DEVELOPMENT OF DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI

Transcription

1 E INTERSESSIONAL MEETING ON CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI Agenda item 2 3 May 2018 ENGLISH ONLY DEVELOPMENT OF DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI Indicative suggestions to assist the Intersessional Meeting in preparing draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI Note by the Secretariat SUMMARY Executive summary: Strategic direction, if applicable: This document provides indicative suggestions to assist the Intersessional Meeting in preparing draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, in order for Member States and international organizations to submit relevant proposed text of the Guidelines 1 Output: 1.17 Action to be taken: Paragraph 8 Related documents: PPR 5/24, PPR 5/WP.6, PPR 5/13, PPR 5/13/1, PPR 5/13/3, PPR 5/13/4, PPR 5/13/5, PPR 5/13/6, PPR 5/13/7, PPR 5/13/8, PPR 5/13/10, PPR 5/13/11, PPR 5/13/12, MEPC 71/5/9, MEPC 71/9/5 and MEPC 71/17 Background 1 MEPC 70 agreed to "1 January 2020" as the effective date of implementation for ships to comply with global 0.50% m/m sulphur content of fuel oil requirement and adopted resolution MEPC.280(70) on the Effective date of implementation of the fuel oil standard in regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. 2 MEPC 71 approved the new output on "Consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI", for inclusion in the PPR Sub-Committee's biennial agenda for and the provisional agenda for PPR 5, with a target completion year of 2019 (MEPC 71/17, paragraph ).

2 Page 2 3 MEPC 71 also approved the following scope of the work (MEPC 71/17, paragraph ):.1 preparatory and transitional issues that may arise with a shift from the 3.50% m/m sulphur limit to the new 0.50% m/m limit;.2 impact on fuel and machinery systems that may result from the use of fuel oils with a 0.50% m/m sulphur limit;.3 verification issues and control mechanisms and actions that are necessary to ensure compliance and consistent implementation;.4 development of a draft standard format (a standardized system) for reporting fuel oil non-availability as provided in regulation of MARPOL Annex VI that may be used to provide evidence if a ship is unable to obtain fuel oil compliant with the provisions stipulated in regulations and ;.5 development of guidance, as appropriate, that may assist Member States and stakeholders in assessing the sulphur content of fuel oil delivered for use on board ship, based on the consideration of mechanisms to encourage verification that fuel oils supplied to ships meet the specified sulphur limit as stated on the bunker delivery note;.6 request to ISO to consider the framework of ISO 8217 with a view to keeping consistency between the relevant ISO standards on marine fuel oils and the implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI;.7 any consequential regulatory amendments and/or guidelines necessary to address issues raised in items.1 to.6 above or otherwise considered necessary to ensure consistent of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI; and.8 consideration of the safety implications relating to the option of blending fuels in order to meet the 0.50% m/m sulphur limit. Draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI 4 PPR 5 agreed to develop a single set of guidelines on "Consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI", taking into account all the proposals submitted to that session, focusing on the administrative issues, including what needed to be approved/verified and legal implications for use in enforcement of MARPOL Annex VI, and noting that, as this was a priority, there was a need to identify what should be included in the guidelines as opposed to the development of other guidance (PPR 5/24, paragraph 13.7). 5 Following consideration, PPR 5 agreed to the outline of the draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, as set out in annex 5 to document PPR 5/WP.6 (PPR 5/24, paragraph 13.20). 6 Based on the outline of the draft Guidelines agreed by PPR 5 and taking into account the relevant submissions to that session, the Secretariat has prepared an indicative draft text of the Guidelines, set out in the annex to this document.

