U.S. Government Ends the Sinking of Old Ships as Artificial Reefs→

The U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) has adopted a new policy that effectively terminates the federal artificial reefing program that allowed the scuttling of old ships for so-called “artificial reefs” – a practice that dates back to the Liberty Ship Act of1972. Since the program’s inception, approximately 45 ships have been disposed of at sea, along with untold tons of toxic substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and heavy metals built into each vessel, as well as many millions of dollars worth of steel and non-ferrous metal resources. U.S. based environmental organization Basel Action Network (BAN), which has actively campaigned against the government-sponsored ocean dumping program, hails this news as a victory for U.S. jobs in the domestic ship recycling industry and a win for the environment. “The Obama Administration got this one right, and they should be commended for finally putting into place a more conservative policy that protects our resources, our jobs, as well as the marine environment,” said Colby Self of the Basel Action Network.

MARAD’s new policy has not been announced publicly but became effective on 29 May 2012, according to Curt Michanczyk, Director of the Office of Ship Disposal of the Maritime Administration. MARAD’s new policy excludes from artificial reefing consideration of any vessel that was built before 1985 (and likely to contain PCBs). PCBs are a persistent toxic chemical family that is described by the U.S. EPA as potentially carcinogenic to humans and builds-up in the marine food chain. They are banned from use and production under the U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act.

Currently, all 38 so called “non-retention” ships that are designated for disposal in MARAD’s National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF), mostly made up of ex-naval vessels, were built before 1985 and will thus all go to domestic recyclers. Of all the 125 vessels owned by MARAD in the NDRF, all of which will be designated “non-retention” at some point in the future, only one of these vessels was built after 1985. This is the only vessel that could be considered for artificial reefing when it is designated for disposal, but only if it is not viable for recycling within two years after disposal designation.

There is little doubt that the post-sinking monitoring study of the sunken Ex-Oriskany aircraft carrier in Florida played an important role in the development of MARAD’s new policy. This study, conducted by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, was not publicly available until BAN highlighted its findings in their July 2011 report entitled Dishonorable Disposal: The Case Against Dumping U.S. Naval Vessels at Sea. The study found PCB migration into the marine food chain from the sunken aircraft carrier Ex-Oriskany and for the first time called into question the practice of sinking ships containing toxic bioaccumulative substances.

The U.S. Navy’s artificial reefing policy also appears to be heading in a similar direction as MARAD’s, as evidenced by the Navy’s sudden decision last year to recycle the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal and three other carriers, rather than scuttle them. This decision came in 2011 following a shorter BAN report and submission to the Navy, entitled Jobs and Dollars Overboard: The Economic Case Against Dumping U.S. Naval Vessels at Sea, highlighting the favorable economics of recycling. The Navy later informed BAN that the decision to recycle these vessels was made on economic grounds due to the price of scrap commodities.

BAN applauds the government for rejecting the “dump first” MARAD policy in favor of recycling but is now seeking a similar stance with respect to the Navy’s SINKEX (sinking exercise) program. SINKEX sinks non-retention vessels during live-fire target practice without complete removal of toxic pollutants, including PCBs. Sinking preparation for SINKEX is much less stringent than required of artificial reef preparation, as the EPA exempted the Navy and SINKEX from environmental regulations that would otherwise require removal of regulated concentrations of PCBs. Since this exemption in 1999, the Navy has sunk 117 vessels, the most recent of which included three sinkings near Hawaii in July 2012.

Approximately $20.5 million in fully recoverable scrap steel, aluminum and copper and hundreds of recycling jobs were lost with the scuttling of these three vessels. A fourth vessel is planned for sinking in 2012 via SINKEX in the coming months. BAN has joined with the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity in a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for continuing to allow the SINKEX program to sink toxic vessels at sea.

BAN Denies Defamation Allegations -- Launches Countersuit Against Intercon Solutions→

The Basel Action Network (BAN), represented by its legal team consisting of the firms, John Phillips Law Group, PLLC (Seattle) and Winston and Strawn (Chicago) have responded to Chicago Heights company Intercon Solutions' recent lawsuit that alleged “defamation” and “false light” against BAN and its Executive Director, Jim Puckett. BAN denied the allegations and filed a counterclaim against Intercon Solutions asking for “declaratory relief” to restore BAN's full credibility and to recognize that BAN has told the truth in the matter regarding the export of electronic waste to China by Intercon Solutions. Two weeks ago, BAN removed the case from Illinois State Court to Federal Court in Chicago. “BAN intends to vigorously defend itself and its most valuable asset – its credibility,” said BAN's legal counsel John Phillips. “BAN is not going to be intimidated by this lawsuit or prevented from pursuing the public interest through objective investigation and reporting of the exportation of hazardous waste to the developing world. We will not rest until the truth in this case is known to all concerned.”

The Intercon lawsuit followed by almost one year, BAN's refusal to grant a license to Intercon Solutions to be certified under its e-Stewards Certification program for responsible electronics recyclers ( www.e-stewards.org). BAN refused Intercon the license because it obtained clear documentation that containers on Intercon's premises were shipped to China and Hong Kong -- a clear violation of the e-Stewards Standard. In accordance with the e-Stewards program's policy, Intercon was investigated and subsequently suspended from the possibility of becoming certified for at least 2 years. In this case, BAN photographed intermodal containers leaving the highly-secured property of Intercon Solutions and tracked them to China. One of the containers was opened by Hong Kong authorities at the bequest of BAN. The Hong Kong authorities then notified BAN and US EPA that the container in question did indeed contain hazardous electronic waste and was illegal to import into Hong Kong. BAN subsequently made public what it had discovered and the reasons for suspending Intercon Solutions.

In 2008-2009, BAN with CBS's 60 Minutes program, exposed another electronics recycling firm, Executive Recycling of Denver, Colorado, by photographing their containers and following them with the journalists to Hong Kong. BAN also notified federal authorities.  Executive Recycling executives are currently under indictment for 16 criminal counts for illegal export and fraud. BAN will be witnesses for the government prosecution in that case.

The Basel Action Network ( www.ban.org) is named after the Basel Convention, a United Nations treaty designed to halt the exploitation caused by the export and dumping of toxic wastes of all kinds on developing countries. BAN is a non-profit organization which seeks to implement the Basel Convention and to prevent toxic trade and global environmental injustice.

Mexico Defies United Nations Convention→

Two tankers owned and operated by Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), Mexico’s state-owned oil company, were recently sold for breaking on the notorious shipbreaking beaches in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The arrival of these obsolete vessels, the Sebastian and the De Marz, in South Asia without notice and without first being pre-cleaned of the tons of hazardous materials built into each ship is a clear violation of the UN Basel Convention and Mexican law. The Mexican government had just last year promised Basel Convention watchdog group the Basel Action Network (BAN) that such exports of Mexican ships were illegal and would not be allowed. BAN is now calling on the newly elected Mexican Government to take immediate corrective action by repatriating the two vessels to Mexico. "Mexico has violated its own laws and international law. In accordance with Mexico’s obligations under the Basel Convention, these toxic ships must be repatriated immediately,” said Colby Self of the Basel Action Network. “The governments of Bangladesh and Pakistan must be told to return the ships and under no circumstances allow them to be scrapped on their beaches.”

