LONDON CONVENTION AND PROTOCOL:INTRODUCTION, ACHIEVEMENTS, AND POINTS FOR

COMPARISON 

René CoenenHead, Office for the London Convention and Protocol (IMO)

IMO/HELCOM Regional Workshop for Promotion of the London Protocol and Helsinki Convention Tallinn, Estonia, 6 – 8 April 2011

OUTLINE OF THIS PRESENTATION:

• Introduction and “orientation”

• Achievements• Lessons learned• Current and future

issues• Membership

implications

INTRODUCTION

• The London Convention 1972 (LC) is one of the first global conventions to protect the marine environment from human activities and has been in force since 1975. 86 States are parties to it, including: Denmark, Finland, Germany, Poland, Russian Federation and Sweden.

• LC formed the basis for the 1974 Helsinki Convention, insofar as dumping is concerned.

• The London Protocol 1996 (LP), which will eventually replace LC, is in force since 24 March 2006. 40 States are parties to it (including Denmark, Germany and Sweden), 32 of which are also LC-parties.

WHAT IS DUMPING?

• DUMPING IS: – Deliberate disposal at sea of wastes

generated on land and using vessels, aircraft or offshore installations as the ‘platform’ for dumping.

– Deliberate disposal of obsolete vessels, aircraft and offshore installations

– Storage of wastes in the seabed and the subsoil thereof

– Abandonment or toppling at site of platforms

WHAT IS NOT DUMPING?

• DUMPING IS NOT:– Pipeline discharges from land– Operational discharges from vessels or

offshore installations– ‘Placement’ of matter, provided it is not

contrary to the LP aims (Similar to the definition in HC Article 2)

“ORIENTATION”

• The objective of LP is to:– …..protect and preserve the marine environment from

ALL SOURCES of pollution, and – take effective measures,…….. to prevent, reduce and

where practicable eliminate pollution caused by dumping or incineration at sea of wastes.

• So LP governs dumping activities world-wide, but always from the perspective of protection from all sources of pollution.

“ORIENTATION”All dumping is prohibited except for possibly acceptable wastes in LP annex 1:  

– DREDGED MATERIAL (Is only exception under HC Art.11) – sewage sludge – fish wastes, or material resulting from industrial fish processing operations– vessels and platforms or other man-made structures at sea – inert, inorganic geological material (e.g., mining wastes)– organic material of natural origin – bulky items primarily comprising iron, steel and concrete for which the concern is

physical impact (conditions apply)– CO2 capture and storage in sub-seabed geological formations (since 2006)

“ORIENTATION”• 6 of these 8 waste

streams are generated on land

• Sediments are dredged from harbours and estuaries, but its quality as a potential resource is often determined by up stream sources: Hence the need for watershed (catchment areas) management

LONDON PROTOCOL BASIC RULES (1)

• Protection of the sea and the sea-bed (“Sea” means all marine waters other than internal waters of States….)

• Internal waters are excluded, unless a party “opts-in” (Art. 7.2) (HC Art.1 includes internal waters)

• No incineration at sea (Art. 5) (HC Art.10)• No export of wastes to other countries for dumping or incineration

(Art.6) Amended in 2009 for transboundary CCS (HC Art. 3.6)• Designation of a national authority to implement the Protocol• Dumping allowed only on the basis of a permit • Reporting (Art. 9) and compliance (Art. 11) enhanced• Technical co-operation (Art.13)

LONDON PROTOCOL BASIC RULES (2)

Dumping provisions applicable to and to be enforced on:

1. Vessels and aircraft registered in a party’s territory or flying its flag (Flag state responsibility)

2. Vessels and aircraft loading in the party’s territory wastes to be dumped (Port state responsibility)

3. Vessels, aircraft and platforms believed to be engaged in dumping in waters under its jurisdiction…..(Art. 10) (Coastal State responsibility)

(Very similar to HC Art. 11)

Question: Which rules apply for dumping by a vessel flying the flag of a Baltic Sea State when dumping is planned outside the Baltic Sea?

