Meeting of the HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

 

 

Date:                Monday 5 December 2011

Time:               1.00 pm

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hastings District Council

207 Lyndon Road East

HASTINGS

 

Agenda

 

Item       Subject                                                                                                                  Page

 

1.         Welcome/Notices/Apologies 

2.         Confirmation of Minutes of the HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group held on 20 September 2011

3.         Matters Arising from Minutes of the  HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group held on 20 September 2011

Decision Items

4.         Update on Outstanding Actions

5.         Hawke’s Bay CDEM Plan Review: Governance Model & Consultation Strategy

Information or Performance Monitoring

6.         Hawke's Bay Oil Spill Preparedness:
Lessons from RENA

7.         Lessons from Christchurch - John Hamilton, Director, MCDEM

8.         General Business  

Please Note:

1.00 pm arrival and lunch in Guilin Room

1.45 meeting to start in Council Chamber

3.15 tour of new GECC facility

3.45 afternoon tea and finish


HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group  

Monday 05 December 2011

SUBJECT: Update on Outstanding Actions        

 

Reason for Report

1.      At previous meetings of the Joint Committee and Co-ordinating Executive Group discussion or resolutions have identified actions that need to be completed to progress matters or provide additional information.  The attached schedule is a chronological listing of these minuted Action Items.  The schedule informs on implementation progress and the current status of each Action Item. The Joint committee are asked to resolve the progress of actions from previous Joint Committee meetings.

2.      The items which are highlighted with green shading and identified as complete will be removed form the schedule once resolved.

Financial and Resource Implications

3.      Action items are generally managed within existing resources unless reported and resolved differently.  Each item on the schedule confirms responsibilities and timeframes.

4.      There are no new financial or human resource requests to be resolved to support implementation actions as a result of this report.

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Joint Committee resolve:

1.    To receive the report “Action Items from HB CDEM Meetings” and completion of items as reported.

 

 

 

 

Nigel Simpson

CDEMG Co-ordinator

 

 

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager HB Civil Defence Emergency Management

 

Attachment/s

1View

Action Schedule

 

 

  


Action Schedule

Attachment 1

 

Actions from Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee Meetings

 

The following are a list of items raised at CDEM meetings that require actions or follow-ups.

All action items indicate who is responsible for each action, when it is expected to be completed and a brief status comment for each action. Once an item have been completed and reported back to the Committee they will be removed from the list.

 

Agenda Item

Action

Person Responsible

Due Date

Status Comment

Status

CEG -  22 March 2010

 

 

 

 

 

5.Improvements to Emergency Operations Performance

Key role position descriptions to be distributed to agencies and followed up by a presentation to all relevant staff

N.S

 

Early 2012

 

·   New GECC Staff and Role descriptions were successfully tested during Ex Tangaroa 2010.

·   Role descriptions will be reviewed in conjunction with the induction programme for the Hastings GECC.

On Target

CEG -  15 Dec 2010

 

 

 

 

 

Item 8

Improvements to Emergency Operations Performance

ALL

Early 2012

 

1. WS1 complete GECC structure and appointments exercised
- strategy for additional GECC staff from across Group to be developed in conjunction with the induction programme for the Hastings GECC.

2. - WS2 complete for Napier GECC site
 - Good progress made at the Hastings GECC site

3. WS3 well advanced until Feb 2011

On Target

CEG -  16 Feb 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Item 7

Facilitate election of CEG Chair once the new organisational structure is effective

NS / IM

Early 2012

At next CEG an election of Chairman will be conducted

Pending

Item 8

Draft of brief on CDEM Group plan review process to be provided to Ross Mcleod

NS / IM

Dec 2011

Proposed process & governance to be presented to a workshop early December

Group Manager CDEM HB to manage Project

On Target

Item 10

HB CDEM Group Tsunami Plan - process for public release

NS

Nov 2011

Ref CEG Item 6 16 August 2011

Group Tsunami Hazard Plan to be updated with new information and circulated

Pending


Action Schedule

Attachment 1

 

 

Joint Committee –

28 March 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Item 6

Proposed response to recommendations of Monitoring and Evaluation Report

1.    Group culture and integration, and the approach proposed for addressing these matters

CEO’s

 

 

 

 

2.    Ensure organisations fully engage with preparation of 2nd Group Plan and Group work programme

ALL

 

 

 

 

3.    Authorises the release of the Monitoring and Evaluation Report together with an improvement plan

CEO’s & AN

 