BAN, a member organization of the global NGO Shipbreaking Platform, initiated contact with the Mexian Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) in a letter(1) in October 2010, alerting officials of PEMEX’s plan to sell a number of obsolete tankers to foreign interests for scrap. At that time, the government replied, stating that they had intervened to block the sale of three PEMEX tankers and imposed restrictions on PEMEX’s future sales to prevent the illegal export of the vessels.

Over the next 18 months, BAN monitored what appeared to be continuous efforts by PEMEX to circumvent the law, and on April 6 informed the Mexican Government that PEMEX was again trying to sell the vessels under the claim that the vessels would be sold for continued use rather than disposal, an apparent attempt to bypass the Basel Convention rules on disposal of hazardous waste. BAN informed SEMARNAT that these vessels were already banned under MARPOL from operating as tankers due to their single-hull configurations and age, and therefore any claim of continued use was likely false. Nevertheless Mexican officials disregarded BAN’s warning and allowed the vessels to depart for alleged re-use, only to sail directly to Pakistan and Bangladesh for scrapping last month.

In an April 30, 2012 letter(2) from the office of Mexico’s representative to the Basel Convention, BAN was told that if these vessels attempted to enter foreign shipbreaking yards, Mexico would view such maneuvers as “illegal traffic” under Article 9 of the Basel Convention as Mexico did not authorize scrapping at foreign yards in non-OECD countries. It is now confirmed that this illegal traffic actually did occur. The Mexican government has not responded to BAN’s inquiries as to why its promised enforcement of its own laws as well as international law did not take place.

The ships are suspected of containing high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos and other hazardous wastes. Mexico has implemented the Basel Ban Amendment into domestic law, which means the export of hazardous wastes is only allowed to OECD countries, EU countries and Liechtenstein. Pakistan and Bangladesh are non-OECD countries, and therefore these nations and others cannot legally receive these vessels as waste from Mexico unless the ships are first fully decontaminated. Alternatively, the ships could have been recycled safely in a proper facility in Mexico, the U.S. or another OECD or EU country.

Shipbreaking in Pakistan and Bangladesh takes place under extremely dangerous and polluting conditions where workers labor on tidal sands to cut ships up by hand, exposing themselves to the risks of toxic chemicals, fires, explosions and falling steel plates. Pollutants are allowed to flow unimpeded into the marine environment.

Last year, two former PEMEX tankers were recycled at Mexican yards following the Government’s proper intervention following a BAN warning which created hundreds of local recycling jobs in Mexico.

“Why the sudden change of policy? We hope it does not reflect a cynical calculation that money is more important than worrying about damaging the global environment, exploiting impoverished Asian laborers, or providing good jobs by doing the scrapping job safely and cleanly at home,” said Self.

Navy’s ‘Great Green Fleet’ Sets Out To Pollute The Seas→

The U.S. Navy’s ‘Great Green Fleet,’ joined by twenty-two friendly nations, will fire-on and sink three inactive U.S. naval warships this summer off the coast of Hawaii during the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) war games. The ships are contaminated with toxic heavy metals and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) based on documentation of known contaminants found in more than 100 ships previously sunk by the Navy over the past twelve years. According to environmental groups, sinking – instead of recycling – these ships will send toxic chemicals into the marine environment and needlessly deprive the U.S. ship recycling industry of both resources and jobs. The deliberate sinking of the vessels is part of a target practice ship disposal exercise known as SINKEX (sinking exercise). This year’s operation will be the first such ocean dumping of old ships since the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) placed a moratorium on SINKEX in 2011, and the first since Sierra Club and the Basel Action Network (BAN), represented by Earthjustice, filed a formal complaint against the U.S. EPA for continuing to allow the ocean dumping of toxins on SINKEX vessels.

“The hypocrisy of the Navy’s new ecological ‘Great Green Fleet’ demonstrating its “greenness” by sinking ships containing globally banned pollutants off the coast of Hawaii is particularly ironic,” said Colby Self of BAN’s Green Ship Recycling Campaign. “But the realization that this choice by the Navy to dump poisons into the marine environment is not only unnecessary, but also is costing Americans hundreds of green recycling jobs, makes this SINKEX program both an environmental and an economic insult.”

The vessels Kilauea, Niagara Falls and Concord are slated for sinking at RIMPAC, while a fourth vessel, the Coronado is slated for sinking as part of the SINKEX at operation Valiant Shield 2012, scheduled for the Pacific later this year. The SINKEX program allows the Navy to fire on inactive naval warships to practice gunnery and torpedo accuracy. Proponents say sinking live targets is essential for fleet readiness, while many military experts suggest that firing on idle ships is not representative of live combat scenarios and there are viable training alternatives with less environmental consequence, such as using simulations or clean inflatable targets.

Proponents also cite the economic boost when 25,000 military personnel from around the world arrive in Hawaii. However this boost comes irrespective of the SINKEX exercise as it is only a minor part of the larger RIMPAC training syllabus which lasts the entire month of July.

Together, the sinking of these four vessels would needlessly waste valuable resources by sending approximately 38,000 tons of fully recyclable steel, aluminum, copper and lead to the ocean floor, valued at approximately $27.6 million in today's scrap market. Lost too with the sinking of these vessels would be hundreds of U.S. ship recycling jobs.

In April 2012, the Center for Biological Diversity joined Sierra Club and BAN’s effort to redirect the Navy toward a more positive environmental and economic approach by petitioning the EPA to rescind an exemption from environmental laws it has granted the Navy for the SINKEX program. The petition asserts that continued SINKEX operations violate U.S. and international ocean dumping regulations including the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; London Convention; London Protocol; Stockholm Convention; Basel Convention; and various OECD agreements.

“PCBs have been banned globally because they’re some of the most dangerous pollutants around,” said Emily Jeffers of the Center for Biological Diversity. “They leach from sunken ships into the ocean and bioaccumulate in the bodies of fish, dolphins, and whales. Our oceans should never be used as a dump for poison.”

The EPA and Navy admit that highly toxic chemicals are released into the marine environment as a result of SINKEX, including asbestos, lead paint, antifouling paint containing tributyltin (TBT), polybrominated diphenyl esters (PBDEs) and PCBs, a suspected carcinogen that has been targeted for global phase out and destruction under the Stockholm Convention. However, the EPA and Navy seem unwilling to consider the new scientific findings presented by the coalition that show the amount of PCBs and other pollutants from the scuttled ships is far greater than EPA believed when it exempted SINKEX from ocean dumping laws. Instead the EPA asked a Federal Judge to dismiss the complaint on procedural grounds – a request that was denied last week.