3 Page 3 7 The proposed draft text is intended to assist and facilitate the discussions on preparation of the draft Guidelines and is not intended to pre-empt the outcome of the discussions. Action requested of the Intersessional Meeting 8 The Intersessional Meeting is invited to consider the indicative draft text and take action as appropriate. ***

4

5 Annex, page 1 ANNEX INDICATIVE SUGGESTIONS TO ASSIST THE INTERSESSIONAL MEETING IN PREPARING DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI 0 Introduction 0.1 MEPC 70 agreed to "1 January 2020" as the effective date of implementation for ships to comply with global 0.50% m/m sulphur content of fuel oil requirement and adopted resolution MEPC.280(70) on the Effective date of implementation of the fuel oil standard in regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. 0.2 The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure consistent implementation of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. These guidelines are intended for use by Administrations, port State control authorities, shipowners, shipbuilders and fuel oil providers, as appropriate. 1 Preparatory and transitional issues 1.1 Ship implementation planning for Leading up towards 2020, ship operators should decide on the compliance option for their ships and develop a plan on how each individual ship will achieve compliance by the applicable date In order to ensure a timely compliance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, it is recommended for ships to develop and keep on board a written implementation plan that describes how the ship is going to prepare in order to ensure that the fuel oil used by the ship is at a compliant level by 1 January In this regard, MEPC 73 agreed that Administrations should encourage the ships flying their flag to develop written implementation plans (Ship implementation plan for 2020) to be endorsed, outlining how the ship is going to prepare in order to comply with the required sulphur content limit by 1 January The implementation plan should be complemented with a record of actions taken by the ships in order to be compliant by the applicable date The ship implementation plan for 2020 could cover various items relevant for the specific ship, including, as appropriate, but not limited to:.1 relevant time schedules, e.g. bunkering plans for late 2019 including the last bunkering of HS-HFO, the first bunkering of LS-HFO, etc.;.2 calculations estimating the consumption of the remaining HS-HFO prior to the effective date;.3 assessment of potential impact on machinery systems with the use of new fuel oils;.4 calculation of the time needed in order to "be fully flushed of all fuel oils exceeding the applicable sulphur content" prior to entry into force of the regulation;

6 Annex, page 2.5 cleaning of the fuel tanks, etc.;.6 a description of how to deal with and limit the impact of possible non availability of LS-HFO, as it may interrupt the ongoing preparation towards the 2020 compliance; and.7 crew awareness and training MEPC 73 further agreed that Administrations and port State control authorities should adopt a practical and pragmatic approach when verifying compliance with the requirements of regulation of MARPOL Annex VI for a period of three months after 1 January The focus of the inspections should be on assessing whether the ship has an endorsed ship implementation plan for 2020 on board and whether the ship has followed the plan, and to inspect the relevant documents such as Bunker Delivery Note (BDN), the Oil Record Book and other relevant log books. Minor exceedances of the sulphur content of the fuel oil as a result of contaminated fuel oil tanks should be accepted. 1.2 Preparation of steam ships [No concrete text has been provided.] 2 Impact on fuel and machinery systems 2.1 The positive experiences from the transition to the 0.10% m/m SO X-ECA indicated that current ship machinery operations should be sufficiently capable of addressing the concerns regarding combustion of the new 0.50% m/m fuel oils. These fuel oils are expected to be more aligned with ultra-low sulphur fuel oils (ULSFO), having a lower viscosity than the current high sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) grades, and may come with increased stability and compatibility risks if not handled correctly. Clear knowledge of the ordered product will assist the crew in carrying out the necessary adjustments to fuel system set up for safe storage, handling, effective treatment and use of the fuels on board of ships. 2.2 Fuel oil suppliers should be encouraged to provide notice of any uncharacteristic variances from the ordering grade specified by the fuel oil purchaser, and specific focus should be on the key handling parameters of ISO Additionally, the ships' crews are expected to carry out their own checks on the compatibility between bunkered fuel and fuels stored on board in order to avoid mixing of incompatible fuels. Ship's crews should also adjust their expectations on the bunkers being supplied and take greater responsibility to be more selfaware of the likely variances of fuel characteristics between bunkers. 3 Verification issues and control mechanism and actions 3.1 Guidelines on the control mechanism to ensure compliance with the sulphur limit of fuel oil Purpose The purpose of the Guidelines is to ensure compliance with the sulphur limit of fuel oil in international shipping by providing recommended procedures for Administrations of flag States and port States and authorities of fuel oil suppliers.

