Navy ship to be immortalised as artificial reef

NEW DELHI: A decommissioned Indian Navy ship has become part of an environmental project to showcase the country's marine life - offering adventure tourists opportunities for underwater tours of the vessel.

The ship, which has been sunk off the Karnataka coast in the Arabian sea, will serve as an artificial reef and over time become a natural home to weeds, sea plants, fishes and other creatures of the sea.

The ship, Seaward Defence Boat T-54, had guarded the country's maritime borders for 23 years from the time it was commissioned in September 1982.

The 162-tonne vessel, also known as 'The Ever Vigilant', was sunk off Karwar Port January 30. Prior to this, it was brought for "final preparations" to Karwar, where the Indian Navy is developing a major base.

The electrical wiring and the communication system were removed from the ship and traces of oil cleaned from the fuel tanks. The ship was then towed out, mines were fitted on the vessel and detonated, causing it to sink.

"The mines exploded and sea water rushed into the compartmets. After two blasts, the ship started sinking slowly - stern first and then the bow," an official said.

A survey conducted by a diver revealed the vessel was nestled on the seabed.

The area has initially been opened to professional divers as the underwater visibility has to improve to about six metres before it is possible to view the ship from glass-bottomed boats. The ship will also promote scuba diving as a sport.

Being a first of its kind of project for the Indian Navy, a lot of deliberation had gone into the identification of the site, and the planning and execution of the project.

"The weapon systems and most of the ship's machinery were removed after it was decommissioned. For the project, relevant parts of the ship which had to be cut away to give access were carefully photographed and demarcated," an official said describing the preparations before the ship was sunk.

"Moreover, in view of the strict naval guidelines for dismantling and cleaning the ship, all potential contaminants that could adversely effect marine life were removed to make T-54 as environmentally safe as possible," the official added.

The Economic Times

Efforts on to transfer ship owners’s burden to shipbreakers in India

Notes for the MMR Conference on shipbreaking industry
19 July, 2008

Little has changed in Bangladesh and India in terms of occupational safety and environmental protection in the ship breaking industry. In Bangladesh, 4 more wokers died on the Shipbreaking beaches in June 2008. Rate of accident in India is quite alarming too even as per official statistics. It is 2 workers per 1000 which is the worse than the worst in any other industrial sector.

One of the most astounding facts about both Alang and Chittangong, Bangladesh is that till date no worker has been compensated for asbestos exposure.

In India, a Committee headed by Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment submitted a report to the Supreme Court of India concluding that 16 % of workers in Alang are exposed to asbestos. In a stark case of callousness bordering on barbarism, even these workers have neither been compensated nor efforts made to treat them till date. Asbestos related diseases are incurable. The chemical exposure of workers and communities has never been addressed. Migrant workers of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Orissa spend most of whatever they earn on their health problems. There is indisputable evidence world over that no controlled and safe use and handling of asbestos is possible. As result more than 50 countries have banned asbestos. In India trade in asbestos waste both dust and fibers is banned but the authorities have so far condoned its entry into India on ships such as Blue Lady (SS Norway).

Despite such a grim situation UN’s Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal appears poised to pass competency on this issue to UN’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) a body without competence on waste management issues; that has drafted a new Ship Recycling Convention (International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships) which, without significant reform will turn back the clock on established principle.
IMO Convention in its current text does not achieve an equivalent level of control as that required under the Basel Convention; and worst of all, it will not stop a single toxic ship from moving across oceans to disproportionately burden the poorest of the poor with toxic waste.

In June 2008, the ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s and continues till today.
In her statement to COP 9, Katharina Kummer Peiry, Executive Secretary of the Basel Convention too reiterated "to the IMO the importance of ensuring that the new ship recycling Convention provides an equivalent level of control as that established under Basel Convention. The final negotiations International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships, under the auspices of IMO will take place in October 2008, prior to its adoption by the Diplomatic Conference in May 2009.


The proposed convention fails to address the four fatal flaws of the beaching method for ship breaking. They are outlined as follows:

1. Cranes Cannot be Placed Alongside Ship: Lack of hard standing alongside the ship to plant cranes to lift heavy cut blocks and sheet steel, or to be used to quickly lift persons from the ship for emergency reasons.

2. Lack of access by emergency vehicles and equipment: Soft sands and tidal conditions make it very difficult for fire trucks, ambulances etc. to approach the ship in urgent conditions, seriously delaying the possibility to rescue or administer first aid to victims of accidents.

3. No Possibility for Containment: Operations involving cutting, removal of oils and bilge waters etc., PCB laden paints and other materials must take place with direct ship to sediment contact allowing continuous release of paints-substrates, hull fouling organisms, chemical compounds and biocides, (antifouling, etc.) and non-collected debris from the operations, allowing the ground and surface waters to be contaminated without possibility of remediation. Oils cannot even be contained with booms. Lack of cranes prevent horizontal cutting and use of hull for containment.

4. Coastal Zone, Intertidal Zone is environmentally sensitive: Managing hazardous wastes in the intertidal zone can never be environmentally sound. Coastal zones not only provide little opportunity for containment from surface and groundwater, but are especially sensitive to the protection of fisheries, wildfowl, and the marine environment.

Environmental groups have been demanding remediation of beaches of their toxic contamination in India and Bangladesh where ship-breaking activity takes place is a pressing need to retrieve and protect the fragile coastal environmental and public health of communities and their livelihoods.

These groups are genuinely concerned about the proposed IMO convention on ship dismantling fails to establish equivalent level of control in its document.

In the Indian context, our officials who are negotiating at the IMO level must communicate categorically to the Marine Environment Protection Committee of IMO that their Ship Recycling Convention so far does not meet the bar of equivalent level of control and we cannot accept a step backwards. Especially, given the fact that in the aftermath of the Supreme Court order of 6th September 2007 that seek prior decontamination of ships in the country of export.

Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) must ensure decontamination of the beaches and suggest a phase out period for the industry to move away from a fragile coastal environment like Alang beach in order to protect the health of the local community and their ecosystem. The industrial activity on the beach started in 1983 in the absence India’ Environment Protection Act, 1986. The wrongful act of having polluted and contaminated Alang beach in an era when there was no environmental sensitivity must be undone.

MEPC’s failure to address this problem and allow status quo will defeat the very purpose for which the committee has been constituted. Protection of the marine environment of Alang is the fundamental reason for MEPC’s existence. History will bear testimony to its manifest and unpardonable failure in ensuring remediation and restoration of Alang beach for posterity.

Lack of coordination among Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Shipping, Ministry of Steel and Ministry of Commerce is taking a toll on India’s interest. The way economic agreements with countries like Japan are influencing Indian position on environmental health is matter of grave concern.

Admittedly, Gujarat Maritime Board does not have the competence to supervise an industrial activity like ship breaking and ensuring workers safety in this industry. The same holds true for the IMO. But shipping industry of the developed countries like Norway and Greece are using one UN body (IMO) to undermine another (Basel) to escape decontamination and liability cost.

IMO has ignored fundamental obligations and principles of the Basel Convention, such as whether vessels are wastes, the need to minimize transboundary movement of wastes, the obligation to minimize the generation of hazardous wastes.

It is indeed alarming to note that IMO pins the burden of ship dismantling risk and obligation on the developed countries like India that host of the existing ship breakers and recyclers. IMO distorts the polluter-pays principles and advocates “polluted- pays” principle by burdening the recipient countries like Bangladesh and India with most of their responsibilities. It is working very hard to ensure that ship designers, owners and operators who have the technical and financial resources to deal with hazardous wastes upstream are relieved of their duty to minimize wastes they have generated.

IMO’s role is to ensure green ship design, proper inventory, decontamination of hazardous substances prior to export for disposal. What IMO should do and Indian negotiators should work for is to create a mandatory regime that ensures that all future ships are free of hazardous materials. If that is done very soon Basel will no longer be required to deal with toxic ships like Le Clemenceau.

Laieta & MV KINGDOM in Indian Waters

Laieta has arrived outer port anchorage at Alang. She will be beached within the next two days. Shreeji Shipping is the Indian buyer for the toxic ship. Efforts are on to beach it without declaring it to the Customs and GPCB and AERB. This is a crime and in violation of the Supreme Court order dated 6th September, 2007.

A liquefied natural gas (LNG) named 'LAIETA" built in 1970 left
Spanish European waters for the scrap yards in Alang beach and has
reached Indian waters. The export of hazardous wastes laden ships for
demolition is prohibited under the Basel Convention. The departure of
this vessel from Spanish Ports without pre-cleaning in the country of
export is illegal under the international law, European law and under
the Indian domestic law.

It is for this reason that some 90 ships are languishing at Alang
seeking the permission from the Supreme Court of India where the
matter is being currently being heard.

The share of LNG in the gas trade accounts for almost 24% of the
total. In 2007, the international trade in liquid form accounted for
374.3 106 m3.

Japan retained its position as the world's leading LNG importer with
145.4 106 m3, or 38.8% of all imports, followed by Korea with 57 106
m3 (15.2%), Spain with 41.2 106 m3 (11%) and the U.S.A., which reached
a record high with 35.7 106 m3 (9.5%).

It has been 38 years since Spain has built an LNG carrier. The world
LNG tanker fleet consisted of 254 vessels at the end of 2007. The
Hassi R'Mel, the Laieta and the Hoegh Gandria did not unload any cargo
during the year as well as twelve other LNG tankers that were
delivered in 2007.


MV KINGDOM is a Finnish ship is the fastest ferry in the world. Global fuel price hike forces owners to sell MV Kingdom; The ship requires fuel worth Rs25lakh per day

Since the inception of the Alang shipbreaking yard in 1982, a number of vessels have been scrapped here, including the controversial Blue Lady.

Now, the world’s fastest passenger-cum-conventional ferry ship has sailed in. Interestingly, it is the unbearable global fuel prices that have compelled the owners of the ship to sell it.

GTS Finnjet, built in 1977 and later renamed Motor Vessel (MV) Da Vinci and MV Kingdom since it has reached the scrapping yard, is the fastest ship in the world. However, due to its enormous speed, Kingdom also guzzles fuel in good quantum.

Thus, for its owners the ship had become a headache in balancing income and expenses.

GTS Finnjet was a cruise ferry, built in 1977 by Wartsila Helsinki, Finland for Finnlines to ply between Finland and Germany. At the time of her delivery, Finnjet was the fastest, longest and largest car ferry in the world, and the only one powered by gas turbines.

She is still the fastest conventional ferry as of 2008, with a recorded top speed of 33.5 knots.

Finnjet has remained out of service since 2005, laid up in Baton Rouge, Freeport and Genoa. Although she was purchased by Club Cruise in November 2007 and renamed GTS Da Vinci in January 2008 for rebuilding into a cruise ship, the ship was sold for scrap in May 2008 and named MV Kingdom.

Jeckon International, Liberia sold Kingdom to Rishi Ship Breakers at Alang and she has completed her final voyage from Jeddah port, arriving at Alang on June 13th. According to port sources, she beached in plot no. 109 in Alang on 19th June.

Kingdom weighs 15,500 metric tonnes, with a capacity of 3,500 passengers and 325 cars. At the time of her last professional voyage, there were 178 crew members aboard.

Generally ships travel at the speed of 10 to 20 sea nautical miles, but Kingdom boasts the speed of 33.5 knots. However, to generate this extra speed, she was consuming 45 tonnes fuel every day.

