SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND · PDF fileSUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION...

I:\PPR\04\PPR 4-21.docx

E

SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE 4th session Agenda item 21

PPR 4/21

27 February 2017 Original: ENGLISH

REPORT TO THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION COMMITTEE

Section GENERAL 4 2 DECISIONS OF OTHER IMO BODIES 4 3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION HAZARDS OF CHEMICALS AND

PREPARATION OF CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE IBC CODE

4

4 REVIEW OF MARPOL ANNEX II REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE

AN IMPACT ON CARGO RESIDUES AND TANK WASHINGS OF HIGH VISCOSITY AND PERSISTENT FLOATING PRODUCTS

9

5 CODE FOR THE TRANSPORT AND HANDLING OF LIMITED

AMOUNTS OF HAZARDOUS AND NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES IN BULK ON OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS

10

6 REVISED GUIDANCE ON BALLAST WATER SAMPLING AND

ANALYSIS 11

7 REVIEW OF THE GUIDELINES FOR APPROVAL OF BALLAST

WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (G8) 13

8 PRODUCTION OF A MANUAL ENTITLED "BALLAST WATER

MANAGEMENT – HOW TO DO IT" 14

9 CONSIDERATION OF THE IMPACT ON THE ARCTIC OF

EMISSIONS OF BLACK CARBON FROM INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING

16

10 STANDARDS FOR SHIPBOARD GASIFICATION OF WASTE SYSTEMS AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION 16 OF MARPOL ANNEX VI

19

11 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISCHARGE OF EXHAUST GAS

RECIRCULATION BLEED-OFF WATER 21

PPR 4/21


12 IMPROVED AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES APPROVED FOR BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND REDUCTION OF ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION

23

13 UPDATED IMO DISPERSANT GUIDELINES (PART IV) 23 14 UPDATED OPRC MODEL TRAINING COURSES 24

15 UNIFIED INTERPRETATION TO PROVISIONS OF IMO ENVIRONMENT-RELATED CONVENTIONS

25

16 USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORD BOOKS 26 17 REVISION OF THE 2011 SCR GUIDELINES 27 18 BIENNIAL AGENDA AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR PPR 5 30 19 ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR FOR 2018 32

20 ANY OTHER BUSINESS 32 21 ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMITTEE 36

LIST OF ANNEXES

ANNEX 1 DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR THE

CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT OF SHIPS CARRYING DANGEROUS CHEMICALS IN BULK (IBC CODE)

ANNEX 2 PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR ESPH 23

ANNEX 3 DRAFT ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION ON THE CODE FOR THE TRANSPORT AND HANDLING OF HAZARDOUS AND NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES IN BULK ON OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS (OSV CHEMICAL CODE)

ANNEX 4 DRAFT BWM CIRCULAR ON GUIDANCE ON METHODOLOGIES THAT MAY BE USED FOR ENUMERATING VIABLE ORGANISMS FOR TYPE APPROVAL OF BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

ANNEX 5 DRAFT MANUAL ON BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT – HOW TO DO IT ANNEX 6 DRAFT MEPC RESOLUTION ON 2017 GUIDELINES FOR THE

DISCHARGE OF EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION (EGR) BLEED-OFF WATER

ANNEX 7 OPRC MODEL TRAINING COURSES ANNEX 8 DRAFT UNIFIED INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION 36.2.10 OF

MARPOL ANNEX I

PPR 4/21


ANNEX 9 DRAFT MEPC RESOLUTION ON 2017 GUIDELINES ADDRESSING ADDITIONAL ASPECTS OF THE NOX TECHNICAL CODE 2008 WITH REGARD TO PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO MARINE DIESEL ENGINES FITTED WITH SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION (SCR) SYSTEMS

ANNEX 10 BIENNIAL STATUS REPORT 2016-2017 ANNEX 11 PROPOSED BIENNIAL AGENDA FOR THE 2018-2019 BIENNIUM

ANNEX 12 PROPOSED PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR PPR 5 ANNEX 13 JUSTIFICATION FOR A NEW OUTPUT ON CONSISTENT

IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION 14.1.3 OF MARPOL ANNEX VI ANNEX 14 STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS AND OBSERVERS

PPR 4/21


1 GENERAL

1.1 The Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR) held its fourth session from 16 to 20 January 2017, chaired by Mr. Sveinung Oftedal (Norway). The Vice-Chair, Dr. Flavio Da Costa Fernandes (Brazil), was also present.