7 Annex, page Possible violations This section identifies the possible violations that should be addressed by the recommended procedures provided in paragraphs 3.1.3, and of the Guidelines General Violations by malicious entities, which may be shipowners, ship operators and fuel oil suppliers, can be categorized into the following three types, in the context of compliance with the sulphur limit of fuel oil:.1 improper use of high sulphur fuel oils (HSFOs);.2 inadequate use of Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems (EGCSs); and.3 forgery/concealment of documents including Bunker Delivery Notes (BDNs), oil record books and IAPP Certificates Improper use of high sulphur fuel oils Ships of malicious shipowners and ship operators The use of HSFOs on ships other than those satisfying the conditions specified in paragraph should be regarded as violation Malicious fuel oil suppliers Supplying fuel oils the sulphur contents of which are obviously higher than those declared in BDNs should be regarded as violation Inadequate use of EGCSs Malicious shipowners and ship operators The use of HSFOs on ships not adequately operating the EGCSs during the voyage should be regarded as violation Forgery/concealment of documents Malicious shipowners and ship operators Forgery or concealment of the following documents should be regarded as violation:.1 IAPP Certificate;.2 Bunker Delivery Note (BDN) required by regulation 18.5 of MARPOL Annex VI;.3 representative sample of fuel oil required by regulation of MARPOL Annex VI;.4 oil record book required by regulation 17.1 of MARPOL Annex I, to confirm the following record information:

8 Annex, page 4.1 place of bunkering fuel oil;.2 time of bunkering fuel oil; and.3 type and quantity of fuel oil of respective tanks (state quantity added to and total content of tanks) 1 ; and.5 engine logbooks, which are usually maintained on board ships to record consumption of respective fuel oils and operating load during voyages Malicious fuel oil suppliers Providing false BDNs or providing BDNs without measurement of sulphur content should be regarded as violation Recommended procedures for flag State Administrations Control of stowage and/or carriage of HSFOs The flag State Administration should prevent ships from improperly using HSFOs under the sulphur limit of fuel oil by controlling stowage and/or carriage of HSFOs, if the ships do not satisfy the following conditions:.1 ships are fitted with EGCSs; and.2 ships are granted permission by the flag State Administration The flag State Administration is recommended to instruct the Companies to establish on-board procedures for the engine log-books to:.1 keep them up to date; and.2 include the following issues:.1 machinery operation; and.2 quantity of fuel retention and fuel consumption within appropriate time period specified in the Ship's Safety Management Systems Survey and certification by the flag State Prior to issuing the IAPP Certificate, the flag State Administration should conduct a survey of the ship to identify whether the ship neither stows nor carries HSFOs or the ship stowing and/or carrying HSFOs satisfies at least one of the conditions in paragraph The flag State Administration should take stringent measures when the Administration finds or is informed by the port State Administration that the ship stowing and/or carrying HSFOs does not satisfy the conditions in paragraph The measures should include reporting the information of the ship to the GISIS module for sulphur limit of fuel oil 2, and may include debunkering in order to prevent recurrence. 1 2 See appendix 3 to MARPOL Annex I. For the proper communication of names of non-compliant ships, it is preferable to develop new GISIS for this purpose.