According to sources, including marine diesel, lubricant oil and other fuel she requires to run her voyage at the fuel cost of Rs25 lakh per day. The ship breaker has purchased Kingdom for Rs40 crores.

ISO aims to regulate shipbreaking

Workers who dismantle decommissioned ships could be better protected after the publication of a new ISO document on shipbreaking.

The ISO publicly available specification (PAS) 30003 will be available for bodies that audit and certify ship recycling management.

It aims to help increase the safety of workers and protection of the environment in an industry known for health and safety failings in some parts of the world, such as Asia.

A full ISO standard is expected to follow at a later date.

"Certification is a recognized means for an organization to provide assurance that it has effectively implemented a system for ship recycling management," said Captain Charles Piersall, chair of the International Organisation for Standardisation's technical committee on ships.

"Clearly the independent third party certification provides the highest level of confidence to the customer - industry or government - in meeting their expectations.

"ISO/PAS 30003, as a publicly available specification, will address an urgent market demand, while awaiting the publication of this useful document as a full International Standard.

Although the document is mainly targeted at third party audit and certification bodies, it can be used by any organization involved in the assessing the management of ship recycling.

It will provide guidance for bodies applying for ISO 30000 registration or certification, define the rules for auditing and certifying ship recycling management systems.

ISO chiefs said the document will also give customers confidence about the way their waste ships have been handled.

It will work alongside the ISO 30000 on ship recycling management, which also promotes the safety of workers and preservation of the environment, as well as the recovery and reuse of steel and other materials.

Work is underway on a number of other standards which will define best practices for the ship recycling facilities themselves, information control for hazardous materials and guidelines for measures to prevent asbestos emissions and exposure in ships recycling.

It is estimated that thousands of shipyard workers in countries such as India and China die as a result of work-related diseases and accidents (see related story).

Kate Martin


Source: edie newsroom

Is Nuclear Energy Good for India?

Environmental impacts of nuclear energy generation has to be considered for the whole fuel cycle, from the mining of Uranium to provide fuel for nuclear reactors, to the disposal of radioactive wastes and the decommissioning of nuclear energy plants.

A fuel cycle is the whole sequence of processes from the energy source to the actual energy from which is transmitted/transported, and beyond the latter to the disposal/recycling of wastes and by-products. The principal environmental impacts arise through (a) radiation (b) thermal pollution. The radiation, which includes alpha, beta and gamma rays, can have adverse effects on those who are exposed to it.

Uranium is mined as uranium ore. Uranium ores are generally mined by underground or surface mining. Uranium-238 is radioactive and decays to give radon-222. Uranium milling operations lead to release of radioactive material as well as radioactive liquid wastes and tailings. Though there are many types of reactors, the primarily used reactor is the light-water reactor.

So far, no satisfactory acceptable long-term solution to high-level waste disposal problem has been developed.

Unprecedented Resolution in Kerala Assembly
Kerala legislative assembly adopted a resolution on 11th July urging
the Union government to ditch the Indo-US civilian nuclear
agreement—on environmental grounds rather than purely ideological. One
green activist said the move was unprecedented.

The resolution linked the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
notification of 2006 with the nuclear deal, over which the Left
parties have withdrawn support to the Congress-led United Progressive
Alliance (UPA) government at the Centre.

The EIA notification mandates that companies wishing to set up nuclear
power plants apply for environmental clearance to the Union government
rather than the states.

Nuclear energy companies associated with the defence forces would be
exempted from requiring environmental clearances.

"The EIA notification of 2006 is against the interest of Kerala state,
nature and environment and people," said the resolution.

"The Indo-American Nuclear Agreement is an attempt by American
imperialism to transform India as a client state. Kerala State
Assembly earnestly requests Central Government to withdraw from the
Agreement," the resolution said.

This resolution was proposed by Rajaji Thomas, a lawmaker from the
Communist Party of India (CPI), and was passed with 76 votes in favour
and none against in the 141-member assembly.

The resolution will now move to the ministry of environment and
forests (MoEF), which will have to take a call on it.
\
"The notification has diluted provisions for nuclear facilities,
opening the gates for the nuclear agreement," said a member of the
assembly, who did not wish to be identified.

The resolution was passed as the UPA prepares for a showdown in
Parliament over the nuclear deal after taking heavy flak over the
agreement from both its erstwhile Left allies and the main opposition
Bharatiya Janata Party.

Another member of the assembly, who did not wish to be identified,
said the nuclear deal was not the only reason behind the resolution.
"There have been many such environmental issues in the state. Some
projects have been getting clearances without even a public hearing,"
he said.

The 163MW Athirapally Hydro-Electric Project, on the Chalakudy river
in Thrissur district, has been hanging fire since the early 1990s.
The project, to be executed by the Kerala State Electricity Board
(KSEB), has been at the centre of protests by local villagers, tribals
and farmers.

KSEB obtained a clearance from MoEF for the project without a public
hearing under the 2006 EIA notification after holding one hearing
under a predecessor.

Supreme Court refuses to pass direction on appointment of CAG

The Supreme Court on 14 July refused to entertain a petition seeking laying down of guidelines for the appointment of Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India.

"Guidelines have to come through some legislation in accordance with the Constitution," a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan said.

"We will not give any direction for the laying down of guidelines for the appointment. You have to find the guidelines in the Constitution," the Bench, also comprising Justice P Sathasivam, observed.

The Court declined to go into the petitioner's plea that the issue was needed to be discussed to keep at bay the appointment of "blue-eyed boys of the government" to the post, which has a tenure of six years.

The PIL filed by NGO Public Cause Research Foundation contended that a proper procedure has to be laid down for the appointment of CAG since the power assigned to the post was equivalent to that of an apex court judge.

