the use of ‘best environmental practices’ and ‘best available technology’, and specifies measures to be applied by state parties in order to satisfy this requirement.^[123] The Convention defines concepts such as ‘offshore activity’, ‘offshore unit’, ‘exploration’, and ‘exploitation’,^[124] and regulates discharges during exploration and exploitation stages.^[125] Abandoned, disused, or accidentally wrecked offshore units must be entirely removed and brought to the shore, and disused drilling wells must be plugged.^[126] Similar to regional conventions discussed above the Convention contains traditional provisions on environmental impact assessment, monitoring, notification of pollution incidents, exchange of information, cooperation in combating marine pollution, and it also specifies measures for responding to marine pollution incidents including contingency planning.^[127]

Other Relevant Legal Instruments

It is important to mention some of the other conventions and legal instruments that were not discussed above, but which also attempt to regulate marine pollution from the offshore oil and gas industry. These include the 1958 Geneva Conventions,^[128] the 1992 Bucharest Convention,^[129] SPREP Convention,^[130] the 1991 Antarctic Protocol,^[131] the 1988 SUA Protocol,^[132] as well as liability agreements such as OPOL,^[133] CLEE,^[134] and the 1992 CLC Protocol.^[135] In addition, there are a number of internationally recognised instruments produced by the IMO such as the MODU Code 1989,^[136] the Safety Guide for Towed Ships and Other Structures on Sea,^[137] and the Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations.^[138]

Summary of the Global Regime

The offshore petroleum industry is subject to relatively few international regulations, and little international effort has been put into the development of a universal convention that would provide effective regulation for all aspects of offshore oil and gas activities.^[139] This may be explained by a number of factors. Firstly, the offshore petroleum industry contributes very little pollution to the marine environment compared to other sources of pollution. Secondly, there is still a strong opposition to adoption of a global convention, particularly from the USA oil industry.^[140] Another reason may be that different maritime regions experience environmental challenges specific to that region, and a number of comprehensive regional treaties such as the Barcelona and Kuwait Protocols are already in place. Many existing bilateral agreements also appear to adequately satisfy the needs of the parties.^[141] However, the most important reason is that, at this stage, advocates for the international convention on offshore units have been unable to muster sufficient governmental support, without which there is very little possibility of such convention being adopted internationally.^[142]

While a number of legal instruments covering pollution from offshore installations have been implemented in regions such as the North-Atlantic and Mediterranean, other areas with offshore activities, such as the North-West Pacific, do not have such conventions.^[143] Most oil and gas operations are conducted on the continental shelf under the direct control of the coastal state. All states that participate in the offshore industry have an obligation to regulate hydrocarbon development in accordance with international law; however, domestic legislation becomes of critical importance in the areas where there is no effective regional instrument or applicable international agreement governing this activity. Many coastal nations have already developed national legislation and standards that effectively deal with pollution aspects of the offshore petroleum industry, but some states have failed to do so.^[144] This is because every country faces a different set of problems, and successful implementation of a sophisticated environmental regime is largely dependent upon the country’s economic development, political factors, and the relative importance of the offshore industry for the national economy.^[145]

For Russia the offshore industry is very important because Russia is at the very beginning of developing its large oil and gas resources located on the continental shelf. Protection of the marine environment from pollution is also very important. To ensure environmental safety of its coastal ecosystems, Russia needs to have stable and effective legal safeguards against potential adverse impacts associated with offshore petroleum operations. The Russian environmental regime and its application to the offshore oil and gas industry will be examined in Part II.

[Part II of this article will follow in the next edition of Maritime Studies]

ENDNOTES

^[1] Mikhail Kashubsky (BA, LLB, LLM) is a Professional Associate at the Centre for Customs & Excise Studies, University of Canberra, and a PhD student at the Centre for Maritime Policy, University of Wollongong (email: mikhail.kashubsky@canberra.edu.au). The author expresses his gratitude to Dr Michael White QC for providing valuable comments and recommendations for improvement of this paper.

^[2] M Gavouneli, Pollution from Offshore Installations, 1995, p. 40.

^[3] Canadian Maritime Law Association, Discussion Paper on the Need for an International Legal Regime for Offshore Units, Artificial Islands and Related Structures Used in the Exploration for and Exploitation of Petroleum and Seabed Resources, 1996, <http://www.cmla.org/papers/MAR96.htm> viewed 25 July 2006.

^[4] S Patin, Environmental Impact of the Offshore Oil & Gas Industry, (Elena Cascio, trans.), 1999, p. 3.

^[5] ibid., p. 1.

