BALTIC SEAENVIRONMENT PROCEEDINGS No. 59 - Helcom

4.
4.1
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HELSINKI CONVENTION AND HELCOM
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE FINNISH POLICY ON COMBATTING MARINE
POLLUTION INCIDENTS
Provisions of the Convention
The most important obligation is Regulation 2 of Annex VI
concerning the requirement to the Contracting parties to
maintain adequate national ability. This obligation has
been transferred into the main body of the new 1992
Convention (cf. article 12). As far as oil is concerned
Finland has sufficient ability both in coastal waters and
at open sea. The ability to combatt chemical spills is
still under development although municipal fire brigades
in towns with chemical harbours have a limited ability.
Regulation 3 requires surveillance to be conducted within
the response region. Today Finland has available only
limited surveillance capability based on optical means. A
new sea surveillance aircraft equipped with remote sensing
system will be delivered by the end of 1994.
Regulation 8 includes on one hand possibility to request
and get assistance and on other hand obligation to render
assistance in case of a major pollution incidents. The
possibility to get assistance is important when considering
how large ability is needed for worst cases, i.e. one can
rely on the assistance from neighboring states in adverse
accidents.
Finland has ability to send one or more vessels (strike
teams) as well as equipment separately to assist other
baltic Sea States. Finland assisted Sweden by oil combatting
vessel HALL1 in the Volgoneft operation as well as Estonia
by two vessels and one rescue helicopter in KIHNU operation.
Regulation 7 requests the Contracting Parties to agree on
the delimitations of response regions for combatting marine
pollution incidents. Finland has agreements with Sweden
and with the former Soviet Union with the exception of a
little sea are in the vicinity of Bogskar in the northern
part of the Baltic Proper. The forthcoming bilateral
cooperation agreement with Estonia will include also a
provision on the delimitation of response regions.
Regulation 2 of the Annex VII to the 1992 Convention
requires drawing of national contingency plan. Finland has
not a singe overall plan but several regional plans for each
of the five coastal provinces. In addition, every
municipality shall have a contingency plan of its own.
The requirement of a ship borne oil pollution emergency
plan (cf. Regulation 6.1 and Regulation 26 of Annex I to
MARPOL 73/78 - Convention) is included into the Finnish
legislation from 4 April 1993.
353