When advocate Kamini Jaiswal, appearing for the NGO, said that during the pendency of the petition, the Centre has appointed Vinod Rai as the CAG, the Bench said "you are confining your argument to a particular person".

She said in the absence of any guidelines or procedure, retiring bureaucrats with no experience of accounts and audit were getting appointed as CAG.

In case, a Secretary of a particular department or ministry, like Defence or Petroleum, takes up the post there would be a conflict of interest as he or she might have to inquire into deals that they themselves executed during their tenure, she said.

Earlier, Vinod Rai was sworn in as the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India on 7 January 2007. He took the oath of office before the President, Pratibha Devisingh Patil.

His predecessor, Vijendra Nath Kaul has expressed his disappointment with the government's handling of its annual reports, saying action over them comes too late.

He said, CAG sends some 3,000 paragraphs on objections alone to state and central governments every year in its report. Parliament, he said, gets similar objections in 1,600 paragraphs. "By the time they are addressed or action is taken against secretaries, one year gets passed and cases keep piling up," Kaul remarked.

The CAG, who blamed what he called a lack of accountability in bureaucracy for delays in action on audit reports, said officials who sit over them should be punished. "Officials who sleep on the CAG report and do not act should be punished," he remarked.

Kaul, who regretted that the CAG had to encounter excuses whenever it enquired about the followup of its report, said he believed such action would help increase accountability in the system.
He also spoke about plans to switch the country's cash-based accounting system to the one based on approvals, saying all key departments have agreed to the proposals initial reservations by the defence and the railways ministries.

Kaul explained that the proposed approval system would require all ministerial and departmental sanctions for different transactions to be put down as accounting entries.

Kaul's term expired on January 6, 2008. Era Sezhiyan, a former parliamentarian had predicted that an IAS officer would occupy CAG's post. He has been proven right.

Checks and balances

ERA SEZHIYAN

The Comptroller and Auditor General’s office has become another public sector enterprise to accommodate superannuating government officials.


Commenting on the importance of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in the parliamentary system of governance, B.R. Ambedkar said in the Constituent Assembly on May 30, 1949: “I am of opinion that this dignitary is probably the most important officer in the Constitution of India. If this functionary is to carry out the duties – and his duties are far more important than the duties even of the judiciary – he should be certainly as independent as the judiciary.” Prof. K.T. Shah was against appointing the Auditor General from among the civil services cadre and demanded laying down of the qualifications which will provide for practical experience and technical knowledge in the person appointed as Auditor General.

On behalf of the Drafting Committee, T.T. Krishnamachari assured the Constituent Assembly that “we had some very good Auditor Generals who were good administrators and who have functioned as Accountant Generals in various places”. This observation gave the impression that the Auditor General, later designated as Comptroller and Auditor General, would be chosen from the experienced Accountant Generals belonging to the Indian Audit and Accounts Service (IAAS).

The assurance was followed up with the appointment of three CAGs such as V. Narahari Rao (1948-54), A.K. Chanda (1954-60) and A.K. Roy (1960-66) from the IAAS. Their rich experience and expertise not only succeeded in setting up an effective public audit on a sound foundation but also rendered valuable assistance to parliamentary committees taking firm decisions and adopting suitable procedures to ensure the accountability of the executive.

In the 1950s, the Government of India wanted to organise public enterprises as private limited companies in order to preclude the CAG audit. Though a few leading members felt that the formation of government companies under the Indian Companies Act would whittle away parliamentary control, they were hesitant to raise their objections against the powerful Nehru government. However, Narahari Rao boldly declared that it would be “a fraud on the Constitution” if the government companies were not subjected to public audit. Supporting the commendable views of the CAG, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) recommended in its Third Report of 1952-53: “The Comptroller and Auditor General should have the unquestioned right to audit the expenditure of these concerns, by whatever name they may be called, because they are financed from the Consolidated Fund of India.”

During a discussion in the Lok Sabha on December 11, 1953, Finance Minister C.D. Deshmukh agreed for a legislation to bring all government companies under public audit. CAG Ashok Chanda introduced the system of Financial Advisers in the Union Ministries to cope with the huge volume of work generated by development planning. A.K. Roy initiated the system of revenue audit that improved the tax collection of the government. They are looked upon as the triumvirate responsible for establishing a responsible Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) in India.

However, of the seven CAGs appointed in the past 42 years, only one was an IAAS officer; the others were from the civil services cadre. An Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer retires on completion of 60 years of age. The term of the CAG is six years or till the end of 65 years of age, whichever is earlier. If a Government Secretary who is about to retire manages to get the post of CAG, he or she, without any training or experience to deal with the high standards of auditing the vast complex government transactions, gets an extension of five years in the higher post. However, a talented Deputy CAG with more than three decades of experience in the IAAS is denied his rightful promotion. It is more of a loss to the supreme audit than to the individual concerned.

It looks as though the government has made an unwritten policy of appointing only IAS officers to head the Supreme Audit Institution. Thus the audit office has become another public sector enterprise to accommodate superannuating government officials.
Practices abroad

In the United Kingdom, the CAG is an officer of the House of Commons and head of the National Audit, which is an independent parliamentary body for auditing central government departments, government agencies and non-departmental public bodies. The appointment of the CAG is made “on an address presented by the House of Commons and no motion shall be made for such an address except by the Prime Minister acting with the agreement of the Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts”.

In Australia, the Governor General appoints the Auditor General on the recommendation of the Minister concerned, after the Minister has referred his recommendation for the approval of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.

In Germany, on a proposal made by the Federal Government, the Bundestag (Parliament) and the Bundesrat (Federal Council) elect without debate the President and Vice-President of the Federal Court of Audit. Before making his proposal, the Federal President shall consult the standing committee of the large Senate of the Federal Court of Audit.

