View
212
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
© 2012 Chevron
The Gorgon Project: A New Paradigm in Quarantine Management
© 2012 Chevron
Gorgon Project Overview
Joint Venture Participants – Chevron (~47%)
– ExxonMobil (25%)
– Shell (25%)
– Osaka Gas (1.25%)
– Tokyo Gas (1%)
– Chubu Electric Power (0.417%)
Project Development Plan – 3 x 5 MTPA LNG trains
– A domestic gas plant with capacity of 300 terajoules per day
– LNG shipping facilities to transport products to international markets
– Reservoir greenhouse gas management via CO2 injection project
© 2012 Chevron
Challenging Regulatory Approval
EPA Report 1101 (2003) rejected the development proposal but advised government it may consider approving Gorgon if we: – Develop a set of standards for acceptable risks to conservation values of
BWI
– Involve independent technical experts
– Included a high level of community input
– Expect to set new benchmarks
– Significantly go ‘beyond best practice’
© 2012 Chevron
Role of Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)
EPA Report 1323 (Sept 2009) stated: ‘ …. likely to be world’s best practice and therefore it is unlikely to be
possible to recommend additional practical controls beyond that system.’
© 2012 Chevron
QMS Risk Assessment Process: Risk Definitions
Infection Survival Detection Eradication L Infection is extremely remote, highly unlikely
Cannot survive Virtually certain to detect early enough to consider eradication
Virtually certain to eradicate without significant impacts
1
Infection is remote, unlikely
Highly unlikely to survive
Very high likelihood of detection early to consider eradication
Very high likelihood of eradication without impacts
2
There is a slight chance of infection
Unlikely to survive
High likelihood of detection early to consider eradication
High likelihood of eradication without significant impacts
3
4-9
Infection will occur continuously
Will definitely survive
Cannot detect early enough to consider eradication
Will not eradicate 10
© 2012 Chevron
Establishing Standards for Acceptable Risk
© 2012 Chevron
Risk assessment model - QHAZ
© 2012 Chevron
Pathways and the Risk Scores
© 2012 Chevron
What was the Plan?
IMEA
PBA
QHAZ
Barriers Quarantine Compliance Procedure
Specifications
Checklists
Guideline
© 2012 Chevron
Structure of the QMS
Management measures Procedures, specifications
checklists and plans
Identify issues Risk assessment
i.e.IMEAs, PBAs, QHAZ
Communication Internal, external and
management of change
Monitoring and audits Environmental & Procedural
Monitoring and 3-Tier auditing
Corrective action Improvements to specifications,
procedures and guidelines
Management review Assessments, audits,
monitoring and expert advice
Capacity Building Education, awareness
and training
Policy
Objectives, strategy
& actions
Performance commitments
Improvement program
Roles and responsibilities Culture, work force participation
and delegation framework
© 2012 Chevron
Eliminate NIS Inspect
Custody Detect
Monitor and eradicate
Protect
EFFORT COST
QMS Focus
Quarantine Continuum
© 2012 Chevron
FID to present – normalized per 10 000 tonnes
12
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Intercepts
Incidents and Intercepts per 10,000 Freight Tonnes FID - February 2013
Supply ChainIncidentsIntercepts
© 2012 Chevron
Have we been successful?
We have funded the largest single biosecurity initiative in the world
We have managed to attract the most competent biosecurity workforce from around the world
We have implemented a comprehensive system
We have set numerous new benchmarks
We have gone significantly beyond best practice
We have not introduced a non-indigenous species to Barrow Island
By any measure, we are successful
13
© 2012 Chevron
Quo vadis?
What was/is the role of the State in this benchmark (and the impact on the economy)?
There can be no doubt that Chevron has ‘set a new benchmark’ and has ‘gone beyond best practice’
One can argue that these represent ‘aspirational goals’ and the State used it authority to steer Chevron in this direction
It is now rational for Chevron to expect the State to strive to attain this same standard/benchmark for its own activities or those of others in the private sector.
If not the exercise was only theoretical and a very poor return on our investment – opportunity cost of the ‘investment dollar’.
14
© 2012 Chevron
Is this what we see?
To the contrary, we see an erosion of standards and in some case a paralysis
The new Biosecurity Act attempts to ignore regional differences – at a time when trade and people movement are growing at expansively
We still cannot agree on biofouling solutions
We see rapidly diminishing funding for state agencies involved in biosecurity
We see an exodus of expertise from biosecurity agencies
We see our hotspots of biodiversity surrendered to a management strategy of benign neglect
15
© 2012 Chevron
Source: http://www.globalfinancialdata.com
Impact of Global Trends
© 2012 Chevron
Conclusion Is this what we want?
17
Recommended