“The sinking of these vessels directly contradicts President Obama’s directives calling on federal agencies to lead by example in recycling and ocean stewardship. The pristine waters north of the island of Kauai have already become a graveyard for more than a dozen ships containing untold tons of pollutants. These sinkings must stop! This is not ocean stewardship, nor is it the action of a “Great Green Fleet,” said Robert Harris of the Sierra Club in Hawaii.

The sinking of the ships runs counter to President Barack Obama’s executive order, “Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts and the Great Lakes,” which established a national policy to ensure the protection of the health of our ocean. It also turns on its head another executive order, “Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance,” which included a call for all Federal agencies to prioritize recycling as policy.

The Sierra Club and Basel Action Network have filed their complaint in federal district court in San Francisco against the EPA asserting that continued SINKEX operations violate the U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act. They are represented in this action by Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm. While the EPA has permitted SINKEX and provided exemptions to various U.S. laws, the groups argue that those exemptions, granted in 1998, are based on out-dated scientific research and should be rescinded.

e-Stewards® Certification Will Now Include R2 Practices→

The Basel Action Network (BAN), the owner of the e-Stewards® Certification for electronics recyclers, announced today that it has included the R2 (Responsible Recycling) Practices, developed earlier by an Environmental Protection Agency sponsored multi-stakeholder process, into the more comprehensive e-Stewards Standard. Already, e-Stewards certifications require adherence to and deliver the ISO 14001 Environmental Management System certification. Effective immediately, the same will now be true for R2. "Almost all of the requirements of R2 are already in the e-Stewards Standard but the reverse is certainly not true," said Jim Puckett, BAN’s Executive Director. "By itself, R2 is inadequate to the task of ensuring a high degree of responsible recycling, but we have seen that many recyclers are getting both R2 and e-Stewards Certifications due to market demands. To make things very cost effective for recyclers, we will now ensure that R2 certification is provided as long as the more rigorous e-Stewards Standard requirements are met at the same time."

BAN created the e-Stewards Standard after the R2 Standard failed to prohibit exports of hazardous electronic waste to developing countries, prohibit the use of prison labor for managing hazardous waste and sensitive data, or prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in municipal landfills. R2 Practices is an 11-page, non-copyrighted, open-source standard. The current e-Stewards Standard is a 51-page copyrighted standard which includes the ISO 14001 Environmental Management System Standard and is available under license with the Basel Action Network.

According to BAN, there are only a few requirements in R2 that are not addressed equivalently or in a more rigorous manner in the current version of the e-Stewards Standard. Now, by virtue of the latest e-Stewards Sanctioned Interpretation, all R2 requirements are now also requirements of the new e-Stewards Standard and all e-Stewards Certifying Bodies will audit to both standards. All three e-Stewards Certifying Bodies are already accredited for R2 and already report negligible additional cost for adding R2 to the e-Stewards Certification audits when conducted at the same time.

"We are very happy to accommodate the marketplace in this way as long as the end result is more globally responsible e-cyclers," said Puckett. "With this move we can make it easier and more economical for recyclers to meet their clients' certification demands, while making the world a safer and more healthy place."

Read R2 Integration Questions and Answers

San Francisco Joins Global Effort to Tackle Electronic Waste→

The Basel Action Network ( BAN ) announced today that the City and County of San Francisco have achieved the status of "e-Stewards Enterprise." The designation recognizes cities, counties and companies that take concrete measures to eliminate the export of hazardous electronic waste (e-waste) to developing countries by using Certified e-Stewards® Recyclers to manage their electronic waste. "Leaders lead, and the City and County of San Francisco have demonstrated that the status quo where the majority of electronic waste is routinely dumped in developing countries or our local landfills is just not acceptable anymore," said Jim Puckett, Executive Director of BAN. "To shrink our toxic footprint and our carbon footprint, to ensure our children’s future, we are going to need more leaders in all public and private institutions to make the kind of bold move that San Francisco just made."

San Francisco joins the e-Stewards Enterprise program current members including Wells Fargo, Nestle, Bloomberg News, Capital One, Samsung, Bank of America, Alcoa Aluminum and LG. They also join King County, the seat of Seattle and Bellevue in Washington State, Santa Clara County and the City of San Jose, home to Silicon Valley.

"The technology tools we use in our everyday lives too often end up in the environment as a major source of toxic pollution. Our city's primary focus when it comes to electronics is on reuse," says Melanie Nutter, Director of San Francisco’s Department of Environment. "But when we do need to recycle, we are committed to doing it responsibly."

E-waste is the world’s fastest growing pollution problem. According to Time Magazine, Americans throw out more than 350,000 cell phones and 130,000 computers every day. Approximately 80% of electronic waste currently delivered to recyclers is actually exported to developing countries. Improperly disposed of, the lead, mercury and other toxic materials inside e-waste poisons workers and pollute communities.

The non-profit BAN created the world's most rigorous standard for electronics recycling, called the "e-Stewards Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment." The e-Stewards Standard protects against e-waste dumping in landfills, processing by prisoners, and the export of hazardous e-waste to developing countries. It also ensures worker protection and strict rules for the security of private data stored in electronics. It is the only e-waste standard to include all these protections. More than 70 environmental groups worldwide have endorsed the e-Stewards Standard.

As an e-Stewards Enterprise, San Francisco commits to using, wherever possible, recyclers that are annually audited and certified to the e-Stewards Standard. The complete list of e-Stewards Enterprises and recyclers certified to the e-Stewards Standard is available at www.e-stewards.org.

Exxon Mobil Scraps U.S. Jobs and the Environment by Sending Its Old Tankers To Asia→

On January 31, Texas-based Exxon Mobil and its wholly owned subsidiary SeaRiver Maritime sold the S/R Long Beach, a 1987 U.S. built single-hulled tanker (sister ship to the notorious Exxon Valdez) to a Chinese shipbreaking facility. Exxon's move to dismantle the Long Beach in Asia is at odds with their December 2011 decision to recycle another tanker, the S/R Wilmington, in Brownsville, Texas. That earlier decision was applauded by domestic industry and environmental organizations alike for creating green recycling jobs in the U.S. while also remaining consistent with the decisions of the United Nation's Basel Convention, which prohibits the export of toxic wastes from developed to developing countries. Old tankers contain many toxic materials and are usually deemed as hazardous waste under international law. Exxon's most recent waste export move, however, has been criticized by global toxic trade watchdog organization Basel Action Network (BAN).

"Sadly, Exxon Mobil has reverted to outsourcing toxic waste and good recycling jobs to China simply to save a buck. We urge the company to reaffirm its commitment to only send their obsolete fleet to safe and environmentally responsible ship recycling facilities in developed countries, in country if possible. Here in the US, we have safe, effective, affordable recycling facilities that deserve the work. It would also create hundreds of US jobs," said Colby Self, Green Ship Recycling Campaign Director for the Basel Action Network.