In Japan, the three Commissioners of the Board of Audit are appointed by the Cabinet with the consent of both Houses of the Diet. In South Korea, the Chairman of the Board of Audit is appointed by the President with the consent of the National Assembly. In Thailand, the Auditor General is appointed with the prior approval of the National Assembly.

In the United States, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of Congress and thus an agency in the legislative branch. The Comptroller General, head of the GAO, occupies a non-partisan position in the U.S. government and is appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a 15-year, non-renewable term. The Comptroller General may not be removed by the President, but only by Congress through impeachment or joint resolution for specific reasons. Since 1921, there has been no formal attempt to remove a Comptroller General. The long tenure of the Comptroller General and the manner of appointment and removal gives the GAO a continuity of leadership and independence that is rare within government.

Thus, in most countries, there is no scope for the head of the Supreme Audit Institution to be chosen at the discretion of the government. India is a member of the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI), which, with 186 members, operates as an umbrella organisation for the external government audit community. The INTOSAI has been insisting that “the Supreme Audit Institutions should have the functional and organisational independence required to carry out their mandate”. It is, therefore, desirable that India adopts the international practice of appointing the head of the Supreme Audit Institution as an office independent of the discriminatory power of the executive.

At the foundation stone-laying function of the CAG Office in New Delhi on July 21, 1954, President Rajendra Prasad emphasised the importance of audit: “In a democratic set-up involving allocation of hundreds of crores of rupees, the importance of this kind of scrutiny and check can never be over-emphasised, particularly at the present moment when the government is incurring huge expenditure in so many welfare projects. It is essential that every rupee that we spend on all these is accounted for. The important task – I am afraid, a task not always very pleasant – devolves upon the Comptroller and Auditor General and his office. In accordance with the powers vested in him, he has to carry on these functions without fear or favour in the larger interests of the nation.”

As a true Gandhian, Rajendra Prasad was very much concerned about proper accounting of every rupee spent as part of the “huge expenditure” of the government. In the annual budget of 1954, the total budgetary transactions of the Centre and the States (including the extra-budgetary resources of public sector undertakings) was Rs.1,254 crore whereas the figure for 2005-06 was Rs.10,49,775 crore.

In 1951, there were only five public undertakings with a total investment of Rs.29 crore under the Union government and very few in the States. Now, at the end of the Tenth Plan, the total financial resources given to the public sector enterprises under the Centre and the States, including the Union Territories, come to Rs.15,92,300 crore. Public enterprises other than nationalised banks and some financial institutions are subjected to public audit. Thus, the CAG and his officers have a very heavy responsibility to see whether financial transactions of the governments and their enterprises are being managed with strict measures of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

At a function held on June 2, 1954, in the Office of the Accountant General, Madras, Vice-President S. Radhakrishnan advised the audit officers to do the duty they owe to the country. He said: “The Comptroller and Auditor General is responsible not to the government. He must serve as the check on the government. The government may make mistakes. It is wrong to assume that the government can do no wrong. The Auditor General is independent of the executive. It is the duty of the Audit and Accounts Department to carry out the financial policies of the government and maintain the authority to Parliament. If I have to give one advice and if I am presumptuous enough to give any advice to the officers of the Audit and Accounts Department, it is this: ‘Do not shrink from the truth for fear of offending men in high places.’”

All these point to the important role assigned to public audit in ensuring the accountability of the executive to Parliament and through Parliament to the real sovereign, the people. The government has been appointing only IAS officers working as Secretaries in one or other of the Ministries to the post of CAG in the past 30 years. It is not clear why government considers an IAS officer superior to and more competent than a seasoned IAAS officer to perform the duties of the Auditor General. The Cabinet has a collective responsibility to Parliament and the Ministers are individually answerable to Parliament for all the work of their Ministries or Departments.

However, in the vast administrative and financial activities of the government, there may be occasions when an individual officer in charge of a Department acts against the rules and procedures laid down and becomes answerable to the Parliamentary Committees. Rule 52 (1) of the General Financial Rules states: “Departments of the Central Government shall be responsible for the control of expenditure against sanctioned grants and appropriations placed at their disposal. The control shall be exercised through the Heads of Departments and their Controlling Officers, if any, and Distributing Officers subordinates to them.”

When an officer working as Defence Secretary is suddenly raised to the post of CAG and if, at that time, audit officers are engaged in a long-standing scrutiny of some questionable defence deals, what will be the natural disposition of the new CAG who has been involved in making the wrong decisions concerned in the Defence Ministry?

If the Secretary of Petroleum Ministry is chosen to the post of CAG, how will he react to the audit investigations into the nebulous and surreptitious transactions by the Petroleum Ministry? Normally, India imports petroleum worth $50 billion at a time out of the total annual import of $180 billion. There are major public sector enterprises such as the Indian Oil Corporation, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited that deal with petroleum products.

How can someone involved in the executive decisions taken earlier in the Ministry be able to face audit objections? Unless a dossier is prepared for each officer about the irregularities, mismanagement and misuse of power committed as per the audit reports on the whole, how can he be promoted to such a sensitive and independent post as that of the CAG?

In January-February 1996, the Indian Audit and Accounts Service Association submitted that the “IA&AS is a service constituted under Article 148(5) of the Constitution with specific purpose to implement provisions of Articles 149 to 151 and the Comptroller & Auditor General’s (Duties and Powers) Act of 1971 and only a professional drawn from their rank who possesses the requisite experience of auditing and accounting can discharge the functions of the post of C&AG.”

It further observed that after Independence, during Jawaharlal Nehru’s time when the best traditions of parliamentary democracy were followed, the first three CAGs were drawn from the IAAS. Giving specific examples, the Association also pointed out that most countries chose an officer from within the rank of officers working in their national audit office to head the audit organisation.

