International Maritime Organization

United Nations Environment Programme

WORKSHOP ON MARINE POLLUTION PREVENTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN PORTS IN SOUTHERN AND EASTERN AFRICA

REPORT MOMBASA KENYA 26-30 APRIL 2004

ii

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANISATION (IMO) UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (UNEP) NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICAS DEVELOPMENT (NEPAD) In collaboration with THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS (KENYA) THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (KENYA)

WORKSHOP ON MARINE POLLUTION PREVENTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN PORTS IN SOUTHERN AND EASTERN AFRICA

REPORT
MOMBASA KENYA 26-30 APRIL 2004

Preface Technical cooperation and assistance is a primary tool to assist countries with implementation of international agreements for the protection of the environment. It is essential for aiding countries with their commitment to incorporating these agreements into their national policies and has functioned with agreements and programmes ranging from the adoption of Agenda 21 to the adoption of the UNEP Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities in 1995 and Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002. The London Convention 1972 and its planned successor the 1996 Protocol provide for the establishment of a scientific and technical support programme to further the objectives of these instruments. The key objectives for technical co-operation have been to: (1) strengthen national marine pollution prevention and management capacities to achieve compliance with the Convention and Protocol; (2) co-operate with other organisations and agencies to ensure a coordinated approach to technical cooperation and assistance, avoiding duplication of effort; and (3) promote membership of the Protocol. Additional objectives are the promotion of marine pollution management generally, and, more specifically, of alternatives to dumping, including alternative disposal mechanisms, recycling and the use of cleaner production technologies. One activity through which these objectives are promoted is to hold meetings of the technical advisory body of the London Convention (the Scientific Group) outside of IMO Headquarters every other year. These meetings have been held in Brazil (1996), South Africa (1998), Australia (2000), and Jamaica (2002), which facilitated the participation of current Contracting Parties in each region and enabled the London Convention to reach out to other countries through technical workshops. One of the objectives of these workshops was to identify technical cooperation and assistance needs. From this identification, project proposals can be drawn up and the countries concerned can be matched with potential donors/partners. For example, during the workshop in Cape Town in 1998, one of the problem areas identified was the difficulty of communication between the stakeholders in the region. This resulted in the establishment of the SEA-WASTE Network for integrated waste- management in Southern and Eastern Africa, funded by the Netherlands Government. It is in this context that the IMO/UNEP/NEPAD Workshop on Marine Pollution Prevention and Environmental Management in Ports in Southern and Eastern Africa was convened from 26 to 30 April 2004 in Mombasa, Kenya, in conjunction with the 27th meeting of the Scientific Group (3 to 7 May 2004) in the same location. This Workshop was held in English and French.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Workshop was hosted by the Ministry of Transport and Communications and the National Environment Management Authority in Kenya and organized by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD). This Workshop was only possible with the financial contributions from the following organizations: Environment Canada The Government of France The Federal Ministry fo r the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety in Germany The Government of Japan The Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, North Sea Directorate in the Netherlands The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in the United Kingdom The United States Environmental Protection Agency The International Maritime Organization (IMO) The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface1 Acknowledgements 2 Table of Contents3 Executive Summary4 Executive Summary (French language) 6 Executive Summary (Spanish language) 8 Workshop Proceedings 10 Opening Ceremony 10 Briefing on the Workshop12 Legal Framework for Marine Pollution Management 13 Sustainable Development Environmental Management in Ports15 Sustainable Development Waste Management in Eastern and Southern Africa 20 Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidelines 23 Working Group Sessions 34 Presentation of National Reports (Priorities and Action Plans)42 Closing Ceremony48 Workshop conclusions and recommendations 49

ANNEXES: I. II. III IV Programme of Workshop 51 List of participants 59 Presentation summaries66 National report summaries141

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The IMO/UNEP/NEPAD Workshop on Marine Pollution Prevention and Environmental Management in Ports in Eastern Africa was held from 26 to 30 April 2004 in Mombasa, Kenya, and was sponsored by Contracting Parties to the London Convention, International Maritime Organization (IMO), United Nation Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Ministry of Transport and Communication in Kenya and organized under the London Convention Technical Co-operation and Assistance Programme, in collaboration with the Coastal and Marine Secretariat of the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD). The Workshop was attended by 66 delegates from 12 countries in Africa; 10 delegates from nonAfrican countries and 11 delegates representing international organizations. During the Opening Ceremony, Mr. A. Mohamed (Co-ordinator, NEPAD Coastal and Marine Secretariat); Professor C. Khamala (Chairman, National Environmental Management Authority, Kenya); Dr. E. Adler (Programme Co-ordinator, UNEP), Mr. R. Coenen (Head of IMOs Office of the London Convention), Mr. B. Ondego (Managing Director, Kenya Ports Authority), Mr. G. Ikiara (Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Transport and Communication) and Mr. C. Vogt (Chairman of the London Convention Scientific Group) delivered the welcome and keynote addresses. National and Regional Marine Pollution and Environmental Management Issues The Workshop was organized around the following themes: the legal framework for marine pollution management; identification of issues for environmental management in ports; waste assessment guidance; and waste management. These themes were explored through technical presentations and regional case studies during plenary and working group sessions. The Workshop also included discussion of national and regional priorities in Eastern and Southern Africa. During an open discussion period, workshop participants had the opportunity to list their nations concerns for marine pollution prevention. Nine representatives from the African nations commented on their issues of greatest concern. Five non-African countries also discussed some of the problems that they face. The issues discussed fell into the following four categories: pollutants of concern, lack of capacity and enforcement, lack of funding, and the role of international conventions in national policy. In addition to this open discussion, each country presented a national report on its current marine pollution prevention activities. Representatives from each of the 12 African countries discussed actions that had been taken, listed areas where action was needed, identified technical assistance needs, and provided recommendations to regionally address marine pollution issues. The primary recommendations made during the Workshop centred on three themes: .1 .2 .3 Regional concerns; Follow- up activities; and, Requirements for implementation of the 1996 Protocol.

The major regional issues and concerns in Eastern Africa included the management of garbage and land-based sources of marine pollution (e.g., sewage), dumping, discharges from ships (e.g., oil, oily bilge water, ballast water), the lack of capacity, public awareness and of co-ordination when addressing marine pollution issues and the limited capacity to ratify or implement international conventions including the London Convention and Protocol.

5 Workshop Recommendations Regional concerns Regional concerns focused both on type of pollution and difficulties in addressing these pollutants. Marine- and land-based pollution were both discussed as challenges faced by the region. The region has difficulty addressing these issues. Lack of reception facilities and sewage treatment is a factor exacerbated by rapid population growth that is beyond infrastructure development. Many countries lack trained personnel for enforcement, as well as the capacity to implement national legislation. Difficulties also exist in the harmonization and coordination between international agreements and national legislation. Countries are seeking assistance to train personnel, set up facilities and create national legislation. Follow-up activities Several steps were recommended as follow-up to the Workshop. The SEAWASTE Network for integrated waste management in Southern and Eastern Africa, was identified as an excellent forum for regional networking. Increased coordination between IMO, UNEP and workshop participants was recommended. As many of the participating countries are parties to the 1985 Nairobi Convention, this agreement offered the most suitable platform to address marine pollution prevention issues and needs in the Eastern African region. Countries interested in joining the London Conventions 1996 Protocol were urged to contact the IMO London Convention Office. Requirements for implementation of the 1996 Protocol Workshop participants recommended the creation of an information package detailing the minimum requirements to accede to the 1996 Protocol. Participants requested a clear description of benefits, costs and consequences a State should consider when becoming a Contracting Party to the this Protocol.

6 RAPPORT SUR L'ATELIER OMI/PNUE/NEPAD SUR LA PRVENTION DE LA POLLUTION DES MERS ET LA GESTION ENVIRONNEMENTALE DANS LES PORTS D'AFRIQUE ORIENTALE RSUM ANALYTIQUE

Introduction 1 L'atelier OMI/PNUE/NEPAD sur la prvention de la pollution des mers et la gestion environnementale dans les ports d'Afrique orientale s'est tenu du 26 au 30 avril 2004 Mombasa (Kenya) et a t parrain par les Parties contractantes la Convention de Londres, l'Organisation maritime internationale (OMI), le Programme des Nations Unies pour l'environnement (PNUE) et le Ministre knyen des transports et communications et a t organis au titre du Programme de coopration et d'assistance techniques de la Convention de Londres, en collaboration avec le Secrtariat des programmes maritimes du Nouveau partenariat pour le dveloppement de l'Afrique (NEPAD). 2 Ont assist l'atelier 66 reprsentants de 12 pays d'Afrique, 10 reprsentants de pays non africains et 11 reprsentants d'organisations internationales. Au cours de la crmonie d'ouverture, M. A. Mohamed (Coordonnateur, Secrtariat du NEPAD pour les ctes et les affaires maritimes), M. C. Khamala (Prsident, Autorit nationale de gestion environnementale, Kenya), M. E. Adler (Coordonnateur de Programme, PNUE), M. R. Coenen (Chef, Bureau de la Convention de Londres l'OMI), M. B. Ondego (Prsident directeur gnral de l'Autorit portuaire du Kenya), M. G. Ikiara (Secrtaire permanent, Ministre des transports et des communications) et M. C. Vogt (Prsident du Groupe scientifique de la Convention de Londres) ont prononc les allocutions de bienvenue et de politique gnrale. Questions relatives la pollution des mers et la gestion environnementale l'chelon national et rgional 3 L'atelier a t organis autour des thmes suivants : le cadre juridique applicable la gestion de la pollution des mers; l'identification des questions relatives la gestion environnementale des ports; des orientations sur l'valuation des dchets; et la gestion des dchets. Ces thmes ont t explors par le biais de prsentations techniques et d'tudes de cas rgionales en plnire et en sessions de groupes de travail. 4 Les dbats de l'atelier ont galement port sur les priorits nationales et rgionales en Afrique orientale et australe. Au cours d'un dbat ouvert, les participants l'atelier ont eu l'occasion d'numrer les proccupations de leur nation en matire de prvention de la pollution des mers. Neuf reprsentants de nations africaines ont formul des observations quant aux questions qui les proccupaient le plus profondment. Cinq pays non africains ont galement examin certains problmes auxquels ils sont confronts. Les questions examines relevaient des quatre catgories suivantes : polluants considrer, manque de capacits et absence d'application des instruments, manque de fonds et rle des conventions internationales dans les politiques nationales. 5 Outre ce dbat ouvert, chaque pays a prsent un rapport national sur ses activits actuelles de prvention de la pollution des mers. Des reprsentants de chacun des 12 pays africains ont examin les mesures qu'ils avaient prises, numr les domaines o des mesures taient ncessaires, identifi les besoins en matire d'assistance technique et fourni des recommandations pour traiter les questions de pollution des mers l'chelon rgional.

7 6 Les principales recommandations formules au cours de l'atelier ont t centres sur trois thmes : .1 .2 .3 proccupations l'chelon rgional; activits de suivi; et prescriptions applicables la mise en oeuvre du Protocole de 1996.

7 Les principales questions et proccupations rgionales en Afrique orientale comprenaient la gestion des ordures et les sources terrestres de pollution marine (comme les eaux uses), l'immersion, les rejets en provenance de navires (par exemple, hydrocarbures, eaux de cale pollues par des hydrocarbures, eaux de ballast), le manque de capacits, de prise de conscience du public et de coordination lorsque les questions de pollution des mers taient abordes, ainsi que la capacit limite ratifier ou mettre en oeuvre les conventions internationales, notamment la Convention et le Protocole de Londres. Recommandations de l'atelier Proccupations l'chelon rgional 8 Les proccupations au niveau rgional taient centres tant sur les types de pollution que sur les difficults faire face aux polluants. La pollution des mers et d'origine terrestre a t examine en tant que dfis auxquels tait confronte la rgion. Celle-ci prouvait des difficults traiter ces questions. Le manque d'installations de rception et de traitement des eaux uses est un facteur exacerb par une croissance dmographique rapide qui dpasse l'laboration d'infrastructures. De nombreux pays manquent de personnel qualifi pour l'application des instruments, ainsi que de capacits pour mettre en oeuvre la lgislation nationale. Il existe galement des difficults harmoniser et coordonner les accords internationaux et les lgislations nationales. Les pays demandent une assistance pour former du personnel, mettre en place des installations et crer leur lgislation nationale. Activits de suivi 9 Plusieurs tapes ont t recommandes pour assurer le suivi de l'atelier. Le rseau SEAWASTE sur la gestion intgre des dchets en Afrique australe et orientale a t reconnu comme tant un excellent forum pour la cration de rseaux rgionaux. Une coordination accrue entre l'OMI, le PNUE et les participants l'atelier a t recommande. De nombreux pays participant l'atelier tant Parties la Convention de Nairobi de 1985, cet accord offrait la plate- forme la plus mme de traiter des questions et besoins en matire de prvention de la pollution des mers dans la rgion d'Afrique orientale. Les pays intresss par l'adhsio n au Protocole de Londres ont t pris instamment de prendre contact avec le Bureau de la Convention de Londres l'OMI. Prescriptions applicables la mise en oeuvre du Protocole de Londres 10 Les participants l'atelier ont recommand la cration d'un ensemble de renseignements prcisant en dtail les prescriptions minimales pour adhrer au Protocole de Londres. Les participants ont demand une description claire des avantages, cots et consquences qu'un tat devrait envisager pour devenir une Partie contractante ce protocole.

INFORME DEL SEMINARIO DE LA OMI/PNUMA/NEPAD SOBRE PREVENCIN DE LA CONTAMINACIN DEL MAR Y ORDENACIN AMBIENTAL EN LOS PUERTOS DE FRICA ORIENTAL Resumen

Introduccin 1 El seminario de la OMI/PNUMA/NEPAD sobre preve ncin de la contaminacin del mar y ordenacin ambiental en los puertos de frica oriental, se realiz en Mombasa, Kenya, del 26 al 30 de abril de 2004, patrocinado por las Partes Contratantes del Convenio de Londres, la Organizacin Martima Internacional (OMI), el Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA) y el Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones de Kenya. El Programa de Asistencia y Cooperacin Tcnica del Convenio de Londres se encarg de la organizacin del evento, junto con la Nueva Alianza para el Desarrollo de frica (NEPAD). 2 Asistieron al seminario 66 delegados de 12 pases de frica, 10 delegados de pases no africanos y 11 delegados en representacin de organizaciones internacionales. Durante la ceremonia de apertur a, pronunciaron discursos de bienvenida y orientacin los Sres. A. Mohamed (Coordinador, Secretara de la NEPAD, Medio Marino y Costero), C. Khamala (Presidente, Autoridad Nacional de Gestin Ambiental, Kenya), E. Adler (Coordinador de Programas, PNUMA), el Sr. R. Coenen (Jefe de la Oficina de la OMI para el Convenio de Londres), B. Ondego (Director Ejecutivo, Autoridad Portuaria de Kenya), G. Ikiara (Secretario Permanente, Ministerio de Transportes y Comunicaciones) y C. Vogt (Presidente del Grupo cientfico del Convenio de Londres). Cuestiones sobre prevencin de la contaminacin del mar y ordenacin ambiental nacional y regional 3 El seminario fue organizado en torno de las siguientes cuestiones: el marco jurdico para la prevencin de la contaminacin del mar, la identificacin de las cuestiones de ordenacin ambiental en puertos, la orientacin respecto a la evaluacin de desechos y la gestin de los mismos. Estas cuestiones se analizaron mediante presentaciones tcnicas y casos de estudio regionales durante las reuniones del Pleno y del Grupo de trabajo. 4 El seminario incluy tambin discusiones sobre prioridades nacionales y regionales en frica oriental y meridional. Durante un debate abierto, los participantes tuvieron la oportunidad de enumerar los aspectos de la prevencin de la contaminacin del mar que ms interesa a sus pases. Nueve representantes de pases africanos hicieron referencia a cuestiones mayor inters. Cinco pases no africanos tambin hablaron de sus problemas en dicho marco. Las cuestiones debatidas abarcan cuatro categoras; contaminantes de inters, falta de capacidad y cumplimiento, carencia de financiacin y el papel de los convenios internacionales en las polticas nacionales. 5 Adems del antedicho debate abierto, los pases presentaron un informe nacional sobre sus actuales actividades de prevencin de la contaminacin del mar. Los representantes de cada uno de los 12 pases africanos debatieron las medidas adoptadas, enumeraron los aspectos que requieren la adopci n de medidas, determinaron las necesidades de asistencia tcnica y proporcionaron recomendaciones para abordar regionalmente cuestiones de contaminacin del mar.

9 6 Las principales recomendaciones efectuadas durante el seminario se centraron en tres temas: .1 .2 .3 intereses regionales; actividades de seguimiento; y requisitos para la implantacin del Protocolo de 1996.

7 Las principales cuestiones e intereses regionales en frica del este incluyeron la gestin de la basura y las fuentes terrestres de contaminacin del mar (por ejemplo, aguas sucias), vertimientos, descargas de los buques (por ejemplo, aceite, aguas de sentina oleosas, agua de lastre, etc.), la falta de capacidad, conocimientos pblicos y coordinacin cuando se abordan cuestiones de contaminacin del mar y la limitada capacidad para ratificar o implantar convenios internacionales, incluido el Convenio de Londres y su Protocolo. Recomendaciones del seminario Intereses regionales 8 Los intereses regionales se centraron en el tipo de contaminacin y las dificultades para abordar tales contaminantes. Se trat la contaminacin procedente de fuentes de mar y de tierra como un desafo que incumbe a la regin, la que ha tenido problemas en lo que respecta a dichas cuestiones. La falta de instalaciones de recepcin y tratamiento de aguas sucias es un factor ampliado por el rpido crecimiento de la poblacin que va ms all del desarrollo de la infraestructura. Muchos pases no cuentan con personal idneo para hacer cumplir las normas, ni la capacidad para implantar las leyes del pas. Tambin existen dificultades en la armonizacin y coordinacin entre los acuerdos internacionales y las legislaciones nacionales. Los pases necesitan ayuda para la formacin de personal, el desarrollo de la infraestructura y la elaboracin de leyes nacionales. Actividades de seguimiento 9 Se recomiendan varios pasos en cuanto al seguimiento posterior del seminario. La Red SEAWASTE, que entiende de la gestin integrada de los desechos en frica oriental y meridional, fue identificada como un excelente foro para la red de instituciones regionales. Se recomend una mayor coordinacin entre la OMI, el PNUMA y los participantes del seminario. Dado que muchos de los pases participantes en el seminario son Partes del Convenio de Nairobi, 1985, este acuerdo ofrece una plataforma adecuada para abordar cuestiones de prevencin de la contaminacin y las necesidades de la regin del frica oriental. Se insta a los pases interesados en adherirse al Protocolo de Londres a que se comuniquen con la Oficina de la OMI encargada del Convenio de Londres. Requisitos para implantar el Protocolo de Londres 10 Los participantes del seminario recomendaron la creacin de un material informativo que d los pormenores de los requisitos mnimos para adherirse al Protocolo de Londres. Los participantes pidieron una descripcin clara de los beneficios, costes y las consecuencias que el Estado debe considerar cuando se convierte en Parte Contratante del Protocolo.

10

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS INTRODUCTION The Workshop on Marine Pollution and Environmental Management in Ports in Eastern Africa was held from 26 to 30 April 2004 at the White Sands Hotel in Mombasa, Kenya in conjunction with the twenty-seventh meeting of the Scientific Group (3 to 7 May 2004). The Workshop was sponsored by Contracting Parties to the London Convention, International Maritime Organization (IMO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Ministry of Transport and Communication in Kenya and in collaboration with the Coastal and Marine Secretariat of the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD-COSMAR) DAY 1 SESSION 1 Opening Ceremony A choir from the Kenya Port Authority welcomed attendees to the workshop followed by the opening remarks from Mr. Ali Mohamed, Co-ordinator of Coastal and Marine Secretariat of NEPAD. Other speakers gave the welcome and keynote addresses. Professor Canute Khamala, Chairman of Kenyas National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA), welcomed participants to Mombasa on behalf of his organization. He remarked that it is Kenyas responsibility to protect both the terrestrial and marine environments. The marine environment, rich with endemics, brings many tourists to Kenya so Mombasa is a fitting location for the workshop as the regions economy is linked with marine resources and faces many marine- and land-based pollution issues. These problems extend beyond borders, as seen by the effects on Kenya of Somalias ocean dumping issues. He stressed that marine pollution prevention is a priority in Kenya and the East African region. Kenya boasts some of the earliest marine protection activities and he had informed an audience of the Nairobi Convention which puts in place sustainable use for the region. He was glad that the Nairobi Convention occurred in Kenya, moreover, he reminded participants that the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD) is an historic opportunity to secure sustainable development on the continent and Kenya is honoured to lead these programmes. He also described NEMA, mandated to advise on international agreement, which was established for the general supervision of the environment and would be Kenyas instrument for the environment. He stated that it is a principle that every person in Kenya has a right to a clean environment and encouraged attendees to participate fully in the African experience as symbolized by NEPAD. He hoped participants would feel at home in Kenya and Mombasa and welcomed. On behalf of Dr. Klaus Tpfer, the Executive Director of United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Dr. Ellik Adler, Programme Coordinator for UNEPs Regional Seas, welcomed all representatives. Dr. Adler stated that all participants should ask themselves, What is it? Sustainable development? for it is a mantra in the environmental world. This workshop reflects the true sense of sustainable development and international management because it brings all sectors together to talk and work. The topic of port management makes the workshop interesting and he believed that all participants would be richer on completing the workshop. He noted that we are all aware suddenly to see that the effects of ports going far into the sea and hoped the workshop will have an open dialogue and dynamic interaction. He welcomed attendees on behalf of UNEP, the Regional Seas Programme and in conjunction with IMO and

11 stated that participants roles as scientists, government representatives and policy makers would allow the workshop to address problems and reach solutions. Mr. Ren Coenen, Head of the IMOs Office of the London Convention, welcomed participants on behalf of IMO and stated that IMOs main mission is to work with its Member States regarding maritime issues. The IMO, which is the administrator of the London Convention, considered waste management a primary issue and the purpose of this workshop, therefore, is to promote the ratification and implementation of the London Convention, and the 1996 Protocol, and provide a forum for discussion of marine pollution issues and sharing of experiences. He stated that international agreements are important because, among other things, they are the basis and cornerstone of environmental programmes and believes that international agreements could be tools to address local issues. He remarked that the London Convention provides support to reduce and address pollution and that assistance can be provided with the help of other attending countries. Mr. Coenen challenged participants to: highlight international agreement relations; identify proactive solutions; get answers and give feedback; share concerns and solutions; and share cooperation opportunities

He thanked the Ministry of Transport, the National Environmental Management Authority, the Kenya Port Authorities, UNEP and all supporters for sponsoring the Workshop. Mr. Brown Ondego, Managing Director, Kenya Ports Authority (KPA), welcomed the participants to the friendly town of Mombasa and was pleased to note that representatives from 12 African countries were present. The Kenya Ports Authority has a standing committee for environmental protection in collaboration with oil companies and noted that Kenya intends to implement the international agreements and is working to meet the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) requirements by July 2004. He wished all a successful meeting and concluded by stating that he believes the partnership with international organizations such as UNEP and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) will have farreaching effects addressing marine pollution issues in the region. Dr. Gerishon Ikiara , Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Transport and Communication also welcomed the participants and stated that the Kenya government was very proud to host the workshop and the Scientific Group meeting and that they pride themselves as regional leaders. He commented on the importance of marine issues and stated that the scientists will be happy to have this exchange and that the workshop come s at a time when Kenya is implementing the safety and security code, as required, by the end of June 2004. Kenyas economy is dependent on ports for activities such as fishing and shipping and safety and security are taken very seriously. He believes it a very important theme and thanked the IMO for choosing Kenya as the workshops location. It is an honour that this workshop is being held in Africa for a second time and hopes to make a regional corridor that will be popular for business. He thanked the Kenya Ports Authority for working so hard on security of ports. He provided an overview of Kenyas situation and stated that Kenya is working on an oil spill pollution plan to be completed by the end of 2004. The country is a party to the London Convent ion and several other international agreements on marine pollution prevention and noted that Kenya is requesting international assistance on regional pollution. Challenges faced by Kenya include international tourism, exploitation of minerals and associated waste, and offshore exploration. Each of these, if not monitored, may lead to pollution and noted that fortunately, Kenya has a large number of NGOs to draw attention to problem situations. He concluded by

12 stating that he hoped the workshop will come up with potential national, regional, and international strategies and declared the workshop officially open. Briefing on the Workshop Mr. Craig Vogt, Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group and Deputy Director of Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, outlined the workshops structure and objectives. Following general introductions by all participants to the plenary, he challenged the attendees to learn from each other and praised the exciting and diverse group for their participation. Following an overview of the London Convention and Protocol that emphasized technical assistance and cooperation, he stated that the workshop objectives, from the perspective of the Contracting Parties, are to: increase awareness of the London Convention and the 1996 Protocol and their relationship to other relevant international agreements and programmes; promote membership of the 1996 Protocol (which will replace the Convention once it comes into force); identify barriers to the implementation of the Convention in this region and to make recommendations for overcoming these barriers; promote the use of guidelines developed under the Convention for waste assessment; promote closer co-operation between the Office of the London Convention and the UNEP Regional Seas Programme; promote marine pollution and environmental management generally and, more particularly, in ports by highlighting issues of current concern; identify barriers to the implementation of MARPOL 73/78, especially the management of ship-generated wastes in ports; identify relevant issues of national concern and to take preliminary steps to attempt to address these issues; and

formulate a regional plan for addressing the issues of common concern. Mr. Vogt described the structure of the workshop, which included a field trip to the Port of Mombasa, as well as the following themes for plenary and working group sessions: legal framework for marine pollution management; environmental management in ports; waste management in Eastern and Southern Africa; and introduction to the Waste Assessment Guidance (WAGs).

He also provided information on national reports that would be presented to the plenary and additional details for speakers. He then challenged participants to make a difference, reminding them that leadership and perseverance at home can make that difference.

13 SESSION 2 Legal Framework for Marine Pollution Management Mr. Craig Vogt moderated the second session of the morning and this session focused on the Legal Framework for Marine Pollution Management. After providing background on the London Convention and 1996 Protocol, Mr. Ren Coenen discussed waste disposal in the ocean and what has been achieved since the London Convention came into effect: unregulated dumping has been halted and is controlled by regulatory programmes; some waste disposal has been eliminated (industrial wastes, radioactive materials, incineration of waste at sea); waste assessment guidelines have been developed for the 1996 Protocol and Reverse List; and establishment of technical cooperation and regular meetings to allow for information exchange.

Mr. Coenen described current trends in dumping and stated that 150-400 million tonnes of dredged material are disposed annually in Convention waters and dredged material constituted 80-90% of all material dumped. He described the London Convention and Protocol relationship with other international agreements in that it provides global rules and standards as required under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as well as coordination with other agreements. He listed the following meeting priorities under the London Convention: improve compliance and scientific evaluation, and highlight technical assistance and cooperation. He addressed the main advantages of the Protocol stating that it is more modern, comprehensive and restrictive than the London Convention. The Protocol also has better linkages with other environmental agreements and is more pragmatic with its focus on waste categories rather than constituents. The existence of a provision for transitional periods recognizes the different backgrounds of the countries that become Contracting Parties. Potential benefits include better capability, access to meetings, linking of solutions to environmental problems, and the role of the Protocol as another tool in the kit. It also provides access to technical experts and knowledge. Potential costs may vary depending on funds and that although there are no fees, costs exist for national legislation, system administration, field and compliance monitoring activities, and attendance at annual Consultative Meetings and Scientific Groups sessions. He listed the following initial steps for those interested in joining the 1996 Protocol: request guidance on national implementation; contact Parties to the London Convention and Protocol; attend London Convention meetings as an observer; access the London Convention Website and contact the Secretariat.

Ms. Geraldine Maingi, Undersecretary, Ministry of Transport and Communications, Kenya, discussed the Status of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973/1978 (MARPOL 73/78) in Kenya. She began by recognizing that the country has taken steps to control sewage, garbage, and other pollutants. In recognition of pollution prevention, the Government of Kenya has implemented a number of actions since 1983 and these included the presentation of Kenyas Marine Pollution Draft Bill, the Maritime Authority Bill, and the

14 construction of a reception facility that is, regionally, one of a kind. The government is also making headway with a draft maritime industry policy paper and addressing capacity building. Kenya has received some assistance but needs more, especially on capacity building. She stated that there are many challenges, one of which is the threat of pollution that result from the approximately 50 ships along route at any time and another is the lack of public awareness in reporting such threats, which could also be addressed through help from international organizations. A final challenge is the lack of public capacity that is needed for other pieces to be completed for MARPOL 73/78 implementation. Dr. Ellik Adler introduced the background to the Regional Seas Programme and stated that the programme addresses a large area with diverse environmental issues. After providing a list of global conventions relating to regional programmes, he stated that the main objectives of conventions and action plans are to serve as a platform for science-based policy making, development of administrative and legal measures at national and regional levels. The activities of the Regional Seas Programme are focused on land- and marine-based issues. It acts as a liaison with global initiatives, and establishes a platform to assist in integrated management and regulatory implementation of global conventions, programmes and initiatives. He mentioned six elements of the Regional Seas Programme that are needed for project success and viability: political will and commitment; solid financial base; solid institutional base; solid legal base; strong and efficient secretariat; and access to external funding mechanisms.

Dr. Adler concluded by stating that the Regional Seas Programme is working closely with UNEPs Global Programme of Action (GPA). Mr. Dixon Waruinge , Programme Officer, United Nations Environment Programme, discussed the Nairobi Convention and referred to the presentation on the Nairobi Convention at the workshop held in Cape Town where problems and concerns were discussed. This time he was going to discuss what should be done, that is, ratification by all parties. The programme objective is to build regional capacity, strengthen institutions, and secure sustainable use of resources. He stated that it is necessary to form partnerships because the Nairobi Convention cannot stand alone. He mentioned possible partnerships with the Global Programme of Action (GPA), Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) as well as the coordination with the mission of the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD). Mr. Waruinge discussed the operation of the Nairobi Convention by describing the conference of the parties, government roles, coordination with global programmes and agreements, and the establishment of task forces. Programmes under the Nairobi Convention are grounded in assessment, management through the identification of demonstration sites and coordination. Activities examine shoreline changes and land-based sources of pollution, marine sources of pollution, and the strengthening of coordination structures. Crosscutting issues are information dissemination and the development of a Global Environment Facility (GEF) project. There is a minimal overlap currently exists among institutions, which does not broaden the picture of what is occurring with marine pollution prevention. He concluded with a discussion on the GEF project. Dr. Yazeed Petersen, Project Officer, International Ocean Institute of Southern Africa, discussed the Southern and East Africa Waste (SEAWASTE) Network, an initiative organized by

15 the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) and funded by the Netherlands. Dr. Petersen began with background on the Network and its objectives to promote communication and information exchange on pollution and water quality issues in Eastern and Southern Africa. He said that the scope would encompass marine- and land-based pollution prevention and activities included a website, development and implementation of projects, and a newsletter. He invited interested individuals to subscribe to the Network as well as to become, or nominate someone from their country, focal points. There are currently 78 memberships from 15 African countries and 8 non-African countries. SEAWASTE developed a fully functional website, which includes a database and bimonthly email newsletter. The Network identified focal points, and created cooperative links with other programmes and projects. He stated that as yet there are no representatives from Angola, Somalia, and La Reunion and invited representatives from these countries to join. The objective of the website is to provide a clearinghouse of relevant information and a collection of tools for information sharing. The SEAWASTE Network website address is http://seawaste.uwc.ac.za and includes a demonstration of facilities for site members, as well as personal email for efficient communication of announcements, articles and links. Dr. Petersen concluded by stating that the SEAWASTE Network should be membership driven with proactive participation. Dr. Melckzede ck Osore , Senior Research Scientist, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, described the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commissions (IOC) efforts to address scientific uncertainties in the management of the marine environment. He showed a map of IOC Western Indian Ocean activities and pointed out that there are 12 countries along the coast, from Eritrea to Tanzania, where these activities take place. Additionally, there are another 10 countries along the Atlantic coast of Africa where activities are underway. He discussed ocean data and information network systems, such as the coastal observation system and Global Sea Observing System (GLOSS Network) in Africa, showing locations for East and West Africa. Data and information management can further develop national ocean data analysis and management efforts. He discussed the emphasis put on product development and information exchange and stated that IOC is attempting to use a training through research approach and also developing a repository of electronic publications. This repository will provide digitized library materials to increase information access for all partners. He concluded by stating that UNESCO provides a portal to access crosscutting issues. SESSION 3 Sustainable Development Environmental Management in Ports Dr. Chris Vivian, Topic Leader at the Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences of the United Kingdom and Vice-Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group, moderated the third session, Sustainable Development: Environmental Management in Ports: Identification of Issues. Mr. Jim Osborne , consultant, discussed land- and marine-based discharges. He began by listing a range of challenges, which included habitat loss, nutrient pollution and invasive species. He stated that 80% of all pollution comes from land-based discharges but his presentation focused ship-based pollution sources. He discussed the following vessel discharges: sewage, bilge water, ballast water, other liquid waste streams, hazardous waste, and solid waste. Additional concerns are vessels with advanced pollution prevention technologies that are turned off because of the high expense of running them. Possible land-based discharges discussed by Mr. Osborne include shipyards and maintenance facilities. He described potential discharges, activities of concern,

16 potential sources of contamination, and potential solutions, as well as some types of technology solutions and concluded with a brief discussion on oil spill response. Question: Answer: Are there alternatives to dispersants as a solution for oil spills? Oil spill responders often go against the use of dispersants due to their potential toxicity. Newer dispersants have overcome some of the toxicity issues. Given the right conditions, dispersants can be an acceptable method, such as when oil is moving towards a sensitive area like mangroves.

Dr. Lynn Jackson, Acting Director, Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP), discussed management of ballast water discharge and the impact of invasive alien species. After referring to the impact of invasive alien species as one of the greatest threats to biodiversity, Dr. Jackson listed the three categories of impacts as ecological, economic, and health. She provided several examples of species including, the Chinese mitten crab and the comb jelly in the Black Sea and that the impact on human health may include toxic dinoflagellates and species carrying cholera or other diseases. Pathways for these invasive alien species may occur through introduction and ballast water exchange. Examples of how intentional and unintentional introductions can occur are: intentional introductions can include aquaculture and fishing, while unintentional introductions can occur through canal developments, marine debris, escape or release from aquaria or shipping. Turning the focus of her discussion to ballast water, Dr. Jackson stated that ballast water is a shipping related vector. There are 3-10 billion tonnes of ballast water transported per year and that over 7,000 species are in transit at any one time, however, there has been development of ballast water management measures. Shipboard measures include risk reduction and ballast water treatment and port/shore side measures also exist. She believes that ballast water exchange is not really viable as an effective means of control and went on to described standards of ballast water management and shipboard controls. Regarding the ballast water treaty, Dr. Jackson stated that her concerns had been tha t too much emphasis was put on the ships and not the coastal states but that this has now been addressed. She was referring to the port water management plans, the development of national and port ballast water management plans, and regional initiatives, such as the Mombasa Port Survey. Dr. Jackson gave a brief overview of the Global Invasive Species Programme. Question: Consequences after introduction becomes the problem of Ministry of Environment, but the introduction is an issue for the Ministry of Transport. There is currently not a lot of overlap and this should be addressed. GISP is attempting to develop a method to address this issue and institutionalize it.