While labor and environmental conditions in China have improved compared to others such as the infamous shipbreaking beaches of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, China still lacks the environmental and labor protections and downstream waste management capacity that exist in developed countries like the U.S.

"Exxon needs to affirm a policy of recycling toxic ships in developed countries, and we stand ready to assist them in finding green recycling yards in the North America and Europe," said Colby Self.

BAN is part of the global NGO Shipbreaking Platform which seeks global compliance with the Basel Convention, seeks to end destructive beach shipbreaking practices, and seeks to promote responsible green ship recycling.

113 Containers of Toxic Waste Arrives at Indonesian Port→

On the heels of massive quantities of toxic wastes arriving at the Jakarta Tanjung Priok Port last week, environmental groups led by Indonesia Toxics-Free Network, the Basel Action Network, Ban Toxics, and BaliFokus condemned the illegal trade and urged world governments that have not already done so to ratify the Basel Ban Amendment and to enforce the Basel Convention as a matter of urgency. Officials at the Jakarta port were able to intercept and seize the illegal shipments which originated from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Customs officials from the two countries have already begun investigating the companies and the individuals involved in the case may yet be prosecuted. However for every shipment caught it is feared many more go unnoticed.

"We were lucky to have caught this one shipment, which begs the bigger question, how many shipments are getting through under the noses of our port officials?" asked Yuyun Ismawati, founder of the Indonesia Toxics-Free Network. "In Indonesia we have regulations on illegal toxic waste traffic based on the Basel Convention, but there needs to be better national enforcement and international cooperation to implement the law."

The environmental groups also call on all governments that have not already done so to ratify the Basel Ban Amendment. Last October 2011, the Basel Convention on the Control of the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal passed a critical decision to ensure that only 17 more ratifications are needed to allow the Basel Ban Amendment to enter into force. The Basel Ban Amendment prohibits and makes it a crime to export toxic wastes from developed to developing countries for any reason whatsoever.

"The Basel Ban places the responsibility of policing this crime not only on the importing country, such as Indonesia, but more importantly on the developed nations as well," explains Jim Puckett, Executive Director of the Basel Action Network. "The UK and Dutch port authorities missed this shipment, and thus it is clear that there needs to be greater responsibility on the shoulders of exporting countries to police unscrupulous actors that avoid costs of proper waste management by exporting toxic waste."

Increasing toxic waste generation in developed countries, increasing costs of managing pollutants, combined with high poverty and lax implementation of environmental laws drive toxic wastes from rich to poorer countries.

The generation of electronic waste or e-waste, included in this illegal shipment, amounts to about 50 million metric tons generated annually, and is increasing rapidly. Unfortunately e-waste is toxic waste containing such toxins as lead and cadmium, and thus disposal is creating major risks for public health and environment in importing countries.

"We are reaching the tipping point of the poisons that society is spewing out, and the ports and customs are the frontiers of that fight," said Richard Gutierrez, Executive Director of Ban Toxics in the Philippines. "Governments can not handle this problem single-handedly. There has to be better coordination and implementation of international and national laws. If not, developing countries like Indonesia will become the dumping grounds for the world’s toxic wastes."

NGO Releases 2011 List Of Top EU Companies Sending Toxic Ships To South Asia→

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform, a coalition of human rights, labour rights and environmental organisations working on the shipbreaking issue, has released its third yearly list of European companies that have sent end-of-life ships to the infamous scrap beaches of South Asia. The European Waste Shipment Regulation – which incorporates international law such as the 1989 Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes – prohibits European Union Member States from exporting hazardous wastes, including those present in the structure of ships to developing countries. Still, the vast majority of European shipping companies continue to avoid the costs of proper disposal by selling their ships to South Asian breaking yards known for the lack of enforcement of environmental and labour laws, exposing some of the poorest communities to extremely dangerous working conditions and severe pollution. The top 10 European “global dumpers” in 2011 are[1]:

1. Greece(100 ships)
2. Norway(24 ships)
3. UK(13 ships)
4. TheNetherlands(12  ships)
5. Germany(11 ships)
6. Italy(9 ships)
7. Cyprus,Switzerland(5 ships each )
8. Bulgaria,Denmark,Romania(4 ships each)
9. Latvia,Lithuania,Poland,Spain,Sweden(3 ships each)
10. Belgium,Finland,Ireland,Slovenia(1 ship each)

Once more, the listing of European dumpers also highlights the problem of “flags of convenience” (FOC). Unscrupulous ship-owners have long used FOCs to evade tax rules, licence regulations, safety standards and social requirements for the treatment of crew. Backed by shell companies, joint-ventures and hidden owners, FOCs are also considerable constraints to combating illegal toxic waste dumping as they make it extremely difficult to locate and penalise the real owners of vessels. In 2011, the top five flags used by European companies were so-called “flags of convenience” as listed by the International Transport Workers Federation, and accounted for 64% of the total (almost two thirds) of flags. These are:

1. Panama(55 times)
2. Liberia(33 times)
3. Bahamas, St Kitts-Nevis (12 times each)
4. Comoros(11 times)
5. Marshall Islands, St Vincent & Grenadines (7 times each)

Pollution and deaths caused by obsolete European ships

Each year, approximately 800 ocean ships reach the end of their service life and are broken down to recover steel.  Yet only a fraction is handled in a safe, sustainable manner.  About 80% of all end-of-life ships are simply run ashore on tidal beaches in developing countries such as Bangladesh, India  and Pakistan, where unscrupulous shipbreaking companies exploit minimal enforcement of environmental and safety rules to maximize profits.

On the beaches ofSouth Asia, poor and unskilled migrant workers are deployed by the thousands to break down the ships manually, which are often full of toxics such as asbestos, lead, PCBs and heavy metals.  Little care is given to worker safety or protection of the environment.  The toxics sicken the workers and ravage coastal ecosystems.  The muddy sand and shifting grounds of tidal beaches cannot support heavy lifting equipment or safety gear, therefore accidents maim or kill hundreds of workers each year.

The statistics are alarming. The European Commission estimates that 40,000 to 1.3 million tonnes toxics (including 3,000 tonnes of asbestos) on board end-of-life vessels are exported each year to South Asia from the EU alone[2]. In Bangladesh, children under 15 years of age count for 20% of the workforce[3].  There and elsewhere, the total death toll runs into the thousands[4]. Also, miles of protected mangrove trees, essential to ecosystem health and protection from monsoons, are being cut to make way for ships.  This and the accompanying poisons from shipbreaking have killed or devastated dozens of aquatic species, destroying also the livelihoods of surrounding fishing communities.

The European Commission needs to take action

In March 2012, the European Commission is expected to release proposals for better enforcement of laws related to shipbreaking. Since the Commission first announced in 2006 that it would be working on this issue, publishing also a “Strategy for better ship dismantling” in 2008, no improvement has been made to the current state of play.