1.2 The session was attended by delegations from Member Governments and observers from international organizations and non-governmental organizations in consultative status as listed in document PPR 4/INF.1.

Opening address

1.3 The Secretary-General welcomed participants and delivered his opening address, the full text of which can be downloaded from the IMO website at the following link: http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/SecretaryGeneral/Secretary-GeneralsSpeechesToMeetings/Pages/Default.aspx

Chair's remarks

1.4 In responding, the Chair thanked the Secretary-General for his words of guidance and encouragement and assured him that his advice and requests would be given every consideration in the deliberations of the Sub-Committee.

Statement of the delegation of Malaysia

1.5 The delegation of Malaysia informed the Sub-Committee of a collision incident between two containerships off its coast on 3 January 2017 and the oil spill response and clean-up operations following the incident. The full text of the statement is set out in annex 14. Adoption of the agenda and related matters 1.6 The Sub-Committee adopted the agenda (PPR 4/1/Rev.1) and agreed to be guided in its work, in general, by the annotations contained in document PPR 4/1/1 (Secretariat) and the proposed arrangements for the session set out in document PPR 4/1/2 (Chair). The agenda, as adopted, together with the list of documents considered under each agenda item, is set out in document PPR 4/INF.11. 2 DECISIONS OF OTHER IMO BODIES 2.1 The Sub-Committee noted the outcome of FAL 40, MEPC 69, MSC 96, C 116 and MEPC 70 relevant to its work, as reported in document PPR 4/2 (Secretariat), and took appropriate action under the relevant agenda items. 3 SAFETY AND POLLUTION HAZARDS OF CHEMICALS AND PREPARATION OF

CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE IBC CODE 3.1 The Sub-Committee agreed to refer documents PPR 4/3/1 (Liberia et al.) and PPR 4/3/2 (Norway) directly to the ESPH Working Group, having noted that these pertained to ongoing tasks of the Group. Report of ESPH 22 3.2 The Sub-Committee recalled that ESPH 22 had taken place from 10 to 14 October 2016 and that the report of that session was circulated as document PPR 4/3.

http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/SecretaryGeneral/Secretary-GeneralsSpeechesToMeetings/Pages/Default.aspx

PPR 4/21


3.3 Having considered the report of ESPH 22, the Sub-Committee approved it in general and, in particular:

.1 noted the outcome of the discussions of GESAMP/EHS 53 and invited industry to submit information on hydrocarbon waxes, paraffin-type products and mineral oil to GESAMP/EHS 54 for subsequent consideration by the ESPH Working Group, with a view to harmonizing the entries for these products in the IBC Code and reviewing the component factor for mineral oils for mixture calculations;

.2 concurred with the evaluation of products and their respective inclusion in

lists 1 and 3 of MEPC.2/Circ.22, with validity for all countries and with no expiry date;

.3 invited the submission of information on drilling brines to GESAMP/EHS 54,

in order to establish a series of generic profiles to cover the range of drilling brines in chapter 17 of the IBC Code;

.4 concurred with the evaluation of cleaning additives and noted their inclusion

in annex 10 of MEPC.2/Circ.22; .5 concurred with the proposed name change of list 1 of the MEPC.2/Circular to

"Pure or technically pure products and mixtures assessed as a whole", in line with the revision of MEPC.1/Circ.512;

.6 noted the Group's progress in revising chapter 21 of the IBC Code and that

an updated version of the draft revised chapter had been prepared by the Secretariat (PPR 4/WP.4, annex 1);

.7 invited the submission of inhalation toxicity data to GESAMP/EHS 54 to assist

the review of the GESAMP Hazard Rating for inhalation toxicity (C3 rating), for the purposes of facilitating implementation of the revised draft chapter 21 of the IBC Code, once adopted;

.8 noted the progress made on the revision of the Guidelines for the provisional

assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk (MEPC.1/Circ.512) and that an updated version of the Guidelines had been prepared by the Secretariat (PPR 4/WP.4, annex 2);

.9 noted the progress made on the development of generic carriage

requirements for contaminated bulk liquids carried on OSVs; .10 noted the Group's discussions with regard to the development of guidance

for assessing and classifying products under Annexes I and II of MARPOL; .11 noted the Group's progress in developing amendments to MARPOL Annex II

related to the discharge of cargo residues and tank washings of high-viscosity, solidifying and persistent floating substances (see also agenda item 4); and

.12 approved the proposed provisional agenda for ESPH 23, subject to revision

based on progress made by the ESPH Working Group at this session (see paragraph 3.21).

