- 1 -ILO/IMO/BC WG 1/7/2
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION /IMO
/ EJOINT ILO/IMO/BC WORKING GROUP ON SHIP SCRAPPING
1st session
Agenda item 7 / ILO/IMO/BC WG 1/7/2
27 January 2005
ENGLISH ONLY
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Shipping industry work programme
The way ahead – practical and pragmatic
Submitted by the International Shipping Federation (ISF), BIMCO, the International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners (INTERCARGO), the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (INTERTANKO) and the International Chamber
of Shipping (ICS)
SUMMARYExecutive summary: / This paper presents the thoughts, work programme and targets of the shipping industry on ship recycling.
Action to be taken: / Paragraph 52
Related documents: / Industry Code of Practice on Ship Recycling; IMO, ILO and Basel Convention Guidelines on the issue; MEPC 52/WP.8, and MEPC52/24, item 3
Introduction
1There is no doubt that the conditions associated with ship recycling in certain countries, in relation to both worker safety and the protection of the local environment, do not meet the standards applicable and applied to such activity in other parts of the world.
2International regulations are applicable to operational ships whereas national regulations, developed according to national, rather than international priorities, apply to the ship recycling industry. To address the issues involved, all stakeholders, including the shipping and recycling industries and their respective administrations, must seriously examine the procedures, responsibilities and possibilities associated with the “hand-over” from one legislative regime to another when a ship changes ownership and subsequently ceases to be a “vessel operating in the marine environment”.
3While contested by certain environmental interest groups, it is generally accepted that there is no applicable international legal instrument applicable to ship recycling although Guidelines on Ship Recycling were adopted by IMO in December 2003 and a Code of Practice, endorsed by the Industry Group on Ship Recycling, has been available since August 2001.
4This paper identifies areas where regulations applicable prior to withdrawal of the ship from service, and between operation and recycling, might be developed which are applicable and enforceable, while highlighting the contribution which can be made by industry guidelines and voluntary codes of practice.
5It looks at the areas which need to be considered, and the work which needs to be undertaken, in order to address the identified problems in a practical and pragmatic way.
Short Term
Recycling facility identification, assessment and endorsement
6There is a great variety of ship recycling facilities throughout the world, each with its own capacity and capability. Each recycling facility seeks to contract for work by purchasing ships to dismantle from among those ships whose owners believe have ended their revenue earning life.
7Every recycling facility should have the capability to recycle the ships it purchases in a manner consistent with national legislation and relevant international conventions and recommendations, especially in respect of worker safety but also in conformity with good environmental practice. This capability can only be monitored by the appropriate national authority. The responsibility for identifying and assessing the capabilities of recycling yards rests with the national administration in whose jurisdiction they are situated.
8The shipping industry strongly supports the view that national administrations should identify, assess and endorse recycling facilities operating in their countries and make such endorsements known to shipping companies. Only then can legislation be introduced which requires shipowners to ensure that their ships are sold for recycling to facilities which have the required expertise and arrangements in place to handle their dismantling and disposal in a safe and environmentally conscious manner.
9To achieve this objective administrations must:
.1identify ship recycling facilities in their countries (a list of those the Industry is aware of is attached at annex 1. Administrations and others are invited to add to, delete from or amend this list);
.2assess the capabilities of those facilities (draft criteria for assessing capabilities are attached at annex 2); and
.3make information on “approved” recycling yards available to the shipping industry.
10In this respect we fully endorse section 8.1.2 of the IMO Guidelines that “Competent authorities in recycling States should assess the capabilities of their recycling facilities and make available the results of those assessments.”
11We are willing to work with others to achieve this.
Potentially hazardous material identification
12The Industry Guidelines on Ship Recycling identify potentially hazardous substances and areas on ships in which they might be found. These are included in the IMO Guidelines which also include materials identified in the guidelines produced on behalf of the Parties to the Basel Convention.
13However, there is no definitive list of potentially hazardous materials which may be on board ships, nor, perhaps more importantly, authoritative guidance as to ways in which such materials might be handled in a safe and environmentally sound manner.
14We believe that Governments should produce an authoritative list of such materials, together with advice and guidance as to how they might be properly handled within the context of ship recycling. We do not believe that this is a task which can be delegated either to the industry or to environmental organizations.
Ship Recycling Plan
15The industry has fully supported the development of a model ship recycling plan by IMO and its inclusion in the IMO Guidelines. We recognize that a recycling plan needs to be produced by the recycling yard in respect of each individual ship and that the seller of the ship should ensure that a practical recycling plan exists.
16It must be appreciated that when a shipowner places a ship on the market as “available for recycling” (or for further trading) he may receive offers from several interested purchasers. Itwould be impossible, practically, for the shipowner to consider the detailed merits of individual recycling plans with each of several potential purchasers as it would to expect each potential purchaser to produce a detailed recycling plan for each ship for which it tenders an offer.
17The seller can only fulfil his responsibilities in this regard if the capabilities and capacities of the recycling yards have been assessed and made available by the administration of the country in which the yards are situated. A simple “check list” to enable this to be done must be developed.
