[DRAFT] Oceanic Hazardous Waste Disposal Ban

[Maowi]

Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known to be of a densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,

OOC: Get rid of the first 'of'.
Also I find it a bit odd that 'Hoping to see further legislation preventing pollution and contamination of the marine environment;' is at the very bottom like that; maybe it would be better as part of the preamble? In any case, the proposal should end in a full stop.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known to be of a densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,

OOC: Get rid of the first 'of'.
Also I find it a bit odd that 'Hoping to see further legislation preventing pollution and contamination of the marine environment;' is at the very bottom like that; maybe it would be better as part of the preamble? In any case, the proposal should end in a full stop.

Could you point out which ones? I will remove them.

(OOC: The ones in iii are not toxic, since they are instead flammable, acidic or reactive. I think you meant ‘hazardous waste’ rather than ‘toxic waste’, since the latter has a much more precise definition that excludes a lot of things obviously damaging to health.)

Done, and done. Since 371 prohibited toxic waste dumping, this proposal now bans a larger group - hazardous waste dumping.

Okay. Are we reaching the end? I think so!

[Kenmoria]

“The ‘Noting’ clause still mentions ‘toxic waste’ as opposed to hazardous waste.”

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

“The ‘Noting’ clause still mentions ‘toxic waste’ as opposed to hazardous waste.”

Fixed!

[Separatist Peoples]

"Awful title. Try "Oceanic Hazardous Waste Disposal Act"."

[Araraukar]

"Awful title. Try "Oceanic Hazardous Waste Disposal Act"."

"Except make it "ban" instead of "act"."

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

"Awful title. Try "Oceanic Hazardous Waste Disposal Act"."

"Awful title. Try "Oceanic Hazardous Waste Disposal Act"."

"Except make it "ban" instead of "act"."

Done and done!

Alright! Any last comments. (24 Hours Remain) Dawn of the Third Day

[Ransium]

I would like to be listed as coauthor. I’d like to make another round of suggestions but I won’t be able to get to it until this weekend. It’ll be lighter but I think there’s more polishing to be done.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I would like to be listed as coauthor. I’d like to make another round of suggestions but I won’t be able to get to it until this weekend. It’ll be lighter but I think there’s more polishing to be done.

Okay! Thanks Rans, seriously. I am excited for the weekends coming round of suggestions.

[Merni]

Clause 1(i):

Radioactive substances created as a by-product product of industry

Remove the second "product".

Also, clause 2:

Prohibits the intentional disposal and discharge of such hazardous waste in any way shape or form into the oceans and/or ocean tributaries,

Remove the "the". Also, I couldn't find a definition for "ocean tributaries", and tributaries in general do not flow directly into an ocean, but into a river. Perhaps you could replace that phrase with "water bodies flowing into oceans"?

[Kenmoria]

“What is the intended category and strength of this proposal? Also, clause 3 should end with a full stop, being at the end of the text.”

[Ransium]

I don't like the style of any emphasis on the first word. I have removed the italics. Leave this up for at least another week, and I'll try to give it another read with another fresh set of eyes.

Category: Environmental; Area of Effect: All industries - mild I could also go with manufacturing as I previously wrote, but mentioning of pharama makes me think this would be the best fit.

The World Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly resolutions regulating waste, litter, and other pollutants in the marine environment,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, demonstrated by industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as providing countless ecosystem services such as providing habitat for oxygen producing organisms,

Noting the dumping of hazardous wastes into oceans have catastrophic impacts on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly member nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping, I don't like to assume anything about other WA nations if I can help it. Instead make an argument for this being a clear cut international issue.

Aware that once dumped in ocean hazardous waste can travel great distances and have international impacts,

Hereby:

1. Defines 'hazardous waste' as:
   
   
   
   1. Radioactive substances created as a by-product of industry;
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste known to be of a densely concentrated carcinogenic nature;
      
      
   3. Waste deemed chemically hazardous, either due to acidity, flammability, or chemical reactivity;
      
      
   4. Uncleaned waste water and excrement (untreated sewage),This one is written redundantly and overly narrow IMO
      
      
   5. Sewage or other materials containing a high level of waterborne pathogens and/or pharmaceutical compounds;
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal of hazardous waste, materials containing hazardous waste, or materials known to break down into hazardous waste into oceans or water bodies that feed into the ocean;
   
   
3. Clarifies that waste, once treated to remove its hazardous characteristics, is no longer regulated by this resolution;
   
   
4. Encourages member nations to find environmentally friendly ways of treating or otherwise disposing of such waste.

Co-Authored by Ransium

[Wallenburg]

This bans scuttling of ships in combat scenarios. That is unacceptable.