PPR 4/21


Guidance/procedures for assessing products classified under Annex I or II of MARPOL 3.4 The Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/3/3 (Finland), providing comments on the report of ESPH 22 (PPR 4/3) and proposing amendments to the draft guidelines for assessing petroleum-like mixtures of "energy-rich fuels" to ensure that they were covered under the appropriate Annex of MARPOL. The Sub-Committee also considered the draft criteria that could be utilized for this purpose. 3.5 Whilst the Sub-Committee indicated support in principle for the proposal set out in the document, a number of questions were raised on the practical application of the guidance and the associated flow diagram and comments were provided on the issues still to be addressed in the guidance, notably:

.1 who the end-user of such information was expected to be; .2 how trade-named cargoes would be addressed; .3 assurance that the oil discharge monitoring equipment (ODME) would

function for such products and would satisfy the necessary performance requirements, before they could be assessed and categorized as Annex I products; and

.4 consideration as to how the blending of such products with bio-fuels would

be addressed. 3.6 Having discussed the proposal and considered the comments raised in plenary, the Sub-Committee agreed to refer document PPR 4/3/3, together with the views expressed, to the ESPH Working Group for further consideration, as part of its ongoing work on the development of guidance for assessing products classified under the appropriate annex of MARPOL. Revision of the Guidelines for the provisional assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk 3.7 The Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/3/4 (Finland), providing comments on the report of ESPH 22 (PPR 4/3) and proposing revisions to the Guidelines for the provisional assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk (MEPC.1/Circ.512), currently under review, to include criteria for the assessment of new "energy-rich fuels" referred to in document PPR 4/3/3. 3.8 In considering the proposal to include the new flow diagram set out in the annex to document PPR 4/3/4 in the Guidelines to address "energy-rich fuels", as part of the ongoing revision of the Guidelines, the Sub-Committee noted that, whilst the information presented had merit, there were a number of issues still to be considered for these products, and therefore agreed that it would be premature to include the flow diagram as part of the revision of the Guidelines, which was nearing completion, at this time. 3.9 Further to the comments received, the Sub-Committee agreed to refer document PPR 4/3/4 to the ESPH Working Group for further consideration, but indicated that it should not be included as part of the current revision of the Guidelines.

PPR 4/21


Establishment of the ESPH Working Group 3.10 The Sub-Committee established the Working Group on Evaluation of Safety and Pollution Hazards of Chemicals (ESPH) and instructed it, taking into account the report of ESPH 22 (PPR 4/3) and the comments and decisions made in plenary, to:

.1 conduct an evaluation of cleaning additives; .2 progress its work on the review of chapter 21 of the IBC Code and of the

product lists set out in chapters 17 and 18, using annex 1 to document PPR 4/WP.4 as the basis and taking into account document PPR 4/3/1;

.3 continue its work on the revision of the Guidelines for the provisional

assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk (MEPC.1/Circ.512), using annex 2 to document PPR 4/WP.4 as the basis and taking into account the information contained in documents PPR 4/3/2 and PPR 4/3/4;

.4 finalize the minimum carriage requirements for contaminated bulk liquids

carried on OSVs; .5 continue its work on the development of guidance for assessing products

under Annex I or Annex II of MARPOL, taking into account document PPR 4/3/3; and

.6 review the draft agenda for ESPH 23 and revise it as appropriate, based on

progress made during this session. Report of the ESPH Working Group 3.11 The Sub-Committee approved the report of the ESPH Working Group (PPR 4/WP.3) in general and, having considered the relevant parts dealing with this agenda item, took action as described in the following paragraphs. Evaluation of cleaning additives 3.12 The Sub-Committee concurred with the results of the Group's evaluation of cleaning additives, as set out in annex 1 to document PPR 4/WP.3, and their inclusion in the next revision of the MEPC.2/Circular, i.e. MEPC.2/Circ.23, to be issued in December 2017. Review of the MEPC.2/Circular 3.13 The Sub-Committee noted that the tripartite agreements for 41 products would reach their expiry dates in December 2017 and invited Member States to take action as appropriate, to avoid any delay in the carriage of these products beyond their expiry dates. Revision of the IBC Code – Chapters 17, 18 and 21 3.14 The Sub-Committee agreed to the final draft of the revised chapter 21 of the IBC Code, set out in annex 1, for approval in principle by MSC 98 and MEPC 71, pending finalization of the revision of chapters 17 and 18 of the Code, with a view to subsequent circulation and adoption of all three chapters.