Inventory
18Since the Industry produced its “Code of Practice on Ship Recycling” in August 2001, shipowners have been urged to take into account the measures outlined therein.
19Despite some assertions to the contrary, the industry is aware that these guidelines are increasingly being followed. An essential feature of the industry proposals involved the preparation of an inventory of assumed potentially hazardous materials indicating their presence, location and approximate quantity at hand-over to be given to the recycling yard.
20However, it is not enough simply to expect the owner to prepare the list. Recycling facilities must also demand it as part of the contract and establish a procedure whereby it is obtained from the ship. The industry is not aware of any occasion on which a recycling facility has asked for such an inventory.
21We will continue to urge those administrations with responsibility for recycling facilities to advise their facilities to demand such a document.
Gas freeing
22Reports of explosions at recycling facilities during cutting operations are all too frequent. It is unacceptable that workers in recycling facilities should be killed and injured for the lack of a simple procedure which is compulsory in shipbuilding and ship repair facilities.
23The industry believes that the single measure with the greatest impact on safety in recycling facilities would be an insistence that the seller of the ship takes responsibility for providing the yard at, or immediately following, hand-over of the ship at the facility, with a “Gas Free for Hot Work” Certificate. This should cover all cargo spaces and as many other spaces and/or compartments as possible. The certificate should be accompanied by a declaration and general arrangement plan showing those spaces and compartments which are not certified as “Gas Free for Hot Work”.
24Despite legislation requiring this in at least one of the major ship recycling countries, it is clear that this demand is sometimes not pursued. Administrations with responsibilities for recycling facilities should be urged to ensure that this requirement is legislated for AND enforced.
25It must be realized that the certificate is only valid at the time it is issued and that continued monitoring of enclosed spaces during the recycling process, by a qualified chemist, is essential to preserve safety.
26Guidance on the safety measures related to this procedure as applied during the operational life of a ship, as it appears in the current (1996) “International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers and Terminals” (ISGOTT), is attached at annex 3.
Reception facilities
27MARPOL already has provisions covering the provision of reception facilities for the discharge of operational waste as follows:
-Annex I, Regulation 12 (Oily residues) – MARPOL already covers “oil loading terminals, repair ports, and in other ports in which ships have oily residues to discharge”;
-Annex II, Regulation 7 (Noxious liquid substances) - MARPOL already covers “cargo loading and unloading ports and terminals” and, for chemical tankers only, “repair ports”;
-Annex IV, Regulation 10 (Sewage) - MARPOL already covers all “ports and terminals”;
-Annex V, Regulation 7 (Garbage) - MARPOL already covers all “ports and terminals”.
The general requirement is on Governments of all contracting parties to “ensure the provision of reception facilities according to the needs of the ships using its ports, terminals or repair ports”.
28Administrations with responsibility for recycling facilities should ensure the provision of such reception facilities at all recycling sites. They should further require that all ships utilize these facilities before the dismantling of the ship commences.
29The industry believes that consideration should be given to amending the MARPOL Convention to include this requirement at recycling facilities.
Endorse acceptable contract
30Shipowners have developed a standard ship recycling contract covering the sale of a ship from a shipowner to a recycling facility, DEMOLISHCON. This contract endorses the IMOGuidelines on Ship Recycling and urges all parties to follow the measures outlined therein. Acopy of the contract is attached at annex 4.
31The industry has sought the comments of administrations on this contract, with little response.
32We request administrations with an interest in the issue, flag States and recycling States, to examine this contract and either comment on it or endorse its use by shipowners and recycling facilities.
Abandonment of ships
33There have been instances where ships deemed unfit or unsuitable for further service have been abandoned by their owners at sea, in port or on beaches. While the London Convention deals with the issue of ships abandoned at sea, there is currently no international legislation covering the abandonment of ships in port or on shore.
34Insofar as incidents involve ships which have been engaged in international trade and are owned by interests unconnected with the country where the ship is abandoned, the Industry recognizes that this is an issue which may need to be addressed and believes that IMO should be invited to address it.
Adoption of the IMO Guidelines and feedback
35The international shipping organizations with observer status at IMO contributed to the development of the IMO Guidelines on Ship Recycling and will continue to encourage shipowners to comply, to the extent possible, with those Guidelines. In complying with them, shipowners will be urged to report on their effectiveness and practicality. Such reports will be used as the basis for industry comments on the IMO Guidelines submitted to IMO for consideration.
Dialogue with recycling yards
36Industry organizations will continue to maintain and widen dialogue with representatives of the ship recycling industry, and their administrations, and encourage the adoption of “best practice” in ship recycling as established in guidelines adopted by IMO, ILO and the Parties to the Basel Convention.
Medium Term
Legislation v. Recommendation
37The operation of internationally trading ships during their working lives is covered by international legislation, applicable to all ships flying the flag of signatory States, and enforced through flag and port State control. By contrast, the operation and activities of the recycling industry are governed solely by the national law of those countries where the activity takes place, reflecting the priorities and concerns of the individual State. They can only be enforced by the responsible State.