The NGO Shipbreaking Platform and its coalition members, including organisations based in the largest shipbreaking countries (India, Bangladesh and Pakistan), will continue to actively advocate for a European policy that gives promise of effectively reversing the current trend where end-of-life ships constitute one of the largest streams of toxic waste dumped by European companies in developing countries. More than 100 non-governmental organisations around the world; the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Toxics; and the European Parliament have voiced their support to the Platform’s human rights and environmental objectives to end the dangerous and polluting practice of breaking ships on tidal beaches.

Forceful and sustained action at the European level is especially urgent because the global phase-out of single hulled oil tankers and the current backlog of old vessels still in operation mean that the number of retired ships that are sent for breaking is reaching an all-time high. The NGO Shipbreaking Platform’s 2011 list shows more than 200 European ships were sent for breaking on the beaches of South Asia last year.

[1] Six ships were sent by non-EU based companies that used European flags (twice theCyprus flag and twice the Greek flag; once the British flag and once the Maltese flag).

[2] European Commission: Impact Assessment for an EU Strategy for Better Ship Dismantling, SEC(2008)2846

[3] FIDH/YPSA: Childbreaking Yards – Child Labour in the Ship Recycling Industry in Bangladesh, 2008

[4] FIDH/Greenpeace: The Human Cost of Breaking Ships, 2005

San Jose Becomes First City to Commit to using e-Stewards® Recyclers for Electronic Waste →

The California City of San Jose, the tenth largest city in the United States, and "capital of Silicon Valley," today became the first city to earn the e-Stewards Enterprise designation for responsible recycling of electronic equipment. By becoming an e-Stewards® Enterprise, San Jose will always give preference to all of its electronics recycling contracts to those recyclers certified to the "e-Stewards Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment." Over 70 environmental groups worldwide have endorsed the e-Stewards Standard, including Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and the National Resources Defense Council. "The city most commonly associated with leading the Information Age, has now chosen to take the lead by choosing the gold standard for responsible and sustainable electronic waste management," said Jim Puckett, Executive Director of the Basel Action Network (BAN) the toxic watchdog organization. "Far too often citizens and cities have been defrauded by rogue companies calling themselves recyclers, that routinely dump old computers and TVs on developing countries. E-Stewards Recyclers are audited and certified to ensure against such malpractice."

The e-Stewards Standard, developed by BAN, with the assistance of recycling industry leaders and health and environmental specialists, is the world’s most robust certification program for electronics recyclers. It prevents the export and dumping of toxic electronic waste in developing countries. There, men, women and children, without the benefit of enforced laws to protect workers and the environment, break down the e-waste by hand using dangerous fire and chemicals, suffering severe exposure to some of the most toxic materials known to man. The Standard also ensures that e-waste will not be dumped in municipal landfills and also safeguards the protection of the public’s private data, as well as prevents unsafe occupational exposure of workers in recycling plants to toxic dusts.

San Jose has joined its surrounding County of Santa Clara in becoming an e-Stewards Enterprise. Likewise King County (Seattle) in the State of Washington has joined. Other e-Stewards Enterprises include major corporations, Alcoa, Bank of America, Bloomberg, Capitol One, LG, Nestle, Samsung, and Wells Fargo Bank.

"In Silicon Valley, we boast the newest technologies in the world," said City Councilmember Ash Kalra. "However, the disposal of high-tech products is all too often done in a way that harms people and devastates the planet. Becoming an e-Stewards Enterprise will allow us to be accountable and ensure that whatever e-waste is recycled through the City is recycled responsibly and does not damage public health or the environment. It gives me great pride to know that San Jose has taken this major step in helping eliminate the harmful impacts our services may cause, directly or indirectly, to communities here or in other countries."

"The City of San Jose is proud to be the first City in the nation to become an e-Stewards Enterprise," added Kerrie Romanow, Acting Director of San Jose's Environmental Services Department. "San Jose strives to be a leader in environmental stewardship and responsible e-waste management, by modeling best practices in all our City operations."

In 2010, San Jose recycled 146,000 pounds of City-generated e-waste, and sponsored two e-waste collection events, generating nearly 10,000 pounds of e-waste that were recycled by an e-Stewards Certified Recycler.

Coalition for American Electronics Recycling: Industry Effort to Limit Toxic E-Waste Exports Adds Sims Recycling Solutions, Bipartisan Co-sponsors→

The Coalition For American Electronics Recycling (CAER) today announced that Sims Recycling Solutions has joined the industry effort to support federal legislation that will restrict export of toxic electronic waste (e-waste) from the U.S. and spur creation of tens of thousands of jobs through expansion of the domestic recycling industry. In the House of Representatives, 13 co-sponsors have announced support for the bill, including six Republicans and seven Democrats. With the addition of Sims Recycling Solutions, the largest e-recycling company in the world, CAER now includes 34 U.S. companies with 89 facilities involved in all aspects of the domestic electronics recycling and disposition industry, with operations in 32 states as well as the District of Columbia. (Complete membership list below, or visit the CAER website). Also supporting the legislation are Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Apple, Samsung, Best Buy and LG.

"The addition of these industry leaders reflects growing consensus that the Responsible Electronics Recycling Act is good for business and will create much-needed jobs and enhance sustainability," said John Shegerian, Co-founder and President, Electronic Recyclers International. "Our members are committed to growing an American industry with the capacity to manage e-waste generated within our borders and the potential to create tens of thousands of jobs in every part of the country."

Introduced in June, the Responsible Electronics Recycling Act (HR 2284/SB1270) would restrict toxic e-waste exports to developing countries that lack adequate safeguards for the environment and workers. There is growing bi-partisan support for the bill as additional co-sponsors have joined the bill in recent weeks. To support Representative Gene Green (D-TX), the lead House sponsor of the bill, 13 co-sponsors now include: Mike Thompson (D-CA), Lee Terry (R-NE), Steve LaTourette (R-OH), Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Blake Farenthold (R-TX), Charlie Gonzalez (D-TX), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Dennis Ross (R-FL), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Jeff Denham (R-CA), Jim Costa (D-CA) and Gus Bilirakis (R-FL). In the Senate, similar legislation is co-sponsored by U.S. Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

CAER's emergence represents a major split in the recycling industry regarding e-waste exports. The industry's primary trade association, the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI), has long opposed restrictions on e-waste exports. By joining CAER, ISRI members are breaking with the trade association's position and taking a stand in support of export restrictions on unprocessed electronic products that will create jobs and protect the environment.

Three of the seven companies on the CAER steering committee are also ISRI members, including Sims Recycling Solutions, Electronic Recyclers International, and Hugo Neu.

"Unrestricted and unfair trade in electronic scrap with developing countries has thwarted the job growth that can come with a robust domestic recycling infrastructure," said CAER steering committee member David Zimet, President of Hesstech. "The Responsible Electronics Recycling Act will enable American recyclers to make new investments in facilities and staff and personnel necessary to legitimize and grow an American industry and position America as a leader in global markets."