[Aclion]

This bans scuttling of ships in combat scenarios. That is unacceptable.

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves. Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal. Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

[American Pere Housh]

I think this is pretty self explanatory

The General Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly resolutions regulating waste, litter, and other pollutants in the marine environment,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, demonstrated by industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as providing countless ecosystem services such as providing habitat for oxygen producing organisms,

Noting the dumping of hazardous wastes into oceans have catastrophic impacts on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly member nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'hazardous waste', for the purpose of this resolution, as the:
   
   
   
   1. Radioactive substances created as a by-product of industry,
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste known to be of a densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste deemed to be chemically hazardous, either due to acidity, flammability, or chemical reactivity,
      
      
   4. Uncleaned waste water and excrement (untreated sewage),
   
   
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal and discharge of such hazardous waste in any way shape or form into oceans and/or ocean tributaries,
   
   
3. Encourages member nations to find more environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Co-Authored by Ransium

The General Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly Resolutions protecting the natural environments of the world from pollutants,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, having a major impact on industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as playing host to many critical oxygen producing organisms,

Noting that the state of the oceans pollution levels has a drastically negative effect on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly Member Nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste', for the purpose of this resolution, as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly hazardous radioactive results and by-products of intentionally performed nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical hazard,
      
      
   4. Uncleaned waste water and excrement (untreated sewage),
   
   
2. Defines an 'Ocean Tributary', for the purpose of this resolution, as a body of water which directly drains into the ocean,
   
   
3. Prohibits the intentional disposal and discharge of such toxic waste in any way shape or form into the Oceans and/or Ocean Tributaries,
   
   
4. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment in regards to plastic disposal,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

The General Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly Resolutions protecting the natural environments of the world from pollutants,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, having a major impact on industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as playing host to many critical oxygen producing organisms,

Noting that the state of the oceans pollution levels has a drastically negative effect on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly Member Nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste', for the purpose of this resolution, as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly hazardous radioactive results and by-products of intentionally performed nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical hazard,
      
      
   4. Uncleaned waste water and excrement (untreated sewage),
   
   
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal and discharge of such toxic waste in any way shape or form in the oceans,
   
   
3. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment in regards to plastic disposal,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

The General Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly Resolutions protecting the natural environments of the world from pollutants,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, having a major impact on industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as playing host to many critical oxygen producing organisms,

Noting that the state of the oceans pollution levels has a drastically negative effect on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly Member Nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste' as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly hazardous radioactive results and by-products of intentionally performed nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical hazard,
   
   
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal of such toxic waste in any way shape or form in the oceans,
   
   
3. Bans member nations from discharging untreated sewage into the oceans,
   
   
4. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment in regards to plastic disposal,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

The General Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly Resolutions protecting the natural environments of the world from pollutants,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, having a major impact on industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as playing host to many critical oxygen producing organisms,

Noting that the state of the oceans pollution levels has a drastically negative effect on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly Member Nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste' as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly hazardous radioactive results and by-products of intentionally performed nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste of known densely concentrated carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical hazard,
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal of such toxic waste in any way shape or form in the oceans,
   
   
3. Bans member nations from discharging untreated sewage into the oceans,
   
   
4. Requires Member States to:
   
   
   
   1. Create a watch list of marine species in those oceans that may be faced with extinction or endangerment due to such existing contaminants,
      
      
   2. Report said species to the WA Endangered Species Committee,
   
   
5. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment in regards to plastic disposal,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

The General Assembly,

Believing the gem that is the beautiful blue expanse of the oceans must be protected,

Noting the state of many oceans across the multiverse to be dismal due to issues caused by improper waste disposal,