Answer:

Dr. Tom Fredette , Biologist, United States Army Corps of Engineers, discussed the environmental risks associated with dredging such as plume management and resources of concern, including sea grass beds, oyster beds, and spawning areas. Dr. Fredette provided an overview of potential dredging impact and effects that may occur during transport and at the disposal site. His description included a discussion on physical, chemical, and biological impacts. Potential impacts include circulation changes, entrainment, habitat modification/loss, fishery migration, blockage, and noise. He noted that potential effects at a disposal site may include increased suspended material, burial of species below, erosion, and sediment loss. He also discussed the potential impacts of disposal, such as habitat loss/modification, sediment resuspension, wave climate impacts, impacts on shipping, and obstacles to fishing. He went on to described potential chemical impacts, such as contaminated sediments, and the potential biological impact from contaminated sediments that may include loss of species productivity, biodiversity, loss of fish resources, bioaccumulation, and human health.

17 Dr. Fredette concluded with a description of the following solutions: predredge assessment, disposal site selection, monitoring, technical alternatives and mitigation. Ms. Mandisa Mondi, Executive Manager Environment, Health and Safety, National Ports Authority of South Africa, described the integration of sustainability issues into port environmental management using Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) through a case study of the Port of Cape Town, South Africa. Ms. Mondi stated that challenges revolved around Cape Town port-city planning, but this is the reality and challenges must be addressed. The Ports challenges are primarily marine ecology and economic issue s. Ms. Mondi said that the Port needs to be sustainable and, in response to its growth, the development of a plan is essential. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a process to develop a management plan and that the aim of SEA guidelines is to integrate the concept of sustainability into strategic decision- making. She went on to explain the legal framework and legislation of SEA by first stating that there is no legal requirement. The National Ports Authority approves the SEA report and sees it as a commitment to sustainable port management. The plan would be a link between the decision- making process and the port-planning process. Phase 1 encompasses scoping, Phase 2 addresses strategic assessment, and Phase 3 provides the sustainability framework for future port development. Ms. Mondi then described the emphasis on stakeholder engagement and the methods used to strengthen involvement. She discussed strategic issues such as marine ecosystems, marine archaeology, shoreline stability, and port accessibility, port-city land use planning, socioeconomic/corporate social investment and economic impact of ports, including institutional arrangements that involve the following forums to facilitate implementation: port-city, port-users, and port-stakeholders. She briefly touched upon the sustainability framework (SEA Report) and discussed implementation efforts. In closing her presentation, Ms. Mondi summarized the SEA process by stating that there is a lot to be accomplished, but more so if the ports receive assistance. She reviewed the implementation guidelines, which include baseline research, consideration for port planning, consideration for port options and management, monitoring, and stakeholder engagement. She described the learning points, stating that SEA focused on providing a framework to promote sustainable development and that many believe it essential to link SEA to existing decision- making processes, as the sustainability framework needs to be supported by information systems for economic, social and biophysical concerns. Ms. Mercy Wambugu, Operations Manager, Kenya Shell, described Kenyas National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan. While discussing the regulatory framework, Ms. Wambugu provided background on Kenyas involvement with the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation 1990. The National Oil Spill Response Committee, formed in 1994, began OPRC implementation. There are three parts to the contingency planning and these are info rmation gathering, strategy development and operational planning. The Kenya coast has risks related to oil activities. She also discussed the many resources threatened, including marine life, beaches, mangroves, coral, fisheries, the tourism industry, seawater intake and the Port of Mombasa. The third part of the operational plan developed in the contingency plan includes a 3-tiered response system. She provided a detailed description of the plans for Tier 1 (small operational spills), Tier 2 (medium spills) and Tier 3 (huge spill, call for international resources). The National Oil Spill Contingency Plan is currently in the draft stage. Ms. Wambugu stated that it does not assess spills from international vessels nor does it include inland waters. Steps forward for addressing oil spills include completion of the legal framework and establishment of a maritime agency. Ms. Wambugu discussed the location of response centres, outlined the organizational structure, and described the personnel and equipme nt required. She also listed current challenges such as an outdated merchant shipping act, proposed legislation that has not

18 yet been passed, lack of enactment of international law, the low number of new market entrants and the lack of oil response equipment. Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: Answer: Question: How does the plan deal with cooperation among neighbouring countries? So far there was nothing in the draft addressing this issue. Does Kenyas green lobby have green people that come and clean up? Yes, there are people who assist in the clean-up if an oil spill occurs. Are copies of plan available? It is still in draft, but copies will be available when it is finished. Could todays oil spill response capacity deal with a spill as large as the one that occurred at the Port of Mombasa in 1988? I am concerned about the major oil spills in Kenya that are destroying mangroves. We have the capacity to deal with up to Tier 2 spills (medium) but need international assistance for Tier 3. We have capacity to accept 2,000 tonnes of oil at the Port. Regarding principle 6 of the OPRC Convention 1990, development is key to economic well being. Principle 6 with long-term economic benefits is very good. How do we sell this? It is a complex issue. The key is dialogue. We need to bring industry on board and understand their issue and how to address it.

Answer:

Question:

Answer:

Dr. Ellik Adler briefly described the Global Programme of Action (GPA), stating that coordination of the non-binding global action programme was adopted in Washington, DC in 1995. It was implemented by UN agencies, the private sector, NGOs, and regional organizations for the purpose of controlling, reversing, and preventing the degradation of the marine environment. Emphasizing the importance of coasts and their resources, Dr. Adler discussed how the acceleration of social and economic development has increased the burden on waterfronts. He mentioned that the large areas, artificially altered dredging, and reclamation of ports and harbours have seriously impacted coasts. Referring back to the environmental management strategies for port management that he felt were so well presented by Ms. Mandisa Mondi earlier in the workshop, Dr. Adler said that the GPA was developed with ten key principles. After outlining the key principles, he concluded that these GPA principles focus on aspects of port development, minimization of physical alteration, and the destruction and modification of habitat. He noted that the guidelines are active and may be updated. Mr. Jim Osborne, Consultant, Canada, moderated the case studies portion of the Environmental Management in Ports: Identification of Issues. Mr. Shreenath Parahoo, Port Emergency and Environment Controller, Mauritius Ports Authority, discussed port development and port/environmental issues in industrial development and waste management. In Mauritius, the ports area has expanded and activities have increased. To address issues at the port, Mauritius recently set up a port safety and environmental committee. The committee addresses the following key issues: the identification and regulation of major hazardous installations, the relocation of major hazardous installations, the establishment of a national policy to protect workers and the general public, establishment of a port disaster management system, and the creation of a port inspectorate. A review of port extension development projects studied the impact of spills and potentially polluting vessels, as well as waste disposal, wind during cargo handling, and climate change. The following factors were considered for port extension projects: water quality, air quality,

19 traffic generators, marine ecology, and fisheries resources. After describing how each of these factors could be impacted by port extension projects, Mr. Parahoo indicated that the Mauritius Port Authority is establishing a port inspectorate to deal with these issues. The inspectorate will also address waste oil reception facilities and ship waste management. He believes the new integration of issues is an example of the good vision with which Mauritius is trying to manage its ports. Mr. Asiva Coopen, Nautical Surveyor, Ministry of Shipping, described the development of the port ballast water management plan for Mauritius. As required under the new ballast water treaty, Mauritius will establish a ballast water management plan. Mr. Coopen noted that prior to the development of a ballast-water plan, it is necessary to have national laws and regulations that follow IMO guidelines and this is currently under development for Mauritius. He emphasized the importance of contacting stakeholders during this process and also stressed that any plan must understand the shipping business, in particular, international shipping. While it is important to consider all issues in ballast water management, it is also important that the regulations being developed should not hinder trade. Mr. Coopen concluded with a discussion of the ballast water management plan which will include ship-port communication systems, requirements for intake and discharge of ballast water, availability of de-ballasting zones, and port facilities for sediments. Mr. Japhet Ombogo, Process Engineer, East Africa Marine Environmental Management Company Ltd, presented the topic entitled Addressing the Realities in Providing Adequate Port Reception Facilities in Kenya.. Following background on the rationale for port reception facilities, Mr. Ombogo briefly discussed the goals of these facilities. Noting that reception facilities are in line with MARPOL 73/78 and the Kenya Environmental Management Act, he explained that a key benefit is retaining port compliance. He described the waste treatment facility and plant layout, as well as the treatment stages and also charted the monthly sludge treatment report and plant capacity utilization. Making the port facility operational has been very difficult, said Mr. Ombogo. The operational efficacy of the plant would benefit from legislative action. Mr. Ombogo concluded by stating that the community and country can benefit from the facility. Mr. Dominque Bucas , Navy Commanders Deputy, Navy - in Charge of State Action for the Sea, La Reunion, discussed POLMAR, the French organization for maritime pollution, as well as the refuge zone concept in crisis response. He began with an explanation of how this organization differs from a coast guard system. The concept for POLMAR was a result of several wrecks, including the Amoco Cadiz and the Prestige. In this system, a central authority coordinates a flexible inter-administrative organization. Mr. Bucas provided an overview of the national organization, as well as the regional organization of the maritime prefecture. The main missions are search and rescue, anti-pollution, and law and order. The mission of POLMAR is to prevent, to prepare, to fight, and to inform in which the protection of a sensitive environment, as well as the port, is the primary consideration. Prevention is key and can occur through maritime approach, surveillance, and administrative police. The refuge zone concept, which is a formalized procedure, should also be addressed and accidents may still occur. To prepare to respond to these accidents, Mr. Bucas stressed the need to involve all departments and establish environmental, economic and social criteria to address the issues, as well as establish an inventory of spill response capacities. In the event of an accident, he listed four phases to fighting it: alert services to human salvage, intervention at sea, transition towards coast, and fight from land. The final step is to inform. Mr. Bucas concluded with a brief review of the refuge zone concept in crisis response.

20 DAY 2 SESSION 4 Sustainable Development Waste Management in Eastern and Southern Africa Mr. Ali Mohamed, of NEPAD-COSMAR Co-ordinator moderated the second days first session, Sustainable Development: Waste Management in Eastern and Southern Africa. This session was consisted of regional overviews and local case studies. Dr. Daniel Munga, Senior Research Scientist, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, provided an overview of waste management in Eastern and Southern Africa and began by discussing the biophysical characteristics of Kenya. In describing current pollution trends in the region, Dr. Munga noted the increase in population and pollution, as well as rapid urbanization. These trends, particularly rapid urbanization, result in lack of planning, inadequate housing, and problems with water supply and sanitation. These trends are also related to increased-waste generation and higher demand for facilities. He referred to the main wastes, which are sewage, wastewater, municipal storm water, and effluent. Emphasizing that coastal areas have inadequate facilities for treatment and disposal, Dr. Munga listed the regional trends in treatment of coastal areas. In the case of industrial wastewater management, no central treatment is the trend. Mauritius has some waste reception facilities but of limited capacities. In describing solid waste management, he noted that most disposal sites are inadequate and there are generally no provisions for safe disposal of industrial or hazardous wastes. The consequences of these trends are contamination of surface and ground water, pollution and destruction of critical habitats, and threats to public health. In his closing remarks, Dr. Munga referred to the strategies and options that exist in the region: policy and institutional framework; infrastructure development for service delivery; innovative methods of waste management research; public awareness and participation; and private sector involvement.

Mr. Akunga Momanyi, Lecturer, University of Nairobi Law Faculty, presented an overview of legal frameworks for marine pollution prevention in Eastern and Southern Africa. Mr. Momanyi described the idea of legal and institutional frameworks as well as global instruments such as the IMO conventions including MARPOL 73/78 and UNEP Regional Seas Programme, also such regional instruments as the Nairobi Convention and NEPAD. He referred to the Nairobi Conventions Protocol Concerning Cooperation in Combating Marine Pollution in Cases of Emergency in the Eastern African Region, 1985, and stated that it is probably the closest the region has come to addressing marine pollution through legal procedures. He believes NEPAD could act as a continent-wide catalyst for the protection of marine and coastal environment, as well as the strengthening of pollution control and port management. Mr. Momanyi also presented a general overview of national instruments. In general, national laws are sectoral. Marine pollution control is administered under a range of ministries that varies for each country and may include the Ministries of Transport, of Environment, or the National Ports Authorities. He raised the issue of why implementation often does not occur and initiated this discussion through a series of questions:

21 With regard to the global instruments, in particular the conventions and treaties, how many of the countries of the region have ratified or otherwise become states parties? If states are parties, to what extent have they implemented those instruments in their own countries? What are the difficulties, if any, towards full or even substantial implementation? Why have some countries failed, neglected or refused to become states parties to conventions and treaties, some quite old and famous? While the Nairobi Convention and its protocols have been ratified by all member states, what is the state of individual country domestication and implementation? Do they need assistance to implement their obligations? What national legislations and institutions exist, and how appropriate and effective are they to deal with marine pollution control and ports management?

Mr. Momanyi concluded with the following proposals: detailed legal and institutional studies should be initiated to consolidate knowledge on the state of marine pollution control and ports management in the region; based on the outcomes of the studies, appropriate interventions should be initiated to help the region and individual countries do better in marine pollution control and ports management; and the London Convention Secretariat should initiate a process of regionalizing some of the provisions of the London Convention and the 1996 Protocol by, in particular, assisting the Nairobi Convention Secretariat to establish a Dumping Protocol to the Nairobi Convention. Developing protocol is an unnecessary exercise when similar global instruments already exist. A protocol is not necessary for the Nairobi Convention. The problem is not additional protocols. The problem is implementation. If countries would comply with the OPRC Convention 1990, an additional protocol would not be needed. It is necessary to encourage countries to implement existing legislation. A new protocol may not be necessary, but may help a country with compliance. Some countries may be hesitant to sign international conventions that may become too binding. An alternative could be to focus on operational facilities in order for marine pollution prevention efforts not to be tied up in diplomacy. The international instruments contain the overarching issues, but it is the regional instruments that have the structures to implement these ideas.

Comment:

Comment: Comment:

Mr. Brian Watt, Maritime and Pollution Consultant, Port Management Association of Eastern and Southern Africa (PMAESA), initially talked on the 2004 International Ballast Water Convention and its impact on port management. He outlined the work of PMAESA, describing its location and background. After a detailed description of ballast water and the international

22 ballast water management certificate, Mr. Watt described the ballast water treaty. He discussed the general obligations for the treaty, as well as the applications of the Convention. Apart from providing a general overview of the Convention, he described a few of the articles in depth, in particular, he elaborated on the control and transfer of harmful aquatic organisms, as well as the development of national policies, strategies, or programmes for ballast water management. He believes that the port should ensure its countries are compliant. He addressed sediment reception facilities, stating that some ports should have these facilities but noted that small ships do not need to use them, however, this would require cooperation with environmental organizations for safe disposal near port. Mr. Watt discussed survey and certification, commenting that the port or port authority could carry this out for administrations and noted that it would require a close relationship. In describing the article referring to the inspection of ships, he noted that security officers receive increasing workloads due to heightened security concerns and felt that environmental representatives should be more involved. Referring to the portion of the Convention focused on technical assistance and cooperation, Mr. Watt said that he sees this as another opportunity for better port management in which information may be shared among other authorities and within national laws, parties may cooperate actively. In his final comments, Mr. Watts recommended that states start using IMO ballast water forms, as the collection of these forms may better illustrate ballast water movement for the development of ballast water policies. Ms. Mirriam Tenyane , Environment, Health, and Safety Portfolio Manager, National Ports Authority of South Africa, discussed ballast water management in the Port of Saldanha, South Africa. After providing a description of the location, trade and vessel movements of Saldanha Bay Port, which is one of the 7 ports in South Africa and one of the largest, she further elaborated on trade. Iron ore composes 95% of exports, while petroleum is the largest import. There were 880 trade movements in the Port of Saldanha by the end of March 2004 and although traffic is decreasing, vessel size is increasing. This port was selected as a demonstration site due to its size, high volume of ballast water discharged, and its ecological sensitivity. In addition to a RAMSAR site near the port, mussel beds are also located in close proximity to the port. Of South African invasive species introductions, 41% have been introduced through ballast water and yet there has been no formal ballast water policy in place, said Ms. Tenyane. She commented that until now it has been voluntary compliance and stated that development of management policy and port management ballast water plans are underway. One ballast water management initiative was the Saldanha Port Survey, which was the first South African port baseline survey targeting alien species. Its purpose is the creation of a database of the ports native population, as well as its known invasive species, in order to develop a catalogue of introduced species that will also track new species through subsequent monitoring. Ms. Tenyane described the survey structure and reviewed the standard protocols used for the survey. She noted that in the final results of the survey, 8 alien species were found, four of which were previously unrecognised. Ms. Tenyane introduced the Ballast Water Risk Assessment (BWRA), which is a South African draft policy providing a blanket-based approach and not a risk/selective-based approach. This approach perceives every vessel as a possible risk. For BWRA, a number of workshops were held the first of which was held in March 2002 and was very hands on. It identified critical information gaps and inputs to be completed for the second workshop, which was held in August 2002, and set homework goals prior to the workshop for the consultants and local teams involved. The results were discussed at the workshop and the final wrap-up meeting was held in March 2003 at which fine-tuning, system updates, and a user manual was provided. Ms. Tenyane described the BWRA methods and then presented the results which showed that ports with similar conditions (temperature, climate, chemistry, etc.) are more at risk ecologically to the

23 introduction of non- native species. Ms. Tenyane concluded by outlining the ballast water management plan for the Port of Saldanha that resulted from the workshop attended by the major stakeholders. The workshop focused on developing a practicable management plan and the draft was to be finalized in May 2004. Mr. Andrianarison Aurelian, Coordinator of Maritime Transport, Madagascar Transport Ministry Maritime, described current is sues for ports in Madagascar. Mr. Aurelian noted that one key issue for Madagascar is the liberalization of ports. Madagascar is focusing on the improvement of its technical plan which encompasses economic, technical, commercial and environmental components. According Mr. Aurelian, its development is important for the coordination of environmental issues. The plan also includes the issue of cleaning ships and chemical/hazardous products they carry. Ballast water is an additional problem faced by Madagascar. Ballast water policies differ between locations, Mr. Aurelian noted, and it is important that national guidance be provided that conforms to the international agreements on ballast water and briefly described Madagascars emergency plan. Construction and maintenance of ports are current environmental problems for Madagascar and he stated that there is funding with which to resolve these issues that were recognized by legislation enacted in 1999. He stated that waste treatment of used water is an additional concern and referred to efforts to ratify MARPOL 73/78. Madagascar, in cooperation with the World Bank, produced a study on technical assistance and identified needs and another study is underway on the effects of dredged material waste. Mr. Aurelian finished by stating that Madagascar is actively attempting to establish cooperative relationships with other countries in order to better address these issues. SESSION 5 Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidance Dr. Gi Hoon Hong, Senior Scientist, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute, moderated the Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidance session. Mr. Craig Vogt introduced waste management principles. He emphasized the need for comprehensive strategies and coordination to prevent pollution due to increasing pressure on the sea. One method, Mr. Vogt stressed, is to minimize waste generation. Waste prevention audits, as well as minimizing production, are key to this reduction. Waste management principles use a tiered approach composed of a hierarchy of potential waste management options. The waste disposal principles are: avoid medium transfer, use scientifically based procedures, integrate waste management strategies, and manage general waste. He emphasized the need to use good science in application of the principle. The integrated waste management strategy uses a geographically focused watershed approach that is holistic and involves stakeholders and partnerships. In summarizing his points, Mr. Vogt stressed the need for a scientifically based, integrated watershed approach. He concluded with his favourite environmental message, No wetlands, no seafood. Question: A representative from South Africa stated that in 2000, foot and mouth disease passed through ports and was classified as low hazard. Why does it seem that other Annexes of MARPOL 73/78 are given more strength than Annex 5? If we are serious about enforcing, how do we do that? The main reason why garbage receives more attention than oil and hazardous waste is that it is more visible. Enforcement needs to be worked into day-to-day activities and requires that all ports have systems. If the structures are in place,

Answer:

24 enforcement is easier. An issue may be that the focus is on what went wrong when it should be on how enforcement should work. Comment: US response is to provide a reward. If an individual witnesses a dumping violation and reports it to the Department of Justice, the individual will receive a reward. This can be an effective enforcement tool. The US statutory provision (33 USC 1908(a)) referring to this reward can be viewed at www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/33/1908.html. The US offered to provide additional information to interested participants. South Africa offered a final comment that could target Annex 5 of MARPOL 73/78 with the inspection of and cooperation among agencies in all countries.

Comment:

Mr. Frans Tjallingii, Coordinator for International Affairs, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, North Sea Directorate, addressed key components of the Waste Assessment Guidance. He recognized there are many questions that develop when discussing the Waste Assessment Guidance (WAG) from the London Convention. What is it? How does it relate to dumping? What is its outline? He stated that the WAG includes a large body of knowledge to aid in the implementation of the London Convention and Protocol. It guides the user through whether a material can be dumped and includes proper care. It is a whole integrated set by which to implement waste management principles and is a platform to share knowledge. A training set is also available to explain how to use the WAG. Mr. Tjallingii noted that the five steps composing the key components of the WAG provide an approach to dumping. The London Convention provides a description of wastes considered for dumping while the 1996 Protocol offers the reverse list approach. Stating that implementation occurs through national legislation, which must be equal to the Protocol or mo re stringent, Mr. Tjallingii believes that the clarity of the reverse list approach means that the Protocol is easier to implement. He described the steps of the waste assessment but emphasized that the WAG is a tool for decision-making and is not prescriptive. Mr. Tjallingii described the five steps of the WAG: waste characterization; waste management options; dumpsite selection; impact assessment and monitoring; and permitting.

In conclusion, he stressed that the WAG is a framework for governments that reduces duplication of efforts but also leaves room for individual adaptation. Question: The London Convention waste guidance was developed by developed countries. In your opinion, is the model and its structural logic as applicable to developing countries? It is applicable but each country needs to individualize it to make it its own process from the framework. The framework allows room for interpretation. The simple answer is yes, the basis of the framework is applicable. The principles are simple and easy to apply.

Answer:

Ms. Linda Porebskis focus was not on MARPOL 73/78 waste but on materials that can be disposed of in accordance with the London Convention and Protocol. She began with an overview of legislation and the general obligations. Waste characterization is primarily hazard assessment. Ms. Porebski described the steps for dumping and noted that under the London Convention there is more latitude for what to dump while the Protocol is more stringent. She stressed that eligibility must be determined before waste assessment. The Protocols reverse list details the waste that can be dumped under the WAGs. The goal of characterization,

25 Ms. Porebski remarked, is to assess the waste materials potential impact on environmental and human health. It is necessary to consider, among other things, the following characterization factors: the origin, amount, properties, persistence, toxicity and bioaccumulation. Ms. Porebski described the specific considerations for each waste material on the reverse list. The main concerns for sewage/organic matter are organic enrichment, pathogens, parasites, cargo or packaging, as well as additives and preservatives. She said, the concern with fish waste is consumption, but aquaculture is not included. The difference in the language between the Convention and the Protocol for inert, inorganic geological material complicates this category. The assessment of this materials impact on physical habitat, however, is the primary concern. Physical impacts are also a concern for bulky waste, but disposal may only be considered by small island states. Noting that these materials are unlikely to do chemical or biological harm, she remarked that reduction of bulky waste materials is the primary issue for vessels and platforms. Stating that dredged material is a large category, Ms. Porebski focused on characterization issues, such as physical and chemical characterization. She stated that previous assessments may be used for characterizations, but emphasized that if there is not enough pre-existing information to characterize the waste, it is not recommended to proceed with the assessment. Impact questions must be addressed. A fixed obligation of the London Convention and Protocol, she said, is national action list levels. It is required that contracting parties set national action levels under the Protocol as a method for screening wastes. Describing these action levels, she stated that States must have an upper limit above which disposal will not be allowed. After showing examples of lower action levels, Ms. Porebski discussed bioassessment tools and stated that they should be done to assist in reaching a decision on whether to dispose waste material cannot be reached. Question: If fish waste volume for 50 permits a year is 200-300 tonnes, globally 5,000 tonnes/year, why does Canada issue permits for fish waste and not make fishmeal from it? Fishmeal is created on Canadas west coast. On the east coast, people are isolated from fishmeal plants. Permits are used to dump fish waste only if fishmeal plants are broken down or inaccessible.

Answer:

Mr. John Lishman, Environmental Protection Specialist, US Environmental Protection Agency, described waste management options. Mr. Lishman focused his discussion on the Protocol, but remarked that his talk is accurate for the London Convention as well. He stated that the key elements are the reverse list, dumping alternatives, and management and control of the dumping list. Noting that the London Conventio n contains a ban on industrial waste, Mr. Lishman mentioned that the intentions and eligibility of the Protocol are similar. Dumping alternatives should be considered. This obligation exists in the Protocols Article 4(1).2, which is reinforced by Annex 2. It is important for permitting regimes to look to the future when dumping of a material may not be permitted. Waste prevention is another key component of waste management. In the waste management hierarchy, minimization of waste generation and reuse/recycle alternatives should be considered prior to dumping. He stressed the utility of the waste prevention audit. Waste characterization should help determine if land disposal is preferable or if waste can be reduced during the production process. Mr. Lishman noted that contaminant reduction methods for sewage sludge and dredged material differ from other waste materials. For those materials, it is necessary to examine what contaminants enter and where opportunities exist for better management practices. He described reuse/recycle options for organic wastes; inert, inorganic geological materials; bulky wastes; platforms and vessels; and dredged material. He emphasized that media transfer should be avoided when considering disposal alternatives as stated in Protocol Article 3(3). The impact of disposing a waste in the ocean should be compared with alternative disposal options in order to

26 fully understand the disposal options. He remarked that comparative risk assessment is flexible because it does not have much guidance. Mr. Lishman concluded by listing the three guiding principles of waste management options: Question: Answer: avoid ocean dumping; obligated to look for environmentally sound alternatives to ocean; and where there are no alternatives to dumping, need to keep an eye to the future. It might be difficult to find alternatives to dumping for damaged fishing vessels or in vessel emergencies. First, if fishing vessels are placed for use as artificial reefs, these are not subject to ocean dumping permits. Domestic laws should address. Second, in the case of emergency vessel disposal at sea, the Protocol has two provisions to override permit. Force majeure allows for disposal. Madagascar noted that it could provide a document on vessel to reef use.

Comment:

Dr. Chris Vivian, Topic Leader, the United Kingdoms Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences (CEFAS), discussed identification of disposal sites. Dr. Vivian began by stating that although his presentation is a general overview, there is a focus on site selection for dredged material disposal. The presentation is also based on the assumption that materials have previously been characterized and assessed. The approach to site selection encompasses different leve ls of detail and provides flexibility to do what the site requires. There are no set guidelines. Site selection occurs through a sequential series of steps and described the eight steps of the site selection procedure: assessment of need for new site, identification of potentially suitable areas, identification of site requirements related to waste, selection of candidate sites, site examination for adverse impacts, comparison of candidate sites, assessment of acceptability, and site selection. He reminded participants that a needs assessment requires a forward- looking approach as well as an examination of existing capacity to determine necessity of dispose at sea. Dr. Vivian noted the need to recognize potentially incompatible uses, such as military exercise areas, protected areas, and recreation areas. Using a site selection process that occurred in Bath, UK, Dr. Vivian demonstrated how GIS could be used to exclude areas that did not meet criteria such as erosion depths, shipping use and fishing use. Although site requirements are waste specific, he stated the necessity to look at physical requirements, biological requirements, and size. Two sites should be selected for comparison. Recognizing waste characteristics and applicable disposal method, sites should be evaluated for potential impacts. These impact evaluations should include short- and long-term scope; proximity; and chemical, physical, biological and ecological impacts. Site comparison occurs through evaluation of potential impacts, how well the site meets criteria, and risk assessment. After results are examined of each sites assessment, it is possible to determine if one of the sites is suitable. Dr. Vivian stressed the possibility of reconsidering site selection. It may also be necessary to accept adverse effects or to decide that dumping is not feasible. Question: Answer: What is the cost for site selection? In the UK, this process takes at least 18 months. If start from scratch, the cost is on average about 100,000. Large sites can be 10-20 million. Who pays? Applicant pays the port authority. If a company would like a new dumping area, is a high cost for site selection sufficient reason to require the company to continue dumping at its current location?

Question: Answer: Question:

27 Answer: This can depend. Even if dumping continues at the same site, it may be necessary to re-evaluate dumping at that location. Some sites, such as those in estuaries, do not alter greatly over time, but may still require at least a minimum desk assessment of project. In identifying disposal sites, companies may select sites located near communities that are unable to be involved in the process rather than more vocal communities. How do we ensure that all communities are involved in the process? All stakeholders should be incorporated into the process. Stakeholders like environmental groups and local communities need to be involved. The site selection process must consult with all relevant stakeholders in order to have a complete picture with which to make the selection.

Question:

Answer:

Mr. John Lishman, Environmental Protection Specialist, United States Environmental Protection Agency, moderated the afternoon portion of Session 5: Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidance. Ms. Linda Porebski discussed the permitting process. If a state signs on to the London Convention and Protocol, a permitting system must be established. The regulatory regime includes: prohibition of disposal of any wastes except by permit; designation of a national authority; development of adequate enforcement; and establishment of consultation networks.

The authorities involved are usually federal, environmental, and navigation delegations from the regions and states. Ms. Porebski provided examp les of authorities for a couple countries. Templates of laws are available to illustrate steps to be taken by regulatory authorities. Ms. Porebski noted the involvement of consultation networks, which include the stakeholders and experts in the field. The permit process is established by developing a standard list of questions for applicants. Noting that examples are available, she explained that application forms should provide a discussion of who, what, where, when, why, and how. Applications allow the regulatory body to see if there is compliance. Applicants are responsible for collecting and providing data, but she stressed that there needs to be a quality check. Ms. Porebski described application submission, types of permits and examples of approaches in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, South Africa and Japan. Ms. Porebski concluded with a discussion of terms and conditions, permit issuance, and follow-up. Question: Answer: Many sources are responsible (e.g. runoff from storm) for much of what is dredged. What about contaminants for which no one claims responsibility? It is important to focus on source control until reduction of contaminants is possible. The permitting process should include the cost of this contamination and should include an action plan to trigger action on source reduction. Currently, Canadas permitting process is user pay as opposed to polluter pay.

Dr. Tom Fredette , Biologist, United States Army Corps of Engineers, described environmental impact assessment and monitoring. Impact assessment involves: characterizing the waste and the dumpsite; predicting physical and chemical changes;

28 predicting and accepting biological response and risk to humans; and issuance of permits.

Dr. Fredette stressed the need to examine different changes. First, he said, are ephemeral changes that have short-term impacts found to be acceptable and then noted that there might also be permanent physical and chemical changes. He described several aspects of impact assessment. It is necessary to ask tiered questions, he said, but monitoring programmes do not have to be complex. Good monitoring, stated Dr. Fredette, has good questions that provide answers for management and described an example of sewage sludge off New York, as well as a dredged material disposal area monitoring system in New England. Dr. Fredette discussed the Disposal Area Monitoring System (DAMOS) and showed an example of this project in Rhode Island Sound and in describing the natural bowl-shaped basin used for disposal, Dr. Fredette explained that a berm was added to create a barrier and sediment was deposited by particle size, i.e. coarse particles in shallow areas and fine particles deposited in deeper regions. Dr. Fredette concluded with a description of several sediment monitoring techniques. Mr. Frans Tjallingii presented a case study on the Dutch experience with environmental impact assessment development, disposal and monitoring of dredged material. Mr. Tjallingii began with a description of the legal and policy framework for dredged material management in the Netherlands. Following an overview of the quantity and quality of dredged material in which he noted that quality is improving, he outlined the permitting procedure for dredged material in the Netherlands. There are 5 designated sites, only one of which required an environmental impact assessment and discussed the results of the ongoing general monitoring in which no toxicity has been found. Mr. Tjallingii discussed action levels as evaluation criteria. Lower action levels provide an idea of quality and background levels and upper action levels are policy decisions. While all levels in the ports are above the lower action levels, all materials found to be above the higher action level are disposed on land. He described parameters used for evaluation criteria. In the previous system, called UCT, if the chemical parameter was above the higher action level, the waste materials were disposed on land. A problem with this system is that there are a lot of different pollutants but it is difficult to know if the system was screening all pollutants, but necessary to make decisions. The new system, called CTT, attempted a practical change with the idea that the volume dumped at sea should be constant, but regions can vary in their amounts. This new system is an attempt to simplify chemical parameters. Mr. Tjallingii provided an overview of the new system. This included a discussion of bioassays. Noting that tests cost approximately 1500 for one set of analyses of chemical and biological analysis, he mentioned that it may not be too expensive to perform if established commercial laboratories exist. To demonstrate how the new system works, he described several small ports. The new system was found to be a bit less stringent in some ports. Mr. Tjallingii stated that it is difficult to determine parameters and mentioned that a practical approach gives confidence to understanding the parameters. Issues may occur in choosing the parameters. Although fresh water issues may not be the same as marine issues, the government would like an integrated policy on all water issues. Environmental policies may also be affected by a shift in the political environment and such shifts are illustrated by the possibility that bioassays may be reversed. In his final comments, Mr. Tjallingii stated that it is a policy decision to dump only dredged material and noted that dredged material quality is the criterion for dumping (only 10% goes into landfills). He stated that they are still working on bioassay development. The policy is aimed at a national standard, but the current policy situation may affect new quality standards. Question: First, wondered if the Netherlands should consider what dumping in ocean in future. Second, how do integrate into policy the non-biodegradable materials that end up in sea?

29 Answer: These materials are not in dumping legislation, but the Netherlands monitors all materials that end up on shores in order to better address this issue. The general policy is that sea is not dumping ground. Try to address with different methods and raise awareness through methods such as school clean up. How do reduce dredged material disposed each year? Can improve quality by addressing discharges from plants and agriculture and increase dredged material that can be reused. Quite difficult, likely dredged material will increase because size of vessels is increasing. Does capital dredging occur? No capital dredging in the Netherlands.

Question: Answer:

Question: Answer:

Ms. Molly Madden, ORISE Fellow, United States Environmental Protection Agency moderated the Waste Management Case Studies session. Dr. Melckzedeck Osore , Senior Research Scientist, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute, described Kenyas efforts to address ballast water management. He began by explaining the GloBallast Programme, which is a global programme on ballast water management. GloBallast milestones in Kenya are guided by the Environmental Management and Coordination Act and he outlined the objectives of the programme. Planning is underway for a biological baseline survey on the Port of Mombasa, one of the largest ports in Eastern Africa. He said that the Port of Mombasa imports more products than it exports and the largest import is ballast water. After noting the existence of a database on zooplankton, the major group found in ballast water, Dr. Osore highlighted the major components of the proposed Mombasa Port Survey. While discussing the methodologies used, he requested input from participants on the proposed innovative sampling techniques. These sampling techniques will range from low- to high- level techniques and he highlighted areas where adequate research has been performed. Stressing that other areas still need better research, he invited experts from the region to fill in these gaps. He commented that pollution is the price Kenya will have to pay for development and it is taking a number of steps to demonstrate commitment to ma rine protection. Dr. Osore concluded by outlining institutions that will be involved in the survey at the national and international level. Mr. Peter Mbiriri, Pollution Control Master, Kenya Ports Authority, discussed dumping of condemned/spoilt cargo and dangerous goods in the Port of Mombasa, as well as the importance of proper procedures for the disposal of contaminated goods. Mr. Mbiriri outlined the procedures and institutions involved in the process of disposing spoilt and condemned cargo. The Kenya Ports Authority issues disposal permits and collaborates with the Health, Safety and Environment Office and the Office of the Harbour Master to identify suitable disposal sites. He acknowledged that Mombasa does not have a well- managed dumping site but stressed that efforts are being made to improve dumping site location and management. Disposal of dangerous goods is guided by the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code and the recommendations of the manufacturer. Mr. Mbiriri highlighted the relevant legislation that guides disposal. Question: Answer: Question: Answer: How often does spoilt cargo occur? It is not a frequent occurrence. It occurs when there is mishandling of cargo. Are vessels moving between similar ports more likely to transport invasive species than those moving between dissimilar ports? Data on the number of ships from similar ports is a joint venture between Kenya Port Authority and Kenya Marine Fishers Research Institute with insight from South Africa. It is necessary to establish baseline data.

