Reconciling the Hong Kong Convention and the European push for regulation

16 September 2020 • 09:00-09:45 BST

Webinar Q&A summary:NP | Nikolas Panagakis, Nick Environmental Services PG | Peter Glover, Reed Smith Richards Butler

Ship Recycling Webinar Week

Part of

15-17 September 2020

Would ISRA members be expected to accept that applications for an environmental permit to be included in the EU list could take up to four years?

What are the exact requirements a facility needs to meet to gain approval? And how is this a level playing field for non-EU yards vs EU yards? Would EU

yards accept being treated in this legally uncertain manner? Are the criteria that legally clear?

NP | In all honesty, this is not about who is going to recycle the ship. This is about the ship recycling industry which has, if not the worst of all, at least one

of the worst public faces. The EU as pointed out during the webinar, has not excluded ship recycling facilities outside Europe by default. The impact to both

the environment and workers needs to change. To answer your questions, the requirements are clear since there have been ship recycling facilities which

have been included in the EU list. A non-EU yard will need to fulfill the same requirements as an EU yard. The uneven level playing field is imposed by

beaching and poor or absent Occupational Health and Safety. In essence, the EU is treating impartially all yards without legal uncertainty.

Ref ISRA Speaker statement on Irresponsible Practices being practiced in non- EU Yards: can you elaborate some more please? I don't quite understand

the reasons why beaching is not considered safe. Respectfully, are you aware of beaching practices and what the tidal variations are in yards, for

example, at Alang?

NP | I am not the ISRA speaker but as far as I am concerned, only a couple of videos on the Internet are enough to convince everyone on what is beaching

and how ship recycling has been taking place for decades. I am fully aware of beaching practices and once again, in my opinion, if one thinks that tidal

variations make a difference on Hazardous Materials and/or operational wastes entering the oceans and aquifers, then we are truly lost in translation.

How would you ensure the yards are keeping up their standard and adhere to standards after audit? Is the audit sufficient if they don't observe the

yards over time?

NP | The audit checks and approves a process. It is up to the yard to keep implementing the practices as engineered, planned, documented and certified.

The revocation of a certificate can always take place. Nevertheless, the very purpose of getting certified stipulates that the practices derived from the

certification standard are constantly implemented in real life. The certificate renewal process has been clearly indicated in the EU SRR where an

independent verifier shall perform a mid-term site inspection prior to certificate expiry. The validity of the certificate cannot exceed 5 years and renewal is

necessary for the ship recycling facility to remain included in the European List.

Under EU SRR, is beaching of a vessel restricted? How can a yard audit be conducted during a Covid-19 situation ?

NP | Yes, indeed impermeable floors with effective drainage systems are clearly needed according the EU SRR for safe and environmentally sound

management and storage of hazardous materials and waste, meaning beaching is restricted. A yard audit can be conducted with the same measures which

have been appropriately implemented since the outbreak of Covid-19.

Could you add the EU SRR website link on Page 9 of Peter's presentation to the chat box, so it can be copied and pasted, please?

PG | https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R1257

The EU SRR does not prohibit beaching. The points related to "operating from built structures' in EU SRR have been successfully closed (compliance

confirmed by EU auditors) by yards adopting beaching.

NP | I am neither an EU spokesperson nor an EU official. And indeed beaching is not prohibited by the EU SRR. I have to apologize once again but we are

lost in translation. Beaching in the ship recycling industry means ship dismantling on a beach with subsequent Hazardous Materials’ and operational wastes’

release to the environment along with dangerous and life-treatening working conditions for the people who carry out ship dismantling. If beaching

practices adhere to safe and environmentally sound management and storage of hazardous materials and waste generated during ship recycling, then

beaching is not prohibited. But beaching practices are not known for keeping to any of those standards.

PG | The SSR Article 13©, (f) and (h) all point away from beaching being permitted.

Peter: You touch on the Basel convention. The Basel is not designed for ship recycling. How should this be reworked to better suit the transport of ships

for recycling?

NP | I think it doesn’t need to. Bottom line, the Hong Kong Convention and the EU SRR have set the bar. The movement of the wastes between different

countries does make it indeed more cumbersome in terms of handling and paperwork, but the response of the IMO to the Basel Convention being

inappropriate for ships has been covered by the Hong Kong Convention, while the EU SRR and the European List allow for ship dismantling in more

countries.

PG | The overarching objective of the Basel Convention is to protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects of hazardous wastes. It

has long been recognised that the Basel Convention can be circumvented for ships proceeding for recycling (although accepting that a ship may be waste as

defined in Article 2 of the Convention. This is in part why the IMO was tasked with developing a new convention - which became the Hong Kong

Convention.

With Basel ban amendment coming into force, can EU-flagged ship go to the Indian subcontinent for recycling?

NP | I think we must not confuse things. An EU ship needs to be recycled in a yard which is mentioned in the European List. If no yard in the Indian

subcontinent is in the European List, then it cannot. The gap in the Basel Convention Ban Amendment has been initially covered by the Hong Kong

Convention and supplemented by the EU SRR.

PG | EU flagged ships can only be recycled under the terms of the SRR - which requires European ships to be recycled in facilities included in the European

List of ship recycling facilities, the 'European List’.

Shipping companies using the term sustainable in their policy should explicitly address this (also) to ship recycling. Can the panel provide their views?

NP | I strongly think this should be the case, but it should not only be the shipping company and owner that have a part in this. Ultimately, the shipyard, the

bank, the charterers, the shippers, the receivers, the crew, the suppliers, the management personnel and broadly speaking, each and every one of us, who

benefit in one way or another from the industry, need to carry their share of the burden. I may have purposefully put the owner in the spotlight during my

presentation, but this was not ill-meant. It is only because the owner is wrongfully the only one who has to deal with all the issues, ranging from reputation,

damage to the environment, safety of workers, crew and officers up to court arbitration on all or any of the above. The ships moving the world economy

need to be owned by someone. For us to continue reaping the benefits of global scale trade, we need to make sure the burden is both evenly and

proportionately distributed as well.

PG | Much will depend on what constitutes a 'shipping company'; what the breadth of the policy is and what the construction of the policy is.