LONDON PROTOCOL BASIC RULES (3)

• Precautionary approach (Art. 3.1):– “…..Parties shall apply a precautionary approach to

environmental protection from dumping whereby appropriate preventative measures are taken when there is reason to believe that waste etc. introduced in the marine environment are likely to cause harm even when there is no conclusive evidence to prove a causal relation between inputs and their effects” (HC Art. 3.2)

• Meaning for dredged materials:– Sometimes more restrictions to dumping– Strong emphasis on control of contaminants at source

LONDON PROTOCOL BASIC RULES (4)

• Reference to "polluter-pays principle“ (Art.3.2)– "….Parties shall endeavour to promote practices whereby

those it has authorized to engage in dumping or incineration at sea bear the cost of meeting the pollution prevention and control requirements for the authorized activities, having due regard to the public interest.” (HC Art. 3.4)

• Meaning for dredged materials:– Incentive for proper allocation of environmental costs– In practice: costs of monitoring can be charged to the applicant– Also recognition that contamination of sediments is often caused

elsewhere

LONDON PROTOCOL BASIC RULES (5)

• No “transfer of damage” (Art.3.3)– "….Parties shall act so as not to transfer, directly or

indirectly, damage or likelihood of damage from one part of the environment to another (air, or soil) or transform one type of pollution into another.”

• Interpretation: – Incentive to strive for the best overall

environmental solution to specific problems

LONDON PROTOCOL STRUCTURE

• The “Reverse list” replaced the “Black and Grey list” concept of LC (before the 1993 Amendments) which also applied to the 1974 Helsinki Convention.

• Tier 1: Dumping is prohibited (Art. 4.1.1)• Tier 2: Exceptions (LP annex 1) and Waste Assessment

Framework (LP annex 2)• Tier 3: Generic Waste Assessment Guidelines• Tier 4: Specific Waste Assessment Guidelines

TRENDS IN DUMPING

• Annually 250 to 500 million tonnes of dredged material are dumped in Convention waters world-wide, 10% of which is contaminated from shipping, industrial and municipal discharges, land run-off

• Dredged material constitutes ~ 80 to 90% of all materials reported to IMO as dumped

• Other materials dumped include: – sewage sludge (RoK is last to stop in 2011)– decommissioned vessels– organic materials, e.g. food and beverage processing wastes,

spoilt cargoes– fish wastes– mining wastes

ACHIEVEMENTS (1)

• Parties stopped unregulated dumping and incineration activities of the 1960s and 1970s (1st phase)

• All dumping is subject to licensing and controlled by regulatory programmes to assess the need for and potential impact of dumping

• Prohibitions extended since mid-1990s for dumping of industrial and radioactive wastes and incineration at sea (2nd phase)

In other words, the “core business” under LC and LP is under control and the main politically sensitive issues of the past have been resolved.

ACHIEVEMENTS (2)

9 specific guidelines have been developed for a logical, step-by-step assessment of each waste category, all addressing:

– waste prevention audit– assessment of alternatives– waste characterization– “Action List” – assessment of potential effects of sea and land

disposal options– disposal site selection– monitoring and licensing procedures

ACHIEVEMENTS (3)

– Guidelines draw on generally accepted approaches for integrated waste management and pollution prevention and are therefore also useful for other fora!!

– Guidelines for the Sampling and Analysis of Dredged Material Intended for Disposal at Sea (2004)

– Advice on Best Management Practices to remove TBT Paints from ships (2008 Prohibition of TBT antifoulants under AFS Convention) (LP>> IMO and GPA)

– Guidelines for placement of artificial reefs (2008)

ACHIEVEMENTS (4)

– Training materials are being expanded and adapted (including for “low-tech” application)

– Guidance how to develop “Action lists/levels” for dredged material assessment (2008)

– Risk Assessment and Management Frameworks developed for CO2 capture and storage (2006) and for ocean fertilization research (2010)

LESSONS LEARNED (1)

• Parties have, together, a wealth of practical experience on marine pollution prevention issues, interpretation, licensing, compliance and field monitoring activities.