30

Mrs. Nashreen Soogun, Environment Officer, Mauritius Ministry of Environment, described industrial development and waste management at the industrial estate of Poudre dor. After highlighting the occurrence of industrial wastewater and sedimentation in the lagoon, she outlined its impacts on the aquatic system. Due to the remote location of Poudre dor, the textile industry had disposed effluent into the mangroves. Describing the effects of the effluent, she said that the mangroves are most affected at the discharge point. There is also an absence of fauna within the damaged mangrove ecosystem. A survey of the lagoon revealed these impacts and these results were so alarming that it was decided that action was needed. A treatment facility was established for remediation of the lagoon but high temperature and pH, however, rendered the treatment plant ineffective. The lagoon remediation occurred through a series of steps and the accumulated pumice stones in the la goon were removed to assist in remediation. Chemical treatment was combined with biological treatment to make the effluent treatment more effective. Sediments were dredged and disposed. Remarking that the treated effluent led into a well- lined pond, M rs. Soogun said that three options for were proposed to address it. These options were aimed at improving the quality of the discharged effluents. The options were: treatment system review; wastewater discharge into artificial wetland prior to sea disposal; and eelocation of industrial estate.

Mrs. Soogun concluded by stating that monitoring is continuing at the lagoon. Question: Answer: How are other textile industries faring? Most of them are under sewer systems. Standards have to be met prior to discharge. Environmental impact assessment is a requirement prior to any expansion.

Mr. John Kwayu, Director of Operations, Tanzania Harbour Authority, discussed the environmental aspects of Dar es Salaams port, providing general background on Tanzania and the Tanzania Harbour Authority. Mr. Kwayu also gave an overview of the Dar es Salaam Port which is underutilized because of competition from the ports of Mombasa and Durban. He stressed that the Port of Dar es Salaam is not congested and welcomed all to use it. Under institutional reform, said Mr. Kwayu, the port is being privatised for better performance. Noting that daily performance is 24 containers per hour for Dar es Salaam versus 16 for Durban and 70 for Mombasa, he remarked that the daily performance compares well with other Eastern African ports. There have been three dredgings since 1953 and the dredged material has either been reused or, because it is not contaminated, dumped in open water. Tanzania has ratified several internationa l conventions. Pollution prevention is primarily administered at the harbour. Question: Answer: How many ship merchants have been caught in an act of pollution? Only one. The penalty is very severe as stipulated by regulations.

Mr. Bakri Oumouri, Director of Maritime Transport, Comoros Ministry of Infrastructure Development, discussed maritime safety efforts in Comoros. Noting that four islands compose Comoros, Mr. Oumori stated that the economy is mostly subsistence farming, but also includes fishing and tourism. Describing the current situation, he stated that the functioning ports are found on the main island. These ports, however, are difficult to navigate and most of the installations are below international standards for safe navigation. Comoros currently has related legislation under review and is actively trying to conform to international laws and conventions.

31 These bills await parliamentary enactment. Mr. Oumori stated that the maritime security efforts include direction of general transportation, port activities, and coast guard activities. Mr. Issa Abdillah Mohamdi, Head of Service, Comoros Direction nationale de lenvironnement, des forts et des strategies agricoles, addressed waste management in the Comoros Islands. He described the demographic makeup, urban infrastructure, and changes in social composition of the population. Rapid population growth and unplanned development has increased waste generation and poor waste management. There are problems with waste collection, transportation of waste, and treatment and he noted that poor waste management has resulted in health hazards from waterborne disease. With assistance from a donor, the government has put in place structural and institutional frameworks to address waste. Mr. Mohamdi stated that activities are being initiated by municipalities, non-governmental organizations, and private communities. Partnership with local communities and private sectors is encouraged and stressed the importance of public education in waste management. He remarked that constraints include insufficient financial resources, lack of qualified personnel, lack of materials and techniques, and the absence of regulation. Mr. Mohamdi listed the following proposed solutions: expand the regulatory body, construct discharge and treatment sites, install waste collection equipment, and put in place management and tax collection system for waste removal. Mr. Saleem Modak, Principal Officer Cape Town, South African Maritime Safety Authority, discussed the South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) and described a case study of their emergency response activities. SAMSA chairs a joint response committee comprised of all port stakeholders including the media. Mr. Modak briefly described this committee. He then presented the case of the grounding and subsequent restoration of the Sealand Express. He stressed that dialogue and a responsible crew made restoration of the vessel possible. The Sealand Express carried a toxic cargo and response efforts were made more difficult by the occurrence of a storm. The response involved a number of people and experts to ensure that the hazardous waste was safely disposed of. Utilization of dredging as a response method emphasized the importance of collaboration in the operation and Mr. Modak noted that the presence and reporting of the media added to the challenges faced by the response team. Question: Answer: DAY 3 FIELD TRIP A field trip was arranged for the programmes third day. The day began with a tour of the Severin Sea Lodge sewage waste treatment facility. As participants toured the facility they were provided with an overview of what happens with the water, as well as what occurs during the rainy season. The facility has paid back the cost of the system in electricity use. The next stop was a visit to Port Waste Reception Facility (EAM Environmental Management Company) where participants visited the plant and listened to a presentation on how the system works. The final stop was a tour of the Port of Mombasa. DAY 4 Plenary discussion Regional Challenges for Marine Pollution Prevention The agenda for the fourth day was changed to allow time for a plenary discussion on regional challenges. The session was facilitated by Dixon Waruinge, Programme Officer, United Nations How much was the cost of the operation for removing the Sealand Express? $50-60 million but the dela y cost may be much higher.

32 Environment Programme. The goal of this session was to enhance understanding on issues of concern for attending countries through an open discussion. Nine African countries commented on their issues of greatest concern in marine pollution prevention. Five non-African countries also discussed some of the problems that they face. The issues discussed fell into four categories: pollutants of concern All countries discussed the pollutants they faced; capacity and enforcement seven countries referred to problems with capacity, or the lack of capacity, and the lack of capacity for enforcement; lack of funding Two countries discussed lack of funding as a major concern, but many countries with capacity problems alluded to possible funding problems; and role of international conventions in national policy eight countries stated that there were issues with international conventions as well as national legislation. Coordination between the two was also a major discussion point.

Namibia stated that there is no proper port control and there is currently no enforcement. The country has ratified MARPOL 73/78, but so far there is no legislation. There are concerns about the fishing industry where pollution occurs, but there is no prosecution. Mozambique stated that MARPOL 73/78 has been instituted, but there is no national legislation. Key issues include implementing waste treatment, lack of reception facilities for vessels and pollution from oil dumping and other sources. Port Management Association of Eastern and Southern Africa (PMAESA) commented that with so much different legislation, it is difficult for seafarers. Also, the representative wondered what countries are doing to stop pollution from land runoff. Eritrea stated that its coast is not affected by a lot of waste discharge, although it is affected by oil discharge from ships. Lack of reception facilities is a concern, as Eritrea would like to avoid illegal discharges. They are aware of MARPOL 73/78, but ratification is not possible at this time. There are 200,000 people living on the coast and in most municipalities waste is discharged into the sea without any treatment. Industrial waste does not have as large an effect, but there are a few factories discharging untreated effluent. Kenya has ratified most of the IMO conventions. Land based sources of pollution are the biggest issue of concern for Kenya. Tourism is affected by sewage discharge into water. It was noted that 15-20% of the population is urban. It was remarked that 17% of Mombasa is sewered and discharged to the sea. Other concerns include: solid waste concerns, which finds its way into the sea; ship-based pollution, the litter of which is found on the coastline; oil paths from ships cleaning in the sea; and, dumping at sea, which is difficult to identify and causes complaints to be raised by neighbouring countries. Tanzania has concerns similar to Kenya. MARPOL 73/78 has been submitted for ratification, as has the London Convention. Compliance is a major concern. There is a lack of compliance, but Tanzania lacks the facilities/capacity to monitor this issue. Solid waste, particularly plastic, is an issue of concern. Freshwater protection is also a concern. International conventions do not address inland waters, but Tanzania has a local need for inland waters be addressed. South Africa resolved its plastic bag problem. The Plastic Minister banned plastic bags and people were then required to buy bags. This resolved one solid waste issue. Land-based waste is a major problem, but it is not being addressed properly. It must be addressed, if not now, in the

33 future. There are problems with unplanned settlements from which waste eventually reaches the sea. Currently, South Africa has a contingency plan and draft policy to address MARPOL 73/78. South Africa is giving attention to reception facilities; they are in the process of consultation and addressing the issue. There are some facilities. Mauritius is very concerned with ratifying applicable conventions. They are currently busy with the security policy, but are also very concerned with the ballast water problem. In response to MARPOL 73/78, Mauritius has reception facilities that are not yet operational. They are attempting to have facilities ready in the next few months. Mauritius noted that by ratifying a convention, it does not immediately become law as national legislation is needed. Mauritius remarked that if there is some new technology or requirement from acceding to IMO conventions, IMO should assist with training of Mauritius personnel and funding is a primary concern including for implementation. Mauritius has wastewater treatment and solid waste management to address land-based sources of pollution. The treatment plant, however, is over capacity; but it is expected to improve by 2010. The problem is lack of funding. Solid waste remains an issue and Mauritius is currently collecting waste but there is still littering. One solution is to require payment for throwing garbage and environmental enforcement officers fine for littering, but personal attitudes are not changing. Another concern is that the landfill is almost full and alternatives are necessary. Time is needed to consider alternatives one of such is incineration but this may not address concerns. Regulations are in place, but the largest problem is enforcement exacerbated by lack of personnel to enforce regulations. Comoros has ratified some conventions (SOLAS and MARPOL 73/78) and has reviewed national maritime legislation in order to develop new texts to incorporate into legislation. A primary issue is that there are not enough personnel. Another issue is the lack of reception facilities as currently, the port cannot receive large vessels. There are also many islands. In order to deal with dumping of oil, Comoros has developed local emergency plans. Madagascars major port receives 75% of all Madagascar port transportation. The major problems are similar to other islands and African nations. It is very difficult to conform to the quantity of conventions. The port is unable to solve its own issues, much less the variety of international conventions, and lack of funding is a major concern. Madagascar asked where they could obtain funding to conform to conventions. Madagascar has many other unimplemented priorities in addition to IMO conventions. Question: Do non-African countries have any problems? Canada: Have wastewater treatment problems, sewage discharged into sea, as well as funding and cooperation problem with governments. For land-based problems, nutrients are a major concern. United States: The United States has addressed most point sources of pollution including municipal and industrial waste waters. We are working to clean up hazardous waste sites and we still have problems with solid waste on beaches, as well as concern about land- and ship-based pollution, ballast water, and toxic releases. Land-based pollution remains a problem. Storm water runoff is a major problem and can release nutrients. Habitat loss is a major concern. Netherlands: Waste water levels are an issue. A political issue is that the population feels that many problems have already been addressed and wonders why it is necessary to set new regulations. The Netherlands also has difficulties in ratifying conventions and currently has about a 5- year backlog.

34

United Kingdom: Long-term habitat degradation is a concern, especially when combined with climate change. Republic of Korea: Has combination of developed and developing problems. A primary issue is high concentration of the population. There is strong opposition to environmental facilities near homes. Solutions often go through political rather than environmental means. Can we identify regional resources that may be utilized by neighbouring countries? IMO: There is a lack of local legislation for implementation of conventions. The IMO is in the process of assisting Mozambique especially in addressing legislation needs. IMO can assist with a needs assessment, which points out weak areas where the country needs assistance. It is the responsibility of the country to request assistance from IMO. A booklet is available, Strategy for Protection of Environment in Eastern Africa.

Question:

SESSION 6 Working Group Sessions Session 6 was dedicated to Working Group Sessions. Four working groups were convened. The themes of these groups were: Dredged Material Management Sewage Treatment and Management of Sewage Sludge/Biosolids Environmental Management of Industrial Waste The SEAWASTE Network

The session was planned in two parts. The morning session was composed of a series of lectures about the various aspects of Theme 1, dredged material management. In the afternoon session, the Dredged Material Management and Sewage Treatment sessions ran concurrently. These sessions were followed by the Environmental Management of Industrial Waste and SEAWASTE Network, which also ran concurrently. Each participant attended two of the four working group sessions. These sessions included presentations of topic relevant case studies and discussion. Working Group 1: Dredged Material Management Mr. Neville Burt, Technical Director, World Organization of Dredging Associations (WODA), introduced the topic of dredged material management. He provided an overview of groups such as WODA and the Central Dredging Association (CEDA) and discussed the role of these organizations as disseminators of professional knowledge and forums for international issues and networking. Mr. Burt stated that conflicts are the main issue for dredging. He discussed a number of reasons for why dredged material is perceived as a problem. People can see the sediment and perceive it as a problem. Although it is not true, dredgers are sometimes considered dirty and smelly. Dredged material may also be thought to be a source of contamination due to a perception that all dredged m aterial is contaminated. It may not be understood that the material is not contaminated just because it is dredged material. Another false perception is that turbidity is bad; which is not always true as it depends on the area. WODA and CEDA are resources for dredged material issues, said Mr. Burt. WODAs environmental policy statement provides a dredged material assessment framework, which is also a good management framework. He noted that the CEDA guide on dredged material

35 management is available. He concluded by stating that CEDAs 7-book series, presents the idea that policy is currently looking at environment as a special problem but should perceive it as the normal way things are. These guidebooks were provided to the workshop participants. Fur ther information about CEDA and WODA may be found at the following websites: www.dredging.org and www.woda.org. Dr. Tom Fredette discussed application of the London Convention and Protocol to dredged material. He began his talk by discussing the International Navigation Association (PIANC) and described it as a sister organization to WODA. Using the Waste Assessment Guidance as a discussion framework, Dr. Fredette described the steps of dredged material waste assessment guidance and its application to the London Convention. In the process of evaluating the need for dredging and disposal, he described capital dredging, maintenance dredging and cleanup dredging. He discussed waste prevention audits and provided an overview of management options. Dr. Fredette mentioned that dredged material characterization should include chemical and biological characterizations, although new chemical testing is not always needed. He then discussed action level lists. Noting that action lists are the more cost effective approach to dredged material management, Dr. Fredette briefly described their use. The importance of the action list is that it can save time and money in project evaluatio n. Test results found to be lower than the action list levels for the contaminant do not require further testing. If above the set levels, further testing is necessary. Dumpsite selection, he remarked, requires a focus on size, capacity and possible future developments. Dr. Fredette briefly described compliance and field monitoring, as well as permits and permit conditions. In his final comments, he described PIANC and provided background on the guidelines that the organization had developed. He believes that the guidelines are very good and include discussions on disposal, treatment, monitoring, and contaminated dredged material management. Dr. Fredette concluded by providing a brochure that discusses dredging environmental facts, as well as listing several information resources. Following Dr. Fredettes talk, Mr. Burt noted that land-based waste assessment was the most frequently mentioned concern during the mornings discussion of regional challenges. Although PIANC does not focus on these issues, it does provide some information on land-based waste assessment. Further information on PIANC may be found at www.pianc-aipcn.org. Mr. Polite Laboyrie , Head, Environmental Department, Civil Engineering Division, the Netherlands Ministry of Transport and Public Works, presented a talk entitled, Project Planning and Assessment: Investigation, Interpretation, and Impact. Using Guide 3 of CEDAs Environmental Aspects of Dredging series, Mr. Laboryie walked through investigation, interpretation and impact of dredging projects. He stated that the objectives of Guide 3 are to provide an overview of topics pertinent to pre-dredging investigations and material characterizations that may be considered when assessing the environmental aspects of dredging and placement operations. These are project planning, initial evaluation, field surveys, sampling and laboratory testing, interpretation of results, and perspectives on environmental assessment. Noting that the emphasis is on maintenance dredging and placement of dredged material at aquatic sites, Mr. Laboryie described initial evaluation, field surveys, and sampling and lab tests. He stated that statistical analysis is very important. Mr. Laboryie described analysis, land placement, and discussed how to interpret results. He concluded with a brief overview of environmental risk assessment. Mr. Neville Burt and HR Wallingford presented Dredging: Machines, Methods, and Mitigation, based on Guide 4 of the CEDA series. After introducing this guide, Mr. Burt discussed dredging works (capital, maintenance and remedial). Mr. Burt listed the criteria used

36 to judge if a site is environmentally sensitive. He described four phases of dredging. Mr. Burt stated that environmental dredging is specialist dredging. It can often use normal equipment but this depends on how the dredging is performed. There is usually a lower output and a higher cost. Mr. Burt discussed the six standard types of dredges and rated the positive, neutral and negative aspects of each. In addition to standard types, Mr. Burt discussed alternatives to standard dredging types, which included hydrodynamic dredger, water injection dredger (WID), and under water plough (UWP). After reviewing new developments in dredging equipment, Mr. Burt discussed environmental dredges; their objectives; and how they rate in safety, accuracy, turbidity, mixing, spill, dilution, noise, and output rate. After providing an overview of four types of transport systems (pipeline transport, barge transport, road transport, and conveyor belt), he demonstrated several placement techniques. Mr. Burt discussed silt/scree mitigating measures in depth and provided more general methods of other mitigation measures. Mr. Bur t finished with a discussion of monitoring. He described the objectives of monitoring, equipment used, and how monitoring is used for decision- making. Ms. Molly Madden, ORISE Fellow, US Environmental Protection Agency and Dr. Tom Fredette discussed the United States Army Corps of Engineers Education Center website. Ms. Madden walked through the website which is an outreach effort developed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The website is intended to be a resource and an education tool for students, teachers, and the general public. Ms. Madden demonstrated how the website works and went through separate sections of the site. Following this demonstration, workshop attendees provided examples of their own outreach efforts. Mr. Noel Williams of South Africa described an effort in which 147 villages were involved with regional managers who set up community meetings to discuss fisheries resources, rehabilitation and conservation. Villages provided their own monitors for each location of the fishing harvest. Mrs. Ann Tipis of Kenya described a personal outreach effort in which she painted a mural about marine pollution and prevention on her house. When people stop to look at the house, Mrs. Tipis discusses these issues with them until they understand. Photo of mural may be seen in the Annex 6 and on the London Convention website (www.londonconvention.org/main.htm). Mr. Polite Laboryie presented a talk on management of dredging activities and potential reuse/recycle options. He highlighted environmental impact assessment (EIA) and provided an overview of the decision-making procedure for disposal of dredged material, assessments of disposal alternatives, and use of the materials. Mr. Laboryie concluded with descriptions of Hamburg, Germany, where there is an upland disposal site, and Lake Ketelmeer, Netherlands, where there is a confined disposal facility. The discussion following Mr. Laboryies talk focused on the principle that dredged material can be used beneficially: Dredged materials should not be used as waste as these materials are a natural resource that can be beneficially utilized. The London Convention encourages using dredged material beneficially and not as waste. The beneficial use of dredged materials has been discussed in the London Convention and raises the question: Can the material be used at a reasonable cost? Need to justify dumping dredged materials into sea. The London Convention requires the dredgers to perform an assessment prior to the materials disposal at sea.

37 Sediment behaviours would guard the options for disposal/use of dredged materials.

Mr. Dixon Waruinge , Programme Officer, United Nations Environment Programme, discussed dredging in coral reef areas. Mr. Waruinge began with a description of UNEPs Coral Reef Unit and then provided facts on coral reefs, as well as the impact of dredging upon them. He noted the i mportance of coral reefs but remarked that it is inevitable that they will be affected by dredging for commerce, transport, and tourism. He stated that it is of primary importance to engage the best dredging option to minimize coral reef damage and stressed that dialogue between the dredging industries and the community protecting coral reef is key for collaborative decision- making. These dialogues are taking place among a number of organizations. Mr. Waruinge concluded by noting that the World Dredging Conference will take place in Hamburg, Germany in fall 2004 and that this conference will bring the coral reef community and dredging industries together for increased dialogue between UNEP and the dredging industry. Mr. Asanda Njobeni, Marine and Coastal Pollution Management, South Africa Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, discussed dredged material management in South Africa. He began with a description of South African ports and an overview of dredging activities. He described the Dredged Material Disposal Protocol, which provides guidelines for the management of dredged material. Mr. Njobeni sited the key issues as the need for marine dredging, disposal site selection, and monitoring and discussed the actions taken, which include introduction of a permit requirement and proposals for Action Levels. After describing sediment analysis used to determine Action Levels, Mr. Njobeni listed areas where South Africa requires technical assistance: capacity building; legal support; development of monitoring mechanisms; and disposal site selection and continued survey of the existing disposal sites.

In his final comments, Mr. Njobeni reviewed South Africas future steps and they are to build capacity, review current permitting conditions, and ensure regular field monitoring of dumping activities. The discussion following Mr. Njobenis presentation focused on action levels: It was noted that South Africas action levels were set from review of existing data on waste material, particularly dredged material; Action level 1 was based on potential toxicity of the materials, e.g hydrocarbons, PCBs. This action level is being reviewed; Toxicity is the basis of action level 2; It was observed that assessments from other regions could be adapted to suit local conditions; Prior to decision- making, disposal options, and physical and chemical analyses should be assessed. Further, bio-assessment should be performed as a precautionary approach, particularly in cases where physical and chemical analyses indicate the monitored parameters are almost at the prohibitive levels; and

38 Action levels and possible actions should be assessed prior to any decisionmaking on disposal measures.

The Dredged Material Management working group then held an open discussion. Tanzania: The idea of dredging at Dar es Salaam was good and intended to increase port capacity. The justification was that big ships could not sail at low tides. Two years after dredging, however, erosion has occurred on the riverbanks resulting in siltation to a depth of 10 -14 meters. A recent survey has shown that depth of water is about 9.3m. Prior to dredging, the port was maintained by natural conditions. The Tanzania harbour is in the process of assessing what went wrong. Tanzania is seeking a solution to these harbour siltation and riverbank erosion problems. South Africa: South Africa asked if the guideline on dredging addresses management of ballast water. The delegates were informed that the guidelines do not address ballast water. Eritrea: Eritrea has a natural harbour but rehabilitation works are underway to accommodate large vessels. Dredging was performed in 2000, but Eritrea does not expect a lot of disposal material. Eritrea has many navy activities, which becomes a problem for sea traffic. The country is in the process of drafting a master plan of the major ports that may need dredging. They appreciate that the strategies they learned from this workshop may prove useful for the development of this plan. Mauritius: Mauritius stated that they had experienced problems with the fishing community dredging locations and the fishermen have to be compensated to allow dredging to go on. Seychelles: Dredging materials are used for land reclamation and for port building. The country has not experienced problems in dredging. Plastics and garbage, however, have been the major problems in the port. It was observed that pollution from plastics is black- listed in the IMO Convention (i.e. no disposal of plastic in the sea). United Kingdom: Dredged material is used for construction. Information on uses of dredged material is available. Mozambique: There are 3 main ports, which depend on dredging. Maputo experiences a high rate of siltation and dredging has to be done annually. Port management is private and remarkable improvement has been recorded. The country has not ratified the London Convention, but is in the process of ratifying and domesticating the Convention. Mozambique has a small dredger, but the high rate of siltation requires a larger dredger. No analysis on the sediments is done at the disposal site, therefore, no information is available on whether the sediments are contaminated or not. Based on the land-based activities on which international standards have been met, there could be limited pollution at the port. Pollution from sewage could be a problem. It might not be economically feasible to treat the dredged materials on a large scale but it is important to assess the quality of the material which will determine to what kind of use it may be put.

39 Comoros: Siltation is a problem at the basin from a seasonal river. Three options have been proposed to address this problem: carry out dredging every three years; build a sediment dyke/dam to trap the sediments; or divert the river course. The river serves quite a large area and it would be costly to divert it, though it seemed the better option. Rehabilitation of the river catchments could occur through planting appropriate trees to reduce river speed and stabilize sediments, as well as sediment removal at the specific location. This could be a cost effective method. United States: To protect the endangered whales, dredging seasons are changed, and crews trained to divert their routes to avoid hitting the whale. United Kingdom: There is a liaison officer to monitor dredging activities. Electronic recording on the vessels record dredging activities. Disposal vessels are required to take specific routes to avoid sensitive sites and dredging contracts must comply with environmental management regulations

Working Group 2: Sewage Treatment and Management of Sewage Sludge/Biosolids Mr. Craig Vogt, Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group and Deputy Director of Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, US Environmental Protection, facilitated this session. He introduced the fundamentals of sewage treatment facilities with a focus on facilities and processes. Beginning with an overview of municipal wastewater treatment, Mr. Vogt provided an example of a treatment plant and discussed different treatment technologies. He provided greater detail on biological treatment/secondary treatment. Mr. Vogt also described sludge disposal, its treatment and associated technologies. Mr. Vogt then presented a case study on management of sewage sludge (biosolids) in the United States. He described what composes sludge and how it can be characterized. He also addressed the health concerns and the treatment it requires. Mr. Vogt described some of the technologies used before discussing the US sewage sludge regulations. Dr. Gi Hoon Hong , Senior Scie ntist, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute, discussed management of sewage sludge disposal in Korea. Dr. Hong provided general background on the Republic of Korea and an overview of sewage treatment. Dr. Hong described Koreas practice of disposal of sewage sludge at sea and illustrated recent trends in disposal. After discussing management options, Dr. Hong presented examples of sewage sludge reuse. Working Group 3: Environmental Management of Industrial Waste Mr. Jim Osborne , Consultant, facilitated the working group on environmental management of industrial waste. He presented a general overview of industrial waste and wastewater management in Canada. He began with a discussion of potential problems and management solutions. At bulk terminal storage, a sulphide truck wash at site may be a potential issue. Mr. Osborne noted the importance of draining runoff into a pit to correct any treatment and to analyse drainage. At Canadian mines, solutions are to dock in the shade for loading bulk into ships and to use a non-recovered conveyor system for dust. Conveyor shape can result in large contaminated areas, said Mr. Osborne. Changing the conveyor shape from flat to a curve may alleviate some contaminants, although problems may occur during rain. Mr. Osborne stated that Canadas Fisheries Act includes a section preventing discharge of anything that kills a fish. Regulations, however, are specific to individual industries. Mining, pulp paper, refinery, and textile are all required to report monthly production and effluent. Chemical parameters on fisheries require bioassays on a regular basis. If industries exceed the limits, inspections are performed and the companies reports are examined.

40

Mr. Osborne described a few examples of how these companies deal with industrial waste management issues. Mr. Osborne noted that 30 companies in the pulp industry went out of business, as they were not complying with the EU standards. Because these companies were not environmentally friendly, they were unable to sell their paper to Europe. It took Canada five years to amend regulations. All pulp industries currently have biological treatment and business has been increasing. He stated that testing parameters for refineries include total suspended solids (TSS) and pH. In final production, application of biological treatment is more effective than physical treatment alone. Textile industry waste and agricultural runoff, said Mr. Osborne, also cause problems. Non-point source pollution may be difficult to manage. An example is fertiliser runs off into local streams. He stated that the best way to ensure a reduction of runoff is to have a proper zone of grass and trees before the stream, which would absorb excess nutrients. Describing methods used in Canada to address these issues, Mr. Osborne noted that wetlands have been used to treat heavy metals by using plants. The backwash absorbs metal and waste materials. He also stated that use of terraces and buffers of grass and trees between farm and streams is a good option. Mr. Osborne concluded with a discussion of whether the principle of polluter pays could be applied. He noted that Canada attempts to implement this, but it is not always 100% effective. He stated that if you are polluting, you are responsible and it is your task to manage it. He believes that industry should be responsible for monitoring waste discharge. An example of user pay is the dredged material fee system in which fees are involved for the removal and dumping of material; this results in a few billion dollars cashed every year from the dredging industry. Working Group 4 SEAWASTE Network Dr. Yazeed Petersen led a small group in a discussion of the SEAWASTE Network. A main focus of this discussion group was related to further development of the online database. The idea was to extend the database beyond a focus on members to also include various resources and information used in waste management in the region. An additional thought was to include the contact information for different organizations involved in marine pollution control. The group also discussed broadening the Network beyond its current emphasis on land-based pollution to also address marine-based pollution. The website is: http://seawaste.uwc.ac.za. SESSION 7: Working group results, national reports and closing Dr. Chris Vivian, Topic Leader, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences (CEFAS), moderated as the working groups summarized results from their sessions. Dr. Neville Burt summarized the key points of discussion for the Dredged Material Management working group: effects of capital projects; environmental regulations lack thereof or of guidelines, particularly for dredged material. Concerns about overzealous regulations; and technical needs for South Africa capacity building, legal support, developing monitoring.

He also summarized the recommendations discussed during the working group: Build capacity. Review conditions under which permits currently review.

41 Ensure regular monitoring.

Mr. Craig Vogt summarized the primary discussion points in the Sewage Treatment and Management of Sewage Sludge/Biosolids working group as follows, noting that discussion was not as in depth due to the number of presentations: steps to treat and manage include development of infrastructure for collection, screening, primary treatment (settling), secondary treatment to address organics in sewage, settling, and disinfection with chlorine or ozonation; sewage sludge can be used as fertilizer, landfill, or dumping; and assistance is available from the London Convention on aspects of sewage sludge disposal.

Mr. Jim Osborne summarized the discussion that occurred in the Environmental Management of Industrial Waste working group: Problems include metal mines, effluent and waste runoff. Waste mines need to be regulated and covered with water so do not get metal released in waste water. Regulation is needed to be sure it works; Bulk terminals and loading lead to problems with pH and runoff as well as overflow and lack of maintenance. Lack of regulation is also an issue. Cover bulk material to reduce runoff. Significant dust is released with bulk loading operation; so it is useful to cover this. Curved conveyor can also help reduce; Pulp and paper mills are another problem; some still use chlorine bleach. Its a good idea to investigate potential dioxin production and sample sediments outside area. The pulp and paper industry has the ability to get serious in reduction of pollution and reduction of cost just through better identification and addressing of solid wastes. In addition to pollution reduction, this will lead to more profits; Sampling and user pay. In Canada, a user does sampling and analysis with periodic surveys to ensure everything is fine. If industry gets off target on pollution problems, government enforces and this can be helpful for low profits; Discussed new industry setting up in an area. Engineers should o l ok at waste treatment of entire process that is being proposed with chemists and biologists to check that things are proceeding well. There needs to be follow up to see that management is occurring; and Industrial waste and London Convention. There were several questions about whether industrial waste from pipeline into ocean is considered and banned by the London Convention: if loaded onto vessel and disposed at sea is banned; if it is piped all the way out like a boat, it is not covered by the London Convention. National regulations would need to address this. The GPA might be another venue for this.

Dr. Yazeed Petersen summarized the discussion held in the SEAWASTE Network group: Discussed ideas of network uses;

42 Interesting idea is to further develop the online database. Network has member database. The plan was to extend database to include not only members but also various resources and information used in waste management in the region. It may be difficult but hope to do so; Also hoping to get contact information of different organizations involved in marine pollution control; Could shift network towards issues discussed in this session. There is mostly a land-based focus now, but also workshop is giving indication of what could be discussed/emphasized on marine-based sources of pollution. One option would be to put the presentations from this workshop online; and Reminded attendees to keep in mind information and network sharing as well as how the Network can assist people. Presentation of National Reports (Priorities and Action Plans) Madagascar representatives referred to their presentation in which priorities were listed. Being an island, the population is dependent on marine products. Madagascar has worked seriously to protect the marine environment, but this requires much effort from all. It is necessary to sensitize the population to take care of sea and use it rationally. Environmental protection in Madagascar is supported by the appropriate international conventions. The Madagascar representative stated, Together in Africa we can unite and put together our efforts to protect the environment. Activities to be undertaken include putting in place reception facilities, setting up waste treatment facilities, establishing an inspectorate, and addressing marine pollution whether ocean or land based. Madagascar needs to request assistance from the IMO and the need to strengthen cooperation between East African countries. Mauritius is surrounded by coral reefs and that problems affecting these reefs are of high priority to the country. The representative from Mauritius remarked that although the convention is ratified, it does not mean that it will be implemented directly. It is still necessary to set up national framework and legislation. There is also a lack of personnel and logistics for enforcement because of lack of capacity and funding and reception facilities are not yet operational. Mauritius is having difficulty with the release of ballast water into ports and landbased pollution is also a concern. Existing sewerage has not kept up with population growth. The funding is piecemeal and, therefore, environmental enforcement officers are unable to keep up with solid waste disposal and littering. Runoff from solid waste leads to frequent dredging. Their landfill is nearly full and that there is not a lot of space on Mauritius so alternatives must be considered. Mauritius is attempting to address these issues and are attempting to increase sewage. Dumping is being relocated from coral reefs. For solid waste, Mauritius is considering recycling, composting, and incineration of waste and a waste oil reception facilities project is underway. An environmental impact assessment has been submitted and it is planned to be operational in early 2005. Mauritius is carrying out awareness campaigns on the importance of a good quality of environment. The Mauritius representative identified technical needs, specifically ballast water control, invasive species control, dredging and regional issues. Actions are being carried out in a number of areas. These actions include focusing on ballast water and baseline biological monitoring so to understand risks of unwanted species. Also, it is necessary to develop waste plans for disposal of solid waste but political will is needed to identify environmental options, as well as appropriate expertise, personnel, and on-time funding for implementation.