The Coalition is continuing to work with both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which have jurisdiction over the bills as well as other Congressional offices who would benefit from the job creation from this legislation. For more information about HR 2284/SB1270, visit the CAER website, which includes links to the full text of each bill.

Coalition for American Electronics Recycling - Membership December 20, 2011

2 trg, Ohio, New York, Kentucky 4th Bin, New York All Green Electronics Recycling, California, DC, New York AVR Recycling, California Cascade Asset Management, Wisconsin, Indiana Creative Recycling, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Illinois ECS Refining, California, Oregon, Texas eForce Compliance, Pennsylvania Electronic Recyclers International, Washington, California, Colorado, Texas, Massachusetts, Indiana, North Carolina eLoop, Pennsylvania EPC, Missouri, Nevada, South Carolina, Texas eSCO Processing and Recycling, Arkansas Extreme Recycling, Kansas, California Friendly Earth, Washington Global Electronic Recycling, Michigan, North Carolina, Texas Greene Lyon Group, Massachusetts Hesstech, New Jersey Hugo Neu Corporation, New York Metech Recycling, North Carolina, Colorado, Utah, Massachusetts, California, Nebraska Onsite Electronics Recycling, California Outback Equipment, California PlanITROI, New Jersey Redemtech, Ohio, Nevada, Virginia ReDirect e-Waste Solutions, California Sims Recycling Solutions, California, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Tennessee, Illinois, New Jersey, South Carolina, Florida Spectrum eCycle Solutions, Missouri Surplus Computers, California TechnoCycle, Texas Total Reclaim, Washington, Oregon, Alaska United DataTech, California Universal Recycling Technologies, Wisconsin, New York, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Texas, Oregon, Indiana Valley City Environmental Services, Michigan Vintage Tech Recyclers, Illinois WeRecycle! New York, Connecticut

Navy Ship Sinking Pollutes Sea with Toxic PCB’s→

Today, conservation groups filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ongoing failure to adequately regulate a Federal ship sinking program that pollutes the sea with toxic chemicals. Earthjustice, on behalf of the Basel Action Network and Sierra Club, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court of Northern California. The U.S. Navy's ship sinking exercise program, called SINKEX, uses decommissioned military ships for live-fire target practice as the Navy's preferred method of ship disposal, sinking a reported 109 ships at sea over the past decade alone. This method of ship disposal differs from the U.S. Maritime Administration's as well as the private shipping industry's preferred method of ship recycling.

The suit claims EPA fails to adequately regulate the ocean dumping of toxic PCBs, (polychlorinated biphenyls), a group of chemicals that are highly toxic and dangerous to human health. PCBs are contained in the obsolete ships used by the U.S. Navy for ship sinking exercises.

New data from a study in Florida supports the conclusion that PCBs, dumped during ship sinking exercises, are leaching from the sunken vessels and are entering the marine food chain. According to the study, this leads to PCB concentrations in fish that make them unsafe for human consumption.

In July 2011, the Basel Action Network and the Sierra Club petitioned EPA to regulate ship dumping more stringently. EPA failed to respond to the petition by the statutory deadline.

"The ocean dumping of our national fleet squanders natural resources that could otherwise be recycled, eliminates recycling job opportunities that could boost local economies, and poses unreasonable risk to the marine environment and to the people who derive their livelihood or recreation from it," said Colby Self of the Basel Action Network. "The EPA can no longer turn a blind eye to this arcane practice; we have given them full notice."

"Protection of our Nation includes protection of our ocean environment and all the species, including humans, who depend on the health of the ocean," said Dave Raney of  the Sierra Club. "By strictly adhering to the law, we need not trade one for the other in the SINKEX exercises."

The lawsuit claims that EPA must initiate rules to regulate the marine disposal of PCBs during ship sinking exercises to protect human health and the environment against an unreasonable risk of injury.

BAN and Sierra Club are advocates for responsible ship recycling in the U.S. that not only serves to protect the environment and human health from toxic PCBs, but also creates recycling jobs and stimulates the local economy.

"EPA is legally required to keep dangerous chemicals like PCBs out of our oceans," said Amanda Goodin, an attorney with Earthjustice representing BAN and Sierra Club. "It's time for EPA to make the Navy clean up its act."

Exxon Mobil Creates Green U.S. Recycling Jobs→

Instead of sending their defunct tanker to the infamous ship-scrapping beaches of South Asia, Exxon Mobil and wholly owned subsidiary SeaRiver Maritime, recently completed the sale of the S/R Wilmington, a 1984 built tanker, to a U.S. ship recycling facility, where it will be dismantled by a skilled workforce, using advanced technologies to manage the vessel’s hazardous waste stream. Exxon’s move to recycle the Wilmington in the U.S. is seen by the toxic trade watchdog organization, Basel Action Network (BAN), as a move to lead by example, opting for the safe and environmentally preferable ship recycling methods of U.S. ship recyclers, while creating green U.S. jobs in a tough economy. “We applaud this decision and hope this is a harbinger of many more such corporate choices – to internalize costs and not use the global commons or developing countries as convenient dumping grounds for pollution and harmful activities,” said Mr. Colby Self, Green Ship Recycling Campaign Director for BAN.

This move is in stark contrast to some of Exxon’s competitors including BP, who often send their retired fleets to the shipbreaking beaches of South Asia, where nearly a quarter of the exploited workforce at these yards are child laborers making less than USD$1 per day, and where little is done to protect their health and safety or that of the environmentally sensitive tidal flats where these vessels are scrapped.

Because of its age, the Wilmington is suspected of containing a host of hazardous wastes within its construction. These wastes cannot be managed in an environmentally sound manner on the shipbreaking beaches of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, where approximately 90% of the obsolete global shipping fleet is dismantled. Using advanced technologies at U.S. ship recycling facilities, these wastes, including PCBs, asbestos, lead, and mercury are contained and managed with proper care, while approximately 91% of the vessel, including critical metal resources such as steel, aluminum, and copper, are fully recycled and recirculated into the marketplace, thereby reducing demand for environmentally destructive primary metal mining and related carbon emissions.

“BAN is pleased with this outcome after having been in close contact with Exxon/SeaRiver for months,” said Self. “Building on this positive result, we now call on Exxon to further lead by example to make a corporate commitment to Off the Beach environmentally sound management of all end-of-life vessels owned, operated or leased on behalf of Exxon/SeaRiver.”

The NGO Platform, of which BAN is a part, is seeking an “Off the Beach Commitment” from all enterprises utilizing shipping. This Commitment entails agreeing to ensure that the ships used by a company directly or under contract, do not find their way to the beaches of South Asia at end-of-life.