It is learnt that the IAAS officers discussed this matter with the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament, who met the President and the Prime Minister and conveyed his full support to the representation made by the officers.

Narahari Rao was the first Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

The consultation paper circulated by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution recommended a high-level committee for the appointment of CAG. However, the final report recommended that “a healthy convention be developed to consult the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, before the government decides on the appointment of the CAG so that the views of the PAC are also taken into account” (Para 5.16.3).

In recent years, the government has made statutory provisions of selection to sensitive posts through high-level committees. The Human Rights Act, 1993, lays down that appointment of the chairperson and other members of the National Human Rights Commission to be based on the recommendations of a committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Home Minister, the Leaders of the Opposition in the two Houses of Parliament, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Deputy Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha.

For the post of Central Vigilance Commissioner, the Act provides for the appointment of a three-member committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Home Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. One should be careful not to give, overtly or covertly, a stronger hand to the government to enforce its decisions in the matter of making appointments to any sensitive post.

If there is no independent audit, there will be no accountability; if there is no accountability, there will be no control of the executive and if there is no control, there will be no Parliament worth its name. The term of the present CAG expires on January 6, 2008, and there is already speculation about filling up the post with an IAS officer.

The parliamentary system of a functioning democracy can be saved only by appointing a competent and experienced IAAS officer to the post of CAG.

Era Sezhiyan is a former Member of Parliament.

India, dumping ground of asbestos waste

Russian asbestos laden toxic ship dumped in India

Alang-- On its final voyage, the 25-year-old, 370-foot Russian trawler Komandarm Shcherbakov collected 3,000 tons of blue whiting fish from Denmark's Faroe Islands and ferried the catch to Nigeria. Three months later, the rust-riddled vessel sailed into this port - to die.

In May, the vessel gunned its engines for the last time and slid up the beach alongside the skeletal remains of numerous other ships at India's biggest ship-recycling yard in the western coastal state of Gujarat.

Like many vessels of its era, the Shcherbakov has asbestos insulation in its engine rooms and elsewhere, according to the ship's chief mate, Andrey Potapov.

"They didn't know it was bad back then," he said.

The Komandarm Shcherbakov is just the latest character in an ongoing drama of foreign waste dumped on Third World shores, critics say. Environmental groups say there are 90 ships on Alang's beaches, none of which has been precleaned of asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) or other hazardous material. PCBs were once used as fire retardants in paints, gaskets, cables and flooring.

"These are toxic chemicals, but the moment these things enter Indian territory, they become nontoxic," said Gopal Krishna of the Ban Asbestos Network of India, who accuses India of shirking its responsibilities as a signatory of the Basel Convention, which prohibits the international trade of toxic material.

Krishna and other activists argue that such hazardous materials are putting surrounding villages and Alang's estimated 5,000 workers in danger.

A 2006 report by India's Supreme Court found that the number of fatal accidents in the shipyard is six times higher than the nation's mining industry and that 1 in 6 ship recyclers suffer from asbestosis, a chronic inflammation of the lungs caused by prolonged exposure to asbestos fibers.

Ship recyclers are mostly migrants from India's poorest states, who toil for $2 to $3 a day scavenging steel sheets, pipes and bolts and cutting heavy plates of steel with blowtorches. A 2005 study by the International Federation for Human Rights showed that 48 to 60 workers at Alang ship recyclers die each year, mainly from explosions and falling plates of steel.

"This is the most vulnerable workforce in the world," Krishna said. "There are whole villages of widows."

State officials, however, say Alang properly disposes of all hazardous materials. While entire sections of asbestos paneling are resold in a street market outside the yard, the unusable materials and PCB waste are bagged and dumped in a nearby landfill.

Environmental groups argue that landfill disposal violates the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, of which India is also a signatory. The convention considers landfills as unsuitable disposal sites for PCBs.

"India has the capability to recycle warships, nuclear vessels, passenger carriers and all kinds of ships," said Atul Sharma, an environmental engineer for the Gujarat Maritime Board.

But Alang is losing business to the cheaper, less regulated recycling yards of Bangladesh and Pakistan, which are more convenient for ship brokers seeking to dump a vessel with minimal preparation beforehand. Alang, which is still the major recycler of large vessels, scrapped only 129 ships in 2007, down from a high of 428 in 2001, according to the Indian Ship-Breakers Association.

Perhaps with that in mind, the Supreme Court report said the overall value of the industry must be considered when discussing the adverse environmental and health conditions of Alang. In the past 10 years, the court pointed out, Alang has produced 23 million tons of steel and employed 40,000 migrant workers. Scrapping one large ship can mean $10 million.

"No development is possible without some adverse effect on the ecology and environment," said a court statement last year.

But the court also issued a ruling requiring ship owners to compile a list of toxic materials to be disposed of in an environmentally sound manner.

Jim Puckett, coordinator of the Basel Action Network, a Seattle group dedicated to curbing international toxic trade, said the ruling has failed to regulate the ship recycling industry.

"There is just no way in the world that this can be sustainable for the environment and workers. It's complete anarchy on the beaches of India right now," Puckett said.

"No one is in control except the ship-breakers. They seem to be running the show."

A tale of two ships

In 1992, the Basel Convention, signed by 170 nations, curbed the trade of toxic materials. A signatory country like India cannot accept hazardous material from a nonsignatory nation like the United States.

Environmental activists say ship owners typically skirt international law by using dummy corporations to transfer ship ownership, changing the vessel's name and flag on the high seas and lying to authorities about its final destination.