To be released to interviewees and other contributors after 1 October 2011

Complete

 

4.    Relocation of:

-       GEMO to the Hastings

-       Primary GECC to Hastings

-       agreement on tenure and related matters

 

 

- GEMO to remain in Napier  in the short term

- Hastings GECC to be operational Nov 2011

 - MoU to be developed with HDC

On Target

 

CEG - 28 March 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Item 8

Group Coordinator to review Capacity of the GCEE Planning and Logistics

NS

 

Progressing – awaiting lessons learnt from CHCH

Pending


Action Schedule

Attachment 1

 

 

CEG - 16 August 2011

NOTE: Agenda sequence altered items below match order in minutes

 

 

 

 

Item 8

MCDEM RESILLIENCE FUND 2010/11 AND 2011/12

Ian Macdonald to input into the drafting of the final project brief. 

 

Jan 2012

MCDEM funding approved.  Project Plan to be confirmed

On Target

Item 14 GB

National Controller Forum

Andrew Newman, Ken Foote, Ian Macdonald and John Freeman, will attend

AH

Di Wisely

Nov 2011

Facilitate Travel & Accommodation

Completed

Item 14 GB

Group Controller Induction

Ian Macdonald to have an induction with John Hamilton, David Coetzee etc in Wellington

AH

Nov 2011

Dates being agreed with MCDEM

Completed

Item 14 GB

Industry Training Org

“Learning State” to meet with Training Advisory Group and present themselves to CEG’s

TAG Chair

CN

 

Chair of TAG progressing this action

Pending

Item 14 GB

Absence of members

Andrew Newman to contact member organisations that regularly are not represented

AN

 

 

 

 

Joint Committee – 20 Sept

 

 

 

 

 

GB

Ex. Pacific Wave Communicate with partner organisations, low key approach

NS/IM

Nov 2011

Exercise conducted.  Group Office the only registered participant for Hawke’s Bay.  Objectives were meet.

Completed

GB

Consider development of online disaster impact Assessment form

 

 

 

 

 


 

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group   

Monday 05 December 2011

SUBJECT: Hawke’s Bay CDEM Plan Review: Governance Model & Consultation Strategy        

 

Reason for Report

1.      The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision of the Joint Committee on a governance model and consultation strategy to be used as part of the review of the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Plan Review.

2.      The current Hawke’s Bay CDEM Plan was adopted in March 2005.  Under the CDEM Act 2002 the Plan must be reviewed within 5 years.  The current Plan is therefore due for review and is the top priority in the Group work plan.

3.      The CDEM Act outlines the statutory requirements for undertaking this review.  The relevant sections are attached as Appendix A.  The key points are that the Plan must involve partner organisations and that public consultation is required.  The Plan must also be approved by the Joint Committee.  The purpose of this report is to address these three matters prior to drawing up a detailed project plan and commencing the review process.

4.      This report concludes by recommending that the Committee adopt the Governance Model and Engagement and Consultation Strategy attached as Appendix B and C respectively.

Discussion of Options and Recommendations

Governance Model

5.      In is proposed that the governance input in the plan review occur at identified points during the process.  Appendix B broadly identifies these proposed points.  This will involve the governance group being both consulted and making decisions.

6.      Other options revolve around who makes up the governance group for the various tasks.  It may be appropriate that in hearing submissions on the plan that a separate panel be appointed.  The Joint Committee may also appoint nominees to carry out the governance functions.  The only requirement of the Act is that the Joint Committee gives the final approval of the reviewed Plan.

7.      It is recommended however that for consistency and an efficient process, the Joint Committee approves the Draft Plan for consultation, hears any pubic submissions made, and gives final approval to the reviewed Plan.

8.      It is considered that there are no ‘conflict of interest’ matters created by this process.  It is therefore recommended the Committee adopt the model proposed in Appendix B.

9.      It is noted that next year is also an LTP year so the intention would be for hearings to occur after July 2012.

Engagement and Consultation Strategy

10.    The purpose of the strategy is to set the guiding principles for engagement and consultation with both key stakeholders and the public through this process.  Appendix C outlines the overall intent with regard to engagement and consultation and how it is proposed this will be achieved.

11.    The key points are that key stakeholders are engaged early in the process to shape the draft plan.  This draft is then used as a vehicle for specific public consultation.  A final draft plan then forms a statement of proposal notified under the special consultative process of the Local Government Act 2002.