Scrap Industry E-Waste Export Claims "Sadly Mistaken"→

First Federal Criminal Charges Brought Against Recycler for Exporting Toxic e-Waste→

After 30 months of investigations, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and EPA Criminal Investigation Division handed down multiple criminal charges today against two executives of Executive Recycling Inc., a Denver, Colorado electronics recycling firm. The government first became aware of the alleged violations following an investigation by the Basel Action Network (BAN), a Seattle based organization dedicated to combating toxic trade. The investigation became highly publicized after BAN worked with CBS’s 60 Minutes news magazine in an episode entitled “The Wasteland.” It is the first instance that criminal charges have been brought against an e-waste exporter. In 2007 and 2008, BAN volunteers photographed 21 sea-going containers at Executive Recycling’s loading docks that they subsequently tracked across the world, with most ending up in China. BAN then alerted the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and 60 Minutes, and together the groups documented US businesses posing as responsible electronics recyclers but who instead were simply shipping e-waste to developing countries where it was processed in deadly, highly polluting operations. The resulting 60 Minutes episode has since become one of the most popular and award winning in the program’s history.

“This is a major victory for global environmental justice,” said BAN Executive Director Jim Puckett. “Even before we have a US law in place to explicitly prohibit this dumping on developing countries, the US government’s criminal justice system has recognized the massive toxic trade we first discovered in 2001 as fraudulent, as smuggling, and as an environmental crime. Now these sham recyclers are warned: their shameful practices can land them in jail.”

Currently, legislation has been proposed in both the US House of Representatives and the Senate to prohibit the export of toxic electronic waste to developing countries. Such an export prohibition already exists in Europe. The US has been behind in enacting such rules, and in 2008, the U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) was highly critical of the EPA and uncontrolled e-waste exports in a strongly worded report. EPA enforcers themselves have lamented that the US lacks clear laws to combat the global e-waste dumping practice.

According to the federal grand jury indictment, Executive Recycling was responsible for at least 300 exports, including shipments of more than 100,000 toxic cathode ray tubes that netted the company $1.8 million. Executive’s CEO, Mr. Brandon Richter, together with Mr. Tor Olson, Vice President of Operations, were indicted on 16 separate counts including wire and mail fraud, environmental crimes, exportation contrary to law, and destruction, alteration, or falsification of records.

Executive Recycling still operates in the Denver area and has had e-waste recycling contracts with the cities of Denver, Boulder, and Broomfield and the El Paso County and Jefferson County governments. It is registered with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment as a “Large Quantity Handler of Universal Waste.”

“Sadly, Executive Recycling is just the tip of the e-waste iceberg,” said Puckett. “They are but one of hundreds of fake recyclers who sell greenness and responsibility but in fact practice global dumping. This is why we must pass federal legislation prohibiting this activity. And this is why all those disposing of electronic waste should use only Certified e-Stewards® Recyclers who will not export your old toxic computer or TV to a developing country.”

LG Electronics Commits to Using the Most Responsible e-Waste Solution Worldwide→

The non-profit Basel Action Network (BAN) and LG Electronics today announced that LG Electronics Inc. is the first "Global e-Stewards Enterprise," a company committed to responsible recycling of its electronic waste and choosing to use e-Stewards® Certified electronics recyclers worldwide. "This is historic," said BAN Executive Director Jim Puckett. "To have a company like LG, with more than 90,000 employees working in 120 operations on five continents, embrace the e-Stewards program around the world will not only significantly protect human health and the environment from toxic pollution but will raise the profile of the e-Stewards internationally. It speaks volumes about LG's commitment to environmental leadership."

The company has been leading the way in responsible electronics recycling in the United States. The LG Electronics Recycling Program provides consumers with a convenient and responsible way to dispose of used, unwanted, obsolete or damaged consumer electronics products. In 2010, LG recycled more than 8 million pounds of home electronic products in the United States, free of charge to consumers.

"LG has always been committed to providing consumers the highest quality products available while reducing the environmental impacts of the manufacturing and use of those products," said Dr. Skott Ahn, president and chief technology officer, LG Electronics, Inc. "Our partnership with BAN and e-Stewards demonstrates LG's equal commitment to reducing the impacts of products at the end of their life."

By becoming an e-Stewards Enterprise, LG will give preference to electronics recyclers that meet and are certified to the "e-Stewards Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment."

The international standard, developed by BAN, with the advice of industry leaders and health and environmental specialists, is the world's most rigorous certification program for electronics recyclers. It prevents the export and dumping of toxic electronic waste in developing countries. The standard also calls for strict protection of private data and occupational health safeguards to ensure workers in recycling plants are not exposed to toxic dusts.

Currently, there are e-Stewards Recyclers in the United States, Mexico and the UK with several in progress in Canada.

As the primary sponsor of the Champions of the Earth award, the United Nations flagship environmental award, LG contributes more than $600,000 annually to raise awareness of environmental issues at the regional and global levels and to help develop practical solutions.

"Sustainability is a core value at LG," said Wayne Park, president and CEO of LG Electronics USA. "From our ambitious carbon reduction commitments, to our industry-leading efforts to bring high efficiency ENERGY STAR® qualified products to market, to our support for environmental efforts around the world, reducing environmental impact, while enhancing consumers' lives through innovation. Life's good when you live green."

Federal E-Waste Effort Gets Mixed Reaction from Environmental Coalition→

An Interagency Task Force - chaired by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, and General Services Administration, today released "A National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship." The report makes a variety of important recommendations to promote green design of electronics, and to improve handling of e-waste coming from federal agencies. According to environmental groups, the report has some good recommendations on green design and on using certified recyclers, but it completely fails to address what is generally recognized as the most serious e-waste problem - e-waste exporting to developing countries. One of the report's stated goals is to ensure that the federal agencies will "lead by example" in managing their used electronics.

"We are very disappointed that the Task Force missed the opportunity handed to them by President Obama's mandate to truly lead by example and ensure that all federal agencies do the right thing and not export obsolete used electronic equipment unless it is fully functional," said Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of the Electronic TakeBack Coalition, a national environmental coalition which promotes responsible recycling of e-waste. "We have other companies like Dell, HP, Apple, Samsung that have set the leadership bar there, so I don't understand why our own federal government can't do the same with its own e-waste."

"Sadly, this report is a living contradiction," said Jim Puckett, Executive Director of the Basel Action Network. "On the one hand it claims to promote responsible recycling and job creation here in the U.S., but then does nothing to prevent e-waste exporting, which squanders our critical metals resources, and poisons children abroad while exporting good recycling jobs from our country. This report shows why we need Congress to pass the Responsible Electronics Recycling Act, now under consideration in both the Senate and Congress, to truly address this issue."

Currently, most U.S. electronic waste is exported to developing countries by many U.S. companies that claim to be recyclers, to be bashed, burned, flushed with acids, and melted down in unsafe conditions in developing countries. Eighty percent of children in Guiyu, China, a region where many "recycled" electronics wind up, have elevated levels of lead in their blood, due to the toxins in those electronics, much of which originates in the U.S. The plastics in the imported electronics are typically burned outdoors, which can emit deadly dioxin or furans, which are breathed in by workers and nearby residents.

ETBC applauds the commitment by the GSA to use its purchasing power to promote greener products, and to get involved in the standards setting processes.