9 Annex, page Recommended procedures for port State Administrations Inspection by port State Administrations based on documents Port State Administrations should prevent ships from improperly using HSFOs under the sulphur limit of fuel oil by controlling stowage and/or carriage of HSFOs, if the ship does not satisfy the conditions in paragraph In this context, port State Administrations are recommended to investigate whether a ship stows and/or carries HSFOs based on BDNs and oil record books, and engine logbooks if available. When the ship stows and/or carries HSFO, the port State Administration is recommended to further investigate whether the ship satisfies the conditions on carriage of HSFOs in paragraph , based on IAPP certificate or a relevant document For a ship fitted with an EGCS, in addition to the documents listed in paragraph , the port State Administration should inspect the record of measurement of SO 2 (ppm)/co 2 (% v/v) of exhaust gas from the EGCS, to ensure that the ratio of SO 2/CO 2 does not exceed the following ratio in accordance with Table 1 in paragraph 1.3 of the 2015 Guidelines for exhaust gas cleaning systems (resolution MEPC.259(68)):.1 for ships engaged in voyages within emission control areas: SO 2/CO 2 4.3; or.2 for ships not engaged in voyages within emission control areas: SO 2/CO In the case that the continuous monitoring system is not fitted with an EGCS, the SO 2/CO 2 ratio of exhaust gas from the EGCS should be inspected using the reports of daily spot check or parameter check prescribed in paragraph of the 2015 Guidelines for exhaust gas cleaning systems Sampling of fuel oils When a port State Administration suspects non-compliance of a ship based on investigation of documents according to the provisions in paragraph , the port State Administration may require representative samples of fuel oils to be analysed, in accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, taking into account the fuel oil verification procedure for MARPOL Annex VI fuel oil samples (appendix VI to MARPOL Annex VI). In the case that the aforementioned representative samples are considered to obviously be non-compliant, the Administration may take samples from fuel oil tanks, taking into account the Guidelines for onboard sampling for the verification of the sulphur content of fuel oil used on board ships (MEPC.1/Circ.864) In the case that a reliable and practical method for on-board analysis of fuel oils is not available, the port State Administration may analyse the samples at an appropriate shore-side facility. In such case, the port State Administration should not delay the operation, movement and departure of the ship, and should inform the Administrations of the next ports of call of the result of the analysis The aforementioned analysis at a shore-side facility may be carried out by an entity authorized by the Administration in accordance with ISO/IEC 17025:2005 "General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories" or equivalent national or international standards. In addition, the analysis should be carried out in accordance with one of the following standards, or an equivalent national or international standard, e.g. Quartztube combustion method:

10 Annex, page 6.1 ISO 20846:2011 "Determination of sulphur content of automotive fuels Ultraviolet fluorescence method";.2 ISO 20884:2011 "Petroleum products Determination of sulfur content of automotive fuels Wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry";.3 ISO 8754:2003 "Petroleum products Determination of sulfur content Energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry"; or.4 ASTM D e1 "Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry" Procedure for non-compliant ships The port State Administration which finds a ship stowing and/or carrying HSFO without satisfying the conditions in paragraph should, in principle, detain the ship until the ship debunkers all HSFOs. The port State Administration, however, may permit a temporal voyage indispensable for bunkering of compliant fuel oil for the ship, in accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. The temporal voyage should be one way and minimum for bunkering. In the case that the port State Administration permits a temporal voyage of a ship, the port State Administration should inform the flag State Administration of the information of the ship granted with the permission to the temporal voyage with the certified record of analysis of the sample as the evidence The port State Administration which finds a ship stowing and/or carrying HSFOs without satisfying the conditions in paragraph should inform the flag State Administration and the relevant port State Administrations and report the information of the non-compliant ship to the GISIS module for the sulphur limit of fuel oil 3. In that case, if the fuel oil supplier of HSFOs is identified, the port State Administration should also inform the authority of the fuel oil supplier and flag State Administration of the information of non-compliant ship and the fuel oil supplier Undue delay to ships All possible efforts should be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed under paragraphs and In particular, the time required for sampling of fuel oils should not be used as a basis for unduly delaying the operation, movement or departure of the ship Recommended procedures for authorities of fuel oil suppliers Authorities of fuel oil suppliers should prevent ships from improperly using HSFOs under the sulphur limit of fuel oil by controlling sales and/or purchase of HSFOs, if the ship does not satisfy the conditions in paragraph In this context, the authorities should prohibit the fuel oil suppliers from providing HSFOs to ships not certified to use such fuel oils in accordance with IAPP Certificate. 3 4 For the proper communication of names of non-compliant ships, it is preferable to develop a new GISIS module for this purpose. It may be possible to incorporate the contents of this part into "the guidance on best practice for fuel oil purchasers/users and Member States/coastal States" to be developed by the MEPC based on the report of the correspondence group established at MEPC 71 (MEPC 71/17, paragraph 5.16).