38In an international industry such as shipping, the “level playing field” is an essential requirement. To the extent possible, the shipping organizations will encourage the adoption of international standards by the ship recycling industry.
39The industry will work towards the development of legislation covering certain aspects of the IMO Guidelines (as outlined in annex 1 of MEPC 52/WP.8) covering the following elements:
.1Recycling facilities
-to have reception facilities;
-to be “approved/licensed”;
-to prepare a recycling plan in consultation with the shipowner;
-to include elements of the IMO Guidelines in the contract of purchase;
.2Shipowners
-to only sell to “approved/licensed” recycling facilities;
-to arrange the removal of materials the recycling facilities declares it cannot handle;
-to consult with the recycling facility in respect of the ship recycling plan prepared by the facility;
-to include elements of the IMO Guidelines in the contract of sale;
-to provide an inventory of potentially hazardous materials on arrival at the recycling facility;
-to mark assumed and identified potentially hazardous materials and any potentially hazardous spaces;
-to maintain/create ship details and part 1 of the Inventory sections of the “Green Passport”;
-to prepare Parts 2 and 3 of the “Green Passport” prior to arrival at the recycling facility;
-to deliver the “Green Passport” to the recycling facility;
-to arrange for a “Gas Free for Hot Work” certificate to be provided at handover of the ship;
-to pass the Continuous Synopsis Record to the recycling facility;
.3Shipbuilding States’ administrations
-to prohibit/restrict/minimize the use of potentially hazardous materials in new ships;
.4Shipbuilders
-to provide the first shipowner with part 1 of the Inventory;
-to seek advice on limiting the use of identified potentially hazardous materials;
-to provide new ships with a “Green Passport”;
.5Flag States
-to prohibit/restrict/minimize the use of potentially hazardous materials in existing ships.
Continuous Synopsis Report (CSR)
40There are no provisions in SOLAS, nor in its accompanying guidelines, which cover the use of a ship’s Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) after the end of life of the ship.
41The industry believes that this record of the history of the ship should be handed over to the recycling yard and provide the details on the ship as required in the IMO Guidelines. The IMO Maritime Safety Committee/Marine Environment Protection Committee should be asked to advise accordingly.
Reporting procedures
42The shipping industry could support the establishment of a reporting procedure in respect of ships destined for recycling provided the purpose of such a procedure is clear and unambiguous, applicable to all (i.e. seller to flag State, buyer to recycling State) and enforced by all. A “permit to recycle” procedure on shipowners alone would be unenforceable and, because of this, opposed. The industry believes that any such reporting procedure should conform to the following criteria:
-fulfil a purpose;
-simple and straightforward;
-universally applicable;
-be completed before contract;
-place responsibility on both parties to the contract to notify their appropriate administrations of their intentions;
-permit no subsequent interference in completion of the contract;
-“no response” from flag State or recycling state after notification is deemed “approval”.
43The detail to be included in any report to the respective administrations needs to be standardized.
44The establishment of a list of “approved” facilities (see paragraphs 6 to 11) is also a prerequisite of a reporting system.
Training and advice
45The ILO Guidelines on “Safety and Health in Shipbreaking” and the “Guidelines on the Full and Partial Dismantling of Ships” produced under the aegis of the Basel Convention contain a wealth of advice to recycling facilities. The industry fully endorses this advice. IMO has now agreed in principle to establish a fund with the potential to assist in this area.
46Consideration now needs to be given by administrations as to where additional training and advice should be targeted.
Long Term
Cradle to grave
47Shipbuilders have accepted the concept of the “Green Passport” and several are now producing such a document for ships now being built. However, only outline guidance as to the content and scope of the proposed “Green Passport” has so far been developed and included within the current IMO Guidelines.
48Despite this, some owners with new ship buildings are requiring their ship builders to produce a “Green Passport” in respect of those ships. However, with little detailed guidance available on this, the results are likely to deliver.
48Consideration now needs to be given to the design and content of a standard format for the “Green Passport”. Shipping organizations would encourage its use.
Potentially hazardous material substitution
49The use of asbestos as a fire retardant in ships was compulsory in some countries until the hazards now known to be associated with the material were discovered. Other materials are now used in ships.
50The identification now of equivalent hazardous materials and advice on less or nonpotentially hazardous substitutes might remove risks to human health or the environment when ships are dismantled.
51Administrations and intergovernmental organizations are asked to address the issue and advise the industry accordingly.
Action requested of the Joint Working Group
52The ILO/IMO/BC Working Group on Ship Scrapping is invited to note the Industry views and comment on them. The Industry would be willing to expand on any of these and other related issues during the meeting.
***
C:\DOCUME~1\Rugaraba\LOCALS~1\Temp\d.Lotus.Notes.Data\~1769124.doc
ILO/IMO/BC WG 1/7/2
ANNEX 1
Page 1
ANNEX 1
RECYCLING FACILITIES
BANGLADESH
A B Shipbreaking Industries, Bhatiary, Sitakunda, Chittagong
Ahmed Mustaba Steel Industry, Madambibir Hat, Sitakunda, Chittagong
Ajmain Ispat Associated, Bhatiary, Sitakunda, Chittagong