"We think it's appropriate that the country's largest electronics purchaser, especially one using taxpayer dollars, do everything possible to advocate for products that are less toxic, longer lasting, and more recyclable," said Barbara Kyle.

Ship Sinking Programs Waste Taxpayer Dollars, Squander Valuable Resources, Jobs And Pollute The Sea→

A new report, "Dishonorable Disposal," by the Basel Action Network (BAN), and subsequent investigation by The Washington Post, uncovers the wasteful legacy of the U.S. Navy's ship sinking programs. This first-ever comprehensive analysis of ship ocean disposal by way of target practice exercise or "artificial reefing," cites new toxicological data demonstrating contamination of seafood, and an economic analysis revealing lost recycling jobs, wasted taxpayer dollars, and squandered resources at the center of the government's ship disposal program. Recently, the Pentagon quietly pulled back on plans to sink the USS Forrestal and three other aircraft carriers earlier this year, deciding instead to recycle these vessels domestically, based on economic factors. However, the Navy is now ignoring the rationale that led them to that decision and is moving ahead with plans to sink two vessels annually for military exercises (called SINKEX) in the Gulf of Alaska, one of the richest fishing grounds in the world. Another naval vessel will soon be sunk as an "artificial reef" - the Ex-Arthur Radford, a 563 foot Navy destroyer. The Radford sinking, planned for later this month if not stopped by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), will be the largest ship dumped as an artificial reef off the eastern seaboard.

The EPA and Navy admit that toxic chemicals are deposited into the marine environment as a result of ship sinking operations, including asbestos, lead paint, antifouling paint containing tributyltin (TBT), polybrominated diphenyl esters (PBDEs) and notably polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), a suspected carcinogen that has been targeted for global phase-out and destruction under the Stockholm Convention. As yet unreleased fish sampling data gathered by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, cited in BAN's report, reveals startling toxic leaching from the scuttled aircraft carrier Ex-Oriskany, an artificial reef sunk in Florida waters in 2006. The report reveals that PCBs were leached into surrounding waters and taken up by fish at levels exceeding the Florida Department of Health fish consumption advisory levels. However, no public health warnings have been issued since the discovery of this contamination.

"The harmful effects of PCBs include cancer, reproductive problems and memory loss, with the risk greatest for children and unborn babies. PCBs may also cause similar problems in wildlife," said Dr. Alan Duckworth, research scientist at the Blue Ocean Institute at Stony Brook University in response to the report. "It is therefore disturbing that the U.S. disposes of obsolete vessels by sinking them, promoting the release of toxins like PCBs into our food chain. To prevent the contamination of our seafood it is essential that we have zero tolerance for intentional PCB dumping at sea."

BAN also found that the U.S. government's ship sinking programs have escalated in recent years. From 1970-1999 the ship sinking programs accounted for approximately eight percent of all vessel disposals, but from 2000-2008, sinkings accounted for an alarming 70 percent of all disposals. Roughly 100 vessels containing an estimated 600,000 tons of recyclable steel, copper and aluminum, worth an estimated half a billion dollars have been dumped at sea over the past decade alone.

In a time of tight budgets and careful use of taxpayer money, the report reveals that the U.S. government spent a total of $25 million on the dumping of just four ships as artificial reefs in the past eight years. Total reefing costs amounted to $554 per ton. In contrast, the cost of recycling retired vessels for metals recovery in these same years was an average $67 per ton.

While the SINKEX program allows the Navy to fire on inactive naval warships to practice gunnery and torpedo accuracy, there are more reasonable methods now demonstrated as viable and available, such as computer simulations, or use of clean barges and inflatable targets. Further, contrary to popular belief, the sinking of waste material at sea as artificial reefs may actually be detrimental to species populations, as it concentrates fish and allows for overfishing.

According to BAN, domestic ship recycling is the only acceptable disposal method, as it properly contains and disposes of toxic waste, recirculates critical metals resources into the domestic marketplace to reduce reliance on the dangerous and damaging primary metals mining industry while creating green U.S. jobs. BAN's report calls for an end to government sponsored ocean dumping programs and calls for a national policy that always favors domestic recycling.

Environmnetal groups petition EPA to end Navy ship dumping program→

An administrative petition to put a halt to the Navy's practice of sinking contaminated old vessels in the high seas as part of target practice exercises known as SINKEX was filed today by the Basel Action Network (BAN) and the Sierra Club. The petition, directed to U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, alleges that the decommissioned ships used by the Navy contain a host of toxic materials including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that pose serious threats to the marine environment when sunk. The legal action is timely as the Navy recently announced plans to extend the SINKEX program to the Gulf of Alaska, one of the richest fishing grounds in the world, including commercially important fisheries such as crab, cod, salmon and halibut.

The petition concludes that the current program not only violates U.S and international ocean dumping regulations, but in fact may contaminate waters to such an extent that fish found there will not be fit for human consumption.

"After more than a decade of unchecked dumping and sinking of old naval vessels, the Navy's SINKEX program has raised toxic PCB and contaminant levels in our marine environment, threatening our waters, food supply, local fishing industries and human health," said Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. "The Sierra Club is joining the Basel Action Network in this important effort to clean up our oceans and promote safe recycling of ships. We hope the Navy will lead by example - as they have with their adoption of hybrid ships - by putting a halt to this arcane dumping practice."

The Navy's SINKEX program allows the Navy to fire on inactive naval warships to practicegunnery and torpedo accuracy while also disposing of unwanted ships at sea. The program has operated under a series of general permits and exemptions from existing environmental laws, namely the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), which implements the London Convention into U.S. law and regulates ocean dumping, and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which regulates the transport and disposal of PCBs. The EPA and Navy admit that PCBs, a suspected carcinogen that has been targeted for global phase out and destruction under the Stockholm Convention, are deposited into the marine environment as a result of SINKEX operations. Recent data from the scuttled aircraft carrier Oriskany reveal that PCBs were leached into surrounding waters at far greater rates than anticipated, resulting in human health threats to those consuming fish from the Florida dump site.

In the petition, BAN and Sierra Club request the EPA Administrator to reevaluate the SINKEX program given the current body of scientific knowledge on PCB leaching and uptake through the marine food chain.

Computer simulation and use of large balloons and clean barges are demonstrated and viable alternative methods to sinking actual ships for the purposes of naval training. According to BAN and Sierra Club, by using such alternatives, the government will lead by example and will uphold President Obama's Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance by promoting recycling, and by doing so, will create thousands of 'green jobs' here in the U.S. Recycling recirculates critical metals resources into the marketplace, and reduces reliance on the dangerous and damaging primary metals mining.

"While the EPA and Navy both acknowledge new science on PCBs, they have failed to reevaluate the unimpeded ocean dumping privileges extended to the Navy more than a decade ago," said Colby Self, BAN's Green Ship Recycling Campaign Director. "They have also failed to recognize today's ethic of recycling rather than dumping. It's time we take a more rational approach."