Tribunal attendees learnt on Day One of the hearing that the State Government has been removing potential PCB-containing electrical cables from the warship for the past month.
Evidence pertaining to the electrical cable removal was only submitted to the tribunal on the weekend.
PCBs, a flame retardant widely used in warships, are one of most toxic substances known to man and their manufacture was banned by the US Environment Protection Agency in 1979.
Ship-cleaning contractor McMahons stated in evidence that the ship had 2100 kg of electrical cables (which are likely to contain PCBs) on March 22, which is when the State Government declared it was clean and PCB-free.
In the past month the State Government contractor has removed 500 kg of cables.
By July 9 another 250 kg of electrical cables will be removed, the court heard.
This will leave about 1320 kg of electrical cables on the ship.
It was a photograph of a “weeping cable” oozing a yellow fluid, likely to be PCBs, which first alerted scientific experts and the media about problems with the cable wiring.
No Ship Action Group’s barrister Geoffrey Kennett, acting with the Environmental Defenders’ Office senior solicitor Ian Ratcliff, told the court that dumping the warship could be illegal under international law.
Scuttling the ex-HMAS Adelaide could breach international treaties such as the Stockholm Convention and London Protocol which both have strict guidelines about PCBs, Barrister Kennett told three members of the tribunal, AAT president Garry Downes, Mark Hyman and Peter Wulf.
Yesterday was the opening day of a four-day hearing which follows the No Ship Action Group’s appeal of Minister Garrett’s signing of the Sea Dumping Permit on Tuesday March 23 this year.
The dumping of the ex-HMAS Adelaide should be examined on environmental merits alone by Minister for Environment Protection, Peter Garrett, Barrister Kennett told the hearing.
"The Minister’s role is an environmental gate-keeper,“ he said in his opening address.
“[The Minister is] not a person seeking to balance the environment against other considerations.”
“For example, the decisions about social and economic benefits and risk must be taken by other people, such as the State government.’’
"The Minister’s task under the Sea Dumping Act is to consider whether the sinking of a vessel is acceptable from the point of view of the London Protocol.”
Barrister Kennett argued that the granting of the Sea Dumping Permit was not consistent with the aims of the London Protocol, an international standard to which Australia was a signatory.
Recycling the ship was an option which needed to be considered, Barrister Kennett said.
The inadequacy of PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) sampling and testing of materials taken from the ship was discussed.
The hearing continues on Tuesday.
A crowd of about 50 people attended.
Media Inquiries http://noship.com.au
Ben Smith 0409 693 205, Michelle Meares 0439 645 372
Note: Following the evidence provided by the State with regards to the removal of 750 kg of electrical cables, the No Ship Action Group no longer consider PCBs to be an issue in dispute in the matter.