SS Blue Lady - The 47-year-old ship, formerly the Norwegian Cruise Line's SS Norway, was decommissioned after a 2003 boiler explosion killed eight crew members in Miami. Norwegian Cruise Line then sent the vessel to Bremerhaven, Germany, where the ship's captain told authorities the ship needed repairs in Malaysia. But once on the high seas, the Blue Lady was sold in 2006 to Bridgend Shipping of Liberia and then beached at Alang, India, with an estimated 1,200 tons of asbestos and other toxic and radioactive materials.

SS Oceanic - Another former Norwegian Cruise Line ship, which sailed out of San Francisco in February after docking at Pier 70 for four years. Built in 1950, the ship has 250 tons of asbestos and 210 tons of PCBs, according to a waste stream analysis by Werner Hoyt, a ship recycler in Weed (Siskiyou County).

The SS Oceanic is owned by the Maryland-based Global Shipping LLC, a subsidiary of Global Marketing Systems, which scraps more than 100 vessels every year. Currently, Global Shipping is facing an EPA lawsuit, which alleges the ship is bound for a foreign scrap yard, a violation of the U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act.

A Global Shipping spokesman, however, says the company is looking for buyers to turn the 57 year-old ship - last seen near Dubai - into a floating hotel, casino or housing for laborers.

Sources: Basel Action Network, Ban Asbestos Network of India, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Global Shipping LLC and Werner Hoyt.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/06/MN2510MASF.DTL

This article appeared on page A - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Alang, world's most toxic beach

Alang is the most toxic beach in the world. Communities, NGOs have rejected new coastal zone notification and demanded that the government 'implement the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notification in its original 1991 form, until a new comprehensive legislation is enacted that satisfies the requirements of the fishing communities'.

The CRZ has been in place since 1991 and amended 19 times in the last 15 years 'under pressure from commercial interests'. The current amended policy that allows status quo deprives communities in Alang of their livelihood and threatens their food chain and health.

CRZ notification was aimed at protection of the coastal areas from the ravages of coastal tourism, industrialization and other development activities. It was first mooted in 1981 by Indira Gandhi late Prime Minister of India. Attempts to protect the coastal stretch started in 1991 when developments were regulated with respect to the high tide line. In 2004, the Environment Ministry set up a committee under the Chairmanship of M.S. Swaminathan to review the existing rules and recommend changes and if necessary recast the coastal regulatory framework.

In 2005, the committee suggested a scientific way to classify coastal zones and emphasised the idea of comprehensive management. Following which the ministry proposed that the coastal ones be delineated with reference to a setback line based on the vulnerability of the coast to the sea-level rise and shoreline changes, amongst other parameters.

The proposed coastal management zone (CMZ) policy must ensure that the toxic industrial activity that pre-dates Environmental Protection Act of 1986 must be shifted from Alang and restored to its original form. Dumping of most toxic wastes and ships since 1982 from countries like US, Russia and Europe on Alang beach has contaminated the ground water and the coastal ecosystem beyond repair.

The new CMZ, India would also be violation the Convention on Biological Diversity, Ramsar Resolution and the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

No wonder, National Fishermen Federation (NEF) and the fishermen are totally against the implementation of CMZ. It would be in fitness of things if NFF takes up the issue of protection Alang beach to save health and livelihood of the local communities in Bhavnagar, Gujarat.

The fishermen from all over the country will be launching an indefinite agitation in front of the parliament at New Delhi from July 22, to press for their demand for the scrapping of the CMZ.

Any environmental policy that threatens livelihood and fails to stop hazardous industrial activity on Alang beach for instance clearly condons and encourages such ecological and health disaster is regressive and cannot be deemed "envioronmental" from any strech of imagination.

Vijai Sharma, the new union environment secretary must make fresh start by agreeing to revise the CMZ in the light of the concerns raised by the communities and protect the coastal zones such as Alang and others. Sharma was Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat and replaces Meena Gupta, as Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests who retired on June 30, 2008. Sharma assumed charge on 1st July.

India to ban new ship-breaking yards, curb coastal construction

(source: http://www.maritimematters.com)
Note: Even as a new ship has recently left Singapore to sail under its own steam towards Alang. The ship is currently under charter to Peace Boat, Tokyo, Japan. The ships is laden with asbestos and PCBs since it was built by Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering, Govan, Scotland and rebuilt at Genoa 1964/5 and Eleusis 1997/8, various refits over the years. Its passenger capacity is 1050. Its owners, Topaz International, Greece remain oiblivious of the fact that on 1 May 2008 the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) released the Coastal Management Zone (CMZ) that is to replace the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) that has been in effect since 1991for the 8,000 kilometres of coast in India.
The pdf of the CMZ draft notification can be downloaded below or from the MoEF site.

This notification entails a decision on prohibiting new ship-breaking yards might be a small step taken on account of the environment, given the complete lack of implementation regimes in India to ensure clean ship-breaking.

Ship-breakers, however, are not happy with the development. “When the Supreme Court has allowed ship-breaking activity, subject to certain guidelines, why should the ministry of environment and forests impose restrictions on this?” asked Pravin Nagarsheth, president of industry body Iron Steel Scrap and Ship Breakers Association of India.

The government’s has outlined it plan in the draft coastal management zone (CMZ) notification published in the gazette on 1 May by the ministry of environment and forests.

“The draft CMZ notification imposes restrictions on the development of infrastructure along the country’s coast,” clarified D.T. Joseph, who was India’s shipping secretary between June 2003 and December 2005 as per Mint news reports.

This plan is aimed at conserving and improving the management of coastal resources, protecting coastal stretches from the risk of inundation from extreme weather and geological events, and strengthening the livelihood security of coastal populations.

After it becomes law, CMZ notification will supersede the coastal regulation zone notification of February 1991, which imposed restrictions on industrialization on specific coastal stretches.