11 Annex, page When an authority is informed by a port State Administration of a fuel oil supplier providing a non-compliant fuel oil, the authority should investigate the fuel oil supplier. When the authority confirms that the supplier has issued a false BDN or a BDN without measurement of sulphur content, the authority should take stringent measures for the supplier not to sell fuel oils again, until corrective measures are adopted to issue proper and accurate BDNs When the authority confirms that the fuel oil supplier has provided a false BDN or a BDN without measurement of sulphur content, in accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, the authority should inform the Organization for transmission to Parties and Member States of the Organization of the non-compliance of the supplier to the requirements specified in regulations 14 or 18 of MARPOL Annex VI. 3.2 Port State control MEPC 59 adopted the 2009 Guidelines for port State control under the revised MARPOL Annex VI (resolution MEPC.181(59)). These Guidelines are intended to provide basic guidance on the conduct of port State control inspections for compliance with MARPOL Annex VI and afford consistency in the conduct of these inspections, the recognition of deficiencies and the application of control procedures MARPOL samples analysis Analysis of the MARPOL sample as the representative sample of the fuel oil for combustion purposes delivered for use on board ships takes place in accordance with regulation 18 of MARPOL Annex VI. Specific guidelines exist on how to obtain such a representative sample in the 2009 Guidelines for the sampling of fuel oil for determination of compliance with the revised MARPOL Annex VI (resolution MEPC.182(59)). This method is relevant only to verify if the ship bunkered fuel oil which is compliant to the MARPOL regulations and corresponds to the information on the BDN The Convention refers to "an Administration" (as opposed to the usual term "the Administration") that can potentially require the representative sample to be analysed in accordance with the verification procedure set forth in appendix VI to MARPOL Annex VI. This procedure is, however, not widely applied in practice. The fact that the Convention refers to "an Administration" has led to a lack of clarity if a port State authority (or only the flag State) can require the MARPOL sample to be analysed without consent from the flag State. This could be relevant in cases where PSC has reasons to believe that the BDN is not representative of the fuel oil delivered to the ship from January 2020, or in cases of potential fuel contamination between two fuel grades It is necessary to clarify that port States can require a MARPOL sample to be analysed under given circumstances, i.e. if there is evidence or indications of fuel oil supplier delivering non-compliant fuel oil Targeting measurements (remote sensing and portable devices) Remote sensing surveillance of SO X emissions from ships while the ships are in trade is possible with innovative monitoring technologies that aims at externally determining the sulphur content of the fuel used by a ship using "sniffer" instruments (gas analysers). The SO 2/CO 2 ratio in the exhaust plume is measured through which the corresponding sulphur content in the fuel oil used by the ship is calculated. Sniffers need to be directed and exposed to the ships' exhaust plume and thus the sniffing instruments need to be within a certain distance from the ship (depending on equipment type) and also relies on meteorological conditions (wind) to enable the detection of individual exhaust plumes. Sniffer measurements

12 Annex, page 8 are combined with information about the identity of the ship from the AIS system (IMO number, name, flag State and next port of call) together with information about the measuring system and location of measurement from GPS. Sniffers can be placed on fixed positions (bridges or port entrances) or be mounted on a mobile platform like small aircrafts, helicopters, boats and remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS), also known as drones. In most countries, the use of RPAS is, however, limited by the fact that RPAS can only be operated within visual line of sight due to aviation regulations Some Parties to MARPOL Annex VI have experience with the use of both fixed and mobile sniffers in SO X-ECA 5. While there is good correlation between sniffer measurements and fuel analysis results, no standard exists yet for remote measurements and the uncertainty is still higher than for fuel analysis. The method is therefore applied only to target ships and trigger a more detailed inspection (e.g. checking oil record books, changeover procedures and/or taking of a fuel sample). Costs vary depending on the platform and measurement technology. The method is useful within limited distances from shoreline like port or specific coastal areas. The technologies are still under development and costs are expected to be reduced in the future while the precision and operational range is expected to increase. The use of sniffers should be encouraged for their relevance in monitoring ships en route It is also possible to measure SO X emissions from ships using optical sensors equipped on planes, helicopters or drones. At present the technology is, however, more of indicative nature since optical sensors cannot easily measure CO Portable devices for onboard sulphur-in-fuel analysis may occur as a supplement to the onboard sampling of fuel oil. The method provides a quick indication whether the fuel oil is likely to comply with the MARPOL regulations or not. If the results suggest non-compliance, the fuel oil sample is normally submitted to an accredited laboratory in order to conduct a thorough analysis. EU experience shows the average cost per portable device to be around 25,000 to 40,000 (~$29,300 - $47,000). Current portable devices measurements are not yet in accordance with ISO 8754 sulphur test If fuel samples are taken according to a regional/local regulation or on a voluntary basis, the method could be used as "clear grounds" for a more detailed PSC inspection if the result is above the mandatory threshold. The use of portable devices for their time and costs saving potential is recommended, but it is stressed that further documentation on the alignment of the reliability with ISO 8754 would need to be produced Other enforcement practices dedicated to open-sea compliance monitoring Fuel calculator types of tools are used to check compliance over an entire voyage/leg. They allow the calculation of the theoretical minimum fuel consumption on board a ship which is then compared with estimates based on the documents presented by the crew. In this process, various documentation and data might be cross-checked and inserted into the tool including from BDN, navigation information from bridge's logbooks, engine data from the ship's statutory documents or engine room logbook, oil record book, fuel changeover records, fuel tanks capacity and content, etc. The tool allows to check whether the ship used low sulphur fuel oil in the SO X-ECA, changed over from high to low sulphur fuel oil before entering the SO X- ECA or there is enough fuel in compliance with regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI to reach the next destination in or outside the SO X-ECA. 5 Detailed information about experience with remote measurement technologies is available at:

