SEABED COUNCIL DISCUSSES NEW ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSAL AS WORK CONTINUES ON CODE FOR NODULE EXPLORATION
Press Release
SEA/1626
SEABED COUNCIL DISCUSSES NEW ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSAL AS WORK CONTINUES ON CODE FOR NODULE EXPLORATION
19990812(Received from the International Seabed Authority.)
KINGSTON, 11 August -- The Council of the International Seabed Authority, continuing its series of informal meetings in Kingston, proceeded this afternoon with its examination of the draft mining code for exploration for polymetallic nodules in the deep seabed, taking up the four annexes to the text.
Before considering the annexes, the Council discussed proposals to add to the main body of the regulations clauses extending a seabed contractor's liability for environmental damage to six months after expiry of its contract, and authorizing Authority inspectors and coastal State observers to ensure compliance with environmental undertakings.
The Council will continue its informal first reading of the draft code at 11 a.m. tomorrow, 12 August.
The proposals that the Council discussed this afternoon consist of additions to regulations 27 and 29. As they stand, these regulations would hold seabed contractors responsible and liable for any environmental damage arising from wrongful acts in the conduct of exploration operations, and authorize coastal States to apply to the Authority for preventive steps when they had clear grounds for suspecting serious harm.
The first addition proposed by one delegation would extend the contractor's liability for environmental damages for up to six months after completion of the exploration phase, while it acts to finalize a contract for exploitation. In a case where the contractor did not continue exploration or apply for exploitation, it would have to notify the Authority before removing its equipment, whereupon the Authority could send inspectors to the site in order to certify that the contractor's undertakings to preserve and protect the environment had been fulfilled. A related addition would allow a coastal State to appoint an observer to take part in the inspectors' activities.
In response to these proposals, a number of delegations were wary of limiting the period of liability to six months, as that might seem to release
- 2 - Press Release SEA/1626 12 August 1999
contractors from responsibility if the results of damage became evident only afterwards. One delegation suggested that the paragraph could be reworded to allude to any time in the future "as long as harm is caused by the activities of exploration".
One delegation did not see the practicality of inspecting a site after exploration ended. With regard to enabling coastal States to observe the inspection, the issue of confidentiality was raised, as some coastal States could be land-based competitors of the contractor.
It was agreed that delegations should have time to consider the proposals and that, in the meantime, the secretariat should prepare a new formulation based on the comments expressed.
The four annexes to the draft mining code spell out details of the contractual process. Annex 1, on which there was little discussion, lists 18 information items to be supplied by any entity when notifying the Authority of its intention to engage in seabed prospecting. Annex 2 describes the information to be provided in an application for approval of a plan of work prior to obtaining an exploration contract. Annex 3 outlines the contract for exploration. Annex 4 sets out standard clauses for such a contract.
Section II of annex 2 deals with information required of the applicant relating to the seabed area under application. Some delegations felt that the information requested about technology was too wide in scope and went beyond the details prescribed in regulation 14, and that the cost to the applicant in supplying all the environmental information requested would be too high. However, another member made the point that such information would assist the Authority in deciding what emergency measures to take in the event of an environmental incident. Also, certain elements of environmental information would also help determine the commercial value of a site.
The Council completed debate on the first five of 28 sections contained in annex 4, which contains standard clauses for exploration contracts.
Much of the debate focused on portions of section 2, dealing with security of tenure, and of section 4, on exploration. Some delegates felt that a clause acknowledging the Authority's right to enter into contracts with third parties for resources other than polymetallic nodules was redundant. Discussion centered on proposals to reformulate the paragraph or delete it altogether.
Some delegates suggested deleting a clause obliging contractors to spend each year no less than they had specified in their programme of work; they felt that the provision was too rigid. It was pointed out by other delegates who had no problem with the wording that annex 2 required the contractor to provide a schedule of anticipated expenditures for the programme of work.
* *** *