43 Mozambique representatives discussed ports in the south and north. After showing port locations, they indicated that, of their three ports, two of them rely on dredging activity. Byra has large problems because of the high rate of silting and its small dredging capacity. Regarding the legal framework, in 1994, parliament adopted a maritime act, which includes port activity. The 1996 government adopted a port policy allowing private intervention of port and leasing of the port. The Mozambique government ratified international conventions addressing pollution, such as MARPOL 73/78 and the Nairobi Convention. There are still problems because of lack of funding and expertise. Mozambique needs help with implementation even though marine pollution prevention is a part of the national legislation it is still required. Key issues in Mozambique are pollution from ships, ballast water, and sewage treatment. During ship operations, there is leakage. Mozambique is not yet prepared to address ballast water. There is almost no treatment for sewage; which is mostly dumped directly into the sea. Additionally, there are workshops in the port area that are dumping oil into sea. In Byra, they are starting to address these issues. Workshops have plans to monitor and to address these environmental issues, as are the main ports. There is a lack of resources for implementation in Mozambique. Mozambique described their technical issues as primarily a need for assistance and the recognition that the IMO could assist in developing national legislation. Mozambique believes both these needs will be addressed. The Mozambique representatives gave the following recommendations: the government should ratify the London Convention and request assistance for training, implementation, and expertise from IMO and other international organizations. Namibia representative stated that the Namibia port authority is part government and part private and there are two large ports. A major issue is the implementation of the environmental management system which makes environmental impacts more serious. A RAMSAR lagoon is located next to the port. Key issues of concern in Namibia are pollution from vessels (oil slops, rubbish, ballast water) and pollution from fishing vessels on the landside. Namibia has signed some international conventions, such as MARPOL 73/78, but lacks implementation and enforcement. Namibia designated a site for dredging material that was identified through environmental impact assessment. Namibia has taken action to address these issues. It has established a pollution tariff within the port limits based on a polluter pays idea and there are now regular inspections. This has provided an example for the government because they now see that enforcement of environmental regulations is possible. It took sometime for the government to realize this approach and instead, sought to extend port limits. The Namibia representative recommended state control of ports and noted that it would be done if there is assistance to translate IMO conventions into law. The Namibia representative also recommended more workshops like this and that it is necessary to properly identify representatives to attend such workshops. There are a number of government ministries that should be involved and all these different ministries should be identified. He indicated that because workshops like these are for the improvement of policies, it is very important to include the right representatives. The SEAWASTE Network may be a good tool to involve all government representatives. It is also necessary to include all affected parties. The Namibia representative recommended a focus on incentives, as well as a focus on the benefits of environmental protection and related economic benefits. Eritrea is in the early stages of developing maritime and environmental legislation. Eritrea inherited the old maritime code from its previous colonizer and no amendment has been done. There is now a revision being made with IMO that will establish a new code. Eritrea has not ratified many international conventions. The environment of Eritrea has not been much affected, there have been cases of illegal discharge and oil discharge. Ships carrying oil and passenger ships visit the ports but there are no facilities which is the main concern. Most common

44 environmental problems occur during loading and unloading. Additional key concerns listed by Eritrea include ballast water, sewage, and garbage from ships. This last is a great concern because there are no reception facilities. Eritrea is fully aware of MARPOL 73/78 and believes it is important, however, they have not yet acceded because implementation is not possible. Eritrea has a long seacoast with 350 islands, but there is no significant population along this coast so it is not yet polluted. There are just a few factories, but the waste from these factories is not treated well. There is some tourism, but not enough to cause pollution. Eritrea has a maritime administration, which is responsible for ship safety at sea and for the prevention of marine pollution. It is clear that the maritime administration plays a major role in pollution prevention from ships. Eritrea faces some constraints. It has not developed an oil pollution contingency plan and it also lacks the ability to address emergency response. Other constraints include the lack of financing, control and enforcement mechanism; insufficient public awareness; lack of trained expertise; and minimal involvement in international meetings and conferences. The current coastal activities in Eritrea include a fishing programme and the construction of a container terminal. Technical assistance is underway for improving Eritreas general situation. Comoros main port receives 70% of all trade. Ships up to 1,000 tonnes can be received. The port does not have good communication facilities and berth facilities are also difficult. Offloading is also slow and tiresome. Container ships are used, but they are very slow and with the minimum necessary for navigation. Security at the port is necessary to prevent dangers to cargo and people. Separation of international and local traffic is necessary and would assist in safety. Comoros carried out a study of port pollution. There is an oil route to the Gulf that goes through Comoros Islands and, therefore, poses a certain risk of pollution to the islands. The Comoros are ecologically very rich and biological diverse. These characteristics make it a good possibility for tourism. It is necessary, however, to protect this fragile environment. As a result, Comoros has established a number of measures to protect the environment from oil spills. Ratification of several international conventions is one plan. Another action is to establish national and international procedures for environmental protection. Comoros does have facilities for emergencies, including personnel and equipment. It is still necessary to establish measures for these emergencies under the charge of the ministry. Measures include a plan for early warning of oil spills and for monitoring modalities. Comoros requires ships for policing, including at least one larger ship and a central operation centre. Personnel with radio facilities are also needed to ensure protection of port. The Comoros representatives stated that the maritime police should be strengthened. The ports need to deal with catastrophes, but these needs cannot be filled because of lack of resources. The Comoros representatives believe that the original maritime plan should be put in place to increase maritime security. Kenya representatives began by stating their awareness of the economic and social value of coastal and maritime resources. They are looking to protect these resources for the future. Kenya has taken steps to address environmental issues. At the regional level, Kenya entered into a number of agreements, including NEPAD and the Nairobi Convention. Kenya hosts the maritime secretariat for NEPAD. At the national level, Kenya has established environmental regulations that address maritime resources. Dumping at sea is an ongoing problem. Dredging is underway at a world heritage site north of Mombasa (Lamu Town) where dredged material is used for land reclamation. The Kenya representatives noted that pristine coral rock is used, so it is not contaminated. Kenya has taken action on the implementation of appropriate conventions. Kenya has a draft maritime bill, as well as a draft inland waterway bill. There is a task force putting in the final touches to these bills. The Inland waterway bill will be merged with the maritime authority bill

45 in order for both bills to come under one body. The London Convention will be ratified and implemented into national legislation. Kenya is ratifying the ballast water convention. Under the Environmental Management Act, the National Environmental Mana gement Authority (NEMA) is in the process of developing environmental regulations. The Kenyan Government has commenced development of a national oil spill contingency plan. Kenya is undertaking the following actions to address their issues of concern: publish a maritime bill, implement conventions, ratify the London Convention, and finalize the oil plan. Kenya is working on sensitivity maps for the oil plan and plans to carry out the global ballast water survey. The port survey will begin in August 2004. The company in charge of the waste facility reception will provide work a party to finish the rest of facility for reception of garbage, solid waste, and fuels. Kenya needs to address permitting for the 1996 Protocol, as well as to facilitate environme ntal management standards. It is necessary to fast track enactment of draft maritime bills. Kenya noted the need to enhance state control of ports while stating that they are currently shorthanded with personnel. Kenya also noted the need to complete domestication of the London Convention and the 1996 Protocol. Kenya recognizes the primary need to strengthen frameworks, build capacity and increase interests of relevant organizations. Kenya would like to address waste assessment facilities and the treatment of sewage and garbage this year. They would then focus on oil and other materials by next year. Kenya would like to aggressively promote regional cooperation. La Reunion currently has a number of projects with the result that the administration in charge is overburdened. The Departments of Environment and Public Works are dealing with these projects. Prevention and control of pollution has three related aspects: navigation monitoring, pollution prevention and general issues. La Reunion will soon sign texts regarding vessels carrying dangerous items. Le Reunion is also strengthening monitoring in the Indian Ocean, especially where oil tankers move. The focus of monitoring of navigation is to strengthen control of ships to be certain that dangerous ships are avoided as much as possible. For pollution prevention, La Reunion is developing a guide to address issues that exist. The representative from La Reunion noted that lessons learned from this workshop would enable the environment agency in his country to test materials in an autonomous way and prevent pollution. One difficulty is the idea of refuge, which can be rationalized only with navigational cooperation. La Reunion recognizes that it requires stakeholders to buy-in. La Reunion plans to hold a seminar on rescue and pollution prevention with South Africa. A key point is to intervene as rapidly as possible. La Reunion also hopes to strengthen links with Madagascar on a number of issues. A current issue is environmental management and dumping as addressed by organizations. There are three major projects: extension of the port of La Reunion, treatment of waste, and management of waste materials from ships. The La Reunion representative stated that the ratification instrument for the 1996 Protocol would have to be submitted, but noted that ambiguities should be removed. These ambiguities include emergencies and the relationship with France and other parties. There is pressure on coastal lagoons, resulting in sedimentation and leaching. La Reunion authorities are addressing these pressures. It will be necessary to balance preservation of the environment with the economic needs of France. La Reunion is cooperating with Australia on training, education, and controls. La Reunion also hopes to strengthen links as far as fishing in the South is concerned. International cooperation in this field is important because counterparts are well informed and have good resources. Illegal fishing is also an issue that would benefit from international cooperation. La Reunion believes that there may be fishing in the channel of Mozambique. This is an issue against which South Africa and Mozambique are also fighting. It is important that the links between these countries are strengthened.

46 Seychelles major port is Port Victoria. Seychelles has the Environmental Protection Act of 1994, which has sections on dumping polluting substances and wastes into territorial waters, control of entry of hazardous substances and waste, and waste on land. Seychelles participates in a number of activities to prevent marine pollution. Monitoring efforts include monitoring fishing, oil spills and waste. There is also monitoring of customs and warehouses, as well as onland inspection of buildings and facilities. Seychelles marine pollution prevention is coordinated among a number of agencies including Seychelles Coast Guard, Port Marine and Services Division, Seychelles Fishing Authority, Seychelles police, and the Marine Parks Authority. These agencies are trying to integrate their activities. Some of the integrated activities are joint inspections; joint enforcement action; meetings for fishing port waste, oil spills and port cleaning; coordination and control of cleanup and waste collection; and training. Weaknesses have been identified. In addition to a lack of adequate equipment and financial resources, there is also a need for constant monitoring, increased enforcement coordination, increased technical knowledge, and sensitisation of crew and agents. Somalias representative provided a general background on the physical and ecological settings of the country, emphasizing the large and ecologically diverse marine ecosystem. The Somalia representative described the sources of marine pollution in the country. There are six major concerns for Somalia. Municipal runoff, solid waste, sewage, and slaughterhouses create problematic domestic waste. Agricultural and industrial wastes, oil pollution as well as coastal quarrying, are additional pollution concerns. There are four deepwater ports and numerous landing sites. Oil spill and leakages come from these local port operations. Oily ballast discharges from tankers and major oil spills from tankers add to the oil pollution. Fishing activities both at sea and on shore result in marine pollution. The Somalia representative stated that there is alleged dumping of hazardous waste such as radioactive waste and other toxic refuse in the region. After describing the current political situation, it was noted that there are no contingency plans or capability to deal with these issues in Somalia. Somalia does not have any legislation concerning pollution by ships. Although Somalia is a signatory to the Nairobi Convention and the Regional Organization for the Conservation of the Environment of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA), it has ratified the SOLAS, MARPOL 73/78, or Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG). The way forward for marine pollution prevention in Somalia is unclear. South Africas representatives listed their key points as capacity building, legislation, national coordination, and research and development. South Africa has a programme to address marine pollution, but capacity building is needed. A key issue is training personnel. South Africa would like to increase personnel by increasing available training as well as through forming partnerships to train people into positions. Mentoring in other locations of the world would also improve technical knowledge of personnel. Currently, research and development in South Africa is focused on fish with little emphasis on pollution. It is important to elevate the importance of pollution in order for more research to be performed on coastal pollution and other issues. Coordination in research is necessary as there are a number of departments that are responsible for marine issues. These individual research efforts should be brought together. In addition to information sharing and exchange, it is necessary to enhance research and development capacity. The SEAWASTE Network could assist in this effort. The South Africa representatives hoped that all workshop participants would become involved with the Network. Knowledge dissemination is important among the working communities. South Africa has contracted to have a website developed and is hoping to identify marine research areas as this will be important for developing coastland protection.

47 South Africa hopes to establish national committees to work in coordinated efforts. Coordination among the regions of Africa and within South Africa itself is important to advance marine pollution prevention. Regular activities should include consultation among interested parties. South Africa is developing a number of activities. They plan to finalize the national oil spill contingency plan. South Africa is hoping to conduct an audit of reception facilities, which they would like to finish by the end of the year. South Africa is still operating on legislation from 1943. They are hoping to review regulations and criteria for dumping, as well as to sort out the permitting process. In order to address ballast water, South Africa would like to conduct a marine fauna and flora survey in all ports and harbours and to strengthen relationships between the departments of environmental affairs and water affairs to create a much more integrated and holistic process. South Africa requires assistance to strengthen their marine pollution prevention efforts, particularly financial assistance. Tanzania has six major threats to its water bodies and ports. These are oil pollution, ship ballast water, land-based pollution, dredged material management, air pollution programme, and soil erosion along coastlines. Oil pollution occurs from ship handling and waste, as well as oil suppliers. Tanzania has a national oil contingency plan in draft phase. Technical assistance is needed for these issues. Tanzania requires reception facilities, as well as funds for research and development addressing oil issues. Tanzania would like to carry out studies on port reception facilities and on oil waste standards. Another pollution threat is waste generated from land-based sources such as fisheries, sewage, and industry. Tanzania is developing a project to tackle this problem. One proposed project is the beautification of the coast using seagrass, with funding from UNEP GPA. Another project is to establish a sewage system in Dar es Salaam, but this requires assistance on technical expertise and funding. Tanzania also needs to address ballast water. They hope to have a national port and resources awareness campaign that will include students and technical personnel. Dredging is another threat. There are three major ports. Tanzania will need to identify the dredging needs for each port. This will require identification of dredging technologies and facilities, as well as the operation. Another threat is air pollution. Climate change and global warming are problems that are already being experienced along Tanzanias coasts and ports. It is leading to erosion. It is important for Tanzania to establish a database on air pollution and point sources. The Tanzania representative noted the importance of understanding nutrient loading through air pollution and other air pollution issues. Another threat is erosion. Tanzania has a programme for planting seagrass to prevent erosion. However, they need assistance to work on this programme, to identify future work, and to increase public awareness as well as funding. From a description of these threats, Tanzanias representatives concluded that a joint effort from this workshop is needed to prevent marine pollution and to identify key institutions for implementation and evaluation of the meeting outcome. Mr. Ren Coenen concluded this session with a discussion of the national reports. He stated that he was really impressed by the national reports, noting the limited time available for preparation during the week. Mr. Coenen said that the countries clearly identified priorities and the next steps. He told the participants that the Scientific Group would look at the recommendations given during its session immediately following this workshop. He also indicated that there would be follow- up actions for those involved in the Nairobi Convention. Mr. Coenen hoped to coordinate with marine pollution issues and determine areas for IMO to step in with concrete advice. Mr. Coenen was struck by fact that many countries stated they are working towards ratification of the London Convention. He made a strong plea, urging countries to aim instead at the 1996 Protocol. Noting that the London Convention will end and be replaced by the Protocol, he suggested countries aim for the Protocol to ease the burden and resources for preparing dumping

48 issues in the international context. He asked participants to contact him or John Paul Muindi, Regional Co-ordinator for IMO, if they have any questions. He concluded with a reaction to the issue of capacity building. The IMO/PMAESA strategy plan is in place and waiting for implementation. He requested participants to contact John Paul Muindi to find out how these plans could fit into their national action plans and how to implement these strategies. Finally, he requested a round of applause for all the effort put into session.

CLOSING CEREMONY After certificates were distributed to all participants, Mr. Ali Mohamed moderated the closing session. Mr. Dixon Waruinge provided some closing remarks. On behalf of UNEP, Mr. Waruinge thanked the meeting organizers and, particularly noted IMO, Craig Vogt, and Rene Coenen. He also thanked Lynn Jackson for thinking of having the conference in Kenya. Finally, Mr. Waruinge thanked Ali Mohamed for taking on the challenge of organizing the meeting. Mr. Waruinge stated the need to work within conventions, noting that those within the Nairobi Convention should also work with IMO. He emphasized the need to work among agencies, remarking on the need to combine such ministries as transportation and environment. Mr. Waruinge thanked the participants for attending the meeting. He thanked the IMO for initiating a dialogue with at least dredging companies and the UNEP coral reef unit. He stated the utility of knowing that the GPA will work with countries on their priorities and recommendations. He believed partnerships would be developed through this meeting and knows that they would be fruitful. Municipal waste has been discussed and now the participants know that actions can be taken. Participants in this workshop, Mr. Waruinge stated, are aware any recommendations on municipal waste have ready solutions. He noted the importance of working closely with IMO to move towards solutions. He mentioned a couple projects in the Southwest Indian programme developed by the World Bank and IMO and plans to keep the participants informed on the progress of these two projects. In closing, Mr. Waruinge said that these had been five very intense days of learning and hoped everyone would return home with something fresh and new that to commit to their countries. Mr. Ali Mohamed noted East Africas strong history of unified work on marine environment. He thanked Mr. Waruinge and UNEP for their fine steering of the Nairobi Conventio n. Mr. Ren Coenen thanked the participants for their hard work and noted that the discussion had been very candid about the needs on which work should be focused. He hopes that the participants will continue to use the IMO and London Convention as a resource. He mentioned that the SEAWASTE Network would be continued for the next two years and hoped that everyone would use it. Mr. Coenen stated that the IMO is ready to work with the workshop participants and UNEP. He noted that efforts would be concentrated on implementing the regions issues and addressing their needs through the Nairobi Convention. He urged countries interested in joining the London Conventions 1996 Protocol to contact the IMO office, which will assist countries where they can. Finally, Mr. Coenen thanked those who had been involved: Mr. Ali Mohamed with his thorough and great effort in organizing; Professor Khamala and the National Environmental Management Authority for bringing things together; the Ministry of Transportation f or their work; and the Kenya Ports Authority for the field trip and wonderful reception the night before.

49 Professor Canute Khamala stated that on behalf of the Government of Kenya, he is greatly honoured to have played host to this very important workshop. He believed that all participants learned a lot at the workshop, noting himself in particular. Professor Khamala thanked the IMO. Professor Khamala stated that during the country discussions it became clear that Eastern African countries face great challenges in marine pollution, particularly in coastal areas and ports. Countries have attempted to address these challenges through membership in international conventions. Several countries noted that they have ratified the London Convention and are working towards other IMO conventions. It emerged from the discussions that compliance and enforcement of international conventions have not been easy, due largely to lack of capacity and resources in the region. As ports are expanded, dredging is inevitable. Professor Khamala stated that dredging has to be performed in an environmentally friendly manner. The effects of dredging can have a great impact on marine life, noting that a dredger can be as large as 3 football fields, and asked participants to imagine this impact. He remarked on the importance of dredging to make causeways for ships, but stressed also the importance of sustainable management of the environment. Professor Khamala stated that what was lacking in the presentations was the extensio n of biological concerns and that these concerns should come into play for dredging and other issues. Professor Khamala stated that this workshop demonstrates what can be accomplished when regions and nations work together. He is very proud to have the Secretariat of the Coastal and Marine Programme of NEPAD in Kenya and believes that the same people who attended the workshop will work with the NEPAD Coastal and Marine Programme. He remarked that African countries are very good at working in organizations, but noted the need for funding and seeing how to organize initiatives to benefit from them. Professor Khamala concluded with thanks to the organizers, facilitators and participants and gave special thanks to the organizers of the two receptions, especially the event at which all learned more about Fort Jesus. Professor Khamala declared the workshop closed. Mr. Ali Mohamed offered a few final words. He noted how proud the Kenyan representatives were to have had the privilege of hosting the workshop and offered a very big asanti for coming to the workshop. Mr. Mohamed believed that active participation had allowed the workshop to be such a great success. Mr. Mohamed thanked all the organizers as well as the donors and contributors, which made the workshop possible and also thanked the interpreters, as well as those who worked behind the scenes.

WORKSHOP CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The IMO/UNEP/NEPAD Workshop on Marine Pollution Prevention and Environmental Management in Ports in Southern and Eastern Africa informed the participants about the London Convention and Protocol in the context of other international agreements and programmes for the protection of the marine environment. The Workshop also provided a forum for representatives of national marine pollution prevention and management agencies to gain more information about relevant topics and to learn more about relevant resources in the region and from international organizations. Regional Concerns Discussion of regional concerns was divided between marine-based challenges and land-based challenges. The primary marine-based challenges discussed were oil spill contingency planning, the provision of reception facilities for ship-borne wastes, the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms through ballast water, ship-based pollution and litter on the coastline, and the

50 difficulty of preventing and controlling dumping at sea. Land-based challenges focused on sources of pollution on land and sewage, solid waste management, e.g., litter and plastics, and industrial wastewater. Once the types of pollution faced by the region were identified, the discussion centered on the difficulties of addressing each of these. The lack of reception facilities and sewage treatment is a problem faced by many countries and is exacerbated by rapid population growth that is increasing beyond the building of infrastructure. Additionally, many of the countries mentioned the lack of trained personnel for enforcement and implementation of national legislation, while other countries were not sure how to coordinate international agreements with national legislation. Countries were seeking assistance to train personnel, setup facilities and create national legislation. Follow-up Projects The SEAWASTE Network on integrated waste management in Southern and Eastern Africa was identified as an excellent, additional platform for regional networking and giving a follow- up to discussions at this Workshop and sharing of experiences in solving regional concerns would be easier through this network. Participants were urged to take advantage of this resource. IMO stressed its readiness to work with workshop participants and UNEP on marine pollution prevention in the region. Efforts would be concentrated on utilizing the Nairobi Convention to address regional issues and needs. Countries interested in joining the London Protocol were urged to contact the IMO Office for the London Convention. Minimum requirements to implement the London Protocol Several countries recommended the creation of an information package detailing the minimum requirements to join the London Protocol. Participants requested a detailed list of the steps that a country should to take to join, as well as a clear description of the benefits, costs and consequences a State should consider when becoming a Contracting Party to this Protocol.

51

ANNEX I

IMO/UNEP WORKSHOP ON MARINE POLLUTION PREVENTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN PORTS IN EASTERN AFRICA: Mombasa, Kenya (26 - 30 April 2004)
Programme of Workshop Sunday, 25 April Monday, 26 April 07:30 09:00 Session 1 09:00 10:10 Registration of participants Pre-registration

Opening Ceremony Welcome and Introduction: Professor Canute Khamala, Chairman, Board of Management, National Environment Management Authority Dr. Ellik Adler, UNEP Mr. Ren Coenen, IMO-Office for the London Convention, IMO/London Convention Mr. Brown Ondego, Managing Director Kenya Port Authority

Official Opening of the Workshop Dr. Gerishon Ikiara, Ministry of Transport and Communications COFFEE & TEA BREAK 10:45 11:00 Workshop Objectives Objectives and structure of the workshop: Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group: Mr. Craig Vogt Session 2 11:00 12:30

Legal Framework for Marine Pollution Management (Moderator: Mr. Craig Vogt, Chair of the LC Scientific Group) Introduction to London Convention 1972 and its 1996 Protocol and Implications of Membership: Mr. Ren Coenen, IMO MARPOL 73/78 Convention: Ms. Geraldine M. Maingi, Kenya Ministry of Transport and Communications Global Programme of Action (GPA) and Regional Sea Programme in Eastern and Southern Africa: Dr. Ellik Adler, UNEP

52

Nairobi Convention: Dixon Waruinge, UNEP Southern and Eastern African Waste Management Network (SEAWASTE Network): Dr. Yazeed Petersen, International Oceans Institute, South Africa Intergovernmental Oceanographic Committee (IOC): Dr. Melckzedeck Osore, Kenya Marine Fisheries Research Institute Discussion: Opportunities for collaboration and integrated management 12:30 14:00 Session 3 14:00 16:00 LUNCH BREAK

Sustainable Development: Environmental Management in Ports: Identification of Issues (Moderator: Dr. Chris Vivian, Vice Chair, LC Scientific Group, United Kingdom) Land-Based and Sea-Based Discharges (sewage, industrial wastewater, storm water runoff, vessels: bilge water, black and gray water, antifouling systems, vessel-repair dry docking facilities): Mr. Jim Osborne, Canada Management of Ballast Water Discharges: Dr. Lynn Jackson, Global Invasive Species Program, South Africa Dredging of Ports and Marinas: Engineers, United States Dr. Tom Fredette, Army Corps of

Integration of Sustainability Issues into Port Management Using Strategic Environmental Assessment: Capetown Case Study: Ms. Mandisa Mondi, National Port Authority, South Africa National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan: Ms. Mercy Wambugu, Kenya Shell Global Programme of Action (GPA): Dr. Ellik Adler, UNEP Discussion 16:00 16:30 16:30 17:30 COFFEE & TEA BREAK Sustainable Development: Environmental Management in Ports: Identification of Issues (Moderator: Mr. Jim Osborne, Canada) (continued) Case studies: Port Development Programme and Industrial Development and Waste Management: Mr. Shreenath Parahoo, Ports Authority, Mauritius Development of Port Ballast Water Management Plan for Mauritius: Mr. Asiva Coopen, Ministry of Shipping, Mauritius

53 Addressing the Realities in Providing Adequate Port Reception Facilities: Mr. Japhet Ombogo, East Africa Marine Environmental Management Company Ltd. French Organisation for Pollution Prevention and Pollution Response (POLMAR): Mr. Dominque Bucas, Navy, La Reunion Discussion 18:30 Tuesday, April 27 Session 4 09:00 10:30 Reception

Sustainable Development: Waste Management in Eastern & Southern Africa (Moderator: Mr. Ali Mohamed, Kenya) Overview of Waste Management in Eastern & Southern Africa: Dr. Daniel Munga, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute Overview of Legal Frameworks for Marine Pollution Prevention in Eastern and Southern Africa: Mr. Akunga Momanyi, University of Nairobi Case studies: The 2004 International Ballast Water Convention and its Impact on Port Management: Mr. Brian Watt, Port Management Association of Eastern and Southern Africa (PMAESA) Ballast Water Management in South African Ports: Ms. Mirriam Tenyane, National Ports Authority, South Africa Port Management in Madagascar: Mr. Andrianarison Aurelian, Transport Ministry, Madagascar Discussion

10:30 11:00 Session 5 11:00 13:00

COFFEE & TEA BREAK

Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidance (Moderator: Dr. Gi-Hoon Hong, Vice Chair LC Scientific Group, Korea) Introduction to Waste Management Principles: Mr. Craig Vogt, Chair LC Scientific Group Key components of Waste Assessment Guidance: Mr. Frans Tjallingii, Netherlands Waste Characterization: Ms. Linda Porebski, Canada Waste Management Options: Mr. John Lishman, United States Identification of Disposal Sites: Mr. Chris Vivian, United Kingdom

54

Discussion 13:00 14:30 14:30 16:00 LUNCH BREAK Introduction to Waste Assessment Guidance (Moderator: Mr. John Lishman, United States) Permitting Process: Ms. Linda Porebski, Canada Environmental Impact Assessment and Monitoring: Dr. Tom Fredette, United States Case Study: Dutch Experience EIA Development, Disposal, and Monitoring of Dredged Material: Mr. Frans Tjallingii, Netherlands Discussion 16:00 16:30 16:30 - 17:30 COFFEE & TEA BREAK Waste Management Case Studies (Moderator: Ms. Molly Madden, United States) Case Studies: Efforts to Address Ballast Water Management in Kenya: Dr. Melckzedeck Osore, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute Dumping of Condemned/Spoilt Cargo and Dangerous Goods: Mr. Peter Mbiriri, Kenya Ports Authority Industrial Development and Waste Management in the Industrial Estate of Poudre dor: Mrs. Nashreen Soogun, Ministry of Environment, Mauritius Status of Environmental Aspects at Dar Es Salaam Port: Mr. John Kwayu, Harbour Authority, Tanzania Maritime Safety in Comoros: Mr. Bakri Oumouri, Ministry of Infrastructure Development, Comoros Waste Management in the Comoros: Mr. Issa Abdillah Mohamdi, Direction nationale denvironnement, de fort et strategie agricole, Comoros South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) and Emergency Response Activities: Mr. Saleem Modak , South African Maritime Safety Authority Wednesday, April 28 Thursday, April 29 FIELD TRIP PORT OF MOMBASA

55 Session 6 Working Group Sessions

(Convening of Working Group 1, Dredged Material Management, and Working Group 4, SEAWASTE Network, is definite. Working Groups 2 and 3 are optional and these sessions will be determined on the basis of responses received from invited countries.) 9:00 17:30 Working Group 1: Dredged Material Management Facilitators: Mr. Neville Burt (WODA/HR Wallingford) Mr. Polite Laboyrie (Dutch Rijkswaterstaat) Dr. Tom Fredette (USACE) Ms. Molly Madden (USEPA) Mr. Dixon Waruinge (UNEP) The working group session is planned in two parts. The morning session will be a series of lectures about various aspects of dredged material management. For this, delegates will receive a free set of CEDA/IADC Guides Environmental Aspects of Dredging. Opportunity will be given during and at the end of each lecture for questions. The afternoon will provide an opportunity for presentation of cases by delegates followed by a panel discussion led by the speakers and other invited experts. 09:00 09:10 Introduction to the dredged material management Working Group Neville Burt (WODA/HR Wallingford) Application of the LC to dredged material Tom Fredette (U.S Corps of Engineers) London Convention/Protocol: Specific Waste Assessment Guidelines for Dredged material The role of The International Navigation Association, PIANC; Dredged Material Management Guide, Management of Aquatic Disposal of Dredged Material, Managing Contaminated Dredged material, Dredging: The Environmental Facts - where to find what you need to know.

09:10 09:45

56 09:45 10:30 Project Planning and Assessment: Investigation, Interpretation and Impact Polite Laboyrie (WODA/ Rijkswaterstaat) 10:30 1100 11:00 12:00 Project planning Initial evaluation Field surveys, sampling and lab tests Interpretation of results Assessment

COFFEE & TEA BREAK Dredging: Machines, Methods, and Mitigation Neville Burt (WODA/HR Wallingford) Types of project Phases of a project Dredging equipment Recent developments Transport and disposal equipment and techniques Mitigating measures Monitoring and Control

12:00 13:00

Management of Dredged Material: Re- use, Recycle or Relocate Polite Laboyrie (WODA/Rijkswaterstaat) Management alternatives Selection of best option Material properties Beneficial use Open water disposal Confined disposal Treatment

13:00 14:30 14:30 15:00 15:00 15:15

LUNCH BREAK Dredging in Coral Reef Areas Mr. Dixon Waruinge (UNEP) Environmental Education: Dredged Material ManagementWeb Site Demonstration Ms. Molly Madden (U.S. EPA) and Dr. Tom Fredette (US Corps of Engineers) Case studies Dredged Material Management in South Africa, Mr. Asanda Njobeni, Department of Environment, South Africa COFFEE & TEA BREAK Panel discussion chaired by Neville Burt

15:15 16:15

16:15 16:45 16:45 17:45

57 Panel members: Tom Fredette Polite Laboyrie Dixon Waruinge Chris Vivian Working Groups 2, 3, and 4 operate concurrently in the afternoon with Working Group 1 (Working Groups 2 and 3 are optional and these sessions will be determined on the basis of responses received from invited countries.) 13:30- 15:15 Working Group 2 Sewage Treatment and Management of Biosolids Facilitators: Mr. Craig Vogt (U.S.) Fundamentals of Sewage Treatment-Facilities and Processes: Mr. Craig Vogt, United States Management of Sewage Sludge (Biosolids), Mr. Craig Vogt, United States Management of Sewage Sludge Disposal in Korea, Dr. Gi Hoon Hong, Korea 15:15-15:45 15:45-17:30 COFFEE & TEA BREAK Working Group 3 Environmental Management of Industrial Waste Facilitator: Mr. Jim Osborne, Canada Industrial Waste and Waste Water Management Issues: Mr. Jim Osborne, Canada Case Studies 15:45-17:30 Working Group 4 SEAWASTE Network Facilitator: Dr. Yazeed Petersen, University of South Africa Prepare reports on national priorities & draft Action Plans (Moderators, Working Group Chairs and Delegates). This session is for delegates to prepare national reports to be presented to the Workshop Friday, April 30 Session 7 08:30-9:00 Identification of funding opportunities Management/Partnerships, TBD for Environmental

18:30-20:00

09:00-09.30

Summary Results from Working Groups (Moderator: Dr. Chris Vivian) Dredged Material Management, Mr. Neville Burt, WODA/HR Wallingford

58

Sewage Management, Mr. Craig Vogt, USA Industrial Waste and Waste Water Management, Mr. Jim Osborne, Canada SEAWASTE Network, Dr. Yazeed Petersen, International Oceans Institute 09.30-12:00 11:00-11:30 11:30-12:30 Presentation of National Reports (Priorities & Action Plans) COFFEE & TEA BREAK Presentation of National Reports (Priorities & Action Plans )Continued

12:30 Closing Ceremony Closing Remarks Mr. Ren Coenen, IMO/London Convention Closing Remarks, Mr. Dixon Waruinge, UNEP Closing Remarks, Government of Kenya 13:00 Closure of Workshop

***

59

ANNEX II
IMO/UNEP Workshop on Marine Pollution Prevention and Environmental Management in Ports in Eastern Africa Mombasa, Kenya 26 30 April 2004 List of Participants CANADA Linda Porebski Chief Marine Pollution Prevention Environment Canada 12th Fl., Gatineau, Quebec, K1A OH3 351 ST. Joseph Blvd, 12th Floor Gatineau, Quebec, KIAOH3 Phone: 819 953 4341 Fax: 819 953 0913 Email: lindaporebski@ec.gc.ca Jim Osborne Consultant 1030 Route 105 Chelsea, Quebec Phone: 819-827-3368 Mobile:613 614 3368 Email: j.m.osborne@sympatico.ca COMOROS Toimimon Youssouf Securite Maritime Autorite Portuaire des Comores P.O. Box 957 Moroni Phone: 269 730 008 Fax: 269733253 Email: apc@snpt.km Bakri Oumouri Director Maritime Transport Ministere de development des Infrastructure Charge de Transport P.O. Box 97, Moroni Phone: (269) 734060 Fax: (269) 734241 Email: apc@snpt.km Ali Mohamed Assoumani Port Officer Autorite Portuaire des Comores P.O. Box 858, Moroni Phone: (269) 730008 /733253 Mobile: (269) 337272 Fax: (269) 733253 Email: apc@snpt.km Issa Abdillah Mohamadi Chef de Service Communication et Education Environmentals Direction Nationale de lEnvironment, Des forets et Strategies Agricoles P.O. Box 41 Moroni Phone: (269) 736388 / 799177 Fax: (269) 736388/736362 Email: issab_mohamadi@yahoo.fr ERITREA Alem Tsehaye Director General, Department of Maritime Tranport Ministry of Transport and Communication P.O. Box 679 Asmara Phone: 00291-1-121317 Fax: 00291-1-121316 Email eprp@gemel.com.er Yishak Weldemariam Marine Engineer responsible for the Port environmental protection Massawa Port Administration P.O. Box 73, Massawa Phone: 291 1 552122 Fax: 291 1 552106 Email: yishakmass@yahoo.com Amanuel Asmelash Ghebretensae Head, Standard & Regulations Department of Maritime Transport P.O. Box 679, Asmara Phone: 291-1-120555/121317 Fax: 291-1-121316 Email: motcrez@eol.co.er Tewolde Gebreyesus Director of Resources Assessment & Information Department of Environment Ministry of Land, Water & Environmental Resources P.O. Box 5713, Asmara Phone: 291-1-125887 Fax: Email: wedisiratu@yahoo.com

60
KENYA Saeed M. Mwaguni Head, Environment and Department Coast Development Authority P.O. Box 1322, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-313382 Mobile: 254-733 600 910 Fax: 254 224411 Email: cda@africaonline.co.ke Dr. Melchezedeck Osore Senior Research Scientist Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute P.O. Box 81651, Mombasa Phone: 254-041-471129 Fax: 041-475157 Email: mosore@kmfri.co.ke Peter W. Kwinga Executive Officer Kenya Ships Agents Association P.O. Box 83908, Mombasa Phone: 041-230027/8 Fax: 041- 230001 Email: ksaa@africaonline George Sunguh Managing Editor African Shipping Review Box 45, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-315454 Fax: Email: Daniel Nyassy Journalist East African Stardard Newspaper P.O. Box 90120, Mombasa Phone: 254 41 228605/313185 Fax: 254 41 312331 Email: nyassyt@yahoo.com Jack Owuor Photo Journalist East African Stardard Newspaper P.O. Box 90120, Mombasa Phone: 254 41 228605/313185 Fax: 254 41 312331 Email owuorjack@yahoo.com Mercy Wambugu Operations Manager Kenya Shell (OSMAG) P.O. Box 43561, 00100 Nairobi Phone: 3200 5163 Mobile: 254-722 512 395 Fax: 245 644 Email: mercy.m.wambugu@ksl.shell.com Prof. Canute P.M. Khamala Chairman National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) Box. 67839, 00200, Nairobi Phone: 020-609697 Mobile: 07433 779 Fax: 020-609697 Email: chairman@nema.go.ke Fatma Twahir Head, Research and Development Department E.A.M. Enviromental Management Co. Box 90302, Mombasa Phone: 041-228313 Mobile: 254-733 296782 Fax: 041-316583 Email: fatma@marpol-africa.com John M. Kasina Plant Inspector Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Services (KEPHIS) Box 80126, Mombasa Phone: 041 316002/3 Mobile: 254-722 283 193 Fax: Email: kephiscg@africaonline.co.ke jkasina@yahoo.com Boniface Musumba Security Officer Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: 041 312211 Mobile: 254-733 895920 Fax: 041 311867 Email: bmusumba@kpa.co.ke Lt. Col. D.O. Edepi Squadron Commander Kenya Navy P.O. Box 95350, Mombasa Phone: 041-451201 Mobile: 0721 375 045 Fax: 041-451213 Email: omulgu@yahoo.com Godrick Mwashigadi Technical Co-ordinator Oil Spill Mutual Aid Group Kenya P.O. Box 80394, Mombasa Phone: 041-495762 Mobile: 254-722 832661 Fax: 041-494515 Email:godrick.m.mwashigadi@exxonmobil.com