Saddened by the ever increasing amounts of waste disposed into the oceans,

Wishing to correct and prevent these actions,

Shocked by the lack of legislation covering this in the General Assembly,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste' as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly endangering radioactive results and by-products of intentionally performed nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Unnatural Carcinogens and unnatural waste of known Carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical hazard (excluding toxic heavy metals),
2. Prohibits the disposal of such toxic waste in any way shape or form in the oceans,
   
   
3. Bars member nations from dumping plastic waste and untreated sewage into the oceans,
   
   
4. Creates the Ocean Safety Organization (OSO) to:
   
   
   
   1. Restore whatever oceans may currently be polluted by such contaminants in the Marine Biosphere Restoration Programme which:
      
      
      
      1. Shall clean the ocean environments primarily polluted by Member States with various techniques that must be applied in the given situation,
         
         
      2. Shall work only within international waters unless otherwise permitted to work within those of a member state,
         
         
      3. Shall work to improve biodiversity in oceans clean of most pollutants,
      
      
   2. Create a watch list of marine species in those oceans that may be faced with issues regarding the contaminants,
      
      
   3. Protect said species and alert states which may be directly affected by their absence or their endangerment,
   
   
5. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

The General Assembly,

Believing the gem that is the beautiful blue expanse of the oceans must be protected,

Noting the state of many oceans across the multiverse to be dismal due to issues caused by improper waste disposal,

Saddened by the ever increasing amounts of waste disposed into the oceans,

Wishing to correct and prevent these actions,

Shocked by the lack of legislation covering this in the General Assembly,

Hereby,

1. Defines 'toxic waste' as the:
   
   
   
   1. Decidedly endangering radioactive results and by-products of nuclear fission,
      
      
   2. Unnatural Carcinogens or waste of known Carcinogenic nature,
      
      
   3. Waste which can be defined as an industrial chemical bio-hazard (excluding toxic heavy metals),
2. Prohibits the disposal of such toxic waste in any way shape or form in the oceans,
   
   
3. Bars member nations from dumping of plastic waste and sewage into the oceans,
   
   
4. Creates the Ocean Safety Organization (OSO) to:
   
   
   
   1. Restore whatever oceans may currently be polluted by such contaminants in the Marine Biosphere Restoration Programme which:
      
      
      
      1. Shall clean the oceans of the world with various techniques that must be applied in the given situation,
         
         
      2. Shall work only within international waters unless otherwise permitted to work within those of a member state,
         
         
      3. Shall work to improve biodiversity in oceans clean of most pollutants,
      
      
   2. Create a watch list of marine species in those oceans that may be faced with issues regarding the contaminants,
      
      
   3. Protect said species and alert states which may be directly affected by their absence of their endangerment,
   
   
5. Encourages member nations to find more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of disposing of such waste,

Hoping to see further legislation regarding the marine environment,

Establishes the above, implementing the Oceans Protection Act.

Support

[American Pere Housh]

This bans scuttling of ships in combat scenarios. That is unacceptable.

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves. Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal. Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

http://www.floridapanhandledivetrail.com/oriskany.html
Scuttling ships like USS Oriskany can be used to make man made reefs.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

This bans scuttling of ships in combat scenarios. That is unacceptable.

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves. Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal. Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

@Wallenburg , I hope this clears things up for you!

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I don't like the style of any emphasis on the first word. I have removed the italics. Leave this up for at least another week, and I'll try to give it another read with another fresh set of eyes.

Category: Environmental; Area of Effect: All industries - mild I could also go with manufacturing as I previously wrote, but mentioning of pharama makes me think this would be the best fit.

The World Assembly,

Lauding previously passed World Assembly resolutions regulating waste, litter, and other pollutants in the marine environment,

Understanding the crucial role oceans play in global ecological and economic stability, demonstrated by industries such as fishing, marine aquaculture, shipping, and recreation, as well as providing countless ecosystem services such as providing habitat for oxygen producing organisms,

Noting the dumping of hazardous wastes into oceans have catastrophic impacts on all of the above industries and organisms,

Distressed that many World Assembly member nations are already experiencing the consequences of damaging ocean waste dumping, I don't like to assume anything about other WA nations if I can help it. Instead make an argument for this being a clear cut international issue.