• “Full compliance” remains a substantial problem for many Parties, due to technical, legal and administrative issues. Improvement of compliance is on the agenda since 1999.

• The LP “Compliance Group” to promote and advise on compliance meets annually since 2008.

• The “Barriers to Compliance” project is currently being

implemented (2008-2012).

LESSONS LEARNED (2)

• Continuous outreach activities to new Parties are a necessity, such as this Workshop.

• Not all Parties and potential Parties can afford coming to meetings in London. Hence the promotion of LP since 1996 in Regional and National Workshops.

• Collaborative agreements with other organizations (UNEP, IOI, etc.) have helped to move from “ad hoc” to more programmatic co-operation.

CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES (1)

• Core issues under control, so more attention for new, “boundary” issues which, invariably, demand co-operation with other fora:

– Spoilt cargo management 2008 - 2011 (LP>>IMO)

– Review of 2006 Guidelines implementing LP amendments permitting CO2 capture and storage and 2009 amendments (LP>>UNFCCC)

– Regulation of ocean fertilization research (2008–2011?)(LP>>IOC, CBD)

CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES (2)

– IMO Ship-recycling convention (2009): Implications for LP? (IMO>>LP)

– Collection of Best Management Practices on (1) sub-sea disposal of mining wastes, (2) destruction of marine habitats and (3) marine litter, aimed at development of general guidance (LP + UNEP)

– Implementation of Monitoring and Assessment project to assess and improve (reporting of) field monitoring by Parties

OCEAN FERTILIZATION: ACTIVITIES UNDER LC/LP (1)

• What is it?: OF is aimed at deliberately increasing planktonic production in the open ocean, e.g., by adding nutrients, and so stimulate ocean uptake of part of the surplus of CO2 in the atmosphere

• Concerns: (1) effectiveness of the method, does it work? (2) potential impacts on the marine environment and human health

• Action in 2007: Parties issued “Statement of Concern” for environmental and public health reasons and agreed working towards regulation

OCEAN FERTILIZATION: ACTIVITIES UNDER LC/LP (2)

• Action in 2008: Parties acted on 2007 concerns by adopting a “policy” resolution allowing only “legitimate scientific research” (no commercial activities!)

• Action in 2010: Adoption of Assessment Framework guiding Parties how to assess OF research proposals they receive

• Action in 2009 - 2011: Work continues towards a legally binding resolution and/or amendment of LP to regulate this activity

POTENTIAL BENEFITS FOR HELCOM PARTIES TO JOIN THE PROTOCOL

• LP annex 2 gives a, legally binding, step-wise waste assessment procedure, whereas HC Annex V, regulation 3, only lists comparable factors, without showing how these fit together

• A better capability to prevent marine pollution from dumping activities, world-wide: LP governs dumping activities of BS flagged vessels outside the Baltic Sea

• Access to the regulatory and standard-setting process for dumping world-wide (Think of CCS and Ocean Fertilization)

• Standing ‘Compliance Group’ is ready to assess, promote and advise on LP Compliance

POTENTIAL COSTS FOR HELCOM PARTIES WHEN JOINING THE PROTOCOL

There are no LP membership fees. The potential costs vary and depend on the dumping activities but funding would be required for:

– Preparing enabling national legislation

– Administering a licensing system and procedures

– Conducting field and compliance monitoring activities and preparing reports thereon

– Attending annual meetings of the Parties and the Scientific Groups

• The first 3 points are in place through HC Annex V

WHO TO CONTACT?

I M O Office for the London Convention and Protocol4 Albert EmbankmentLondon SE1 7SRUnited KingdomTel: +44(0)20-7735-7611Fax:+44(0)20-7587-3210rcoenen@imo.org ekleverlaan@imo.orghttp://www.londonconvention.org