Meanwhile, global maritime regulator International Maritime Organization (IMO), is working on a code for the ship recycling industry.

After the code comes into force by September 2009, the global shipping industry would have to send their ships to India for breaking, Nagarsheth of ship breakers association claimed.

“This is because, qualitatively, we will be a much better recycler of ships than our biggest rival Bangladesh if the Supreme Court guidelines are implemented fully,” he said.

From being the world’s top ship-breaker some 10 years ago, the Alang yard has lost ground to Bangladesh due to higher taxes and tighter regulatory controls in India.

These two countries account for about 90% of the ships that are dismantled after serving out their economical life.

At a recent meeting of Basel Convention in June 2008 in Bali, Indonesia, environmental groups criticised IMO for promoting the status quo with regard to the ongoing contamination. They sought decontamination and reclamation of Alang beach for future generations.

Clemenceau to be dismantled in UK

London: The asbestos-contaminated obsolete French aircraft carrier Clemenceau. Whose entry into India for dismantling was once blocked, will be finally broken up in the U.K after being kicked around like a football for fear of exposure to toxic waste.
The French Defence Ministry said the toxic-laden warship will be broken up by a company called Able UK whose shipyard is in the north-east of Britain.

The controversial ship with an estimated 22 tonnes of toxic material,which no foreign country was willing to dismantle, had nearly overshadowed French President Jacques Chirac's visit to India in 2006.

The 27,000 tonne warship, which was once a proud symbol of France's naval might, was the target of environment groups like Greenpeace and anti-asbestos groups like Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)when it set sail in 2005 to Alang in Gujarat, home to the world's largest shipbreaking yard. It was decommissioned in 1997.

Named after France's World War I prime minister Georges Clemenceau, the ship was a subject of protracted legal battles in Supreme Court in India as well as in Europe.

The Clemenceau is currently docked in the north-western French port of Brest, where it returned a year ago after an embarrassing saga that saw it towed as close to India in a bid to find a company to dismantle it.

Its return to France was hailed as a major victory by environmentalist groups, who had fought tooth and nail to block its transfer to Alang.

The French Defence ministry said five companies had bid for the new contract to break it up.

Britain and France must draw up a "cross-border transfer authorisation," a procedure which will take a few weeks and after which the ship will be able to leave Brest, the ministry said.

Clemenceau to be broken in UK

India is infamous for its ship graveyards which are amongst the most toxic places on the planet, but apparently the former flagship of the French Navy is too toxic for the Indian salvage yards to deal with, so the ship will end its existence in Britain.

After many twists and turns, the Clemenceau will be finally dismantled by the British company Able UK, which is located in the north-east of England.

The former aircraft carrier, now designated under the name Hull Q790, has been docked at the military port of Brest since May 2006, after a journey of 18,000 km between Toulon, India and Britain, against a backdrop of controversy around the presence of asbestos on board the vessel.

Able UK, which claims to have the largest dry-dock in the world has announced that Q790 will move to the port of Graythorp sometime during the summer and that the work of recycling, which includes asbestos removal, would be completed at the same time as other boats already moored on the site, including four vessels of the fleet reserve American and three British vessels

In an article last December, the company was not even cited among the outsiders, just Sita, a subsidiary of Suez, or Italian Simont.

The Belgian Galloo Recycling and French Veolia Clean then seemed better placed to deal with the work.

But then British Environment Agency allowed a waste management licence that allows Able UK to break up ships and oil platforms at its Graythorp ‘TERRC’ site, and the French Defence Ministry then decided to award the contract to the company.

Able UK has assured the Environment Agency that it is capable of safely handling up to 700 tonnes of asbestos waste at the plant in an environmentally safe manner.

The announcement of the choice of Able UK foreshadows the signing of a formal contract.

Great Britain and France have yet to issue an authorisation for the transfer, a procedure that will take several weeks, after which the former Clemenceau can leave the harbour of Brest and head for its final resting place in the UK.

The deal, if completed, will assure around 170 jobs already in place at the facility.

This is assuming that ‘Green’ protesters do not return to the site where they have previously demonstrated against an earlier deal to break up a US ship.

In his long career, the Clemenceau has come close to a million nautical miles, or about fifty times around the globe, 3,125 days at sea.

Some 20,000 sailors served on board.


by Alan Harten
July 3, 2008

Note: The decommissioning of Le Clemenceau, formerly one of the French navy's most prestigious ships, is turning into a nightmare for a government eager to profit from one of the world's dirtiest industries: the scrapping of toxic ships by workers in Asian countries. French efforts to side-step international protocols and global agreements1 preventing countries from exporting hazardous waste have been frustrated by the campaigning efforts of Ban Asbestos Network of France, India and Greenpeace working closely with members of an NGO Platform for Clean Ship-breaking. For months, legal proceedings kept the ship berthed in the French port of Toulon. On December 31, 2005, an Administrative Court cleared the way for the redundant aircraft carrier to depart for the scrapyards in Alang, India via the Suez Canal.

The problem is that while the 22,000 tonnes of steel on-board are worth eight million euros, the ship is riddled with asbestos, PCBs, lead and mercury.

Le Clemenceau factfile


# THE Clemenceau is affectionately known as Le Clem.

# The vessel is 714ft long with a beam of 95.1ft.

# When fully loaded she weighed 32,700 tons.

# The ship is carrying 700 tonnes of asbestos-contaminated materials and Able UK needed an exemption from the Health and Safety Executive to import it.

# The vessel is named after Georges Clemenceau and it was built in the Brest shipyard.

# It was launched on December 21, 1957, and commissioned on November, 22 1961.

# The ship was decommissioned on October 1, 1997.

# It had a top speed of 32 knots, (59 km/h) and has a capacity for 582 personnel.

# The ship had a capacity for 40 aircraft in total.