61
Mickie M. Abkeah Revenue Officer Kenya Revenue Authority P.O. Box 95300 Mombasa Phone: Mobile: 254-722879961 Fax: Email: Fidelice O. Ongany Revenue Officer Kenya Revenue Authority Box 41304, Mombasa Phone: 225811 ext 140 Fax: 041- 2205389 Email: Ali Mohamed NEPAD Coastal and Marine Secretariat P.O. Box 67839, 00200, Nairobi Phone: 254-20-608997 Email: biofish@africaonline.co.ke Salome Machua National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) P.O. Box 67839, 00200, Nairobi Phone: 254-20-608997 Email: biofish@africaonline.co.ke Ali Mwachui NEPAD Coastal and Marine Secretariat P.O. Box 67839, 00200, Nairobi Phone: 254-20-608997 Fax: Mobile: 254-722-370653 Email: ltvike2@yahoo.com Eunice Chipinde Personal Secretary National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) P.O.Box 67839, 00200, Nairobi Phone: 254-20-608997 Mobile: 0721-361606 Fax: 254-02-608997 Email: biofish@africaonline.co.ke Akunga Momanyi Lecturer University of Nairobi, Faculty of Law P.O.Box 10324, 00100 G.P.O Nairobi Phone: 254-20-342149 Mobile: 254-733-873300/254-722-992979 Fax: 254-020-34249 Email: akuad@todays.co.ke Brown M.M. Ondego Managing Director Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-312211 Mobile: Fax: 254-41-311867 Email: bmmondego@kpa.co.ke Capt. T. A. Khamis Harbour Master Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-312211 Fax: 254-41-311867 Email: twalibkhamis@kpa.co.ke Peter Mbiriri Pollution Control Officer Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-312211 ext 2583 Fax: 254-41-311867 Email: pkmbiriri@kpa.co.ke Murithi Mugambi Environment and Safety Manager Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: Fax: Email: Capt. J. Nguyo Marine Pilot Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95009, Mombasa Phone: Fax: Email: Peter K. Thuo Director/Shipping and Maritime Affairs Ministry of Transport and Communication, P.O. Box 52692, Ngong Road, Nairobi Phone: 254-2-7244553 Mobile:254-722-624538 Fax: 254-02-2724553 Email: Geraldine Maingi Under Secretary Ministry of Transport and Communications P.O. Box 52692, Ngong Road, Nairobi Phone: 254-2729200 Mobile: 254-733-924286 Fax: 254-2726362 Email:

62
Annah Tipis Principal Merchant Shipping Supt.(Commercial) Kenya Ports Authority P.O. Box 95076 Mombasa Phone: 254-41-225955/6 Ext 4330 Mobile:254-722-867631 Fax: 254-41-220831 Email: wanjirutip@hotmail.com Japhet Ombogo Process Engineer E.A.M. Environmental management co. Ltd P.O. Box 90302, Mombasa Phone: Mobile: 254-722-364332 Fax: Email:japhet@marpol-africa.com Rebecca Muga Administrator E.A.M. Environmental Management Co. Ltd Box 90302, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-228313 / 226824 Mobile:254-733-732 Fax: 254-41-316583 Email:rebecca@marpol-africa.com Fatima Abdallah Ministry of Transport and Communications P.O. Box 52692, Ngong Road, Nairobi Phone: Fax:: Dr. Daniel Munga Snr. Research Scientist Kenya Marine & Fisheries Research Institute P.O. B ox 81651, Mombasa Phone: 254-41-475152-4 Mobile:254-733-584729 Fax: 254-41-475157 Email: dmunga@kmfri.co.ke MADAGASCAR Roland Rakotondrasata National Co-ordinator of Oil Spill Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests Ampefiloba, Antananarivo Phone: 261-20-2264081 Mobile: 03311-157-81 Fax: Email: sata@dts.mg Andrianarison Aurelien Responsible of Maritime Transport Transport Ministry - Maritime P.O. Box 581, Antananarivo Phone:261 20 22258-60 Mobile: 03204546-92 Fax: 261 20 2225860 Email: spapmf.dt@mttpat.gov.mg Avellin Christian Head of ShipsDepartment Toamusina Port BP 492 , Toamasina - 501 Phone: (261-20) 5332155 Mobile: 0320-461062 Fax: (261-20) 53335 58 Email:sept@dts.mg MAURITIUS Nashreen Soogun Environment Officer Ministry of Environment Ken Lee Tower, Barracks Street, Port Louis Phone: (230) 2124385 Fax: (230) 2126671 Email: nsoogun@mail.gov.mu Yajoshi Basant Rai Scientific Officer Ministry of Fisheries 4th Floor, LIC Building Port Louis Phone: (230) 238-4829/4100 Fax: (230) 238-4184 Email:fish@intnet.mu/fisheries@mail.gov. mu Shreenath Parahoo Port Emergency & Environment Controller Maurituis Ports Authority Port Administration Bldg, Mer Rouge, Port Louis Phone: (230) 2403741/2065466 Mobile: 00230-2571599 Fax: (230) 2065465 Email: Capt.Asiva Coopen Nautical Surveyor, Shipping Shipping Office 4th Floor Quayd Port Louis Phone: (230) 2407016 Fax: (230) 2161612 Email: acoopen@mail.gov.mu MOZAMBIQUE Jardo Matimula Ministry of Health Av. Eduardo Mondlane/ Salvador Allende, P.O. Box 264, Maputo Phone: 258-1-310281 Mobile: 258-82-468992 Fax: 258-1-310281 Email: jmatimula@yahoo.com.bn

63
Select Mundlovo Ministry of Transport and Communications Box 336, Maputo Phone: 258-1-303480 Mobile:258-82-407826 Fax: 258-426853 Email: dnmp.zebra@uem.mz NAMIBIA Jo Leitz ISO Consultant Namibian Ports Authority No. 17th 13th Road, Walvis Bay Phone: 264(0)64 208 2283 Fax: 264 (0) 64 208 2333 Email: jo@namport.com.na NETHERLANDS Frans J. Tjallingii Co-ordinator for International Affairs Ministry of Transport Public Works & Water Management North Sea Directorate P.O. Box 5807 2288 G K Rijswijk Phone: 31 703366846 Mobile: 316-53946430 Fax: 31 70 3900691 Email: f.j.tjallingii@dnz.rws.minvenw.nl Hypolite. Laboyrie Head of Environmental Department Ministry of Transport, Public Works & Water Management Griffioenlaan 2 P.O. Box 20000 3502 LA Utrecht The Netherlands Phone: 31-30-285-7826 Mobile: 31-6-51313279 Fax: 31-30-285-8195 Email: h.p.laboyrie@bwd.rws.minvenw.nl REPUBLIC OF KOREA SOUTH AFRICA Gi Hoon Hong Senior Scientist Korea Ocean Research & Development Institute Ansan P.O. Box 29 Kyonggi 425-600 Phone: 82-031-400-6180 Mobile: 82-(0)11-9066-3189 Fax: 82-31-408-4493 Email: ghhong@kordi.re.kr REUNION (France) Dominique Bucas Navy Commander's Deputy Noel Williams Director Depart. of Environmental Affairs & Tourism 7 Doddington Street, Avondale, Atlantis 7349 Phone: 21-4023181 Mobile:0833066732 Fax: 21-4023181 Email: nwilliam@deat.gov.za Mirriam Tenyane Environment Health & Safety Portfolio Manager National Ports Authority of South Africa Private Bag x1, Saldahna 7395 Navy - In Charge of State Action on Sea Rond Point de la Glaciere, 97821, LE Port Cedex Phone: 262 (0)-262-55-13 48 Mobile: 262 (0)-692-60-04-54 Fax: 262-(0)-262-55-1208 Email: comar.aem@wanadoo.fr SEYCHELLES Philip DeCommarmond Environment Inspector Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Victoria, Mahe Phone: 248-224644 Fax: Email:ppc@env.gov.sc Clement Julienne Snr. Tug Coxswain Port and Marine Division P.O.Box 1145, Botanical Garnes, Mahe Phone: 376147 Fax: Email: Clifford Toussaint Fishing Port Manager Seychelles Fishing Authority P.O.Box 449, Victoria, Mahe Phone: 248-241098 / 511441 Mobile: 248-511441 Fax: 248 241508 Email: management@sfa.com SOMALIA Abdirahman J. Kulmiye Director Somali Network for Resource Management Bosaso, Puntland, Somalia Phone: 252-523-3626/4521/6363 Fax: 252-523-4801 Email:akulmiye@unobi.ac.ke

64
Phone: 27-22-701-4338 Mobile:27-83-285-3397 Fax: 27-22-714-2285 Email: miriamt@npa.co.za Mandisa Mondi Executive Manager Environment, Health & Safety National Ports Authority of South Africa P.O. Box 32696, Braamfontein, 2017 Phone: 27-11-242-4105/4342 Mobile: 083-308-4670 Fax: 27-11-242-4260 Email: mandisam@npa.co.za Saleem Modak Principal Officer - Cape Town South African Maritime Safety Authority SAMSA, 19th Floor, 2 Long Street, Cape Town 8001 Private Bag X7025 Roggebaai Phone: 27-21-421-6170 Mobile:27-83-257-5931 Fax: 27-21-419-0730 Email: smodak@samsa.org.za Asanda Njobeni Oceanographer Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism Private Bag x2 Roggebaai 8012, Cape Town Phone: 272-1402-3347 Fax: 272-1402-3140 Email: anjobeni@deat.gov.za Yazeed Petersen Project Officer International Ocean Institute of Southern Africa c/o Dept. of Biodiversity & Conservation Biology, University of the Western Cape, Private Bag X17, Bellville 7535, Cape Town Phone: 27-21- 959-3408 Mobile:27-83-530-3129 Fax: 27- 21-9591213 Email: ypetersen@uwc.ac.za Aurelia Nosipo Sobekwa South African Maritime and Safety Authority P.O. Box X 54309, Durban 4000 Phone: 31 306 8163 Mobile: 082 8590 117 Fax: 31 306 7558 Email: asebokwa@samsa.org.ze Lynn Jackson Acting Director Global Invasive Species Programmes Private Bag X7, Claremont 7735, Cape Town Phone: 27 21 799 8837 Mobile: 27-83-406-7666 Fax: 27 21 797 1561 Email:jackson@nbi.ac.za TANZANIA John K Kwayu Director of Operations Tanzania Harbour Authority P.O.Box 9184, Dar-es-salaam Phone: 255-22-211-7394 Mobile: 0744-787789 Fax: 255-22-211-3938 Email: do@tanzaniaports.com Melania Mary Sangeu Senior Environment Management Officer National Environment Management Council NEMC, P.O. Box 63154, Dar-es-salaam Phone: 255-022-134603 Mobile: 255-0744-753179 Fax: 255-022-111579 Email:melania_sangeu@yahoo.com Erasto Wapalila Maritime Transport Economist Ministry of Communications and Transport P.o. Box 9144, Dar-es-salaam Phone: 255-22-2122263 Mobile : 255-7744-490-800 Fax : 255-22-21-22268 Email: wapalilaes@yaoo.com UNITED KINGDOM Chris Vivian Topic Leader Centre for Environment Fisheries & Aquaculture Sciences (CEFAS) CEFAS Burnham Laboratory, Remembrance Avenue Burnham-on-Crouch, Essex, CM0 8HA Phone: 44-1621-787200 Fax: 44-1621-784989 Email: c.m.g.vivian@cefas.co.uk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Thomas J. Fredette Biologist US Corps of Engineers 696 Virginia RD Concord, MA Phone: 978-318-8291 Fax: 978-318-8303 Email:thomas.j.fredette@USACe.Army.mil

65
John Lishman Environmental Protection Specialist US Environmental Protection Agency Marine Pollution Control Branch (4504T) 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20460 Phone: 202-566-1364 Fax: 202-566-1546 Email: lishman.john@epamail.epa.gov Craig Vogt Deputy Director Oceans & Coastal Protection Division US Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20460 Phone: 202-566-1200 Fax: 202-566-1334 Email:Vogt.Craig@epamail.epa.gov Molly Madden ORISE fellow US Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20460 Phone: 202-566-1279 Fax: 202-566-1546 Email:Madden.Molly@epamail.epa.gov PORT MANAGEMENT ASSOCATION Olivier Hartmann Secretary General PMA Eastern and Southern Africa P.O. Box 99209, Mombasa, Kenya Phone: 254-41-223 245 Mobile: 254-733-804278 Fax: 254-41-228344 Email: pmaesa@africaonline.co.ke Mereille Backo Secretary General PMA West and Central Africa Box 12 Parklane, Lagos, Nigeria Mobile: 234 803 3650075 Email:mfbacko@yahoo.com/secgen@pmawc aagpacc.org Brian Watt Maritime & Pollution Consultant PMA Eastern and Southern Africa P.O. Box 38128, Faerie Glen 0043, South Africa Phone: 27-12-9913947 Mobile:27-82-4453155 Fax: 27-12-9916253 Email: brwatt@iafrica.com WORLD ORGANIZATION OF DREDGING ASSOCIATIONS Neville Burt Technical Director WODA c/o H R Wallingford, Wallingford Oxon OX10 8BA, UK Phone: 44 1491 822 348 Mobile: 44 7889 169080 Fax: 44 1491 832 233 Email: nev@hrwallingford.co.uk INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION Ren Coenen Head Office of the London Convention International Maritime Organization 4 Albert Embankment London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom Phone: 44-207 587-3239 Fax: 44-207 587-3210 Email: rcoenen@imo.org James N. Paw Programme Co-ordination Officer International Maritime Organization 4 Albert Embankment London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom Phone: 44-207 587-3238 Phone: 44-207 597 3210 Email: jpaw@imo.org John Paul Muindi Regional Co-ordinator International Maritime Organization P.O. Box 30218, Nairobi, Kenya Phone: 254-20-624377 Fax: 254-20-624485 Email: jmuindi@imo.org UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME Dr. Ellik Adler Programme Coordinator United Nations Environment Programme Regional Seas Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya Phone: (254) 20629033/544 Fax: (254) 20 624618 Email: Ellik.Adler@unep.org Dixon Waruinge Programme. Officer United Nations Environment Programme Box 63204, Nairobi, Kenya Phone: 020- 622025 Email: dixon.waruinge@unep.org

Annex III Presentation Summaries

Objectives and structure of the Workshop on Marine Pollution and Environmental Management in Ports

Mr. Craig Vogt

Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group: Deputy Director of Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, US Environmental Protection Agency The London Convention and the 1996 Protocol provide for the establishment of a scientific and technical support programme to further the objectives of the legal instruments. These provisions led to the development, in 1996, of a Framework for Technical Co-operation and Assistance Programme under the London Convention 1972, which was then further elaborated into a full Technical Co-operation and Assistance Programme, adopted in 1997. Subsequently, this led to further development into a Strategy for Technical Co-operation and Assistance under the London Convention, adopted in 2003. The Framework adopted in 1996 sets out the following objectives: To promote membership of the Protocol; To strengthen national marine pollution prevention and management capacities to achieve compliance with the Convention or, after its entry into force, the Protocol; and To cooperate with other organisations and agencies to ensure a coordinated approach to technical cooperation and assistance, avoiding duplication of efforts.

One of the steps to promote these objectives has been to hold the meetings of the Scientific Group in different regions of the world every alternate year. One objective is to identify technical co-operation and assistance needs. From the perspectives of the contracting parties, there are nine objectives for this workshop in Mombasa. They range from increasing awareness of the London Convention and 1996 Protocol to formulating a regional plan to address issues of common concern. The structure of the workshop is organized around these nine objectives.

67

Introduction to the London Convention 1972 and its 1996 Protocol: Implications of Membership

Mr. Ren Coenen

Head of the London Convention Office at the International Maritime Organization There have been four primary achievements since the London Convention came into affect. Unregulated dumping has been halted and is controlled by regulatory programs. Some waste disposal has been eliminated (industrial, radioactive, incineration). Waste Assessment Guidelines have been developed with the 1996 Protocol and Reverse List. Technical cooperation and regular meetings allow information exchange. The 1996 Protocol has a number of advantages. It is more modern, comprehensive and restrictive than the London Convention. The Protocol also has better linkages with other environmental agreements and is more pragmatic with its focus on waste categories rather than constituents. The existence of a provision for transitional periods recognizes the different backgrounds of the countries that join. Potential benefits include better capability, access to meetings, the linking of solutions to environmental problems, and the role of the Protocol as another tool in the kit. It also provides access to technical experts and knowledge. There are a number of steps to join the Protocol. Interested parties should request guidance on national implementation, contact Parties to the London Convention and Protocol, attend London Convention meetings as an observer, and contact the London Convention Website and Secretariat.

68 MARPOL 73/78 Convention

Ms. Geraldine Maingi

Undersecretary, Kenya Ministry of Transport and Communications The economic and social value of the marine environment to the country is highly recognized and its protection as a very important natural heritage for present and future generations benefit is a priority agenda. In this connection the country has made substantive steps in addressing threats to the marine environment posed by pollution. Kenya became signatory to MARPOL 73/78 Convention on 12th Sep 1975 with the objective of dealing with marine pollution by oil, pollution from chemicals, other harmful substances, garbage and sewage. To realize this objective, various activities/programmes have been adopted and put in place by the Government mainly the Ministry of Transport and Communications (Custodian of the Convention) and the Kenya Ports Authority in conjunction with the National Environmental Management Authority, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. Kenya has had a number of achievements in this field. It is well acknowledged that oil waste, chemicals, other harmful substances, garbage and sewage in any form are harmful to the marine environment. Disposal of waste oil and other substances into the sea affects the marine resources and the eco-system significantly. In addressing these, the MOTC prepared and presented to the Attorney General a marine pollution draft bill whose preparation was undertaken through stakeholders participation and IMO consultancy. The bill is intended to domesticate MARPOL Convention, OPRC and the Fund Convention among others related to marine environment protection. The bill became necessary after the realization that the existing Merchant Shipping Act was not adequately addressing marine pollution due to lack of updating and limited scope. In addition the Government has put in place an environment friendly waste reception facility at the Port of Mombasa to receive and recycle oily waste from ships and other port activities. The waste reception facility meets IMO requirements and is one of its kind in the region. This achievement has been spearheaded by KPA, the oil industry and the operating company East African Marine Environmental Management Company Limited. The facility is presently implementing Annex I of MARPOL. It has a receiving capacity of 200,000 litres of waster oil, processing capacity of 5,000 litres per hour and end tank capacity of 200,000 litres. It is a three (3) phased project with phase I already operating. Phase II - Covering reception of garbage and sewage is expected to be operational by end of 2004 while phase III is projected to be operational during 2005/6. phase III will handle grey water/cargo waste. Another important bill also with the Attorney General from MOTC is a Maritime Authority Bill intended to operationalise a National Maritime Administration. It will administer all maritime bills including the Marine Pollution Bill, hence, enhancing the countrys institutional capacity in this regard. With regard to capacity building, the Government has undertaken training of officers both at the Ministry and KPA to enhance knowledge and skills in marine pollution among others. A draft maritime industry policy paper, which addresses development and promotion of maritime education, has also been prepared and is in implementation process. The above achievements have been realized with technical co-operation assistance from IMO through workshops, consultancy services and scholarships in various subjects. In undertaking these programmes, various challenges have been faced. These challenges include:

69
Pollution threat from increased ship traffic along Kenya Coastal area. At any given time approximately 50 ships of various types are present in the major shipping lanes. Of these about ten are laden oil tankers of various sizes. Lack of public awareness on marine pollution threat is still a challenge that requires attention by stakeholders. Lack of capacity to handle chemicals, garbage and sewage waste at the port. Lack of coordinated approach by the various stakeholders/agencies programmes addressing marine pollution prevention in the country. Although the country has put in place an Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) of 1999, which provides regulations and guidelines on the protection of coastal and marine ecosystems, there are still gaps between its implementation and others addressing the marine environment which call for attention.

70

Regional Sea Programme in Eastern and Southern Africa

Dr. Ellik Adler

Programme Coordinator for Regional Seas Programme, United Nations Environment Programme The Regional Seas Programme is a way to address a large area with diverse environmental issues. The Regional Seas Programme is composed of scientific, legal, financial, and institutional elements. Principle activities are focused on land- and marinebased issues. Regional Seas acts as a liaison with global initiatives and establishes a platform to assist in integrated management and regulatory implementation of global conventions, programmes and initiatives. There are six elements of the Regional Seas Programme that are needed for project success and viability. These are political will and commitment, a solid financial base, a solid institutional base, a solid legal base, a strong and efficient secretariat, and access to external funding mechanisms. The Regional Seas Programme works closely with UNEPs Global Programme of Action (GPA).

71

Nairobi Convention

Mr. Dixon Waringue

Programme Officer, United Nations Environment Programme The objective of the Nairobi Convention is to build regional capacity, strengthen institutions, and secure sustainable use of resources. Partnerships are necessary the Nairobi Convention. Potential partners include: Global Programme of Action (GPA), Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). A broad objective is coordination with the mission of the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD). The Nairobi Conventions programmes are grounded in assessment, management through the identification of demonstration sites, and coordination. Activities examine shoreline changes and land-based sources of pollution, marine sources of pollution, and the strengthening of coordination structures. Crosscutting issues are information dissemination and the development of a Global Environment Facility (GEF) project.

72

Southern and Eastern African Waste Management Network (SEAWASTE Network)

Dr. Yazeed Peterson

Project Officer, International Ocean Institute of Southern Africa University of the Western Cape, Private Bag X17, Bellville 7535, South Africa Tel +27 21 959 3408; Fax +27 21 959 1213 Email ypetersen@uwc.ac.za; Web http://www.ioisa.org.za/ SUMMARY OF PRESENTA TION: 1. Background

The Southern and East Africa Waste (SEA-WASTE) Network was initiated in July 2002 by IOI -SA, with funding provided by the Netherlands Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management through the Office of the London Convention 1972. The network is the result of recommendations made at two workshops held under the auspices of the IMO (in Cape Town) in 1998 and 2001, which stressed the need for enhanced collaboration and information exchange amongst experts and organisations in the region. The aim of the network is to promote communication, information exchange and cooperation on pollution and water quality issues that impact on all aquatic environments in Southern and Eastern Africa. The networks scope therefore covers both landlocked and coastal countries. 2. Development of the network

As the present host of the network, IOI-SA carried out a number of promotional activities in 2003, in order to secure a critical mass of members to kick-start processes of information dissemination. Experts involved in various aspects of aquatic pollution were invited to join the network and a website was constructed to attract further interest. As a result of this process, the network has secured a membership base of 78 experts representing 15 countries in the region. Countries that are currently represented are: Botswana, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Four countries in the region are not yet represented namely Angola, Somalia, Swaziland and La Reunion (France). Readers are encouraged to suggest the names of persons in these countries who could be invited to join the network. A number of national focal points have also been secured from the region, however, there is a need for focal points to be secured from all countries represented. These individuals will have the responsibility to facilitate two-way communication and information exchange between their countries and the wider network. As the networks membership grew, announcements and articles were submitted by members and were eventually compiled into e-mail newsletters and distributed. Information materials received were also uploaded to the networks website, which can be found at http://seawaste.uwc.ac.za. The website contains a number of interactive facilities which enable members to send email to other registered members, hold discussions, upload

73
documents for wider sharing and create web further web pages. There is still a need for members to make active use of these facilities. 3. Issues Arising

As the project is essentially a networking and information sharing venture, a substantial amount of time has to be devoted to obtain relevant materials for distribution. Such a task becomes easier when the network is driven by its members. In the past however, the process of information sourcing was driven mainly by IOI-SA as the host institution. There is a need for members to participate more proactively in the network so that the host organisation can adopt a more facilitatory role, rather than serve as the resource developers. One way to address the above issue is to continue the process of securing national focal points, who will encourage members in each country to forward information of interest to their country and wider network. Again, IOI-SA would like to invite readers to suggest persons in their countries who could serve as focal points. In 2003, the SEA-WASTE Network gained more exposure when it was represented at three UNEP events in Mombasa, Zanzibar and Maputo. The events enabled the project to gain better insights on subjects related to waste management and aquatic pollution, and enabled the project to develop meaningful working relations with various UNEP programmes and African professionals. The events emphasise the importance of establishing personal / face-to-face contact with interested parties in the region. The network will continue to provide a supportive role to structures such as UNEP/GPA, the Nairobi Convention Office, the UNEP Regional Seas Programme and regional projects such as the GEF West Indian Ocean Land-based Activities (WIO-LaB) Project. Although information and communications technologies such as the Web and E mail are important media through which the project distributes information, the projects host recognises that Internet access may limit some professionals from participating in the network. The network will do its best to respond to this limitation by providing information materials in print format where needed, and on a demand-driven basis.

74

Activities of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) in Africa

Mika Odido
IOCWIO Project Office, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (IOC-UNESCO)

Dr. Melckzedeck K. W. Osore

Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute The current IOC activities in Africa include the following Ocean Data and Information Network for Africa; Coastal Observing System and Gloss network; Data and Information Management; Products development, Communication with end users; GeosphereBiosphere Coupling Processes in Ocean; and Development of an African Repository of Electronic Publications. Activities focus on i ncluding crosscutting themes aimed at the contribution of information and communication technologies to the development of education, science and culture and the construction of the knowledge to the society.

75

Land-Based and Sea-Based Discharges

Mr. Jim Osborne

Consultant Many sources of pollution to the marine environment 80% of all pollution is land-based. 20% split among shipping, offshore industry (oil and gas and seabed mining) and disposal at sea as well as atmospheric deposition.

Primary sources of ship-based pollution Sewage Gray water Bilge water Ballast wastes Antifouling paint

Garbage

Management of these sources of pollution Best management practices on board vessels. Best management practices in ports.

76

Management of Ballast Water Discharges

Dr. Lynn Jackson

Acting Director, Global Invasive Species Programme The impact of invasive alien species is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity. Human health impacts may include species carrying cholera, toxic dinoflagellates, or other diseases that may cause habitat destruction. Pathways for these introductions may occur through invasive species or ballast water. Intentional introductions can include aquaculture and fishing. Unintentional introductions can occur through canal developments, marine debris, escape or release from aquaria or shipping. Ballast water is a shipping related vector. There are 3-10 billion tonnes of ballast water transported per year. Over 7000 species are in transit at any one time. Shipboard measures to address ballast water management include risk reduction, ballast water exchange, and ballast water treatment. Port/shore side measures also exist.

77

Dredging of Ports and Marinas

Dr. Tom Fredette

Biologist, US Army Corps of Engineers Dredging projects have the potential to result in a number of different impacts that should be considered, evaluated, and minimized as part of the planning process. These include:
q q q

Physical Impacts such as circulation changes Biological impacts such as habitat modification Chemical impacts such as water quality degradation

All of these concerns can be minimized and mitigated by early identification and assessment.

78

Integration of Sustainability Issues into Port Management Using Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Mandisa Mondi
Executive Manager: Safety, Health and Environment (SHE), National Ports Authority of South Africa A Geohydrologist by profession who has undergone extensive training in the environmental management and business management fields, responsible for overall coordination of SHE functions at head office, based in Johannesburg, 101 De Korte Street, Braamfontein, SOUTH AFRICA, 2017. Tel: 27 (0)21 242-4105, e-mail: mandisam@npa.co.za. www.npa.co.za. The principle of integrating sustainability (biophysical, social and economic) issues early on in the port planning, policy formulation and ultimately into operational processes has been widely debated. IN response to this challenge, SEA has been developed as a tool to achieve this objective. This paper will discuss the application of SEA directly to the port management processes and policy formulations in South Africa, where ports are situated in sensitive marine environments, surrounded by complex built and social environments while playing a critical role in sustaining the Southern African economy. The SEA process that was undertaken for the Port of Cape Town will be used as a case study to show how the principles of SEA have been practically implemented to facilitate sustainable port development, operations and reporting. It will be argued in this paper that SEA can be used to empower industries to integrate sustainability issues into their day-to-day decision-making. This is achieved by contextualising sustainable development for the specific industries, through developing an industry specific vision for sustainable development and identifying strategic issues that, if addressed, will assist the industries to positively contribute to sustainable development. The linkages between the outcomes of the SEA, a Sustainability Frame work, and the requirements of Triple Bottom Line reporting (Sustainability Reporting) will be emphasized.

79

National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan

Ms. Mercy Wambugu

Operations Manager, Kenya Shell The National Oil Spill Response Committee, formed 1994, began OPRC implementation. There are three parts to the contingency planning. These are information gathering, strategy development and operational planning. The Kenya coast has risks related to oil activities. Threatened resources include marine life, beaches, mangroves, coral, fisheries, the tourism industry, seawater intake and the Port of Mombasa. The National Oil Spill Contingency Plan is currently in the draft stage. It does not assess spills from international vessels nor does it include inland waters. Steps forward for addressing oil spills include completion of the legal framework and establishment of a maritime agency. Current challenges are an outdated merchant shipping act, proposed legislation that has not yet been passed, lack of enactment of international law, the number of new market entrants and the lack of oil response equipment.

80

Global Programme of Action (GPA)

Dr. Ellik Adler

Programme Coordinator for Regional Seas Programme, United Nations Environment Programme The Global Programme of Action (GPA) was adopted in Washington, DC in 1995. It was implemented by UN agencies, the private sector, NGOs, and regional organizations for the purpose of controlling, reversing, and preventing the degradation of the marine environment. It is an important programme of action due to the importance of coastal resources, as well as the acceleration of social and economic development. Environmental management strategies for port management can alleviate the impact on coasts from dredging, and port and harbour reclamation. The GPA was developed with ten key principles. These principles focus on aspects of port development, minimization of physical alteration, and the destruction and modification of habitat.

81

Port Development Programme and Industrial Development and Waste Management

Mr. Shreenath Parahoo

Port Emergency and Environment Controller, Mauritius Ports Authority THE PORT AREA Over the years, with the rapid development of Mauritius, the port of Mauritius has witnessed major transformation. Not withstanding the fact that cargo traffic has increased; commercial and industrial activities within the port area have also expanded. The port today, within its 300 ha. of total land area, apart from catering for port infrastructures and activities now include many port based industries, installations and Freeport related activities. Moreover, whilst the port has been expanding towards the sea, through dredging and reclamation, the City of Port Louis has continuously grown nearer to the port and today housing estates and the M1 motorway are bordering petroleum tank farms and former lighterage areas have been converted into leisure waterfronts. Presently there are 52 port-based operators/companies and organisations within the port limits. Many of these have plants and processes considered as hazardous and their main activities comprise fertilizer manufacturing, handling and distribution of petroleum products, power generation, coal handling, edible oil refining, plastic processing, bitumen handling and storage, etc. While cargo-handling activities are regulated by international laws and norms, there is no integrated system in place to assess the degree of risks posed by the port-based installations, their processes and products. Although some of these installations individually may appear intrinsically safe, collectively they represent a serious threat to port infrastructure, environment, neighbouring installations and nearby residents. This threat is mainly due to any emergency on one site possibly overspilling out of boundaries and creating a Knock-On or Domino effect. The undeniable fact is that the port area is to-day transformed into one of the highest and most condensed risk areas in the country. PORT SAFETY & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE The Mauritius Ports Authority, conscious of the need for improved safety, health and environment, is striving hard to ensure continued improvements in these areas. As part of the safety and environment policy enunciated in the Report on Port Safety and Environment, the Authority is monitoring major hazards and risks in the port area to ensure a safe and healthy port environment. The Mauritius Ports Authoritys main objective is, therefore: to ensure a pollutionfree environment; to achieve an accident-free port area; and to ensure that the management of safety, health and environment related to the port reflects and meets higher standard.

82 Recently, a Port Safety and Environment Committee (PSEC) was set up to address comprehensively the issues of safety and environment in the Port Area. The Committee carried out intensive safety audits in the port and had produced a report containing its detailed findings and recommendations.
The main recommendations of the Port Safety and Environment Committee (PSEC) pertain to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) setting up a system of registration of hazardous installations in the port area; monitoring the relocation process as regards existing hazardous installations to bring down the existing levels of risk; establishment of a major hazards control system to protect workers, the general public and vital port installations; the setting up and implementation of a Safety, Health and Environment Management System to effectively tackle emergency/contingency an On-site and Off-site Emergency Plan; and the setting up of a port inspectorate within the Mauritius Ports Authority to ensure that safety and environmental measures are effectively implemented.

Following the various recommendations of the Port Safety and Environment Committee and taking into consideration the findings of the recent studies on risks in the port area, the Mauritius Ports Authority has taken the lead responsibility for the successful implementation and monitoring of relevant issues for the promotion of a healthy and safe working environment whilst increasing all users and operators awareness for safety and environmental protection.

The following main issues are being addressed:

identification and registration of major hazardous installations; relocation of major hazardous installations and products to a segregated area; the setting up of a safety, Health and Environment Management System within all organisations in the port area; assisting in the formulation and implementation of a national policy with a view to protecting port workers and the general public whilst safeguarding vital industrial and port installation against risks of major accidents; the setting up of a Port Disaster Management System to cope with any eventuality of disaster depending on the degree of severity; and the setting up of a Port Inspectorate within the Authority to carry out regular safety inspections, audits and also to monitor compliance with relevant port legislations with regard to safety and environmental protection.

The Authority has already reviewed existing regulations and has come up with a consolidated version of safety and environment regulations within the appropriate legislative framework. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

As part of our Port Master Plan Study, a study of the impacts on the environment of the various aspects of the Port Extension Development Project was commissioned. In particular, the environmental review called for the following to be studied:
The impact on the environment of accidental spills of chemical, petroleum products and other potentially polluting cargo;

83
The impact on the ecology of ships waste disposal and other sewage which might be generated by the port extension; The effect of wind during cargo handling of bulk cargo such as wheat, cement, coal, fertilizer, etc; and The impact of global warning and consequential rise in sea level on the port infrastructure.

The environmental review was prepared based on site visits and extensive literature review and consultation meetings with both government and non governmental organisations concerned with environmental issues, port develop and other development plans along the coast of Mauritius, the industrial zone and Port Louis Harbour area.
SETTING UP OF A PORT INSPECTORATE Since January 2002, the Mauritius Ports Authority has set up a Port Inspectorate to ensure that safety and environment measures are effectively implemented according international guidelines. The Port Inspectorate is working in conjunction with work Inspectors from the Ministry of Labour and Industry, Scientific Officers and Environment Officers of the Department of Environment. The processes of the different port based plants are being inspected as regards to safety of workers and the environment and the disposal of ship/port generated waste and used materials from sites of work. The Inspectorate is also setting a hazardous substances data-bank supported by relevant material safety date sheets to enable a proper monitoring of hazardous substance entering and leaving the port. STRENGTHENING OF THE PORT EMERGENCY AND ENVIRONMENT UNIT In order to have a more efficient first strike force in the port area to deal with port emergencies, the Mauritius Ports Authority has taken concrete steps to strengthen the intervention capabilities of its Port Emergency and Environment Unit both in terms of manpower and back up equipment. WASTE OIL RECEPTION FACITILIES

The Chantier Naval de LOcean Indien (CNOI) for the Dry Dock and shipyard in Port Louis Harbour includes facilities planned for the retrieval of:
Waste or used oils and lubricants from docking vessels as per the MARPOL convention as well as waste oil from inland sources; and Hydrocarbon mud (from ships, petroleum terminals, thermal plants, etc).

