Break Up of Blue Lady Begins

Published Oct 18, 2007 12:01 AM by The Maritime Executive

Gujarat workers recently began dismantling the controversial Blue Lady, which has been anchored off the Gujarat Coast since June 2006, at Alang shipbreaking yard. Though opponents of the dismantling say that toxins in the vessel's structure may cause the workers severe health problems in the future, many of the workers are content to be back at work. For more than a year, workers had been forced to find temporary jobs elsewhere while India's Supreme Court decided the fate of the Blue Lady.

The workers got their wish on September 11 of this year when India’s Supreme Court ruled that the Blue Lady could be dismantled. The court came to its decision after fully examining a report compiled by a technical expert committee (TEC) that was commissioned last year when a legal conflict erupted between environmentalist groups and India’s shipbreaking industry over the vessel. The court’s written statement concluded, “Taking into account the contours of TEC report dated 10.5.2007 and the opinion of TEC that the recycler M/s Priya Blue Industries Pvt. Ltd. has complied with the norms regarding dismantling and recycling, we accept the report of the TEC dated 10.5.2007 and we accordingly grant permission to the said recycler to dismantle the said ship ‘Blue Lady’ as recommended by TEC.”

Sold by its French owners in 1979, the vessel, then known as the SS France, was renamed the SS Norway and later the Blue Lady. The more than 1,000-foot vessel was rejected by Bangladesh in February 2006 because it contained too many toxic materials. Eventually, it arrived in Indian waters and was allowed to anchor off the Gujarat coast in June of last year. According to the Supreme Court statement, the TEC report does affirm that the toxins asbestos, ACM, and PCB do exist within the structure of the ship, but Priyablue Industries’ dismantling plan, which all recyclers are required to submit before scrapping a potentially toxic vessel, complies with all official regulations. Furthermore, the Supreme Court stated that the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and Britain’s General Union (GMB) have certified that there are no radioactive materials still aboard the Blue Lady.

However, environmental organizations, including Greenpeace and the Ban Asbestos Network, disagree with the TEC assessment. In a statement published on August 4, 2006, Greenpeace stated, “Blue Lady is full of highly toxic substances such as asbestos, PCBs and heavy metals besides radioactive substances. Given the fact that Alang shipyard does not have the facility to deal with these hazardous wastes and substances it endangers the occupational and environmental health and safety of the casual and contract workers.” Greenpeace and other organizations still standby this statement. They believe that India’s shipbreaking industry is violating the Basel Convention, an international treaty meant to restrict the movements of dangerous wastes between countries.

The Supreme Court decision touched upon both environmental and the shipbuilding industry’s concerns, stating that a “balance” must be found: “while applying the concept of ‘sustainable development’ one has to keep in mind the ‘principle of proportionality’ based on the concept of balance. It is an exercise in which we have to balance the priorities of development on one hand and environmental protection on the other hand.” The Supreme Court stated that the scrapping of the Blue Lady would employ 700 workers and provide 41,000 metric tons of steel, which would put “less pressure on mining activity elsewhere.” Regardless, environmental groups are still not pleased with the court’s decision, but the workers dismantling the vessel are.

Read the full Indian Supreme Court decision here.