12.    It is considered that the process identified in Appendix C provides a good balance between the requirement that some parts of the plan will be of a technical nature, with the ability for the community to influence Hawke’s Bay CDEM into the future.  It is therefore recommended that the Committee adopt the strategy contained in Appendix C.

Financial and Resource Implications

13.    Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group has budgeted for the review of the Group Plan.  There will be some requirement for staff from all of the Councils and partner agencies to be involved in the review process and this will need to be managed.

Future Intentions

14.    Once the Governance Model and the Engagement and Consultation Strategy are agreed by the Committee, work can commence on establishing the project and in particular completing a detailed project management plan.

15.    The aim is to have the reviewed Group Plan adopted by the end of 2012 at the latest.

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Joint Committee resolve:

1.    To adopt the Governance Model contained in Appendix B to this paper.

2.    To adopt the Engagement and Consultation Strategy contained in Appendix C to this paper.

 

 

 

 

 

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager HB Civil Defence Emergency Management

 

 

Attachment/s

1View

CDEM Act Statutory Requirements

 

 

2View

Governance Model

 

 

3View

Engagement and Consultation Strategy

 

 

  


CDEM Act Statutory Requirements

Attachment 1

 

Appendix A

 

Civil Defence Emergency

Management Act 2002

 

Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plans

48 Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plans

Every Civil Defence Emergency Management Group must prepare and approve a civil defence emergency management group plan.

49 Proposed plan to be sent to Minister

(1) Before approving a civil defence emergency management group plan, a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group must send a copy of the proposed plan to the Minister for his or her comments and must allow the Minister 20 workingdays to comment.

(2) The plan must state and provide for—

(a) the local authorities that have united to establish the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group:

(b) the hazards and risks to be managed by the Group:

(c) the civil defence emergency management necessary to manage the hazards and risks described under paragraph (b):

(d) the objectives of the plan and the relationship of each objective to the national civil defence emergency management strategy:

(e) the apportionment between local authorities of liability for the provision of financial and other resources for the activities of the Group, and the basis for that apportionment:

(f) the arrangements for declaring a state of emergency in the area of the Group:

(g) the arrangements for co-operation and co-ordination with other Groups:

(h) the period for which the plan remains in force.

…….

51 Incorporation by reference

(1) Any written material or document that, in the opinion of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, is too large or otherwise impractical to be printed as part of a civil defence emergency management group plan may be incorporated by reference.

(2) Any material incorporated by reference under this section is to be treated for all purposes as forming part of the plan.

(3) If any amendment to the material incorporated by reference under this section is made, the amendment does not come into force as part of the plan until—

(a) an amendment to that effect to the plan has been made under this Act; or

(b) a date specified by the Group by notice in the major metropolitan daily newspaper circulating in the Group’s area.

(4) All material incorporated by reference under this section must be available at the office of the Group and copies of that material must be available for purchase for a reasonable charge.

 

52 Procedure for making civil defence emergency management group plans

(1) Before making a civil defence emergency management group plan, a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group must—

(a) give public notice, and any specific notice that the Group considers appropriate, of the proposal to make a plan; and

(b) specify in every notice given under paragraph (a) a period within which persons interested in the proposal may make submissions on the proposal to—

(i) the Group; or

(ii) a subgroup or committee of the Group; and

(c) ensure that any person who makes written submissions on the proposal within the period specified in the notice given under paragraph (a) is given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the body to which the submissions are made; and

(d) make all written submissions on the proposal available to the public unless there is some good reason in law why it should not do so; and

(e) ensure that the final decision in relation to the proposal is made at a meeting of the Group.

(2) The period specified under subsection (1)(b)—

(a) must not be less than 1 month; and

(b) unless the Group otherwise directs, must not be more than 3 months.

 

53 Civil defence emergency management group plan must not be inconsistent with national civil defence emergency management strategy and must take account of Director’s guidelines, codes, or technical standards

(1) A civil defence emergency management group plan must not be inconsistent with the national civil defence emergency management strategy in force when the plan is approved.

(2) A civil defence emergency management group plan must take account of the guidelines, codes, or technical standards issued by the Director under this Act.

……

 

55 Currency of civil defence emergency management group plan

A civil defence emergency management group plan—

(a) takes effect on the date of the final decision taken under section 52(1)(e); and

(b) remains operative for the period specified in the plan, but if the plan is not replaced before the close of that period it continues in force until replaced.

…….