Aware that once dumped in ocean hazardous waste can travel great distances and have international impacts,

Hereby:

1. Defines 'hazardous waste' as:
   
   
   
   1. Radioactive substances created as a by-product of industry;
      
      
   2. Industrially produced carcinogens and waste known to be of a densely concentrated carcinogenic nature;
      
      
   3. Waste deemed chemically hazardous, either due to acidity, flammability, or chemical reactivity;
      
      
   4. Uncleaned waste water and excrement (untreated sewage),This one is written redundantly and overly narrow IMO
      
      
   5. Sewage or other materials containing a high level of waterborne pathogens and/or pharmaceutical compounds;
2. Prohibits the intentional disposal of hazardous waste, materials containing hazardous waste, or materials known to break down into hazardous waste into oceans or water bodies that feed into the ocean;
   
   
3. Clarifies that waste, once treated to remove its hazardous characteristics, is no longer regulated by this resolution;
   
   
4. Encourages member nations to find environmentally friendly ways of treating or otherwise disposing of such waste.

Co-Authored by Ransium

Got it. Leaving it up another week.

[Bears Armed]

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves. Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal. Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

http://www.floridapanhandledivetrail.com/oriskany.html
Scuttling ships like USS Oriskany can be used to make man made reefs.

Isn't it standard procedure to remove "hazardous" materials from the ships before scuttling them for that purpose?

[Imperium Anglorum]

The original point was raised by Wallenburg having to do with scuttling warships during wartime, perhaps like Scapa Flow. However the specific examples are, I would not expect that the enemy would permit one's navy the time to unload whatever hazardous materials are present before allowing them to scuttle the ship.

[Ransium]

I think adding an exception for emergency situations (especially since nuclear waste is mentioned and nuclear contaimination of the ocean might be the only way to prevent a meltdown) as well as war time, would be a good idea.

[Wallenburg]

This bans scuttling of ships in combat scenarios. That is unacceptable.

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves.

Ships tend to contain materials that fall under this proposal's restrictions.

Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal.

Disposal is the act of getting rid of something. Scuttling is getting rid of a ship by causing it to flood and sink. It is, therefore, disposal.

Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

Discharge from what? And who decides whether the material is unwanted? And what qualifies as unwanted? For instance, ships are often scuttled because the ship is wanted by both its crew and an enemy, but its crew does not want it in the enemy's hands. Is that wanted material? If disposal is limited to discharge, does that mean that massive containers of hazardous waste may be sent out to sea and sunk, as the containers themselves are not discharged and are not designed to discharge the material therein?

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

NS =/= RL, and bad rulings in favor of lead contamination certainly aren't the sort of thing I'd expect anyone here to hold up as supporting evidence.

[Kenmoria]

“The ‘noting’ clause doesn’t quite agree with itself grammatically. It is also the only place in the proposal where ‘hazardous wastes’, rather than ‘hazardous waste’, is used.”

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I don't think that ships would fall under the definition of waste here, unless they were made of hazards waste themselves.

Ships tend to contain materials that fall under this proposal's restrictions.

Also I don't think it would count as disposal in that case, as the aim is not to dispose of the ship, but to deny it to the enemy, or block a sea route, or some other military goal.

Disposal is the act of getting rid of something. Scuttling is getting rid of a ship by causing it to flood and sink. It is, therefore, disposal.

Still this issue could be resolved by narrowing the meaning of disposal to refer to the discharge of unwanted material.

Discharge from what? And who decides whether the material is unwanted? And what qualifies as unwanted? For instance, ships are often scuttled because the ship is wanted by both its crew and an enemy, but its crew does not want it in the enemy's hands. Is that wanted material? If disposal is limited to discharge, does that mean that massive containers of hazardous waste may be sent out to sea and sunk, as the containers themselves are not discharged and are not designed to discharge the material therein?

OOC: I am reminded of a lawsuitfiled against a gun range in my state, which was sued for violating law relating to the disposal of lead. The court took a similar position, that the lead was not being disposed of because it was being discharged for a purpose, not simply because it was unwanted.

NS =/= RL, and bad rulings in favor of lead contamination certainly aren't the sort of thing I'd expect anyone here to hold up as supporting evidence.

Wally, I think you missed the word “intentional” before disposal. No one intends to have their ship destroyed!

[Kenmoria]

“In the ‘aware’ clause, it should be ‘oceans’ not ‘ocean’.”