SHIP WASTES MANAGEMENT The following procedure for collection of ship waste will soon be implemented. Procedures for collection of ship wastes in Port: Prior Arrival of Ship; Ship in port; On collection of wastes; Before Departure of ship; and After Departure of ship.

84
SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM As regards SHE-MS, the Mauritius Ports Authority has taken actions to: Ensure that every company in the port area has devised and implemented a Safety, Health and Environment Management System (SHE-MS); Encourage the larger companies, which already been a SHE-MS in place to share their expertise with other companies; and Ensure that all parties in the port area are aware of the emergency evacuation plans and participate fully in the conduction of the drills.

BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT The objective of ballast water management is to minimise the Aquatic Invasive species from invading the local waters and to allow the shipping business to go on by avoiding undue delays to ship in ports. In the respect the IMO guidelines Res A.868 (20) requires that every ship should have a ballast water Management plan and each port of those states who are signatories to the Convention should put in place specific arrangements for Ballast Water Management. At present the port of Port Louis has no provision regarding ballast water management. To ensure that appropriate and effective measures are taken to minimise the risk of spreading harmful aquatic organism and pathogens there should be timely and effective communication between the next port of call and the ship.

CONCLUSION With the new sense of modern and visionary direction and leadership in setting up an integrated development strategy incorporating all key aspects of port planning, environmental management, safe operations and development it is felt that this initiative would form the basis for the enhancement and upgrading of this vital center for the economy at national, regional and international levels. The increase in vessels calling at Port Louis Harbour, is proof that the port of Port Louis has recognition worldwide. The expansion initiatives to develop the Port Louis Harbour further could have resulted in increased disturbance to the environment but a sound and well-planned strategy have minimised such impact. The Mauritius Ports Authority is committed to continual improvement of the environment, and to prevent pollution of all forms. The environmental management of the port goes beyond the biophysical components and seeks to integrate the dynamic interaction between development and the natural component to make up the total port environment. The Mauritius Ports Authority is confident that with well-planned strategies and good corporate environmental practices coupled with the diligence and professionalism of its employees, the Authority is geared to realise its objectives in terms of environmental protection.

85

Development of Port Ballast Water Management Plan for Mauritius

Mr. Asiva Coopen

Nautical Surveyor, Mauritius Ministry of Shipping Requirements under Article 4(2) and Article 5 under : 1. 2. The International Convention for the Control and Management of ships Ballast water and Sediments, 2004. IMO Resolution A.868 (20).

Essential considerations prior developing a Port BWMP. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. National law/Regulations. The Plan should be as close as possible to the Convention and IMO requirements. Consultation with all stakeholders i.e. Port master, shipping community etc. Environmental constraints for the port. Shipping business in that port i.e. Types of trading patterns etc Must cater for International and Coastal shipping. The impact upon safety and the cost effectiveness of the project. Should not hinder ships from calling at that port.

Contents of a Port BWMP 1. 2. Reference to National law/Regulations. Specific requirements for the port in question in terms of ; Communication system between the port and ships calling at it (How and when) Requirements regarding the intake and discharging of water ballast. Any deballasting areas or zones available or not. Port facilities for sediments. Contact persons for the subject matter of Ballast Water. Any Penalties for non-compliance.

3. 4.

86

Addressing the Realities in Providing Adequate Port Reception Facilities

Mr. Japhet Ombogo

Process Engineer, East Africa Marine Environmental Management Company Ltd A key benefit of Kenyas reception facilities, which were developed in line with MARPOL 73/78 and the Kenya Environmental Management Act, is the retention of port compliance. Although making the port facility operational was it is effectively treating some wastes. A number of laws and regulations need to be developed, however, for the facilities to become operationally effective. Increasing efficacy is a worthwhile endeavor as the community and country can benefit from the facility.

87

French Organisation for Pollution Prevention and Pollution Response (POLMAR)

Mr. Dominque Bucas

Navy, La Reunion The wreck of the Amoco Cadiz in March 1978 considerably increased public concern towards maritime issues. The same year a decree organizing States action at sea came out. One year later, similar text for French overseas territories was published. More than 10 governmental departments share responsibilities for the French sea areas. A flexible inter-administrative organization coordinated by a central authority was developed based on two principles: For routine tasks, each public department assumes its own responsibility at sea. Whenever coordination appears necessary, a powerful and undisputed authority, at the closest to the scene of action, leads coordination the maritime tasks at sea. This authority is vested in the prfet maritime who also commends the local naval forces.

The main missions at sea are search and rescue, law and order, antipollution, which is the focus of this talk. Faced with two dangerous and different zones (Mozambican Channel and La Runion island), French authorities built up an organization based on a POLMAR plan. The POLMAR plan can be described by four verbs: prevent, prepare, fight, and inform. The refuge-zone concept within crisis response also resulted from dealing with vessel emergencies. Recent events underlined the necessity to think about the opportunity to let a ship in difficult approach instead of moving it away. Sometimes, it is a better solution to provide help, in order to avoid or to limit pollution. In other cases, it appears better to get a ship away. This new analysis, rather revolutionary, needs a whole analysis and some prepared reactions. We can formulate this objective in capacity to welcome, according to all information received, in a short time, a ship with difficulties, if necessary. Preservation of human life must remain a priority preoccupation for authorities. Faced with this concept which procedures will give the best crises analysis? The following should be kept in mind: means to obtain information; choice of a survey measure by authority in charge; and means available for on-shore response.

88

Overview of Waste management in Eastern and Southern Africa

Dr. Daniel Munga

Senior Research Scientist, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute Kenya is experience population growth and raid urbanization. These trends result in lack of planning, inadequate housing, and problems with water supply and sanitation. These trends are also related to increased in waste generation and higher demand for facilities. The main wastes are sewage, wastewater, municipal storm water, and effluent. Kenyas coastal areas have inadequate facilities for treatment and disposal. There is no central treatment of industrial wastewater. Waste reception facilities exist in limited capacities. Disposal sites are inadequate and there are generally no provisions for safe disposal of industrial or hazardous wastes. The consequences of these trends are contamination of surface and ground water, pollution and destruction of critical habitats, and threats to public health. The following strategies and options that exist in the region are policy and institutional framework, infrastructure development for service delivery, innovative methods of waste management research, public awareness and participation, and private sector involvement.

89

Overview of Legal Frameworks for Marine Pollution Prevention in Eastern and Southern Africa

Mr. Akunga Momanyi

Lecturer, the University of Nairobi Law Faculty There are global instruments such as the IMO conventions, MARPOL and UNEP interventions, as well as regional instruments such as the Nairobi Convention and NEPAD. The Nairobi Conventions Protocol Concerning Cooperation in Combating Marine Pollution in Cases of Emergency in the Eastern African Region, 1985, is probably the closest the region has come to addressing marine pollution through legal procedures. Additionally, NEPAD may act as a continent-wide catalyst for the protection of marine and coastal environment, as well as the strengthening of pollution control and port management.

In general, national laws of the region are sectoral and are enacted by prefectures or municipal authorities. Marine pollution control is administered under a range of ministries that varies for each country and may include the Ministries of Transport, of Environment, or the National Ports Authorities. Implementation of legal frameworks for marine pollution prevention often does not occur. This could be ameliorated through a number of methods. Detailed legal and institutional studies should be initiated to consolidate knowledge on the state of marine pollution
control and ports management in the region. Based on the outcomes of the studies, appropriate interventions be initiated to help the region and individual countries do better in marine pollution control and ports management. The London Convention Secretariat should initiate a process of regionalizing the provisions of its (London) provisions, by, in particular, assisting the Nairobi Convention to establish a Dumping Protocol to the Nairobi Convention.

90

The 2004 International Ballast Water Convention and Its Impact on Port Management

Mr. Brian Watt

Maritime and Pollution Consultant, Port Management Association of Eastern and Southern Africa (PMAESA) The 2004 Convention applies to the administrator. It is only applicable for those port authorities that are also the administrators. The Convention discusses the control and transfer of harmful aquatic organisms as well as the development of national policies, strategies, or programs for ballast water management. Sediment reception facilities, surveying and certification, ship inspections, and technical assistance and cooperation are also considered in the Convention. Benefits of the treaty are better port management and information sharing. The use of IMO ballast water forms may allow for greater understanding of ballast water movement. This in turn may lead to better development of ballast water policies.

91

Ballast Water Management in South African Ports

Ms. Mirriam Tenyane

Environment, Health, and Safety Portfolio Manager, National Ports Authority of South Africa Ballast water is essential for the safe and efficient handling of the ship during voyage and while they enter port. It controls the stability a nd the trim of the vessel and balances the stresses on the ships hull, as well as allows for the efficient steering within coastal waters and is important for efficient fuel consumption. Ballast water is essentially a surface water sample of immense volume taken in from a port making it inevitable that significant amounts of organisms find their way into ballast tanks of ships. The problem arises when ballast water taken up by a ship contains unwanted marine organisms. These may be bacteria and other microbes, planktonic species, small invertebrates and the spores, eggs and larvae of larger species. The potential for species transfer is compounded by the fact that almost all marine species have planktonic stages in their life cycle, which may be small enough to pass through a ships ballast water intake ports and pumps. This means that species with adult stages that are large or attached to the seabed may still be transported in ballast water. There is therefore a serious threat not only to natural biodiversity, but also poses health hazards for humans and potential losses for the mariculture & associated industries. The National Ports Authority of South Africa (NPA) has been closely involved with an international programme specifically tasked to address this problem - the Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast) is being implemented by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in association with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The projects aim is to manage the threat of alien invasive species that are introduced during the uptake and discharge of ballast water at ports around the world, by assisting developing countries to implement and customise existing international guidelines and reduce the transfer of invasive aquatic species in ballast water - the programme is being piloted in six countries, including the Port of Saldanha in South Africa. The first step has been to identify and assess all aquatic species, local and alien, present in each port. A marine fauna & flora survey has already been conducted in Saldanha, and the data was presented at an international workshop in Brazil, where significant progress was made on producing an IMO sponsored set of port survey protocols. In 2002 NPA undertook the surveying for their newest edition, the Port of Ngqura that is currently under construction. This latter survey was conducted prior to the commencement of construction activities and therefore allowed for data to be collected prior to any possible invasion by alien species due to port activities, presenting an excellent opportunity to determine a baseline against which future surveys and sampling can be compared. The remaining deepwater port, the Port of Richards Bay, was next in line to undertake such a survey and sampling was completed in May 2003. It is planned for all ports in South Africa to conduct these surveys in future. All these surveys are being done according to a standardised, international protocol. Combined with these surveys, risk assessments have also been indicated as useful tool for assessing the impacts and risk associated with alien species introductions. A risk assessment for Saldanha has recently been completed, relating to the threat of introduced species thru ballast water. These preliminary results were presented at the 1st International

92
Ballast Water Risk Assessment Workshop in Melbourne (Australia), which aimed to help standardize a global approach to ballast water risk assessment methodology. One of the main outcomes and results from this risk assessment exercise, not just from the South African context, but also when looking as results for all the GloBallast pilot countries that presented at this workshop, was the fact that the risk of ballast-mediated bio-invasions from these case histories indicate that port environmental matching and risk species profiles appear to have a more significant influence on the risk of introductions, irrespective of volumes of ballast. In simple terms, the more environmentally similar ports are that accept or discharge ballast water from each other, the more likely the risks associated with alien invasions are. The NPA has initiated a process in 2002 for the official collection of Ballast Water Reporting Forms from all ships calling at South African ports. These forms are standardised by the IMO and capture data relating to ballast water uptakes and discharges, as well as vital shipping details per vessel. In the absence of legislation making it compulsory to complete and provide the port authority with such information, the NPA has to find ways to encourage ships and their agents to comply with these voluntary international guidelines and requirements. Although these marine alien invasions are still not fully understood by the science or shipping community, the need to act upon this challenge and manage the risk is one thats been taken seriously at various international levels. A diplomatic conference at the IMO is scheduled for February 2004, where the Draft International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water & Sediments will be submitted. Also, the NPA and GloBallast are currently working on developing a ballast water management plan for the Port of Saldanha, which will be used as the basic document for replication of management plans in other South African ports. Like other projects, the success of this challenge will depend to a large degree on the cooperation and commitment from various stakeholders, but with NPAs devotion to environmental management, as well as economical and social development, we will proudly continue to support initiatives like these.

93

Port Management in Madagascar

Mr. Andrianarison Aurelian

Coordinator of Maritime Transport, Madagascar Transport Ministry Avec ses 5000 kilomtres de ctes, Madagascar possde 15 ports dont un port principal long-courrier (Tamatave), trois ports principaux secondaires long-courriers (Digo-Suarez, Majunga et Tular) et enfin onze ports au cabotage. 1. Vue densemble du dveloppement Commercial du Port :

Etant donn lexistence de nombreux Ports Madagascar, nous avons seulement choisi de traiter le cas de la Socit dExploitation du Port de Tamatave qui est un Port Autonome bien quactuellement le Gouvernement Malgache a dcid de procder la libralisation de la Gestion des autres Ports.

Schma de dveloppement du Port de Tamatave :

Plac dans le contexte du progrs technique et lintensification des changes entre les pays industrialiss ou non, le Port de Tamatave sest fix comme objectif principal lamlioration de ses performances techniques et le dveloppement de ses trafics commerciaux. Ainsi, pour les annes venir, le Port de Tamatave envisage de poursuivre son dveloppement suivant le pla n ci-aprs : sur le plan conomique : la redynamisation de lconomie de son hinterland. Cela consiste mettre au point des actions et des services pour soutenir le dveloppement conomique de cet hinterland susceptible de rehausser en retour le niveau du trafic maritime ; sur le plan technique : la mise en uvre du programme dquipements et dinvestissements, de concert avec les usagers et rpondant aux besoins immdiats et venir de la clientle ainsi que la remise niveau des infrastructures portuaires ;
sur le plan commercial : ladoption dune politique commerciale cherchant fidliser la clientle et inciter le trafic ; sur le plan social : la mise en uvre dun dispositif permettant de participer la cration demplois durables, susceptibles, au moins en partie, de rsorber le chmage et de rduire ainsi les charges sociales ;

Ce dveloppement va de concert avec la mise en place d`un service environnement au sein de la capitainerie du port, service qui veille la sauvegarde de l`environnement marin et terrestre du port (salubret et suivi des activits des navires). Port et Question environnementale

94
En ce qui concerne les ports en gnral et la question environnement, l`entre des produits chimiques au port est interdit sans le contrle pralable de l`inspecteur de la marine marchande suivant les normes et exigences de l`OMI. Du fait de l`inexistence des facilits de rception , il est aussi formellement interdit jusqu` prsent de rejeter les dchets d`hydrocarbures, les ordures et les eaux uses au port,et de mme les eaux de ballast. Mais le problme qui se pose c`est que si les navires ne sont pas autoriss dcharger leurs dchets au port, certainement ils vont les faire en mer, et ce qui va crer la pollution marine. Du point de vue lutte contre les dversements des hydrocarbures, Madagascar a bnfici en 2001 du financement de la Banque Mondiale par le biais de la Commission de lOcan Indien dans le cadre du Projet de la lutte contre les dversements des hydrocarbures en mer pour lacquisition des matriels de lutte pour sept sites avec un gros lot de matriels dit lot national. Gnralement ces lots sont stocks au port. A cet effet, sept plans durgence, dont 5 provinciaux et 2 locaux avec un plan national de lutte contre les dversements des hydrocarbures, ayant dj fait l`objet d`une rvision, sont actuellement oprationnels. Aussi, une quipe dintervention pour chaque site de stockage (plus de cinq cents personnes au total) a t forme et disponible tout moment en cas durgence. A titre dexemple, en 2003, sur chaque site deux simulations avec laide des experts de lAfrique du Sud et de La Runion ont t effectues. Si, ces plans de lutte provinciaux se structurent de la mme faon, ils se diffrencient suivant la particularit de chaque province et de chaque localit. Par contre, le plan national de lutte est applicable dans tout le territoire de la Rpublique de Madagascar. Pour faciliter, la mise en uvre de ces plans, un Organe de lutte a t cr au niveau provincial et au niveau national. Des systmes d`alerte par le biais de la Gendarmerie Nationale qui est parpille le long du littoral ont t mis en place pour faciliter la communication. Avec la loi de mise en conformit de la lgislation nationale avec les Conventions internationales OPRC 90, CLC 92 et FONDS 92, une inspection environnementale des navires surtout ptroliers par l`autorit charge du contrle du port sera effective. Il est aussi noter que Madagascar a adopt le plan durgence rgional des pays membres de la Commission Indien et pourra faire appel la mobilisation des matriels de ces pays voisins si besoin est, et galement elle pourra porter son aide la demande de ces pays. Pour la prennisation de ce projet, une perception de taxes de 5 francs malgache par litre de carburant vendu a t mis en place depuis 2001. Problme sur la construction ou la rhabilitation de port Quant au problme de rhabilitation ou de construction de nouveau port, une tude dimpact environnemental est exige au pralable sinon, aucun financement des Bailleurs de Fonds nest obtenu. Cette disposition a t confirme officiellement par la lgislation qui est en vigueur Madagascar depuis 1999. 2. La gestion et le traitement des eaux uses

Normalement, Madagascar devait ratifier la Convention Internationale MARPOL 73/78 lors de la session parlementaire 2002 et 2003, mais pour des raisons dvnement politique qui sest produit, elle na pas pu le faire.

95
Ce ne sera que pendant la prochaine session parlementaire au mois de mai juillet 2004 que ladite Convention avec ses cinq Annexes sera prsente nouveau. Toutefois, il convient de signaler quen 2003, Madagascar a bnfici, auprs de la Banque Mondiale dans le cadre du Projet Sectoriel Transport, un financement pour ltude sur lAssistance Technique sur la Prvention de la Pollution par les navires. Une tude qui a t acheve en dcembre de la mme anne et qui a permis didentifier les besoins en matriels de rception pour deux Ports longs-courriers ( Tamatave et Majunga). Lacquisition de ces matriels sera galement finance par la Banque Mondiale. A cet effet, un dossier d Appel dOffres a t envoy auprs de cette Institution pour demander son aval et que trs prochainement le lancement de cet Appel dOffres sera effectu. 3. La gestion des matriels de dragage

Pour ceux qui sont de matriels de dragage, Madagascar ne possde actuellement que quatre dragues qui ncessitent des rhabilitations plus ou moins importantes : Drague Hydroland FL 901 ( port de Morondava) Drague Hydroland FL 901 ( Rgion de Nosy Varika) Drague Ellicott ( Port de Toamasina) Drague Elliot ( Port Saint Louis).

Nanmoins, sur le plan environnemental, le dragage de port Madagascar est soumis une tude dimpact environnemental au pralable que ce soit sur la consquence du dragage sur les faunes et flores, ou que ce soit sur le dpt des produits de dragage. 4. Conclusion

Conformment aux engagements qui ont t pris par notre Prsident de la Rpublique, pour la protection de l`environnement, Madagascar est en train de rattraper son retard par rapport aux autres pays. Il est donc ncessaire de soutenir ses efforts.

96

Introduction to Waste Management Principles

Mr. Craig Vogt

Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group: Deputy Director of Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, US Environmental Protection Agency Population increase and industrial expansion in the future will lead to increasing pressure on the sea as a source of living and non-living resources, energy and transportation, and as a receptacle for wastes from all sources. A comprehensive waste management strategy will be increasingly important and will need to include cooperation at the international level. All possible steps should be taken to prevent pollution of the seas by substances that are liable to create hazards to human health, to harm living resources and marine life, to damage amenities or to interfere with other legitimate uses of the sea. There are six waste management principles, which provide steps for addressing marine pollution. Steps should be taken to minimize wastes generation and to prevent pollution of the seas. A hierarchy of waste management options provides a tiered approach to control waste production and disposal with the highest level giving preferred status to waste avoidance. Transferring waste from one medium/place to another should be avoided whenever possible. Scientifically based procedures should be used for selection of appropriate methods of waste disposal. When developing integrated waste management strategies, consider the watershed approach. Waste management procedures should also be developed.

97

Key components of Waste Assessment Guidance1

Mr. Frans Tjallingii

Coordinator for International Affairs, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, North Sea Directorate Background and Introduction The London Convention 1972 and its 1996 Protocol provide a global legal framework for the management of wastes in general, and dumping at sea in particular. Under both instruments waste needs to be assessed in order to determine what options for disposal are acceptable, legally and environmentally. The Waste Assessment Guidance (WAG) was developed by the Scientific Group of the London Convention 2 to aid Member States with waste management in general. It addresses the question whether a certain waste would be allowed for dumping, whether its disposal would be environmentally acceptable and what procedures could be implemented for proper care. The members of the Scientific Group believe that this guidance has a much broader application than merely for the assessment of wastes for dumping. In other words, it could be used for the assessment of waste for disposal by a variety of means for example, pipeline discharges to sea. In order to help countries in applying the Waste Assessment Guidance, a training set is in part available and in part under development by the London Convention Scientific Group. Under the London Convention, all wastes could initially be considered for dumping, although once they had been characterised in more depth, they might not be considered acceptable. For example, if chemical analysis of the waste showed that it contained more than certain levels of Annex I substances (such as Cadmium or Mercury), then they were not accepted for dumping. Over the years, however, a number of resolutions were adopted by the Contracting Parties to the Convention which led to a complete prohibition on the dumping of certain categories of waste. These are primarily, industrial waste and radioactive waste. This approach was then taken a step further with the adoption of the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention under which there is a prohibition on the dumping of all wastes except for 7 specified categories: dredged spoil, sewage sludge, fish processing waste, vessels and platforms, inert inorganic geological material, organic material of natural origin, and bulky items such as steel, iron, concrete and other materials which are unharmful from a chemical perspective, but which are likely to have a physical impact. The last category is limited to locations, such as small island states where there is no practicable access to alternative disposal options. This list is known as the Reverse List. Even in the case of wastes from the Reverse List, however, the waste may only be considered for dumping and must still be subjected to a thorough assessment. In implementing the London Convention 1972 or its 1996 Protocol, national legislation has to be set up which sets equal or more stringent requirements to waste management, taking into account the precautionary approach. This legislation will require
1

This summary was based on the paper by Dr.Lynn F.Jackson, former Chairperson of the Scientific Group of the London Convention, presented in Jamaica, 2002. 2 Adopted at the 19th Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties to the London Convention in October, 1997.

98
setting up an authority that will evaluate wastes in accordance to the lists of the London Convention 1972 or its 1996 Protocol and permit in accordance to the subsequent requirements. The requirements on permitting are for instance listed in Annex II of the 1996 Protocol. The permits need to be monitored and reported to the office of the London Convention. The steps to be undertaken in permitting are given in the diagram below and described step by step after that. Key components of the WAG As indicated on the diagram (above), the first two components are generally undertaken in parallel, although if an alternative waste management option is selected at any point, then it may not be necessary to complete the characterisation process as outlined here. Waste characterisation The detailed waste characterisation process generally takes a tiered approach with the first step being chemical and physical analysis. The results of these analyses are compared against set criteria (Action Lists comprising set limits of specific contaminants in the case of chemical criteria), and if they exceed these limits, the waste would be
Waste characterization
Consider Waste Prevention Audit and Waste Management Options

yes reject

Are there practicable opportunities to re-use, recycle or treat waste? no Action List no Is material acceptable? yes Identify and characterize Dumping Site Can material be made no reject

acceptable?
yes

Determine potential impacts and prepare Impact Hypothes(i/e)s no Issue permit? yes Implement project and monitor compliance reject

Field monitoring and assessment

subjected to biological testing. This will be discussed in more detail in the next presentation, but I would also like to point out that we will be having a full days discussion on the use of bioassays during our Science Day at the Scientific Group Meeting next week.

99

Waste Management Options

In considering Waste Management Options, there are two aspects:

the Waste Prevention Audit the identification of alternatives to dumping

The Waste Prevention Audit requires an evaluation of the sources and volumes of the waste for which an application is being made, from which opportunities for waste reduction can be identified. This is obviously a longer term approach in as much as the waste reduction would not be applicable to the application in hand, but could be built in to the conditions for any permit issued. In other words, the applicant could be informed that a permit might be granted on this occasion, but not necessarily in the future. However, the requirement for the identification of alternatives to dumping could apply directly to a specific application, with options to be considered including re-use, treatment and disposal to media other than the marine environment. Dumpsite selection The impact which a specific waste may have depends not only on the nature of that waste, but also on the nature of the dump-site. The selection of an appropriate site is therefore a key step in mitigating any potential impacts and must take into consideration a range of factors including the characteristics of the type of waste being considered as well as those of the proposed dump-site, proximity to amenities or other marine-based activities, and economic and operational feasibility. Impact assessment and monitoring

During the waste characterisation and dump-site selection processes, a lot of information will be generated on the potential impacts of granting approval for the dumping of the specific application. This information should be consolidated into a formal impact assessment report (or Impact Hypothesis) and should form the basis for deciding whether or not to approve the application as well as to define the environmental monitoring requirements which are to be included as a part of the conditions of the permit.
Monitoring should include not only environmental monitoring requirements, but also compliance monitoring i.e. conditions and mechanisms which will enable the authorities to determine whether or not the applicant actually abides by the conditions stipulated in the permit. Permitting The approach to issuing a permit is likely to vary from country to country, but the WAG does include recommendations on aspects of the permitting process, such as consultation, as well as on the content of the permit. In conclusion The WAG offers a general waste management framework for governments. It can help implement the London Convention 1972 and/or the1996 Protocol, but can also be used besides these legal frameworks. The guidance offers sufficient room for adaptation to fit different national situations as the set-up is aimed at giving points of thought to those

100
applying the material. The WAG includes a lot of information that has been compiled during a substantial period of time by many different countries. As such it includes a lot of knowledge that can be used by other countries and thereby save time, money and possible failures in avoiding duplication.

101

Waste Characterization

Ms. Linda Porebski

Chief Marine Pollution Prevention, Environment Canada Waste characterization is primarily hazard assessment. Under the London Convention there is more latitude for what to dump than under the more stringent Protocol. The goal of characterization is to assess the waste materials impact on environmental and human health. It is necessary to consider, among other things, the following characterization factors: the origin, amount, properties, persistence, toxicity and bioaccumulation. There are specific considerations for each waste category on the Reverse List. National action list levels are an obligation under the Protocol. Contracting parties are required to set national action levels. Waste characterisation evaluates the necessity of establishing action level lists.

102

Waste Management Options

Mr. John Lishman

Environmental Protection Specialist, US Environmental Protection Agency The key elements for waste management options, as described in the Protocol are the reverse list, dumping alternatives, and management and control of the dumping list. Dumping alternatives must be considered. Comparative risk assessment for dumping and alternatives impacts on all media should be considered. Waste prevention is also a key component of waste management. In the waste management hierarchy, minimization of waste generation and reuse/recycle alternatives should be considered prior to dumping. A waste prevention audit can assist in waste management. In addition to these steps, permitting regimes should prepare for when dumping of a material may not be permitted. The three guiding principles of waste management options are to avoid ocean dumping, to look for environmentally sound alternatives to the ocean, and keep an eye to the future for where there are currently no alternatives to dumping.

103

Selection of Sites for Disposal of Wastes at Sea

Dr. Chris Vivian

Topic Leader, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences (CEFAS) Selection of disposal sites should proceed through a sequential series of stages designed to weed out unsuitable areas and ultimately to present the regulatory authority with a suitable site or sites for designation. This needs to be done in such as way as to minimize any interference with other present and potential uses of the sea area concerned (e.g. fishing, navigation, aquaculture, recreation). The presentation described the 8 steps that are required to be addressed in order to select a suitable site or sites and the key points for each step are detailed below. 1. Assessment of need for a new site Assess other organisations needs for a new site Determine the suitability/capacity of existing sites in the area Determine the acceptability of waste materials for sea disposal Evaluate available alternative disposal options for waste materials in the area

2.

Identification of potentially suitable areas Determine the Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF) Compile information on incompatible uses within the ZSF Identify remaining suitable areas within the ZSF

3.

Identification of site requirements related to waste characteristics Physical characteristics Chemical characteristics Biological characteristics

4.

Selection of candidate sites Identify 2 or more sites to allow comparisons to be made Determine the required size of the site required to accommodate the volume of material anticipated Determine whether the physical characteristics are appropriate to the national, regional or local disposal strategies or policies?

5.

Determination of potential adverse effects at each candidate site

104
Consider near and far-field effects Consider short and long-term effects Information will be required on: 6. The nature of the seabed The physical nature of the water column The chemical/biological nature of the water column The biological/ecological impacts of the waste

Comparison of candidate sites Evaluate the relative potential adverse effects at the candidate sites Use established environmental criteria where available e.g. water quality standards Use risk assessment approaches where available/appropriate

7.

Assessment of acceptability of potential adverse effects Assess the acceptability or otherwise of the potential adverse effects at each site If the potentially adverse effects are not acceptable for any sites, reconsider the selection of the candidate sites by determining: Whether you can adjust the ZSF, and/or Revise other criteria used in selecting the candidate sites

If no acceptable sites are available, either some potentially adverse effects have to be accepted or sea disposal cannot take place

8.

Site selection If one or more sites are acceptable, then the licensing authority can select a site or sites

105

Permitting Process

Ms. Linda Porebski

Chief Marine Pollution Prevention, Environment Canada Establishment of a permitting system is required once a state signs on to the London Convention and Protocol. This regulatory regime includes prohibition of disposal of any wastes except by permit, designation of a national authority, development of adequate enforcement, and establishment of consultation networks. The permit process is established through development of a standard list of questions for applicants. Applications allow the regulatory body to see if there is compliance and provide a discussion of who, what, where, when, why, and how.

106

Environmental Impact Assessment

Dr. Tom Fredette

Biologist, US Army Corps of Engineers Assessment of environmental impact involves:
q q q q q q

Characterization of the waste Characterization of the dump site Prediction of impacts Project modification to minimize impacts Revision of impact predictions Monitoring to evaluate predictions

Examples of monitoring applications using this approach include deep ocean disposal of organic wastes and shallower water dredged material disposal. The talk presents an overview of these programs and provides sample data results.

107

Case Study: Dutch Experience EIA Development, Disposal, and Monitoring of Dredged Material

Mr. Frans Tjallingii

Coordinator for International Affairs, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, North Sea Directorate The Netherlands dredges about 20 to 30 million m3 of maintenance material every year. This paper describes in summary how it is dealt with in terms of the legal and policy framework, the permitting procedure and the proper handling of the dumping procedure. A short insight is given in the problems the Netherlands still faces in the regulation of dredged material. Legal Framework The Netherlands has implemented the London Convention 1972 in the national Sea Water Pollution Act. This convention basically describes that a permitting procedure is needed, and who the responsible authority is. In our case this is Rijkswaterstaat (Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management). The North Sea Directorate provides the permits for the Ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Other regional Directorates permit some of the other small ports. The Sea Water Pollution act is further specified in policy rules, which for instance set the Action Levels for the dredged material. The Netherlands is currently amending the Sea Water Pollution Act in order to implement the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention. As said, the Sea Water Pollution Act is further specified in policy rules. The Netherlands Policy is that basically only dredge spoil is permitted for ocean disposal. On the one hand this stems from the principle that the sea is not meant as a dumpsite, on the other hand disposal of any other matter than dredged material is likely to create problems for neighbouring countries. In terms of dredged material, the first priority for the Netherlands is the reduction of the input of pollutants to the sediment. On a parallel it is recognized that managing polluted dredge spoil is necessary. The most polluted dredge spoil is land filled in a sanitary landfill (Confined Disposal Facility (CDF)). Clean sand is reused as much as possible, and only the moderately polluted sediments (for Rotterdam about 50% silt) are dumped at sea.

Quantity and Quality of Dredged Material

From the up to 30 million m3 of material dredged yearly, about 17 m illion m3 originates from the Port of Rotterdam. The quality of this dredged material is slowly improving. On the one hand this is caused by the success of efforts in reducing the inflow of pollutants into the water, on the other hand also by a clean up action which has improved the quality of the sediments in the port. The improved quality can be seen from figure 1, which shows trends in trace metal concentrations in dredged material disposed at sea in the Port of Rotterdam (trend lines). The same trend can be observed in other pollutants, and especially in PCBs the use of which is phased out.

108
12,0 800 160 Cr Zn 600 120

mg/kg Dry Wt (Cr, Pb and Zn)

10,0

Cd

8,0 6,0 4,0 Hg 2,0 0,0 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
Cd Hg

400

80

200

Pb Cu Ni

40

0 0 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 Ni*10 Zn Cu Pb Cr

Figure 1: Port of Rotterdam Trace Metal Concentrations in sediment fraction < 2 mm.

Permitting Procedure
The Netherlands has a relatively small number of permit holders disposing at sea. The major two are the Ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. The general framework for permitting in the Netherlands is laid out in the General Law on Governance, which is not specific to dredged material but is valid for all procedures in government. Other laws generally refer to this act.
End of term for comments or objections (day X + 18 weeks) Decision of completeness/ suitability of the application (day X + 8 weeks)

Sending draft decision to applicant (day X + 12 weeks)

Publication of permit/decision (day X + 26 weeks)

Figure 2 shows the process steps in the permitting process. Publication of draft End of the term for The most important aspects to decision appeal note are its duration (32 weeks), (day X + 14 weeks) (day X + 32 weeks) its iteration steps with the applicant and the moments at which outside Figure 2: Permit procedure for dredged material disposal in stakeholders can provide their the Netherlands comments on the draft permit. The validity of the permit is currently 2 years, but steps are being undertaken to prolong this period to 6 years. The reason that this period is prolonged is the improving quality of the soil, and the lower administrative burden involved in a permit with longer validity.

Dump Site Selection

5 sites were designated in the Netherlands for the disposal of dredged material. These sites correspond with the major ports which need to dispose dredged material. Under Dutch legislation, no Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was required for this activity. The reason no EIA was performed was also the expectation of low impact due to the focus on input mitigation and the character of the dump sites. The sites are all relatively shallow and are in an environment of active currents. These aspects ensure that disposed dredged material will be dispersed after dumping. One of the sites (for the Port of Rottedam) was later replaced by a new site which was deepened to increase its capacity. For this activity an EIA was performed which confirmed the expected low levels of expected impact.

mg/kg Dry Wt (Cu and Ni)

mg/kg Dry Wt

109 Monitoring
The dump sites for dredged material are monitored specifically for bathymetry to assess their condition. In addition the water quality and biological quality is assessed in the ongoing monitoring activities on the Netherlands Continental Shelf. The new dumpsite for Rotterdam, for which an EIA was undertaken, was monitored more intensively before undertaking the activity and after 1 year of activity. The chemical and biological effects of this new site where compared with the abandoned site and a reference site. The impact hypothesis used was recovery of the old site within 4 years, and a level of impact at the new site which was comparable to the abandoned site within 1 year. After 1 year the old site was significantly recovered, and the new site comparably impacted to the old site. The toxicity levels in organisms where about 1.5 times the reference value, but no toxic effects where observed (Biomarkers in sea stars, fish diseases).

Evaluation Criteria: Action Levels

To aid decision making with regards to dredged material two action levels have been established in accordance with Annex 2 of the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention (see figure 3). The lower action level (Action Level 1) is a quality objective which is set at a negligible concentration or a background concentration if the latter is higher. It is a precautionary value below which the disposal of dredged is unrestricted. In practice this value is not observed in the Netherlands ports. The upper action level (Action Level 2) is the cut-off value for allowing disposal. Above this value the dredged material is land filled, below it the material may be dumped at sea restricted by permit requirements. Action Level 2 has been determined by measuring the soil quality in 5 Disposal on land areas and taking the 99 percentile of Action Level 2 these qualities and adding a reference Dumping under permit value. The action level arrived at aims (Sampling/study needed) to keep the amount of dredged Action Level 1 Ecological material disposed at landfill within Quality reasonable limits. Currently about 10% Objective of dredged material is land filled. (not seen in practice Evaluation Criteria: Parameters
Figure 3: Action Levels in the Netherlands

The Netherlands has just completed a change from one set of parameters for Action Level 2 to a new set. The old situation (UCT) included Heavy Metals, PAH (16 components), PCBs (7 com ponents) and different Pesticides. In the year 2000 TBT was added as a parameter with an Action Level of 100 mg tin per kilogram of dry weight (Sn/Kg dw). The reason to change the system was that on the one hand the system did not look at biological effects and on the other hand did not include all PAH and PCB components. The new system (CTT) was implemented for the North Sea in 2003 and aims to keep the amount dumped at sea relatively constant on a national basis. Regionally however changes in trends are allowed. In the new system, the chemical parameters where simplified by pooling the PAHs and PCBs, and by removing phased out and no longer observed pesticides. TBT was included in the new system and bioassays were added. Three types of bioassays are used namely Amphipod mortality (Corophium volutator), the Microtox Solid Phase test (Vibrio fisheri) and the DR-CALUX (modified Rat liver cell line for dioxins) test. These different bioassays have different sensitivities and give a good level of knowledge about the toxicity of a certain substance.

Conclusions
There are still some difficulties in implementing the new system of assessment parameters. Firstly the fresh water authorities have more difficulties with applying the new system and the government aims at a consistent policy for both. Under the new system

110
some ports will have to landfill more material than under the old system. The political situation has also changed due to a new government whose election was based rather on economic and security issues than environmental and social. This was also caused by the economic downturn in the world in general and has shifted priorities to giving room to enterprise to develop. The decision to implement bioassays for the North Sea may yet be reversed due to a possible increase in the material to be land filled. In general the policy in the Netherlands is however still based on controlling pollutant inputs to the marine environment and sound management of dredged material. Increasingly also European legislation (e.g. EU Water Framework Directive) is driving the way the Netherlands manages water pollution issues.

Useful Websites:
www.zeeslib.nl: gives an overview of dredged material assessment and management in the Netherlands (also in English). www.ospar.org: provides information on dredged material management in the North East Atlantic region (OSPAR is the Regional Seas Convention for that area). The OSPAR countries report to the London Convention Secretariat through the OSPAR secretariat.

111

Activities of the Regional Global Ballast Water Management

Dr. Melckzedeck K.W. Osore

Senior Research Scientist, Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute Summary Global Ballast Water Management in Kenya and the eastern Africa coast was initiated flowing the meeting of the southeastern Africa regional task force (RFT), which was convened in S. Africa in March 2003. The RTF discussed and planned various activities for the region and proposed to conduct baseline port surveys. The Port of Mombasa was selected for the first regional biological baseline survey. The Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI) offered to act as the host institution in collaboration with the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA), the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), and the National Museums of Kenya as well as other institutions. The Port of Mombasa is a suitable representative location in the eastern Africa coastal region for conducting the survey for a number of reasons. It is one of the busiest ports in the region and receives a large number of marine vessels, which act as vectors for exotic plants animals transported either as fouling or in ballast water. The port serves a vast hinterland that includes Uganda, northern Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. Export, import and transshipment cargo handled in 2003 is in excess of 12 million DWT. The port environs are also endowed with extensive mangroves, bird sanctuaries, coral gardens, sea grass meadows and other habitats, which act as nursery grounds fisheries and other marine fauna. These are all susceptible to alien invasive species introduced by marine vessels. The Mombassa Port Biological Survey will be conducted in August 2003 and is main objectives are to: Establish a database of existing natural populations and known introduced species; Develop a catalogue of existing introduced species including their preferred habitats; Track new introductions through subsequent monitoring; Establish national reference and voucher collections for all species collected during the survey and for monitoring efforts; Provide training and capacity building to personnel from Mombasa and other WIO ports in aspects of planning, preparation, conducting and completeion of such surveys.

112

Dumping of Condemned/Spoilt Cargo and Dangerous Goods

Mr. Peter Mbiriri

Pollution Control Master, Kenya Ports Authority Summary v Port Health, Kenya Bureau of Standards and Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate are jointly responsible for the inspection of any organic cargo suspected of being spoilt. Customs are responsible for issuing the Destruction Permit for condemned cargo. Safety, Health and Environment Department in consultation with the Harbour Masters Office and advise from the Municipality determine the method and site of disposal. The handling of dangerous cargo must be in compliance with the IMDG Code. Disposal of the condemned cargo is by dumping at sea or on land at designated sites. Destruction is by incineration in industrial furnaces. The Destruction of spoilt cargo is witnessed by all interested parties.

v v

v v v v

113

Industrial Development and Waste Management in the Industrial Estate of Poudre dor

Mrs. S. R. N. B. Soogun
Environment Officer, Mauritius Ministry of Environment

Mrs. Y. Basant Rai

Scientific Officer, Mauritius Ministry of Fisheries A Textile Industrial Estate established in the mid-seventies lies in the coastal village of Poudre d'Or about 350m from the estuary of Rivulet Grand Marais, in the north east of Mauritius. The estate occupies a surface area of about 4 000m 2 and comprises three factories involved in dyeing, bleaching and manufacturing activities. For a long time, untreated dye-borne effluent including particles of pumice stone was being discharged into Rivulet Grand Marais initially, then into a canal leading to the lagoon. The discharge has contributed to the discoloration of water, sedimentation, asphyxiation of sea grass beds, smothering of corals and benthic organisms. Mangrove vegetation found near the discharge and the associated fauna has also been affected. With the proclamation of the Environment Protection Act (EPA) in 1991, the management of the factories had to consider treatment of the effluent. On several occasions Prohibition and Programme Approval Notices have been served to the companies. Hence, four treatment plants were constructed in different stages, from 1994 to 2003, and a clean-up of the lagoon was effected in 2002 to remove the slurry accumulated over the seabed and from the surrounding mangrove area. Options proposed to mitigate the environmental impacts are: (1) treatment facilities to be reviewed to incorporate either (a) (b) (c) (2) (3) ozonation electroflocculation electrochemical treatments

discharge of effluents into an artificial wetland before it reaches the sea relocation of the industrial Estate

Monitoring of the quality of the effluent is being effected to ensure that the effluent meet the standards of effluent discharge. The quality of seawater in the lagoon has also been monitored as from 1999 for compliance with the Guidelines for Coastal Water Quality Requirements for Category Conservation, GN. 621 (1999) . Visual monitoring of the colour of effluent being discharged are being carried out by Fisheries Protection Services and in case of darkish blue effluent being discharged, authorities concerned are immediately informed for actions.

114

Status of Environmental Aspects at Dar Es Salaam Port

Mr. John Kwayu,

Director of Operations, Tanzania Harbour Authority The Dar Es Salaam Port is under-utilised due to competition from the ports of Mombasa and Durban. Under institutional reform the port is being privatised for better performance. Daily performance at the Dar Es Salaam port compares well with other East African ports. There have been three dredgings since 1953 and the dredged material has either been re-used or, because it is not contaminated, dumped in open water. Tanzania has ratified several international conventions. Pollution prevention is primarily administered at the harbour.

115

Maritime Safety in Comoros

Mr. Bakri Oumouri

Director of Maritime Transport, Comoros Ministry of Infrastructure Development Securite maritime et gestion des dechets en union des comores La securite maritime I) II) Introduction Situation actuelle Les services concourant a la securite maritime III) Le service de la direction generale du transport La capitainerie du port La gendarmerie maritime

Les eaux de ballast

Conclusion

116

Waste Management in the Comoros

Mr. Issa Abdillah Mohamdi

Direction nationale denvironnement, de fort et strategie agricole, Comoros La gestion des dechets en union des comores Introduction Croissance demographique Urbanisation anarchique Changement de Comportements sociaux

Les problemes de la gestion des dechets Collecte Transport Traitement

Les actions menees pour la gestion des dechets Direction nationale de lenvironnement direction nationale de lurbanisme Les prefectures et les communes les ongs Les societes privees

Les contraintes Inssufisance des moyens financiers Labsence de personnel qualifies dans la gestion des dechets Le manque de materiel et technique Labsence dun cadre reglementaire dans la gestion des dechets

Les solutions envisagees Elaboration dun cadre reglementaire de gestion des dechets Contruction des sites de decharges et de traitement installation des equipements pour la collecte des dechets Transport des ports des dechets mise en place dun systeme durable de gestion et de recouverment dun taxe

117

South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) and Emergency Response Activities

Mr. Saleem Modak

Principal Officer Cape Town, South African Maritime Safety Authority SAMSA AND POLLUTION 1 2 South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) is mandated, in terms of the SAMSA Act to prevent and combat pollution of the marine environment by ships. SAMSA ensures that the South African fleet, including the fishing fleet does not threaten the marine environment through operational waste. We apply the MARPOL convention in South Africa. NDOT (National Dept of Transport) has a contract for a suitably powered salvage tug to be stationed on the South African coast on a permanent basis. SAMSA has a budget for intervention purposes. We have empowering legislation and the expertise and the WILL to use it. Offshore installations (rigs and FPSOs) also fall within the ambit of our legislation. We investigate pollution incidents a nd implement punitive measures as needed, ensuring that the measures are of a magnitude sufficient to encourage the greatest care for the marine environment. South Africa is a party to the IOMOU on Port State Control and of the West African MOU. MARPOL compliance verification forms part of the regime. The Marine Pollution (Control and Civil Liability) Act delegates a wide range of responsibility and power to SAMSA. We have demonstrated the will and expertise to give effect to the terms of the Act. We can boast a reasonable success rate. We have the support of our maritime industry. We have survived challenges from the legal fraternity. We enjoy international recognition and respect.

3 4 5 6 7

8 9

10

The Grounding and subsequent Re-floating of the SEALAND EXPRESS 1 2 Sealand Express dragged anchor in a gale and grounded in Table Bay on 19 August 2003. SAMSA took immediate control and tug assistance and salvors were on scene within the hour. DEAT prepared themselves for a possible clean-up and oil spill abatement exercise. She had grounded on a sandy bottom and chances looked good for early refloating, but the sea packed her tightly with sand.

118
4 5 Risk was assessed and oil pollution was not an immediate threat. SAMSA corresponded with who we had been informed and thought were the owners and who had responded. Actual owners appeared to be very evasive and only came out of the woodwork when we applied our legislation in terms of intervention. They wisely came to the table after that. It should be noted that care should be taken in remembering that owners and not insurers or agents are the responsible parties. Hazardous cargo information was sought, but this was very slow in coming as the vessel lacked documentation of hazardous cargo loaded in foreign ports. That loaded in Durban, South Africa was fully documented. It took about 7 days before we had sufficient knowledge to assess the risk. In the interim period plans were already hatched for the discharge by whatever safe means to prevent pollution of the bay by chemicals, some of which later proved to be super toxic. Attempts to re-float in the first few days proved unsuccessful and efforts were then also directed at the removal of the vessels bunkers. The safest place, for the time-being, of the hazardous cargo was on board the vessel, as removal would also be a very dangerous exercise. In consideration of possible further storms / gales in the ensuing weeks, hazardous cargo removal was also commenced, starting with the most obnoxious. A passing dredger was chartered to assist and dredge and escape route for the stricken ship. A final effort by the dredger to undermine the vessels starboard side (beach side) proved successful and the vessel was re-floated on 13 September 2003. Damage was not extensive and the vessel was back in service after a dry docking and repairs in Cape Town and Durban.

7 8 9 10

11

119

Application of the LC to Dredged Material

Dr. Tom Fredette

Biologist, US Army Corps of Engineers PIANC, the International Navigation Association, has developed several guidance documents on the management of ports, including issues regarding management of dredged material. The PIANC dredged material guidance builds upon the London Convention approach and also provides background on the importance of port infrastructure and other management challenges facing ports. The PIANC documents draw upon studies and experience of past projects and provide valuable lists of relevant references and information sources. These and other documents provide an excellent source of information for use by port authorities and governments who desire to implement improved environmental and engineering management practices.

120

Project Planning and Assessment: Investigation, Interpretation, and Impact

Polite Laboyrie
Head, Environmental Department, Civil Engineering Division, Netherlands Ministry of Transport and Public Works Abstract of Guide 3 INVESTIGATION, INTERPRETATION AND IMPACT Primary objective of Guide 3 is to provide an overview of topics pertinent to predredging investigations and material characterisations that may be considered when assessing the environmental aspects of dredging and placement operations. This guidance is couched within the project planning process and how the results are interpreted following data generation. The emphasis in Guide 3 is on maintenance dredging conducted for navigational purposes and placement of dredged material at aquatic sites. This emphasis is justified for the following reasons: This type of dredging operation is the most common by v olume and by project number Aquatic disposal tends to elicit the highest and most vocal environmental concerns Most countries statutory requirements were developed to regulate this type of dredging operation

Pre-dredging studies to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of other types of dredging (e.g. new construction, contaminant clean-up) and other placement options (e.g. land placement, beneficial uses) will be addressed in a less comprehensive manner. The Guide is a document on the subject of pre-dredging investigations for material characterisation to evaluate the environmental aspects of dredging operations. This process consists of a series of four steps, which when followed, will result in a focussed, coat-effective collection and evaluation of information necessary to consider the potential environmental impacts of dredging operations: Step 1, Project Planning The nature and scope of pre-dredging activities are developed. Important activities include defining the purpose of the dredging project and identifying potential placement options of dredged material. Regulatory requirements must be carefully gauged and public involvement solicited. Step 2, Initial Evaluation Here, pertinent existing information is assembled. Interpretation of this information may lead to the conclusion that no further pre-dredging evaluation is needed. If additional data are required evaluation is needed. If additional data are required, go to step 3. Step 3, Field Surveys, Sampling and Laboratory Testing

121
The majority of pre-dredging laboratory testing and field survey are carried out in step 3. This guide describes the sampling and analysis that may be required to characterise the physical, chemical and biological aspects of dredged material. Step 4, Interpretation of Results The basis for evaluating physical, chemical and biological data is discussed. Special attention is given to statistical analysis, the use of reference and background sediment information and the spatial-temporal distributions of potential environmental impacts. The guide ends with a chapter with a short perspective on the environmental evaluation of dredging operations. In it, pre-dredging activities are placed in the context of the entire dredging continuum and the potential use of environmental risk assessment is explored.

122

Dredging: Machines, Methods, and Mitigation

Polite Laboyrie
Head, Environmental Department, Civil Engineering Division, Netherlands Ministry of Transport and Public Works Abstract of Guide 4 MACHINES, METHODS AND MITIGATION Dredging is an important activity for creating and safeguarding our ports and industrial areas. It is not a goal in itself, but should be considered as a tool to improve and adapt our surroundings in order to meet the requirements of modern industrial and living standards. Clearly, any human activity will have an effect on the environment, either positive or negative or a combination of both. Dredging is no exception. In the context of maintenance dredging, the dredging process on the one hand may increase the suspended sediment content and disperse some of the material from the channel bottom into the surrounding water. On the other hand, the same process leads to navigational improvements and as a consequence places the port in a more competitive position and brings positive socio-economic returns. Moreover, dredging fulfils a remedial role in which contaminated material is removed from the natural system. This is an important consideration in assessing overall environmental impacts of a dredging project; if not removed, contaminated sediments can be put into the water column and dispersed through the aquatic environment by river and tidal currents, propeller wash, anchoring, and other means. The underlying premise of this Guide is that there are basically three types of dredging projects: capital, maintenance and remedial. Each has its own characteristics, which are defined, and each has its own positive and negative impacts. To evaluate a dredging project, criteria to judge the environmental effects of a dredging activity and the dredging equipment must be established. The phases of a dredging project are explained: disintegration of the in-situ material; raising of the dredged material to the surface; horizontal transport; and placement or further treatment. The means to accomplish these phases are explained in the guide. Firstly standard dredging equipment is described, and then new types of dredgers especially developed for low-impact projects are discussed. Both type of equipment are evaluate based on the following criteria: safety of people accuracy of the excavated profile suspended sediment mixing of different soil layers creation of loose (mobile) spill layers dilution noise generation normal output rate effect on seabed or riverbed ecosystem

Furthermore attention is given to the different possible methods of transport and disposal of dredged sediments, with emphasis on the techniques and equipment that

123
mitigate environmental impacts. Also is there a discussion of mitigation measures to be implemented on board dredgers, at the dredging site as well as at the relocation sites. Finally monitoring and control of the dredging process are considered in terms of compliance, verification of the assessments, and the acquisition of know-how in order to improve the assessment of future projects.

124

Management of Dredged Material: Re-use, Recycle or Relocate

Polite Laboyrie
Head, Environmental Department, Civil Engineering Division, Netherlands Ministry of Transport and Public Works Abstract of Guide 5 REUSE, RECYCLE OR RELOCATE Dredged material is increasingly regarded as a resource rather than as a waste. The London Conventions Dredged Material Assessment Framework (DMAF) recognises this by requiring possible beneficial use of the material to be considered before a license for sea disposal may be granted. Defining "beneficial" is not a simple matter. The context in which the phrase has been coined probably gives it the emphasis "beneficial to the environment" rather than "beneficial to man in particular". It still poses the question of what will benefit. For example the construction of an offshore berm using dredged material in order to reduce coastal erosion may at the same time destroy an important fishing ground. The authors' preferred definition arises from the context of the concept: "any use which does not regard the material as a waste". Beneficial use options are discussed in Chapter. Having considered possible beneficial uses by this definition it may still be necessary to dispose of some or all of the material and this should then be carried out with minimum detriment to the environment compatible with reasonable cost. Open water disposal is the placement of dredged material at designated open water sites in oceans, estuaries, rivers and lakes such that the dredged material is not isolated from the adjacent waters during placement. Open-water disposal generally involves placement of clean or mildly contaminated material. Disposal of highly contaminated material can a lso be considered with appropriate control measures. This category includes unrestricted placement on flat or gently sloping waterbeds in the form of mounds or placement with lateral containment (e.g. depressions). For contaminated material a cap of clean material can provide isolation from the benthic environment. If capping is applied over the mound formed by unrestricted placement, it is called levelbottom capping (LBC). If the capping is applied with lateral containment, it is called contained aquatic disposal (CAD). Open-water disposal options are discussed in Chapter. Confined disposal is the placement of dredged material in an engineered containment structure (e.g. dikes, natural or constructed pits) enclosing the disposal area and isolating the dredged material from surrounding waters or soils during and after placement. Other terms used in the literature for this type of placement include "confined disposal facility" (CDF), "diked disposal site" and "containment area". CDFs may be constructed in open waters (island CDFs), near-shore or on land. Near-shore sites use the coast as one of the sides. With island and near-shore facilities the dikes must be constructed above the mean high water elevation to prevent direct interchange with the adjacent waters. In CDFs, dredged material may remain water saturated (anoxic, reduced and near neutral in pH) and may partially or totally dry out (may become oxic and acidic).

In this document the terms open-water disposal and confined disposal are used in conformity with the definitions of the USEPA/USACE Technical Framework (USEPA/USACE, 1992).

125
CDFs in which the dredged material eventually dries out through the whole depth are often referred to as upland facilities. CDFs are primarily designed for the placement of contaminated material. Some CDFs receive uncontaminated material, where the physical impact of unrestricted disposal is deemed unacceptable. Confined disposal options are discussed in Chapter. It is only relatively recently that treatment of contaminated sediments has been a serious option. It has never been considered economically viable because of the huge costs involved. However, the changes in legislation controlling disposal at sea and on land (Guide 2) have created a different economic climate. For example New York/ New Jersey Port, faced with the alternative of closure of the port (or severe limitation on vessel size) has recently set aside $130million to attempt to find a solution to the treatment and disposal of harbour sediments. The other example is from Europe. Dutch policy set a target of 20% of contaminated dredged material to be processed and recycled by the year 2000 (Rijkswaterstaat, 1997). The problem is scale. Technologies exist to deal with most contaminants but many are only conceivable at laboratory and some at pilot scale. Treatment is defined as a way of processing contaminated dredged material with the aim of reducing the amount of contaminated material or reducing the contamination to meet regulatory standards and guidelines. Treatment ranges from separation techniques (separating contaminated fine-grained fraction from relatively clean sand) to incineration. Some techniques are well developed but others are still in the early stages of development. Treatment techniques are discussed in Chapter 8. Each management alternative may raise environmental concerns and not only when the material in question is contaminated. For instance, the "beneficial" use of clean, beach compatible sand for beach nourishment may damage well-established sensitive marine habitats or species. Or the unrestricted open-water placement of clean material may have unacceptable direct physical impacts such as smothering of bottom-dwelling organisms or local increases in suspended solids concentrations. If the material is contaminated, the harmful substances may migrate from the placement site to the surrounding waters, soil and air, endangering aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and human health. Dredged material treatment processes are not free from potential harmful environmental impacts either. Some processes produce highly dangerous concentrated residues, the environmentally safe disposal of which demand sophisticated isolation measures. Treatment may create polluted emissions (wastewaters, gases), consume considerable amount of energy the production of which may be environmentally damaging. Treatment may also put a significant demand on valuable land. The effects may occur only in the close vicinity of the discharge point (near-field effects) or in distances far away from it (far-field effects). Both may be temporary or longterm. For each alternative a broad array of control measures exist, including operational, technical or site management measures, to reduce or eliminate predicted adverse impacts and make the alternative environmentally acceptable. The environmental assessment of management alternatives (with controls) should consider all potential impacts. Many countries require that Environmental Impact Assessment Studies (EIA) be undertaken and the results be documented in formal Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). Even if law does not require such studies it is advisable to include them in the project planning. EISs may prove to be very useful in the permitting procedure and in gaining public acceptance for the projects. Environmental considerations for each of the four alternatives and potential control measures are discussed in the respective chapters of this document.

126

Dredging in Coral Reef Areas

Mr. Dixon Waruinge

Programme Officer, United Nations Environment Programme Coral reefs are very important for the marine ecosystem. However, dredging for commerce, transport, and tourism can adversely impact this fragile resource. In order to effectively protect reefs and manage dredging needs, it is essential select the best dredging option for minimizing coral reef damage. Dialogue between the dredging industries and the community protecting coral reefs is key for collaborative decision-making.

127

Environmental Education: Dredged Material Management

Ms. Molly Madden

ORISE Fellow, US Environmental Protection Agency

Dr. Tom Fredette

Biologist, US Army Corps of Engineers The US Army Corps of Engineers Education Center website was developed for outreach by the US Army Corps. It is a resource and an education tool for students, teachers, and the general public. Controversy can surround dredged project due to misconceptions by the public. As the primary US agency working on dredged material the US Army Corps of Engineers is working to increase public awareness of their projects. The website, in addition to being an outreach tool on its own, also provides access to other resources such as educational materials, teaching plans, and other information sources.

128

Dredged Material Management in South Africa

Mr. Asanda Njobeni

Marine and Coastal Pollution Management, South Africa Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Description Generally, there are three kinds of dredging that take place in South African ports and harbours i.e. maintenance dredging, capital dredging and remedial dredging. However, the most frequent dredging activities are from maintenance dredging with a minimum of about 10 dumping permits being issued annually. Maintenance dredging is a necessary but environment-threatening activity with its main purpose being that of retaining the design dimensions of the harbour i.e. in terms of depth to allow easy access to the harbour. The bulk of this material is comprised of natural sand and silt (non-toxic) but a small quantity of it is usually contaminated with trace metals and other pollutants that, depending on their concentration levels, can have significant environmental implications. In South Africa the dredging activities take place mainly in our commercial ports i.e. Richards Bay, Durban (East Coast), East London, Port Elizabeth, Mossel Bay (South Coast), Cape Town and Saldanha Bay (West Coast). The development of an eighth port is under way (Ngqura). On average, the annual volume of dredged material that is dumped at sea in South Africa is estimated at 2.5 million m3. The bulk of this material is coming from two east coast harbours (Richards Bay and Durban) and this is attributed to the high energy level on the east coast waters as compared with the west coast waters. A decline in the volume of dredged material is observed as you move westwards. Consequently, there are no regular dredging activities taking place in the port of Cape Town and Saldanha Bay. A low but significant amount of dredged material is also contributed by the small fishing harbours and this is taking place particularly along the south-west and west coast of South Africa due to the high number of fishing harbours in this region. Key Points The dredging, transportation and disposal of dredged material always present unavoidable environmental impacts and the major concern becomes that of minimising the associated impacts. This is achieved by: Assessing the suitability of the proposed disposal sites for receiving material. Identifying and assessing the impacts associated with the excavation, transportation and deposition of this material. Recommending appropriate mitigatory measures where necessary.

In choosing a disposal site, the main objective is to select a non-sensitive area, an area offshore, where there is enough depth, poor or low species diversity, a non-breeding area, non-migration area and a non-shipping route. Most importantly, the designated areas need to be monitored not only to ensure compliance but also to check the possible changes in the area as well as in adjacent areas. This should be done by conducting surveys in the proposed area before, during and after the dumping activities. This data should be recorded and may be crucial in informing future decisions and disposal site selection.

129
Actions taken There are a number of mitigatory actions taken to allow for a continued environment-friendly development of our ports and country. Preventive and corrective measures are taken through a number of processes and these include: The introduction of a permitting requirement in South Africa in 1993/4. The development of draft Guidelines for the Management of Dredged Material in South Africa, which included proposals for Action Levels based on the review of those used by other countries. Results from previous surveys are reviewed for each port and if the level of contamination of the sediments has reached critical levels (problematic levels) in certain sections, the appropriate steps are taken in co-operation with the port authority i.e. developing appropriate bioassays to be applied to those sediments which are considered to exceed the Action levels. If contamination levels of the sediment have reached prohibition levels, in certain sections of the port, dumping of the material from those particular areas is strictly prohibited. During the screening process of the applications for dumping, it is also crucial to check if sampled areas actually fall within the areas to be dredged, if not then further sampling is recommended. This information should be contained in the locality plan (a map of the port that clearly shows areas to be dredged in relation to sampling stations) that is submitted with the application. Sampling stations should include those that have been sampled historically (to show trends). For sandy areas, at least one sample is necessary (preferably more) and for muddy areas, one sample per 10 000 m 3 to be dredged is a requirement.

Technical assistance needs The main problem that we are currently sitting with is the lack of capacity and expertise. As a body with a legal mandate to regulate and administer the dumping of waste and other matter at sea, we have a responsibility to not only oversee the undertaking of the necessary pre-dumping analysis and activities, but we also have a very much challenging responsibility of ensuring compliance by monitoring the excecution of these activities. The department is currently working closely with CSIR (laboratory analysis work), NPA and various local engineering consulting companies representing the small fishing harbours. The challenge that we are faced with at the moment is the one of surveying the disposal sites and the need for legal support. Proposed steps and recommendations To have legal support in the department who would, among other things revise the conditions under which the permits are currently being issued and to advise and have input in the process of law enforcement. To build capacity. To have specified application forms for the dumping of waste and other matter. To continuously survey the designated disposal sites and initiate monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance.

130

Fundamentals of Sewage Treatment Facilities and Processes and Management of Sewage Sludge (Biosolids)

Mr. Craig Vogt

Chair of the London Convention Scientific Group: Deputy Director of Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, US Environmental Protection Agency

The steps to treat and manage sewage include development of infrastructure for collection, filtering, primary treatment (settling), secondary treatment to address organics in sewage, settling, and disinfection with chlorine or ozonation. Sewage sludge can be used as fertilizer, landfill, or dumping. As sistance is available from the London Convention sewage sludge disposal. Preliminary Treatment As wastewater enters a treatment facility, it typically flows through a step called preliminary treatment. A screen removes large floating objects, such as rags, cans, bottles, and sticks that may clog pumps, small pipes, and down stream processes. The screens vary from coarse to fine and are constructed with parallel steel or iron bars with openings of about half an inch, while others may be made from mesh screens with much smaller openings. After the wastewater has been screened, it may flow into a grit chamber where sand, grit, cinders, and small stones settle to the bottom. Removing the grit and gravel that washes off streets or land during storms is very important, especially in cities with combined sewer systems. Large amounts of grit and sand entering a treatment plant can cause serious operating problems, such as excessive wear of pumps and other equipment, clogging of aeration devices, or taking up capacity in tanks that is needed for treatment.
Figure 1: Basic treatment - primary stage

Primary Sedimentation With the screening completed and the grit removed, wastewater still contains dissolved organic and inorganic constituents along with suspended solids. The suspended solids consist of minute particles of matter that can be removed from the wastewater with further treatment such as sedimentation or gravity settling, chemical coagulation, or filtration. Pollutants that are dissolved or are very fine and remain suspended in the wastewater are not removed effectively by gravity settling. When the wastewater enters a sedimentation tank, it slows down and the suspended solids gradually sink to the bottom. This mass of solids is called primary

131
sludge. Various methods have been devised to remove primary sludge from the tanks. Newer plants have some type of mechanical equipment to remove the settled solids from sedimentation tanks. Some plants remove solids continuously while others do so at intervals. Secondary Treatment Secondary treatment processes can remove up to 90 percent of the organic matter in wastewater by using biological treatment processes. The two most common conventional methods used to achieve secondary treatment are attached growth processes and suspended growth processes.
Figure 2: Secondary treatment suspended growth process

Attached Growth Processes In attached growth (or fixed film) processes, the microbial growth occurs on the surface of stone or plastic media. Wastewater passes over the media along with air to provide oxygen. Attached growth process units include trickling filters, biotowers, and rotating biological contactors. Attached growth processes are effective at removing biodegradable organic material from the wastewater. A trickling filter is simply a bed of media (typically rocks, or plastic) through which the wastewater passes. The media ranges from three to six feet deep and allows large numbers of microorganisms to attach and grow. Older treatment facilities typically used stones, rocks, or slag as the media bed material. New facilities may use beds made of plastic balls, interlocking sheets of corrugated plastic, or other types of synthetic media. This type of bed material often provides a better environment and surface area for promoting and controlling biological treatment than rock. Bacteria, algae, fungi, and other microorganisms grow and multiply, forming a microbial growth or slime layer (biomass) on the media. In the treatment process, the bacteria use oxygen from the air and consume most of the organic matter in the wastewater as food. As the wastewater passes down through the media, oxygen-demanding substances are consumed by the biomass and the water leaving the media is much cleaner. However, portions of the biomass also sluff off the media and must settle out in a secondary treatment tank. Suspended Growth Processes In suspended growth processes, the microbial growth is suspended in an aerated water mixture, where the air is pumped in or the water is agitated sufficiently to allow oxygen transfer. Suspended growth process units included variations of activated sludge, oxidation ditches and sequencing batch reactors. Suspended growth processes are designed to remove biodegradable organic material. The suspended growth process speeds up the work of aerobic bacteria and other microorganisms that break down the organic matter in the sewage, by providing a rich aerobic environment where the microorganisms suspended in the wastewater can work more efficiently. In the aeration tank, wastewater is vigorously mixed with air and microorganisms acclimated to the wastewater in a suspension for several hours. This

132
allows the bacteria and other microorganisms t o break down the organic matter in the wastewater. The microorganisms grow in number and the excess biomass is removed by settling before the effluent is discharge. Now activated with millions of additional aerobic bacteria, some of the biomass can be used again by returning it to an aeration tank for mixing with incoming wastewater. From the aeration tank, the treated wastewater flows to the sedimentation tank (secondary clarifier), where the excess biomass is removed. Some of the biomass is recycled to the head end of the aeration tank, while the remainder is wasted from the system. The waste biomass and settled solids are treated before disposal or reuse as biosolids. Lagoon A wastewater lagoon or treatment pond is a scientifically constructed pond, three to five feet deep, that allows sunlight, algae, bacteria, and oxygen to interact. Biological and physical treatment processes occur in the lagoon to improve water quality. The quality of water leaving the lagoon, when constructed and operated properly, is considered equivalent to the effluent from a conventional secondary treatment system. Land Treatment Land treatment is the controlled application of wastewater to the soil where physical, chemical, and biological processes treat the wastewater as it passes across or through the soil. The principal types of land treatment are slow rate, overland flow, and rapid infiltration. Disinfection Untreated domestic wastewater contains microorganisms or pathogens that produce human diseases. Processes used to kill or deactivate these harmful organisms are called disinfection. Chlorine is the most widely used disinfectant but ozone and ultraviolet radiation are also frequently used for wastewater effluent disinfection. Chlorine Chlorine kills microorganisms by destroying cellular material. This chemical can be applied to wastewater as a gas or as liquid or solid forms similar to swimming pool chemicals. However, any free (uncombined) chlorine remaining in the water, even at low concentrations is highly toxic to beneficial aquatic life. Therefore, removal of even trace amounts of free chlorine by dechlorination is often needed to protect fish and aquatic life. Due to emergency response and potential safety concerns, chorine gas is used e l ss frequently now than in the past. Ozone, ultraviolet radiation, and chlorine dioxide are other common disinfectants. The Use or Disposal of Wastewater Residuals and Biosolids Prior to utilization or disposal, biosolids are stabilized to control odors and reduce the number of disease-causing organisms. The raw sewage sludge solids, when separated from the wastewater, still contain around 98 percent water. They are usually thickened to around 5% solid and may be dewatered to reduce the volume to be transported for final processing, disposal, or beneficial use. Dewatering processes include drying beds, belt filter presses, plate and frame presses, and centrifuges. To improve dewatering effectiveness, the solids can be pretreated with chemicals such as lime, ferric chloride, or polymers to produce larger particles, which are easier to remove. Digestion is a form of stabilization where the volatile material in the wastewater solids can decompose naturally and the potential for odor production reduced. Digestion without air in

133
an enclosed tank (anaerobic solids digestion) has the added benefit of producing methane gas which can be recovered and used as a source of energy. Stabilization of solids may also be accomplished by composting, heat treatment, drying or the addition of lime or other alkaline materials. After stabilization, the biosolids can be safely spread on land. Decentralized (Onsite and Cluster) Systems A decentralized wastewater system treats sewage from homes and businesses that are not connected to a centralized wastewater treatment plant. Decentralized treatment systems include individual septic systems and cluster systems, including those using alternative treatment technologies like media filters (i.e. using sand, peat, carbon or other media), constructed wetland systems, anaerobic treatment units, and a variety of soil dispersal systems. Soil dispersal systems include pressure systems such as low-pressure pipe and drip dispersal systems. These systems treat and disperse relatively small volumes of wastewater and are generally found in rural and suburban areas. While septic tanks and soil absorption systems have significant limitations, decentralized systems can effectively protect water quality and public health from groundwater and surface water contamination if managed properly (i.e. when properly sited, sized, designed, installed, operated, and maintained). Nitrate concentrations in groundwater that exceed the drinking water standards can cause health problems.
Figure 3: Example of a wastewater treatment plant Primary Secondary

Treatment
Primary Sedimentation Preliminary Treatment

Treatment

Raw Wastewater

Biological Treatment

Secondary Clarifiers

(Grit Screenings) Disinfection

Sludge Digestion Landfill

Sludge Conditioning Final Effluent Sludge Disposal

134

Management of sewage sludge disposal in Korea

Dr. Gi-Hoon Hong

Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute Ansan P.O.Box 29, Kyonggi 425-600, Republic of Korea. ghhong@kordi.re.kr The present sewage treatment facilities in the country serve about 80% of the national population, and the number of plants will increase very rapidly in order to meet the citizens demand to the cleaner environment. The effluent standards have gradually tightened for the control of degradation of the coastal water quality, and the amount of sewage sludge produced increases every year and persistent and toxic contaminants are subsequently more enriched in the sludge. Due to the extensive collection and treatment of sewage water and strict control of effluents from various sources has significantly improved the coastal water quality in the last 10 years. However, sewage sludge disposal poses a significant challenge for the sustainable development of our society. An ordinary citizen in the country takes the proper sewage treatment including disposal of the sludge granted at present, however, sewage treatment is relatively new component in our society. The sewage treatment plant was first constructed in 1976 and more than half of the national population became benefited from its service after late 1980s. The number of plants and treatment capacity has been increased rapidly and now we have about 180 plants and their treatment capacity is more than 20 million tons/day. In average, each citizen produces 100 g of sewage sludge and 240 g of food wastes each day. Up to the early 1980s, sewage sludge had been disposed of at the designated landfill sites along with food wastes. However, their disposal became a social problem due to their bad odor, high water content as well as high organic matter contents. Since the country is relatively small and population density is very high in the flat area, acquisition of landfill sites had been always a problem in terms of cost and reluctance from the neighbors. The land application of sludge was not perceived properly due to the notion that sludge may not be clean enough. The remaining option was to incinerate the sludge. Therefore, most sewage treatment plant had a plan to be disposed of the sludge by incineration. However, the first incinerator built in the mid 1980s had to be confronted to the dioxin problem argued by the environmental activists. The construction of the incineration has been slowed down since then. The neighbors around the landfill sites started to regulate the introduction of food wastes and sewage sludge to the site and finally drove the government to ban the all the sewage sludge generated from the city level in 1997. The city level is in fact close to the whole country since the urban population is close to 90% of the total population. Now, the remaining option is the sea disposal. Coastal discharge is not feasible due to the intensive and extensive mariculture and fishing around the coast. The fish and shellfish consumption of an average individual in the country is about 68 kg a year, which is the largest consumption for the worldwide. Therefore the only remaining option appears to be ocean dumping, and the amount of sewage sludge disposed at sea has dramatically increased since 1997. The political environment had been changed in the 1990s. In 1993, Korea joined to the London Convention 1972. In 1996, a new Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries

135
(MOMAFF) was formed by combining former Maritime Agency and Fisheries Agency and relocating marine environment department from the Ministry of Environment. This government reform has affected waste management stream, especially for the final stage of the stream, disposal. The new ministry has realized the gravity of the disposal issue in terms of environmental, social, and political aspects as her officers become familiar with the waste management stream. Recently MOMAFF has launched a long term program on the waste management at sea. The program is basically following the Waste Assessment Guidance of the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention 1972, and the objectives are to develop action levels for the wastes allowed to be disposed of at sea by the protocol, and to do comprehensive field investigation and assessments for the dumping sites, and to develop operational guidelines for all stakeholders involved in the marine disposal. The program also includes to establishing a clearing house mechanism for the prevention and alternative management options for the wastes currently depending upon the sea. In order to guide all stakeholders from the ordinary citizen who generates the sewage to the high level decision makers in the political entities, the technically feasible options and associated costs and benefits have to be presented without bias. As a part of building blocks, existing technologies and methods for improving sewage sludge quality and for the beneficial uses of the sewage sludge developed domestically and internationally as well as management policies developed in other countries are gathered and analyzed in the context of Korean society. In the workshop, two methods for the beneficial use of the sewage sludge, fuel fabrication and charcoal fabrication, will be introduced briefly. If the two methods will be fully operational with claimed costs, then, ocean space does not need to be used for the waste disposal. --------

136

Environmental Management of Industrial Waste

Mr. Jim Osborne

Consultant Primary industrial waste concerns include metal mines, effluent and waste runoff. Bulk terminals and loading lead to problems with pH and runoff as well as overflow and lack of maintenance. Pulp and paper mills are another problem. Some still use chlorine bleach. Lack of regulation remains an issue for industrial waste. In Canada, user performs sampling and analysis with periodic surveys. Follow-up needs to occur to confirm proper management of wastes. When new industries are set up it is essential to include engineers, chemists and biologists in the process.

137 SEAWASTE Network

Dr. Yazeed Peterson

Project Officer, International Ocean Institute of Southern Africa The SEAWASTE Network is an initiative organized by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Committee (IOC) and funded by the Netherlands. Its objective is to promote communication and information exchange on pollution and water quality issues in Eastern and Southern Africa. The objective of the website is to provide a clearinghouse of relevant information and a collection of tools for information sharing. A main focus of this discussion group is to discuss how the Network can benefit workshop attendees and to discuss further development of the online database.

138

UNION DES COMORES SITUTION ACTUELLE ET ORGANISATION PORTUAIRE

Une partie des activits portuaires est excerce par une societ dtat appele (A.P.C.)

Le port de la grande le, qui reoit le 70% des merchandises importes offre un mouillage quai pouvant accueillir un navire jusqu 1500 tonnes sur une zone troite le long du quai, ce qui rend les manoeuvres difficile. La zone de terre-plein est reduite et encombre des conteneurs vides. Le port manque de moyen de communications fiables. Le manque de tirant deau le long du quai oblige les navires dune certaines capacit de mouiller en rade ce qui rend le dechargement long et fastidieux. La sparation des flux passagers et de marchandises nexiste pas. Larrive du caboteurs entrane une circulation de nombreuses personnes (200) qui croisent les elevateurs avec des conteneur ou palanqus au dbarquement. Le balisage maritime du port est quasi inexistant. Et pourtant il constitue un minimum ncessaire pour la securit de la navigation. Toute marchandise transporte par des navires dun tirant deau superieur 4,50m sont decharges au poste de mouillage, directement sur des boutres dans des conditions relativement dangereuses tant pour les boutres que pour les merchandises. Lamlioration des conditions dexploition et de scurit du port ncessitent ce qui suit: sparation physique des oprations des traffics internationales et du traffic inter-le; le traffic de passagers doit imprativement dplacer en dehors despace rserve la manutention et lentreposage des traffic internationals; les operations de manutention doivent tre physiquement spares du movement des passagers; tude de rationalisation et damlioration des installation du port de Moroni; et cette tude devrait galement inclure le volet quipements informatiques et formation du personnel. La pollution marine La route des ptroliers du Golf au cap passe entre la Grande Comore et Moheli Elle comporte de hauts fonds: Il en rsulte un risqu certain de pollution. LES LES Comores sont remarquablement riches en matire de biodiversit et possdent un potentiel valeureux sur le plan touristique les les Comores hbergent une

139 grande quantit considrable des espaces de la faunes tells que les tortues marines, les oiseaux migrateurs, des cellacantes, des rcifs coraliens et des mangroves. Pour la protection de cet environnement fragile, lunion des Comores a pris des mesures pour faire face aux dversements accidentals ou provoqus des hydrocarbures savoir: la ratification de certains conventions maritimes internationals MARPOL, SOLAS, OPRC, FUND 92 etc.; la mise sur pied des plans durgence locaux et plan National durgence de lutte contre le dversement des hydrocarbures; un local a t amnag pour la rception de matrie ls de premiers urgence; une quipe de la gendarmerie a t forme; et des exercises dassimilations sont effectus. En matire de secours en mer Les principes dorganisations sont dj adopts: responsabilit organique la Direction de Transport Maritime (DTM); et responsabilit oprationnelle la gendarmerie maritime en liaison troite avec la premire. Il est encore besoin dlaborer un plan durgence (dit plan SECMAR) qui prcise des procdures de transmission des alertes, les concertations tablir, les modalits de mobilisation des moyens, le suivi des oprations. Au niveau des moyens susceptibles dtre mis en oeuvre dans le cadre dun tel plan, la livraison de deux vedettes la gendarmerie maritime vient encore certes point, mais un dispositif efficace suppose encore la disponibilit dau moins un navire hauturier. Dautre part une CENTRE oprationnel principal et si possible un ou deux centre secondaires, armes en permanence quips en installations radio VHF et B.L.U, devront tre crs pour assurer la veille et pour la conduite des oprations de secours. Le rseau V.H.F. de la Gendarmerie Maritime devra tre complt par de nouvelles stations, le cas chant tlcommandes partir des centre oprationnels et quips de postes slection numrique des appels de dtresse rpondant aux normes du S.M. D.S.M (Systme Mondiale de Dtresse et de Scurit en Mer). Des tels besoins seront difficiles satisfaire pour les seules ressources nationales. Le programme rgional SEC MAR quil est question dengager paralllement au programme rgional POLMAR, devrait permettre datteindre lobjectif dans ce domaine de sauvetage en mer. La gestion des dchets

140 La gestion des dchets constitue une problme pineux dans la prvention des pollutions marines. Au Comores, elle est ltat embryonnaire. Les ressources humaines et financiers sont trs limites pour assurer une gestion durable des dchets. Cependant, le gouvernement comorien appuie les communauts dans la collecte le transport des dchets. Un projet global de gestion est en cours dlaboration et permettra aprs sa mise en oeuvre de lutter en partie contre la pollution marine dorigine terrestre. Actions a entreprendre Elaborer un plan de gestion des dchets. Elaborer le cadre lgal de gestion des dchets Identifier les quipements pour la collecte, le transport et traitement des dchets. Identifier les sites de dcharges Obtenir un financement Mettre en place un system de gestion durable des dchets. Prsenter par:Mon. Ali Mohammed Assomani Elaborer par:Mon. Bakri Umouri Mon. Issa Abdillah Mohamadi Mon. Youssouf Toimimou

141 ANNEX IV

National Report Summaries

ERITREA Paper on Marine Environmental Protection in Port in Eastern and Southern Africa with special refere nce to the Eritrean ports Background and introduction Eritrea became an independent nation in 1993. Currently, Eritrea has neither the organizational nor physical capability to respond and control marine pollution from oil and other harmful and noxious substances. It is also at an early stage in developing its maritime administration and maritime and environmental legislation. Eritrea has not yet ratified relevant international Conventions, particularly those related to marine pollution. It is in the process of developing its own maritime legislation (code), however, it adopted temporarily the outdated Ethiopian Maritime Code of 1960. Description of the problem The main serious problems that affect the Eritrean marine environment are marine pollution and the lack of reception facilities. The Eritrean ports and the oil terminals need to have reception facilities to minimize marine pollution. The lack of reception facilities is of great concern, particularly in the case of ships carrying chemicals in bulk, oil tankers and passenger ships. Usually, the most common marine pollution incidents in port and oil terminal operations occur during loading and unloading. Other critical problems are ballast water, sewage and garbage generated from ships. Thus, to avoid illegal discharges of waste into the sea, reception facilities must be available. Even though Eritrea is fully aware of the importance of the MARPOL 73/78 Convention, the ratification and implementation is not possible at this time. However, Eritrea is taking the necessary measures in compliance with the Convention even without ratifying it, to protect its marine environment. The Eritrean coastline is about 1,200 kms, the total population residing in the coast is about 200,000, mostly around the ports of Massawa and Assab. Most of the Municipalitys sewage system is discharged into the sea without any treatment. The authorities concerned, particularly the municipalities, must take effective steps and enforcement procedures to prevent the disposal of waste. At present, the discharge of industrial wastes into the sea is very limited, as there are few factories located in the coastal areas; these are the cement and salt factories located at Massawa. The waste from these factories, however, can have different chemical contaminants that affect the marine environment, for example, the cement factory generates a large amount of dust particles from the raw and cement mills. It is estimated that about 12kg/hr solid waste dust particles could leave the unit to the surroundings, hence, it is important that the factory should treat the dust particles or be relocated far from the coast to avoid environmental damage. The marine environment is the main natural resource on which the coastal tourism industry depends, however, unplanned tourism development greatly affects the natural

142 habitat and the environment, particularly the most sensitive marine habitats. Currently, coastal tourism industry in Eritrea is not developed, though it has a long coastline with attractive beaches and about 350 small and large islands with different types of fish and coral reefs. Coastal tourism and diving possibilities are significant all along the Eritrean coast, particularly the coast around Massawa where few hotels are available. During summer, many foreign and local tourists visit the coast of Massawa. According to the Ministry of Tourism statistics approximately 240,000 tourists, of whom about 200,000 were expatriate Eritreans, visited Eritrea and mostly to the coast for a few days. So the flow of foreign and local tourists, particularly in the summer time, has an effect on the marine environment. The government has placed a high priority on the protection of the marine environment with the integration of coastal development plans including the plan to d evelop the coastal tourism industry. Current efforts from Authorities The Department of Maritime Transport (DMT) is responsible for the prevention of marine pollution and safety of ships at sea; survey and certification of all ships flying its flag; ensuring that foreign ships calling its ports are safe to proceed to sea (Port State Control PSC); and maritime transport and shipping activities. The maritime administration, that is, the DMT, plays a major role in the prevention of pollution from ships, primarily, because it is the lead liaison between the Ministry/Government and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on maritime transport issues and relevant IMO Conventions. Eritrea is a signatory member of IMO. It has ratified the following Conventions: International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS 1974); International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watch keeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW, 1978); International Conve ntions on Tonnage Measurement of Ships 1969 (TONNAGE, 1969); Convention on the International Regulations for prevention collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREG, 1972); and International Convention on Load Lines 1996 (LL, 1966). Although the MARPOL 73/78 and United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, 1982, are of great importance in the prevention of marine pollution they are not yet ratified by Eritrea. Regarding MARPOL 73/78, Eritrea has stated its interest and commitment to ratify it. The main reasons for no t ratifying this convention are due to financial constraint to fulfil the required reception facilities and lack of trained personnel. Before ratifying any Convention and incorporating it into its national law, an administration needs to consider the implications for its shipping industry (i.e. the cost to its ship owners); its ports (i.e. the provisions of reception facilities for oil, chemicals, sewage and garbage); and its environment (how to deal with domestic ships). Eritreas coast is at great risk, as it is along one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world where heavy oil tankers travel, mostly from the Middle East to the Mediterranean and Europe. In addition, the recent oil and gas exploration and the lack of reception facilities and oil spill combating facilities, including trained personnel and organizational structure to respond to any oil spill incident particularly, in ports and oil terminals, have become of a serious concern.

143 Constraints At present, Eritrea has not developed its national oil spill contingency plan and lacks the corresponding organizational and physical capability to respond to marine pollution emergencies. The major problem that challenges Eritrea in establishing an effective oil response regime at national and local l evels are the following: the establishment of its institutional structures are at an embryonic stage; a critical shortage of skilled personnel; lack of finance and subsequently the non-existence of response equipment; lack of control and enforcement mecha nisms (legislation); lack of a clear definition of responsibility of the different sectors involved in coastal and maritime activities; lack of public awareness; and low participation in international and regional maritime organizations. The two oil terminals located in Massawa have neither established their own organizational structure nor physical capability to respond to any oil spill incident. However, with the co-operation of Massawa Port Administration and other stake holders, studies are being conducted in establishing organizational and physical capability. According to the 1995 IMO Mission Report on the assessment of the ability of the State of Eritrea to respond to marine pollution emergencies, the two oil terminals in Massawa receive approximately 25 million litters of black oil annually and four times that much in White products. This indicates that there is a potential threat of a spill affecting the marine environment during loading and unloading operations. On the other hand, the DMT under the Ministry of Transport and Communications has the organizational structure but lacks the physical capability (trained personnel and the necessary equipment). There is no designated person or agency to act as On-Scene Commander (OSC), which is the most critical element in mobilizing the emergency response operations (persons and equipment). Possible solutions Recognizing the threat of pollution by oil and hazardous and noxious substances posed on the Eritrean marine environment, the DMT considers, as its highest priority, to fill the gap of its organizational structure, as well as to improve the safety and efficiency of the ports and shipping administrations. In demonstrating its commitment, the DMT puts effort into sending its employees to acquire knowledge and skills abroad for higher- and middlelevel education and training. Furthermore, it also exerts unreserved effort to obtain technical assistance from IMO, among others, in drafting the maritime legislation, maritime safety administration and national contingency plan, which are at present in the pipeline. In addition to this, an international consultancy group, Amsterdam Ports Consultants, are conducting a study to improve the management of the environment in the Eritrean Ports. From the aforementioned study, the main problems or causes for marine pollution in Eritrea have been identified as due to, among others, lack of effective maritime and environmental legislation, the non-existence of an institutional framework, lack of coordination and co-operation among the governmental agencies, lack of proper industrial and urban waste management and lack of public awareness. The implementation and enforcement of maritime and environmental laws and regulations should be the foremost requirement for protecting the Eritrean marine environment. The effect of any international instruments largely depends on its implementation by the contracting party. International conventions are implemented through integration into national legislation. Enforcement is generally not provided for an international setting but must be included in national laws, regulations and decrees. Eritrea,

144 therefore, needs to incorporate the provisions of IMO and other international instruments into its national laws and enforce them to meet its national and international obligations and responsibilities towards safer shipping and cleaner oceans. It should, however, be remembered that the adoption and implementation of any international conventions and regulations by Eritrea should keep pace with its stage of development to suit existing local or national conditions and circumstances in respect to its international obligations.

145 KENYA National priorities and action plan on maritime pollution prevention and environmental management of ports in Kenya Introduction Kenya is aware of the economic and social value of the marine and coastal environment and has attempted to consciously conserve and protect this very important natural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. In addition, the country has made substantive steps in addressing threats to the marine and coastal environment posed by pollution and by the insufficient integration of environmental considerations into the development process in the past. At the regional level, Kenya has entered into multilateral agreements for the protection and management of the marine and coastal environment in accordance with the Nairobi Convention and other international law. In this regard, for example, is a party to the New Partnership for Africa Development (NEPAD), and hosts the Secretariat for Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Sub-theme. At the national level, Kenya has recently put in place an environmental legislation framework referred to as the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA) of 1999. The Act has provided for regulations and guidelines on the protection of coastal and marine ecosystems. The dumping of wastes and other matter at sea is a current concern because we have an on- going dredging project in Lamu. We have resolved our concerns by using the dredging material for land reclamation, fortunately for us the dredging material in prestive natural coral rock and soil. Action taken The Government of Kenya is in the process of enacting four crucial bills that have a bearing on the London Convention, i.e. Merchant Shipping Draft Bill, Marine Pollution Draft Bill, Maritime Regulatory Authority Draft Bill and Inland Water Ways Draft Bill. These Draft Bills were presented to the Attorney General on 11th February 2004 for publication and eventual domestication of the London Convention. A Cabinet Memorandum is before the Cabinet for approval of ratification of the 1996 Protocol and once ratified the protocol will be incorporated in the national legislation. Kenya is also a signatory to the Convention on Ballast Water Management for Ships and the Government is in the process of ratifying and domesticating this Convention. Drafting of Environmental Management Regulations and Standards are at an advanced stage by the National Environmental Management Authority. The Government has constituted a National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan (NOSRCP) Working Group which has produced a draft NOSRCP. Issues to be addressed in the near future Publication of Maritime Legislation Bills, by the Attorney General to facilitate implementation of Marine Pollution related Conventions.

146 Ratification of the London Convention Protocol 1996 and the deposit of necessary instruments with the Secretary-General of IMO. Finalizing the National Oil Spill Response Contingency Plan. Carry out Global Ballast Survey of the Port of Mombasa. There is increased transshipment loading in the port which increases the possibility of ballast water discharge in our territorial sea. EAM Company to provide a programme for completion of the remaining phases of the Waste Reception Facility. Seek technical, administrative and legal assistance for the implementation of the LC Protocol 1996. Sensitivity mapping for the NOSRC Plan - The United Nations Development Programme has undertaken to support the sensitivity mapping of the coastline which will be carried out in conjunction with the Kenya Marine Fisheries Institute. Recommendations In order to address the above challenges the following is recommended:.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 enhancement of Port State Control mechanisms; implementation of the ISPS Code to meet the 1st July deadline; facilitation of gazettement of environmental management regulations and standards; fast tracking of the enactment of the draft maritime bills; facilitation of domestication of LC 72, and ratification and domestication of LC 1996 Protocol; enhancement of institutional framework and capacity building and integration of relevant agencies in implementation and enforcement; and completion of waste reception facilities in Mombasa on schedule as follows:(a) Treatment for sewage and garbage - 2004 (b) Grey waters and cargo wastes - 2005/2006, and promotion of regional co-operation particularly in monitoring maritime pollution and scientific research.

8.

147 MADAGASCAR Priorits et actions entreprendre Etant donn que Madagascar est une le et que, non seulement, un bon nombre de sa population vit des produits provenant de la mer pour subvenir ses besoins, mais aussi une partie des activits conomiques du pays laquelle dpend de l`exportation des produits de la mer, il est de son intrt de procder srieusement la protection et la prservation de son environnement marin et ctier. I Toutefois, cela demande un grand effort de la part de chacun pour avoir des ocans propres et sains. Ca ne pourra pas tre un travail d`une journe mais un travail de persvrance. Pour y parvenir, il faut duquer nos co-citoyens, les faire apprendre la manire de conserver la propret de la mer et ainsi que d`apprendre la gestion rationnelle de la mer. Par ailleurs, cette protection de lenvironnement se repose aussi sur la mise en place dun cadre juridique appropri telle que la ratification de certaines Conventions Internationales touchant la mer et surtout leur mise en uvre. L, je voudrais attirer lattention de chaque Dlgu des pays frres quensemble, nous, pays d`Afrique, nous pourrions unir nos efforts et faire un grand pas vers lavant pour protger ensemble notre environnement. A la suite de cet atelier et compte tenu de la priorit du Gouvernement malgache, certaines actions devront tre prises court terme: mise en place des matriels de rception au niveau du port; mise en place d`une unit de traitement des dchets et des eaux uses; mise en place d`une inspection environnementale rigoureuse des activits pouvant engendrer la pollution marine que ce soit au niveau des activits des vires que des activits industrielles; rorganisation de lorgane suivi des dragages en ce qui concerne limpact; assistance de l`OMI pour certaines tudes de faisabilit de projet environnemental au port; demande d`assistance financire auprs des bailleurs de Fonds; renforcement de la Coopration entre pays de l`Afrique de l`Est pour le contrle; and de certaines activits des navires ou des units industrielles.

148 MAURITIUS Introduction The existence of coral reefs and the geomorphology of the coastline have endowed the island of Mauritius with sandy beaches, protected bays and calm lagoons - major factors that have allowed the development of its artisanal fishery and a prosperous tourism industry. Major investments have been made to protect and conserve the coastal zone while at the same time allowing sustainable development. Environmental problems affecting the coastal zone are thus of high priority and need to be urgently addressed. Issue description Ratification of any convention does not automatically lead to its direct implementation. A national legal framework to cover the different clauses/requirements of the convention needs to be establihsed. The whole process is being delayed due to lack of funding. There is a lack of expertise/personnel leading to inadequate enforceme nt and efficiency. There is a lack of logistic support to enable enforcement. Waste management from ships - at present only kitchen waste is collected. Waste from ships is not collected and disposed of according to IMO requirements. Reception facilities in the port area are not yet in operation. Ballast water ships calling at the harbour discharge their ballast water in and within port limits. Land based sources of pollution are the biggest issues of concern. Existing sewerage facilities have exceeded their capacity with increased population growth. Only about 20% of the population is connected to the sewer network. Funding for the upgrading of the sewer network is being obtained piecemeal. Solid waste disposal - most of the domestic and industrial solid waste are being collected by the local authorities, however, this does not preclude the possibility of dumping in spite of the setting up of the Environment Police under the aegis of the Ministry of Environment and fines have been provided for in the EPA 2002. Littering does occur on the streets, streams and rivers which eventually run into the port and coastal waters. Sediment transport, due to input of freshwater courses in the port, lead to frequent dredging in the port area, moreover, the only operational sanitary landfill is nearly full. As Mauritius is a small island and space is limited the extension of the landfill is a major issue and options have to be considered. Key points National legislation, land based sources of pollution, siltation and dredging in the port, ballast water, and inadequate treatment plants.

149 Action taken Legislation: most guidelines and standards for effluent treatment and discharge have been established and existing ones are being reviewed. Sewage treatment: sewer networks are being upgraded and extended to a larger area. Sewage outfalls found near the coast/coral reefs are being relocated and sited as long outfalls at more than 30m depth. Solid waste: options like composting, incineration, recycling, re-use are being considered. Waste oil reception facilities: project already underway and environment impact assessment document submitted. Facility would be operational early 2005. Awareness campaigns are being carried out to sensitize the public on the need to preserve the marine environment and its ecosystems. Identification of technical assistance needs Technical assistance required for: ballast water management and control of invasive alien species; and dredging of the port and disposal of dredging materia ls. Next steps to take to address issue Ballast water: to initiate action regarding ballast water management. A biological base line survey should be carried out and results used for risk assessment in order to determine the impact of unwanted stowaways in our waters. A port ballast water management plan would be made. Wastewater: treatment of effluent for discharge to meet established standards. Solid waste: the most environmental friendly and sustainable option of disposing solid waste is being considered. Recommendations and conclusions First and foremost there should be a strong will and commitment to address the above mentioned issues. This can only be achieved if there is appropriate expertise, trained personnel, appropriate logistics and necessary timely funding.

150 MOZAMBIQUE Background Two of the three ports rely on dredging activity. Byra has large problems because of the high rate of silting and its small dredging capacity. Legal Framework In 1994, Parliament adopted a maritime act, which includes port activity and in 1996 the Government adopted a port policy allowing private intervention of port and leasing of the port. The Mozambique Government has ratified measures for international conventions addressing pollution, such as MARPOL 73/78 and the Nairobi Convention. Weaknesses There is a lack of funding, expertise and resources for implementation. Although marine pollution prevention is part of national legislation, assistance with implementation is required. Key issues There is pollution from ships and Mozambique is not yet prepared to address ballast water. There is almost no treatment for sewage or waste management; mostly dumped directly into the sea. Workshops in the port area are also dumping oil into sea and there is also leaking during ship operations. Action Workshops have plans to monitor and address these environmental issues and main ports are developing such plans. Recommendations IMO could assist in developing national legislation as technical issues primarily need for assistance. The Government should ratify the London Convention and request assistance for training, implementation, and expertise from IMO and other international organizations.

151 NAMIBIA Background Namibia port authority is part government and part private and has two large ports. Namibia noted that a RAMSAR lagoon is located next to the port. It has signed some international conventions, such as MARPOL 73/78, but lacks implementation and enforcement. It has also designated a site for dredging material that was identified through environmental impact assessment. Key issues Implementation of the environmental management system (making the environmental impact more serious, pollution from vessels (oil slops, rubbish, ballast water), and pollution from fishing vessels on the landside. Action A pollution tariff within the port limits has been established based on a polluter pays idea and there are now regular inspections. This has provided an example for the government because they now see enforcement of environmental regulations is possible. Recommendations State control of ports; More similar workshops with necessary identification of appropriate representatives to attend; Different ministries should be identified; The SEAWASTE Network may be a good tool to involve all government representatives; Necessary to include all affected parties; and Focus on incentives and the benefits of environmental protection and related economic benefits.

152 LA RUNION Principaux projets en cours relatifs la prvention des pollutions marines et la gestion environnementale des ports De nombreux projets existent, sur lesquels travaillent la direction rgionale de lenvironnement de la Runion (DIREN) ou la direction rgionale de lquipement (DRE). Une description de ces projets en cours pourra tre transmise par ces administrations lissue de latelier. Les domaines prsents ici revtent un caractre interministriel et entrent donc dans le champ de laction de lEtat en mer. Prvention et lutte antipollution Surveillance de la navigation: arrt SURNAV (signalisation des navires dangereux, en avarie ou non, dans ZEE franaise): sensibilisation des navires, dtection augmentation patrouilles canal du Mozambique; Guides oprationnels Nouveau plan POLMAR: tester lorganisation en plus de lexercice de juin); Guide dintervention pour les zones-refuge: vaincre les rticences diverses, coopration rgionale (ex: Napa et Adamandas) Coopration rgionale Tenue dun exercice commun (SAR et antipol) en 2005 avec lAfrique du Sud ; renforcer les synergies et connatre les interlocuteurs Renforcement de liens avec Madagascar concernant AEM (lutte antipollution, sauvetage) : position stratgique de la Grande le, liens historiques. Gestion environnementale des ports et question des rejets (Rdaction rserve en attente des lments DRE et DIREN) Prochaine prsentation du Protocole de 1996 la convention de Londres pour ratification Lever les ambiguts sur la notion durgence et la diversit des approches entre administrations franaises Prservation du lagon au regard des pollutions dorigine telluriques (pression anthropique) Protection de lenvironnement et des intrts conomiques de la France dans la zone sud de locan Indien en matire de pche En marge du sminaire proprement dit mais grande importance du problme pour la France dans locan indien: occupe de nombreux moyens et nergies. Importance des moyens franais engags (btiments, Osiris, Radar satellite); Coopration franco-australienne (change de renseignements, patrouilles communes);

153 Renforcement liens avec Afrique du Sud (idem); Par ailleurs, par effet dviction, il nest pas impossible que les pcheurs illicites (puissants) chasss du sud, viennent investir les pcheries dans le canal du Mozambique (arraisonnements rcents par la France et la RSA/Mozambique); Renforcement des liens avec Madagascar en matire de surveillance des pches (formation notamment.

154 SEYCHELLES The major port is Port Victoria. Legislation Environmental Protection Act of 1994 which includes sections on dumping polluting substances and wastes into territorial waters, control of entry of hazardous substances and waste, and waste on land. Activities The monitoring of fishing, oil spills and waste and of customs and warehouses, as well as on- land inspection of buildings and facilities. Agencies Marine pollution prevention is coordinated among a number of agencies including: Seychelles Coast Guard; Port Marine and Services Division; Seyc helles Fishing Authority; Seychelles police; and the Marine Parks Authority. Attempting to integrate efforts Some of the integrated activities are joint inspections; joint enforcement action; meetings for fishing port waste, oil spills and port cleaning; coordination and control of cleanup and waste collection; and training. Weaknesses Lack of adequate equipment and financial resources; Need for constant monitoring, increased enforcement coordination, increased technical knowledge, and sensitizatio n of crew and agents.

155 SOMALIA (presented by Mr. Abdirahman Jama Kulmiye, Somali Network for Resource Management) Physical Setting Tropical straddling the equator from 2S to 12N, with an exceptionally long coastline (3,300 km), 2,000 km fringe the Indian Ocean, and 1,300 km face the Gulf of Aden. The continental shelf is narrow (about 16 km) but in some areas can reach up to 135 km. A substantial EEZ of about 1.2 million sq. km (in terms of UNCLOS). Ecological Setting It lies in the tropics and thus the maritime zone is tropical. It has a major up-welling system, which reduces water temperature and creates an almost temperate ecosystem in the mid tropics. The Somali maritime zone also embraces a very important large marine ecosystem (LME): the Somali Current Marine Ecosystem. Major ecosystem component It has sandy and rocky shores, mangrove and estuarine systems, coral reef and associated communities, coastal shallow and sea grass beds, and pelagic systems. Major species components It has sea turtles, namely the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) and ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea). It also has whales and dolphins, and seabirds both endemic and migratory. Sources of Marine Pollution The sources of marine pollution are: domestic waste, municipal runoff, solid waste, sewage, slaughter house, agricultural waste, coastal quarrying, industrial waste, oil pollution, spills from local port operations (4 deepwater ports and numerous landing sites), oily ballast discharges and major oil spills from tankers, and fishing activity both at sea and on shore. Alleged dumping of hazardous waste - radioactive and other toxic refuse. Contingency plans and capability -None Legislation concerned with pollution by ship -None Membership to conventions Somalia is signatory to both the Nairobi Convention and PERSGA, however, not to COLREG 1972, SOLAS 1974, MARPOL 73/78, and LC. The way forward?

156 SOUTH AFRICA (presented by Noel Williams, Director Marine and Coastal Management (DEAT)) Legislation Legal review Update legislation align with international requirements Ratification of relevant conventions Finalize national policies Capacity Building Training awareness and competence Partnership with academic institutions Mentoring Benchmarking and Exchange Programmes Regionally and internationally Research and Development Elevate importance of research Co-ordinate research initiatives in the marine environment sector Stimulate interests Bursaries? Information sharing and exchange SEAWASTE initiative New technologies; etc Knowledge Management Establish a knowledge management centre web site Research in the marine sector Committees Ensure that South Africa has working committees Coordinate representation at regional and international levels Encourage cooperation regarding information sharing Ensure consultation with key stakeholders Quick Hits Finalize National Oil Spill Contingency Plan Conduct an audit of reception facilities to establish baseline Review of the regulations and criteria for dumping at sea permitting Conduct marine flora and fauna surveys in SA ports Strengthen working relationship between Departments of Environmental and Water Affairs holistic and integrated approach to environmental matters (land and sea). Conclusion Requires will and commitment and successful implementation of all the above support and finance

157 UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA Programme on Marine Pollution Prevention and Environmental Management in Ports Issues Major threats to our water bodies and ports are: 1 Oil pollution (one occurred in 1981) - Source of oil pollution includes: by ships during handling of oil in ports and accidents, sludge, leakage from tank farms and waste oil from petrol stations, garage and lubricant suppliers. Action taken National Oil Spill Contingency Plan has been prepared, as well as a local Marine Oil Spill Contingency Plan for Dar es Salaam Port is in place. Technical assistance needed Study on Port Reception facilities Funds for research and Development for establishing database on oil pollution management. The next step is to carry out feasibility study to improve pollution of water by oil. 2 Waste generated from land- based activities - This includes: sewage, industrial effluence, and storm-water runoff. Action taken A pilot project on constructed wetland using Vetiver grass to purify Msimbazi river water to prevent marine pollution (this river runs through Dar-es-salaam city). The improvement of the water supply and sanitation facilities for Dar-es-salaam city and management of solid waste, including plastic. Technical assistance needed Study to improve the Dar-es-salaam city water quality and a study on plastic waste management 3 Ship Ballast Water - No programme so far is in place.

Proposed programme This includes: campaign on ballast water management, sampling of water in Dar es Salaam port, training of port and shipping personnel, risk assessment, and ports replication (this is for the ports including Mtwara, Tanga and Zanzibar). Technical Assistance needed Study on the ballast water situation and funds to implement the outcome of the study. The next step is a feasibility study with project formulation. 4 Dredging of Ports - Ports that need dredging include: cleaning of the Dar Es Salaam entrance channel, Lind and Mwanza( this is an inland port in Lake Victoria).

158 Action taken The identification of the above ports that need dredging. Technical assistance needed Study on the impact of dredging the above ports including availability dredging facilities, training and funds to carry out the studies and training. 5 Air pollution - This includes: emission from ships and the smell from sewage.

Technical assistance needed A study to establish status of Air pollution and environmental aspects and funds to carry out the study. 6 Soil Erosion - This includes: movement of soil by water and wind.

Programme: forestation, planting of mangrove, planting Vetiver grass along Msimbazi river and coastal line. Technical assistance needed This includes: to study to identify the effect, training and awareness, and funds to implement the recommendation of the study. Recommendations To: improve municipal waste management, install oil and solid waste collection facilities to all ports, develop regional arrangement for ballast water oil/plastic and other materials environmental programme, and ratification of marine pollution prevention and environmental management conventions. _______

159