13 Annex, page The tool relies on the robustness of BDNs and log books. Further, fuel oil consumption depends on the ships' maintenance condition. The collection of data might be rather time consuming which can be a challenge if combined with routine PSC inspections. However, for trained personnel, the necessary data can be obtained in an hour. Verifying official data as logs of fuel on board (oil record books/bdns) as part of PSC is important to keep quality and consistency of these records thus allowing reliable reconstructions of used fuel i.e. over meaningful periods of time before the port call. Such detailed inspection of documents as a part of port State inspection may need "clear grounds". While there is not yet extensive experience in using the tool to sustain penalties alone or in combination with other prima facie evidence, fuel calculators are however robust and cost efficient tools to standardise compliance check over an entire voyage/leg. Their use would greatly facilitate the 0.50% compliance checks and hence, should be encouraged. 3.3 Information sharing between Parties to MARPOL Annex VI related to non-compliances under MARPOL Annex VI Common information systems may be effectively used to gather and share information on a joint database concerning the results of different enforcement practices by Parties to MARPOL Annex VI. EU Member States have established the common voluntary database THETIS-EU which has been in operation since January 2015 and now contains more than 24,000 inspections results. The system is used to share alerts on ships (resulting from inspections and from remote sensing equipment), record information about inspections (to avoid unnecessary frequent inspections), update information on new equipment installed on ship applicable to SO X emissions (EGCS, SO X emission monitoring equipment or other). Based on such a system, a risk-based targeting system of ships can potentially be developed to also include alerts on possible violation of the 0.50% sulphur cap. Average time needed by duly authorized officers to input information in similar systems is 10 minutes Global cross-sharing of information or alerts on non-compliances and violation of environmental requirements among different authorities and different PSC MoU regimes involved in emission controls according to MARPOL Annex VI would be very useful. Research into the possibilities for a global exchange of such information should be encouraged. While not a direct enforcement method, data recording and exchanges between different authorities should be encouraged as well as the development of a centralised global system for sharing of information. Such system would require maintenance and training of inspectors to ensure data are kept up-to-date and reliable. Such global system should be linked to and capitalize on already existing IMO databases such as the IMO Ship Fuel Consumption Database adopted by resolution MEPC.278(70) or the IMO GISIS database and could also serve the purpose of a register for fuel unavailability reports as a follow-up to the PPR work scope under item 4 developing their draft standard formats Publication of information on non-compliant ships/companies or a reporting scheme to IMO to be registered on centralized information platforms are proposed as elements of an effective enforcement strategy. Various PSC regimes have successfully used the publishing of information related to substandard ships and companies as a deterrent to non-compliance. Port States also need to report detentions of ships to IMO which may affect the future PSC targeting of the ship. The IMO GISIS database already makes available certain information related to non-compliances with the MARPOL Annex VI regulations Publication of information on non-compliant ships/companies could be an effective preventive method to support compliance with the global sulphur regulations in It would require, however, ensuring that any information published is accurate. In order to avoid inconsistency, strict criteria should be defined and list of instances of non-compliance determined specifying which are the cases, when information on ship or company should be published. Alternatively, a green listing of well-performing companies could be considered.

