in order to recognize nurdles as a hazardous substance can be implemented quicker and within the IMO by using an existing number but does not allow for tailoring of requirements to nurdles. In round 3 of the CG, Norway, several other national participants and the Clean Shipping Coalition preferred amending Appendix I while the marine insurance industry as represented by the IG Group and IUMI preferred a new UN number.
The proposals to create a new UN number and to amend Appendix l of MARPOL Annex III both result in classification of nurdles as a dangerous and hazardous substance. An IMDG designation fits within carriers’ existing logistics systems. Both options would also make spills subject to the Hazardous and Noxious Substances Convention should it come into force. The HNS Convention follows the same model as the CLC and Fund Conventions (covering spills of oil from tankers) strict shipowner liability for spills, mandatory insurance, a liability limit for the shipowner and a fund in excess of the shipowner’s limitation to respond to clean-up and compensation in the event of a spill.
P&I Clubs cover pollution liability under the law applicable in the jurisdiction of the spill. Clubs prefer certainty under a uniform liability and compensation regime setting a level playing field on an international basis for a trans-national industry.
CEFIC speaking for the European plastics manufacturers opposes classifying nurdles as dangerous or hazardous and therefore subject to the HNS Convention stating as one reason that the compensation fund that would apply in excess of the shipowner’s limitation would come from the receivers of the cargo which CEFIC considers not in line with the polluter pays principle.
The next steps
The Correspondence Group asks the Pollution Prevention and Response Sub-Committee to establish a working group to take the proposals
forward including in the short term to further develop the carriage recommendations. The CG further invites the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) at its meeting in July (MEPC 80) to instruct CCC 9 to review and finalize the draft circular with the view to issuing a CCC Circular before MEPC 81 which would mean before the end of this year.
In the submissions before PPR 9 in April 2022, the carrier side as represented by the World Shipping Council and the International Chamber of Shipping as well as NGOs like Friends of the Earth supported proposed mandatory regulation of carriage conditions as proposed by Norway and others. Insurers (IG and IUMI) also support mandatory regulation and although the regulatory path is different the overall result would be similar. Last year the plastics industry as represented by CEFIC opposed mandatory regulation yet now favours mandatory regulation in principle (although opposes designation of nurdles as a dangerous cargo). From last year’s debate over mandatory vs. status quo self-regulation we are now looking at three regulatory options. This is progress.
Parallel initiatives
The Maritime Research Institute of the Netherlands (MARIN) is leading a joint industry project, Top Tier, to investigate what is needed to drastically reduce losses of containers from container vessels. The participants in the three-year project include container shipping lines, class societies, international authorities, insurers, research institutes and other stakeholders. The International Group of P&I Clubs is a participant.
Norway, South Africa, the
International Group of P&I Clubs and ITOPF have submitted to PPR 10, a draft of best practices for the clean- up of nurdle spills. Clean-up can be effective for concentrated areas and maximizing clean-up using best practices is important, but it must be remembered that even using best
practices, only a portion of nurdles can be found and removed.
According to manufactures organization Plastics Europe, about 40% of plastic is used for packaging. Much of consumer packaging starts life as nurdles made from polypropylene and polyethylene which float and distribute widely if spilled. There are many national and regional bans in place or coming into place for single use items such as plastic bags. Bans of single use plastic where alternatives are available should be encouraged on the national, regional, organizational and personal levels. Recycling while important for waste management, is not an answer to preventing nurdles spills because the end result of the recycling process is nurdles which are then transported for use in products that incorporate recycled plastic.
In 2022, the UN Environmental Assembly adopted an historic resolution to develop an international treaty on plastic pollution including pollution in the marine environment. The terms are now in negotiation and will include the entire life cycle of plastic polymers, so will include nurdles. Stakeholders in marine transportation have the opportunity within the IMO to press for measures fit for purpose and should not wait for a treaty as action to reduce the risk of nurdles in our marine environment is needed now.
DISCLAIMER: The International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI) and the International Group of P&I Clubs (IG) each have working groups that provided comments to the Correspondence Group as summarized by Norway in the submissions to PPR 10. The author was not involved with either the IUMI or the IG contributions, and does not speak for IUMI or the IG.
The Report • June 2023 • Issue 104 | 121
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144
