Radioactive Waste Disposal at Sea: Public Ideas ... - IMO

Interest-Based Regime Analysis 101
itself to use its best endeavours to prevent the pollution of the sea by matter
that is liable to cause harm to the marine environment and its living
resources, hazards to human health, hindrance to marine activities including
fishing, impairment of quality for use of sea water, or reduction of
amenities.” (Text of Draft Articles of a Convention for the Prevention of
Marine Pollution by Dumping, IMOD/2 (April 15, 1972), p. 3) Article 2
said: “The Parties shall take effective measures individually, according to
their capability, and collectively to prevent marine pollution caused by the
dumping of harmful matter and shall harmonize their policies in this
regard.” (ibid.)
The phrase “to use its best endeavors” was obviously less binding than
any phrase examined by the drafting group. It was used because representatives
of developing countries were opposed to general provisions that they
thought would impose unacceptable constraints on their economies.
Though developing countries supported the most stringent possible annexes
and criteria for dumping permits, they opposed general provisions that proclaimed
an overall restrictive and prohibitory dumping policy. Essentially,
while developing countries favored stringent standards, they wished to
avoid obligations that might hinder their industrialization. Negotiators
expected this conflict to resume at Stockholm (memo, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Denmark (May 1, 1972), p. 7).
The question of which substances would be completely prohibited to
dump (“blacklisted” substances) and which substances might be dumped
under certain conditions (“graylisted” substances) was from the beginning
seen as being of fundamental importance for the convention. Because of the
technical nature of such decisions, a working group on the annexes, composed
of specialists mainly representing the industrialized countries, was
established. The deliberations of the working group were later debated in
the general meeting. High-level radioactive waste was allocated to the black
list (officially Annex I). This meant a total prohibition on dumping.
Medium-level and low-level radioactive waste were not mentioned. The
inclusion of high-level radioactive waste and “agents of biological and
chemical warfare” in the black list was fiercely contested.
Although the revised U.S. draft convention was silent with respect to
dumping of radioactive waste, it was the position of the United States that
such activity should not be regulated by the future global ocean dumping
convention but instead should remain under the IAEA. 33 In contrast, the