14 Annex, page In-use fuel oil samples MEPC 70 approved the Guidelines for on-board sampling for the verification of the sulphur content of the fuel oil used on board ships (MEPC.1/Circ.864). The objective of these Guidelines is to establish an agreed method for sampling to enable effective control and enforcement of liquid fuel oil being used on board ships under the provisions of MARPOL Annex VI. 4 Fuel oil non-availability 4.1 Guidance and information sharing on fuel oil non-availability Regulation of MARPOL Annex VI provides that, in the event compliant fuel oil cannot be obtained, a Party to MARPOL Annex VI can request evidence outlining the attempts made to obtain the compliant fuel, including attempts made to local alternative sources. Regulations and then require that the ship notifies its Administration and the competent authority of the port of destination on the inability to obtain this fuel oil, with the Party to notify IMO of the non-availability Guidance on consistent evidence. Regulation of MARPOL Annex VI requires that evidence be provided to support a claim that all efforts were made to obtain compliant fuel oil. In this regard, it is suggested that more detailed guidance is needed for the consistent use and acceptance of these reports, including what evidence is needed to accompany a report to ensure that port States are applying the provisions under regulation , consistently Investigating non-availability. It is suggested that emphasis should be placed on ensuring that reports of non-availability are investigated by the port State and solutions found. This process is important to ensure a consistent supply of compliant fuel to industry, as well as prevent incentives for ships to use ports where it is known that compliant fuel is not available on an ongoing basis. Critical to this process will be the sharing of information between Member States on reported compliant fuel oil supply issues In accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI, a Party to MARPOL Annex VI shall notify the Organization when a ship has presented evidence of the non-availability of compliant fuel oil. For this purpose, MARPOL Annex VI module within the IMO Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS) provides a platform for Parties to upload such notifications. 4.2 Standard format for reporting fuel oil non-availability For ships which are unable to purchase fuel oil meeting the requirements of regulations 14.1 or 14.4 of MARPOL Annex VI, the standard format for reporting fuel oil non-availability is set out in the appendix to this document, in accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. 5 Safety implications relating to the option of blending fuels in order to meet the 0.50% m/m sulphur limit 5.1 [No concrete text has been provided.] 6 Other useful guidance/information that assists Member States and stakeholders 6.1 Guidance addressing quality assurance and integrity of the supply chain

15 Annex, page The diverse range of 0.50% m/m fuel formulations expected will further elevate the importance of assuring sulphur compliance of the supplied fuel oils. It is expected that these fuel oils to be blended close to or on the 0.50% m/m limit, driven by the economic considerations of blending. Ship operators should request additional assurances that fuels supplied are consistently compliant In view of this, there will be a greater expectation on suppliers having in place a robust and transparent supply chain assurance system, which adequately addresses all those factors that could affect the quality and sulphur content of the delivered fuel. This would, for example, be expected to include procedures such as ensuring: avoidance of the ingress of extraneous and potentially deleterious compounds into the supply chain, correct blending procedures being applied, the delivery meeting the ship ordering requirements and representative sampling of the bunkers supplied are taken (resolution MEPC.182(59)). 6.2 Guidance on the importance of fuel oil management on board The experience already gained in European SO X-ECA emphasizes the global significance of applying an effective on board fuel management practice to contend with the new fuels entering the market. The requirement for ships crews to be fully aware of the variability of fuels expected leading up to and after 2020, will require a more concerted effort by the industry to implement additional awareness and training. It may therefore be useful to consider including this in the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) programmes Best Practice guidelines on design and operations are being reviewed and updated by both CIMAC and the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS). Their application should further ensure that ships are practising due diligence in applying every means possible to order the correct fuel, to manage the fuel properly on board and to monitor its condition through to engine combustion. 6.3 Guidance on assuring availability of compliant fuel oil, including new fuel blends It is acknowledged that making available 0.50% m/m compliant fuels may provide a logistical challenge in some regions, areas and or ports during the initial implementation stage partly due to the timely availability of new fuel blends. It is therefore recommended that industry preparation for 2020 should be duly planned and started well ahead of the implementation date by all stakeholders. All relevant parties from refinery through to the user should play an active role to assist ships to be ready for the 1 January 2020 implementation date. To minimize occurrences of localized fuel unavailability and to address the possibility of any declarations of fuel unavailability; harmonization and standardization of processes deemed necessary by the Committee should be developed In order to facilitate the process of declaring non-availability and its expected acceptance, a more detailed guide to declaring "Non-Availability" and associated questions and answers could further harmonize enforcement efforts, notwithstanding the discretion of the inspecting authority. In this context, consideration could be given to existing "best practice" for example by reviewing the current United States Environmental Protection Agency Fuel Oil Non-Availability Report 6 (FONAR) as a basis 6