 

Review and amendment of civil defence emergency management group plans

56 Review of civil defence emergency management group plans

(1) If a civil defence emergency management group plan has been operative for 5 years or more and it is more than 5 years since the plan has been reviewed under this section, the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group concerned must review the plan.

(2) A Group may at any time review any civil defence emergency management group plan made by it.

(3) Following a review, the Group may amend or revoke and replace the plan or leave the plan unchanged.

(4) A review under this section is commenced by a proposal notified in accordance with section 52, and sections 49, 51, and 55 apply to that review with any necessary modifications.


Governance Model

Attachment 2

 

 

To:

CDEM Joint Committee

From:

Ian Macdonald, Group Manager Hawke’s Bay CDEM

Date:

29/11/2011

Subject:

Proposed Governance Model

 

 

 

1.       The purpose of this document is to establish an appropriate governance model as to the overview and ultimately approval of the review of the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan. 

2.       The CDEM Act 2002 sets the statutory consultation requirements for the review of the Plan.  The Act requires public notice and an opportunity for submitters to be heard.

Intent

3.       It is intended that the governance of the plan review will enable Joint Committee to have input into the process at key points while maintaining a transparent process in accordance with the relevant legislation.

4.       It is proposed that this be achieved by gaining the Committee’s approval of the draft plan prior to public consultation; and the approval of a final draft before the plan is notified under the special consultative procedure of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.       Finally the Committee will hear any submissions that result from this process before it approves the final plan.

Outcomes

6.       The outcomes sought through this governance model are to ensure that during the development of the Group Plan the Joint Committee:

·    Has an understanding of the issues for CDEM in the region.

·    Has strategic input into the preparation of the Plan.

·    Is able to make informed decisions on public submissions to the plan.

·    That the inter-council arrangements and the operation of Hawke’s Bay CDEM are endorsed by the members of the Committee.

Conclusion

7.       The Group Plan is an example of the councils of Hawke’s Bay cooperating on the provision of CDEM to the community. The governance model proposed helps to ensure that this occurs in an inclusive manner. 

8.       The following table proposes how in outline this can occur.

 


Governance Model

Attachment 2

 

Governance Input into the Review of the Hawke’s Bay CEDEM Plan

 

 

 

Project Plan

Review Workstreams

First Draft Approval

Public Workshops

Final Draft Approval

Hearings

Final Approval

Joint Committee

Consult

Consult

Approve

Can Attend

Approve

Hear & Approve Amendments

Approve

CEG

Approve

Approve

Consult

Can Attend

Consult

Consult

Consult

Project Management Team[1]

Prepare

Overview

Prepare

Prepare

Prepare

Prepare Reports

Prepare

Technical Advisory Groups (TAG)[2]

Consult

Prepare

Consult

Attend

Consult

Prepare Reports

Prepare


Engagement and Consultation Strategy

Attachment 3

 

INTERNAL REPORT

 

To:

CDEM Joint Committee

From:

Ian Macdonald, Group Manager Hawke’s Bay CDEM

Date:

29/11/2011

Subject:

review of group plan: Public engagement and consultation Strategy

 

 

 

 

 

1.       The purpose of this document is to provide guidance and an outline plan for the engagement and consultation of key stake holders and the community as part of the review of the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan.  This paper needs to be read in conjunction with the Governance paper which outlines how it is proposed to involve the Joint Committee or their representatives in this process.

2.       At this point it is important to note that the Group Plan is a strategic planning document.  The Group Plan does not include matters such as local community response plans.  The Group Plan sets the CDEM objectives for the region based on the ‘4Rs’[3].  Within this framework the Plan also covers the regional arrangements/structures for:

·    Specific hazard and risk identification and management measures.

·    Response to an emergency and subsequent recovery operations.

·    The provision of resources.

·    The arrangements for cooperation and coordination both within the Hawke’s Bay Group and with other CDEM Groups and national government agencies across the 4Rs.

3.       The CDEM Act 2002 sets the statutory consultation requirements for the review of the Plan.  The Act requires public notice and an opportunity for submitters to be heard.

Intent

4.       It is intended to engage with key technical and community stake holders at an early part of the review process to ensure they are able to have meaningful input prior to a draft of the reviewed Group Plan being completed.  General public input is best facilitated through discussion on the resulting draft Plan.

Outcomes

5.       The outcomes sought through this Engagement and Consultation Plan are to ensure that the development of the Group Plan:

·    Is a comprehensive, all agency response to the identified hazards and risks.

·    Facilitates regional cooperation and where appropriate integration.

·    Is reflective of the CDEM needs of the Hawke’s Bay community and is “owned” by the community.

·    Consistent with the National CDEM Plan.

6.       Two stages have therefore been identified to facilitate the engagement and consultation for the review of the Plan.

7.       Stage one will be primarily based on the engagement of Group members (including partner organisations) and key stakeholders (such as MCDEM) as part of the review preparation and plan drafting phase.

8.       Stage two will involve specific community consultation based on an approved final draft of the reviewed Group Plan.  This process will also use the special consultative process under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

Stage One

9.       The review of the Plan will be broken into a number of sections based around the 4Rs[4].  Each work stream will have a technical advisory group and where appropriate workshops will be held to bring together the various key stakeholders and seek their input.  Appendix A is a list of currently identified stakeholders.  This list is not exclusive and may evolve as the process advances.

Stage Two

10.     This stage contains two parts.  The first part involves engaging with interested members of the community on a completed draft of the reviewed Group Plan.  This will be achieved through advertising and holding public workshops in:

·    Wairoa

·    Napier

·    Hastings

·    Waipawa or Waipukurau

11.     Any feedback will be considered and if appropriate amendments could be made to the draft Plan.

12.     The subsequent step will involve the notification of the draft of the reviewed Group Plan using the special consultative process for one month.  Hearings will be held on any submissions received.

Conclusion

13.     The engagement and consultation strategy proposed will help to ensure that all stakeholders directly involved Hawke’s Bay CDEM activities will have an opportunity to shape the drafting of the reviewed Group Plan.

14.     Once this has occurred, focused public consultation can occur based on a draft already accepted by the key stakeholders and approved under the governance model.  This public consultation will also fulfil the consultation requirements of the CDEM Act and the LGA.


 

Appendix A

HAWKE’S BAY CDEM PLAN REVIEW LIST OF KEY STAKEHOLDERS

 

1.       TLA Members

2.       HBRC Technical Staff

3.       Hawke’s Bay DHB

4.       Hawke’s Bay Lifelines Group (incorporates Telecom/Unison etc)

5.       Hawke’s Bay WAG and associated organisations

6.       Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management

7.       Emergency Services

8.       NZ Defence Force

9.       Other Government Departments (eg MAF)

10.     Adjoining CDEM Groups (e.g. Horizons MW)

11.     GNS/NIWA

12.     Ngāti Kahungunu

13.     Federated Farmers and other agricultural/horticultural sector groups

14.     Hawke’s Bay Chamber of Commerce

15.     Inter-Agency Communications Group

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group  

Monday 05 December 2011

SUBJECT: Hawke's Bay Oil Spill Preparedness:
Lessons from RENA
        

 

Reason for Report

1.       On the 5 October 2011, Rena, a 21-year-old 236 metre Liberian-flagged cargo vessel en route from Napier to Tauranga, struck Astrolabe Reef off Tauranga and grounded.  Approximately 350 tonnes of oil escaped from Rena, some of it washing up at various points along the Bay of Plenty coastline.

2.       Questions have been asked about risks of a similar event in Hawke’s Bay and what plans are in place to respond to a marine oil spill that occurs within our coastal marine area.

3.       The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council has a statutory responsibility under the Maritime Transport Act 1994 (MTA) to conduct a Tier 2 response to marine oil spills, and maintains a plan which details how a Tier 2 response operation is to be undertaken. This project sits within the Council’s Hazard Management activities and is managed by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group office.

4.       This report is to inform the Joint Committee of the risks and plans in place, and the lessons Hawke’s Bay oil spill response staff have learnt from their involvement with the Rena response, including a photograph presentation by Regional On-Scene Commander, Bryce Lawrence who is also a member of the National Response Team.

BACKGROUND:

5.       New Zealand’s marine spill and pollution response capability is maintained (and developed) through partnerships between Maritime New Zealand, Regional Councils, the oil industry, and overseas agencies.  This includes a National Response Team (NRT) made up of 60 specialists, trained in all aspects of oil spill response. The team includes MNZ and Regional Council staff members and other experts from around the country. The NRT sits above a broader team of about 400 trained oil spill responders based around New Zealand’s 16 regions.

6.       The response system is comprised of three tiers. Each tier can be escalated to the next, depending on the scale of the event.  Those responsible for each tier are required to prepare contingency plans and a response capability appropriate to their respective levels of responsibility:

·    Tier 1 – industry (ships and onshore/offshore oil transfer sites)

·    Tier 2 – regional councils

·    Tier 3 – Maritime New Zealand.

7.       Maritime New Zealand maintains a response capability of sufficient size to counter an oil spill of 3,500 tonnes, which is deemed to be a 'one in a hundred year' event. If the scale of an incident is beyond the nation's domestic capability, arrangements are in place to secure overseas assistance. This relationship is reciprocal - New Zealand will be expected to assist our neighbours if requested.

8.       Oil spill preparedness is funded by an industry levy, the Oil Pollution Levy, which is paid by those sectors whose activities raise the risk of a marine oil spill. In the event of an oil spill, the polluter is liable for all costs associated with the response.


COMMENT:

Risks

9.       Maritime New Zealand undertakes regular national risk assessments for New Zealand which underpins all preparation and planning for marine oil spill response. It includes the assessment of both the likelihood of a spill occurring and the consequences or effects of the spill.  It also establishes the basis for the New Zealand Marine Oil Spill Response Strategy.  Hawke’s Bay is deemed to have a medium to low national risk (see Annex 1).

10.     Historical spill records show that most spills occurring within the Hawke’s Bay region do so during bunkering operations which, in the majority of cases, have proved minor and required little or no clean up action.  Some spills also originate from land sources via storm water outlets.  However, a significant increase in shipping over recent years and the introduction of Amoco oil exploration test wells into the area north east of Castle Point has increased the potential for a large spill.

11.     Hawke’s Bay is provided with sufficient equipment, training and other resources to allow it to effectively respond to most of the minor operational spills likely to occur within the port and along its coastline.  At any time, but more especially in the event of a larger or more catastrophic spill, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council can expect the support of the Maritime New Zealand.  This support could range from providing advice, resources or support personnel to assist the regional (Tier 2) response to escalating the response to a national (Tier 3) response, such as we have seen with the Rena.

Preparedness

12.     The HBRC maintains Tier 2 response plan (a copy of which is available on the HBRC website) which details how a Tier 2 response operation is to be undertaken in response to a marine oil spill within the coastal marine area under our jurisdiction (see Annex 2).

13.     The plan holds maps, site information and response guides showing the amenity areas, commercial and recommended areas for protection within Hawke’s Bay.  These have been prepared in consultation with the Department of Conservation, iwi and interested parties of the Hawke’s Bay region.  Many of these areas are “Significant Areas” as defined in the Regional Coastal Plan.

14.     There are 40 trained responders on the Hawke’s Bay Oil Spill response team, including Port of Napier, DOC staff and others.  MOU’s are also maintained with Napier City Council & Hastings District Council.  Response team members are required to maintain response qualifications and this is normally achieved by regular attendance on exercises and revalidation of the appropriate course qualification every four years.

15.     Regional training exercises, including tabletop and equipment deployment, are held annually to assess the capability and robustness of all planning, management and operational response systems

Response

16.     In the 12 months ending 30 June 2011 6 oil spill incidents had been responded to in Hawke’s Bay for the year.  All were minor, yet provide the Hawke’s Bay Oil Spill Response team with regular practical experience.  Annual spill incidents typically range between 3 - 8 per annum.

17.     13 members of the Hawke’s Bay Oil Spill response team have been involved with the Rena response to date.  Regional On-Scene Commander Bryce Lawrence will give a presentation on the response to date, and lessons being gleaned for Hawke’s Bay.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

1.    That the Joint Committee receives the report.

 

 

 

Lisa Pearse

Emergency Management Coordinator

 

 

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager HB Civil Defence Emergency Management

 

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.


HB Civil Defence Emergency Management Group  

Monday 05 December 2011

SUBJECT: General Business        

 

INTRODUCTION

This document has been prepared to assist the Joint Committee to note any General Business Items to be discussed.

Item

Topic

Member/Staff

1.   

 

 

2.   

 

 

3.   

 

 

4.   

 

 

5.   

 

 

6.   

 

 

7.   

 

 

8.   

 

 

9.   

 

 

10. 

 

 

11. 

 

 

12. 

 

 

 

    



[1] Group Manager, Hawke’s Bay CDEM will act as project manager

[2] TAG groups will generally be based around expertise in risk identification and reduction, readiness, response and recovery

[3] Reduction, Readiness, Response and Recovery

[4] A detailed project plan will confirm the exact work streams