^[6] ibid., p. 47.

^[7] E Gold, A Chircop & H Kindred, Essentials of Canadian Law Series: Maritime Law, 2003, p. 715.

^[8] J Swan, J Neff & P Young, Environmental Implications of Offshore Oil and Gas Development in Australia: The Findings of an Independent Scientific Review’, Independent Scientific Review Committee, Australian Petroleum Exploration Association, 1994, p. 4.

^[9] Patin (1999), op. cit., p. 60.

^[10] Swan, Neff & Young, op. cit., p. 5.

^[11] Patin (1999), op. cit., p. 63.

^[12] Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, Environmental Impact Assessment: Project Description: Offshore Field Development (2003) [2.2.3] <http://www. sakhalinenergy.com/en/documents/doc_38_eia_2_chapter2.pdf> viewed 16 July 2006.

^[13] C Brown, ‘International Environmental Law in the Regulation of Offshore Installations and Seabed Activities: The Case for a South Pacific Regional Protocol’, Australian Resources and Energy Law Journal, vol. 17, 1998, p. 110.

^[14] Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Russia Energy Survey 2002, p. 244. (Joint publication of OEDC and International Energy Agency), 2002.

^[15] Patin (1999), op. cit., p. 77.

^[16] Gold, Chircop & Kindred, op. cit., p. 712. For a detailed discussion of international law principles relating to conflicts between the use of offshore oil rigs and other uses of the sea, see H Esmaeili, The Legal Regime of Offshore Oil Rigs in International Law, 2001, pp. 228-49.

^[17] Brown, op. cit., p. 110.

^[18] S Patin, Decommissioning, Abandonment and Removal of Obsolete Offshore Installations, Offshore-Environment <http://www.offshore-environment.com/ abandonment.html> viewed 15 August 2005.

^[19] M White, Marine Pollution Laws of the Australasian Region, 1994, p. 4.

^[20] Swan, Neff & Young, op. cit., p. 11.

^[21] California Coastal Commission, Coastal Energy Development: The California Experience – A Guide for Coastal Local Governments, 1981, p. 43; see also Gold, Chircop & Kindred, op. cit., p. 709.

^[22] Brown, loc. cit..

^[23] Office of Transport Security, Offshore Oil & Gas Risk Context Statement (2005), Department of Transport and Regional Services <http://www.dotars.gov.au/transport/ security/oil_and_gas/index.aspx> viewed 7 July 2006.

^[24] OECD, op. cit., p. 244.

^[25] Patin (1999), op. cit., p. 2.

^[26] Gavouneli, op. cit., p. 110.

^[27] H Esmaeili, op. cit., pp. 150-51.

^[28] Gold, Chircop & Kindred, loc. cit.

^[29] United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, adopted 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS 3, (entered into force 16 November 1994) (‘UNCLOS’). In force in Russia since 2 November 1997.

^[30] ibid., arts 60, 80.

^[31] ibid., arts 145, 147, 142(3), 192; see also Gavouneli, op. cit., p. 17.

^[32] UNCLOS, adopted 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS 3, art 194 (entered into force 16 November 1994).

^[33] ibid., art 208.

^[34] ibid., art 197.

^[35] ibid., arts 214, 215.

^[36] ibid., art 235(2).

^[37] ibid., art 194(3)(c).

^[38] Brown, op. cit., p. 121; see also Esmaeili, op. cit., p. 156.

^[39] M Tsamenyi, ‘Maritime Regulation and Enforcement in EEZ: Emerging Issues’, (Speech delivered at the Maritime Regulation and Enforcement Short Course, University of Wollongong, 4 July 2006).

^[40] Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes and Other Matters 1972, adopted 29 December 1972, 1046 UNTS 120, (entered into force 30 August 1975) (‘1972 London Convention’). In force in Russia since 29 January 1976.

^[41] ibid., arts IV(1)(a), IV(1)(b).

^[42] ibid., art III.

^[43] ibid., art V(1).

^[44] 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972, adopted 7 November 1996, 36 ILM 1, (entered into force 24 March 2006) (‘1996 Dumping Protocol’). Russia is not a party to the 1996 Dumping Protocol.

^[45] The 1996 Dumping Protocol superseded the 1972 London Convention as between contracting parties to the Protocol, which are also parties to the 1972 London Convention (see the 1996 Dumping Protocol, art 23).

^[46] ibid., art 3(1).

^[47] ibid., art 4(1).

^[48] IMO, 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 <http://www.imo.org/ Newsroom/mainframe.asp?topic_id=1337 & doc_id=6147> viewed 28 June 2006.