16 Annex, page Guidance addressing fuel quality issues, particularly regarding new types of fuels and blends [No concrete text has been provided.] 6.5 Guidance on best practice for fuel oil purchasers/users for assuring the quality of fuel oil used on board ships MEPC 72 approved MEPC.1/Circ.875 on Guidance on best practice for fuel oil purchasers/users for assuring the quality of fuel oil used on board ships. These best practices are intended to assist fuel oil purchasers/users in assuring the quality of fuel oil delivered to, and used on board ships, with respect to both compliance with the MARPOL requirements and the safe and efficient operation of the ship These fuel oil purchaser/user best practices are recommended for all ships and should also be taken into account in those cases where fuel oil purchasing decisions are made by the ship charterer pursuant to a chartering agreement. Under such a charter agreement communication between the owner and the charterer is paramount. It is recommended that clear requirements on these communications should be included within the appropriate charter party clause. 6.6 Guidance on best practice for Member State/coastal State [MEPC 71 re-established the Correspondence Group on Fuel oil quality and instructed it to finalize the draft best practice for Member State/coastal State and submit a report to MEPC 73.] 6.7 Guidance on practice for fuel oil suppliers [MEPC 72 concurred with the view that draft best practice for fuel oil suppliers as contained in document MEPC 72/INF.13 could form a basis for the development of IMO guidance and invited Member Governments and international organizations to submit comments on document MEPC 72/INF.13 to MEPC 73.] ***

17 Annex, page 13 APPENDIX STANDARD FORMAT FOR REPORTING FUEL OIL NON-AVAILABILITY Note: 1 This report is to be sent to port authority of destination with a copy to be sent to the flag Administration in accordance with regulation of MARPOL Annex VI. 2 This report is to be used to provide evidence if a ship is unable to obtain fuel oil compliant with the provisions stipulated in regulations and Particulars of ship 1.1 Name of ship: 1.2 IMO number: 1.3 Flag: 1.4 Port of registry: 1.5 Gross tonnage: 2 Description of ship's voyage plan 2.1 Last port of departure: 2.2 Date of departure from last port (DD/MM/YYYY): 2.3 Port of call: 2.4 Date of arrival at port of call (DD/MM/YYYY): 2.5 Date ship expects to departure from the port (DD/MM/YYYY): 2.6 Sulphur content of fuel oil in use: 3 Description of actions taken to attempt to achieve compliance and a description of the reason why compliant fuel oil was not available: Name of suppliers contacted: Addresses:

18 Annex, page 14 Date of contact (DD/MM/YYYY): In case of fuel oil supply disruption only Name of port at which vessel was scheduled to receive compliant fuel oil: Name of the fuel oil supplier that was scheduled to deliver: Operation constraints, if applicable Describe any operation constraints that prevented using available compliant fuel oil (e.g. with respect to viscosity or other fuel oil parameters): Steps ship has taken, or is taking, to resolve these operational constraints that will allow ship to use all commercially available residual fuel oil blends: Describe availability of compliant fuel oil at the port of call, and plans to obtain it: If compliant fuel oil is not available at the port of call, list the lowest sulphur content of available fuel oil(s) or the lowest sulphur content of available fuel oil at the next port of call: 4 Company information Name of Company (as named on ISM DOC): Address (street, city, country, postal/zip code): ISM Designated Person Ashore (DPA): Telephone number/ Local agent(s) in the port of call(s): Print name: Date (DD/MM/YYYY): Signature of Master: