202 



the final Convention. If the Convention fails to establish adequate enforcement 

 mechanisms or to provide for broad application of its provisions, its ultimate 

 impact on reduciuK pollution of the oceans will be severely limited. Thus, the 

 Convention must (1) provide for mandatory enforcement of the discharge and 

 design and construction standards which it establishes and (2) provide for 

 comprehensive regulation of ship-generated pollution, applying to the widest 

 possible number of states, kinds of vessels and variations of .situations. 



II. THE CONVENTION MUST IMPOSE UNIFORM, MEANINGFUL DISCIIAKGE LIMITATIONS 

 AM) STRIGENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS 



The fundamental requirement of an effective Convention is the establishment 

 of meaningful, uniform discharge criteria and stringent design and con.struction 

 standards to guarantee that these criteria are met. Discharge limitations and 

 design standards are intimately related. A discharge limitation may be little 

 more than a pious platitude unless it is reinforced by technologically sound 

 hardware. Reliance on procedures, such as the load-on-top procedure, for ex- 

 ample, which depends upon such factors as crew skill and diligence, weather 

 conditions, product type, and voyage length, is simply no substitute in mo.st 

 cases for a structural solution, such as that obtained by a segregated ballast 

 requirement, to the discharge problem. For the same reasons, it is important 

 that the choice of means to achieve discharge limitations not be left open to 

 the Contracting States but be mandated by the Convention itself. With regarxl to 

 oil ix)llution in particular — the most significant element of ocean pollution and 

 the major focus of the Convention — we believe that it is essential to impose 

 (1) a uniform discharge limitation for all types of oil, (2) a no-di.scharge limita- 

 tion, and (3) a structural solution to the discharge problem, i.e., imposition of a 

 segregated ballast/double bottom requirement. 



(a) One Discharge Standard for Oil 



Although the Convention as now drafted provides for a single discharge 

 standard for "oil or oily mixtures," which are broadly detiiie<l to include "petro- 

 leum in any form," there is substantial pressure to establish a dual standard, 

 with ••persistent" or black oils presumably being subject to more sti-ingent con- 

 trols than "non-persistent" or white oils. This proposal is environmentally unac- 

 ceptable. Wliite oils may evaporate faster than black oils, and their discharge 

 may not always have the same visible effects as the discharge of black oils, i.e.. 

 fouling of fishing nets, deposits on beaches, coating of birds and wildlife, etc. 

 Nonetheless, the effects of white oil discharges may be subtler and ultimately 

 more harmful for the environment, since these oils, which contain a higher 

 percentage of aromatic derivative compounds than crude oils, will have greater 

 toxic effects on marine biota. 



The dangers associated with discharges of white oils are underscored by two 

 further factors. First, white oils are ordinarily primarily carrietl in coastwise 

 trades near sensitive bays, estuaries and coastal breeding grounds. Thus, merely 

 as a result of trade routes, their discharge will tend to produce more deleterious 

 effects than dis-charges of black oils on deep sea trans-oceanic routes which are 

 less rich and biologically productive than coastal waters. Second, because wliite 

 oils are more water soluble, discharges of ballast water and from oil-water 

 separators will contain significant concentrations of potentially toxic materials. 

 In sum, given the current state of knowledge about the effects of oil polhition 

 on the marine environment, establishment of a dual discharge standard would 

 be wholly unwarranted. 



(&) Meaningful Discharge Criteria 



To provide for the best pos.sible protection of the marine environment, any 

 discharge limitations established under the Convention should be lowest at- 

 tainable with existing technology. The five Annexes to the Convention provide 

 for specific discharge limitations on oil. chemicals, harmful substances wliicli 

 are packaged in containers, sewage and waste. The criteria will be the subject 

 of intense debate at the October Conference. As presently i)ropost'd they .ire un- 

 acceptable. With respect to oil, in particular, the discharge limitations do little 

 more than codify the existing outflow standards which are met through utilization 

 of the so-called load-on-top method (currently employed on 7.'")% of existing 

 tonnage). For example, if the Convention were to permit the discharge of 