PPR 4/21


3.15 The Sub-Committee noted the group's consideration of a proposal to modify the criteria for the application of the D3 hazarding rating assigned by GESAMP/EHS to differentiate between products that were toxic by inhalation, rather than by oral or dermal routes (PPR 4/3/1), and in particular, that it would not be possible to apply such criteria in a practical sense based on the information provided by the Chair of the GESAMP/EHS Working Group. 3.16 The Sub-Committee further noted the Group's agreement in principle to considering revised carriage requirements for methanol based on consideration of submitted technical data and an appropriate rationale for deviating from the criteria in chapter 21, based on expert judgement. Revision of the Guidelines for the provisional assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk 3.17 The Sub-Committee noted the progress made on the revision of the Guidelines for the provisional assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk (MEPC.1/Circ.512), in particular the Group's discussions on revised text for the assignment of ship type based on proposals set out in document PPR 4/3/2 (Norway). Having noted that the Group had not been able to finalize the text as anticipated, due to time constraints, the Sub-Committee noted that the delegation of the United Kingdom had agreed to work intersessionally to finalize the text, with a view to final agreement at ESPH 23 and subsequent endorsement by PPR 5. Development of minimum carriage requirements for contaminated bulk liquids carried on OSVs 3.18 The Sub-Committee agreed to two new entries in list 1 of the MEPC.2/Circular, (MEPC.2/Circ.23 to be issued in December 2017) on carriage requirements for backloading of contaminated bulk liquids from offshore installations and their future inclusion in chapter 17 of the IBC Code, as set out in annex 3 of document PPR 4/WP.3; 3.19 The Sub-Committee concurred in principle with the guidance for selecting the appropriate IBC Code entry for the backloading of contaminated bulk liquids from offshore installation developed by the Group (PPR 4/WP.3, annex 4), noting that this had been incorporated in chapter 15 of the draft OSV Chemical Code, set out in annex 3 (see paragraph 5.6). Guidance for the assessment of products under Annex I or Annex II of MARPOL 3.20 The Sub-Committee noted the Group's progress related to the development of guidance for assessing and classifying products under Annexes I and II of MARPOL, taking into consideration the information set out in document PPR 4/3/3 (Finland); and that this matter had been included in the provisional agenda for ESPH 23 (see paragraph 3.21). Provisional agenda for ESPH 23 3.21 Taking into account the Group's progress during the session, as well as the progress made under agenda item 4, which had also been referred to it, the Sub-Committee approved the provisional agenda for ESPH 23, as set out in annex 2.

PPR 4/21


4 REVIEW OF MARPOL ANNEX II REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE AN IMPACT ON CARGO RESIDUES AND TANK WASHINGS OF HIGH VISCOSITY AND PERSISTENT FLOATING PRODUCTS

4.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that at PPR 3 the ESPH Working Group had concluded that the best way forward to reduce the identified environmental impact from discharges under MARPOL Annex II was to focus on the products that were considered to be persistent floaters. 4.2 The Sub-Committee also noted that the matter had been revisited at ESPH 22 and that the Group had further noted that amendments to regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex II, as well as amendments to the Procedures and Arrangements (P&A) Manual, should also be considered. 4.3 The Sub-Committee recalled further that the Group had also noted concerns raised with regard to the number of ships and number of cargoes that would be affected by the proposed new prewash requirements and the lack of reception facilities to accommodate the discharge of residues from these cargoes. 4.4 The Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/4 (Norway and Sweden), proposing draft amendments to MARPOL Annex II to amend the discharge requirements for persistent floating high-viscosity and solidifying substances, in order to reduce the identified impact on the environment from the release of such products under the current requirements. 4.5 Having considered the proposed amendments, the Sub-Committee generally supported them; however, raised a number issues requiring consideration in the further development of the amendments and noted, in particular:

.1 the reference to the ongoing studies commissioned by one delegation, with regard to the fate and effects of vegetable oils in the marine environment and the request to consider the possibility of exempting vegetable oils from the new requirements, subject to the results of these studies, a proposal which was supported by a number of delegations;

.2 the suggestion that, in addition to the operational considerations, the

physical-chemical properties of the groups of products under review should also be considered when formulating the amendments;

.3 the lack of port reception facilities for the discharge of tank washings for the

groups of products under review remained an ongoing concern, with many delegations emphasizing that this issue would need to be carefully considered and addressed in the development of any new amendments to regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex II;

.4 that consideration should be given to regional reception facility arrangements

to address capacity issues; .5 that consideration should also be given to situations where there was a

requirement to discharge to a port, but where facilities where not available, to ensure that ships would not be penalized in such circumstances; and

.6 with regard to a proposal for a phased approach, based on the outcome of

the discussions at ESPH 22 reported under agenda item 3, general support for this option.

PPR 4/21


Instructions to the ESPH Working Group 4.6 Based on the comments received in plenary, the Sub-Committee instructed the ESPH Working Group, established under agenda item 3, to further develop draft amendments to MARPOL Annex II related to the discharge of cargo residues and tank washings of high-viscosity, solidifying and persistent floating products, taking into account the relevant outcome of ESPH 22 and document PPR 4/4. Report of the ESPH Working Group 4.7 Having considered the relevant parts of the report of the ESPH Working Group (PPR 4/WP.3, paragraphs 9.4 to 9.12), the Sub-Committee noted the Group's progress in developing amendments to MARPOL Annex II and consequential amendments to the IBC Code to address issues related to the discharge of high-viscosity and solidifying persistent floating substances and related considerations; and that this work would continue at ESPH 23, based on the draft text set out in annex 5 of document PPR 4/WP.3. Extension of the target completion year 4.8 In view of the above, the Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to extend the target completion year for this output to 2019. 5 CODE FOR THE TRANSPORT AND HANDLING OF LIMITED AMOUNTS OF

HAZARDOUS AND NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES IN BULK ON OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS

5.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3 had:

.1 noted the good progress made on the development of the OSV Chemical Code by the working group established at that session, and that the report of the group would be submitted to PPR 4;

.2 re-established the correspondence group and instructed it to finalize the text

of the draft OSV Chemical Code and submit it to PPR 4 for consideration; and .3 instructed ESPH 22 to further develop minimum carriage requirements for

contaminated backloads carried on OSVs, and that the outcome of ESPH 22 on this matter had been considered under agenda item 3 (see paragraph 3.3.9).

5.2 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration the following documents:

.1 PPR 4/5 (Chair of the Working Group), providing the report of the Working Group established at PPR 3; and

.2 PPR 4/5/1 and PPR 4/INF.2 (Denmark), providing the report of the

correspondence group, including the text of the draft Code and comments received during its deliberations.

5.3 The Sub-Committee agreed that, given the recommendatory nature of the Code, any mandatory language used in the draft text should be replaced with non-mandatory terms.

PPR 4/21


Establishment of a working group 5.4 The Sub-Committee established the Working Group on the OSV Chemical Code and instructed it, on the basis of the report of the correspondence group (PPR 4/5/1 and PPR 4/INF.2) and taking into account comments and decisions made in plenary, including those concerning the requirements on the carriage of backloads of contaminated bulk liquids under agenda item 3, to prepare the final text of the OSV Chemical Code as well as the text of a draft requisite Assembly resolution for its adoption. Report of the Working Group 5.5 Having considered the report of the Working Group on the OSV Chemical Code (PPR 4/WP.5), the Sub-Committee approved it in general and took action as described in the following paragraphs. 5.6 The Sub-Committee agreed to the draft Code for the Transport and Handling of Hazardous and Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk on Offshore Support Vessels (OSV Chemical Code) and the associated draft Assembly resolution for its adoption as set out in annex 3, for submission to MSC 98 and MEPC 71 for approval, with a view to adoption by A 30. 5.7 In this connection, the Sub-Committee authorized the Secretariat, when preparing the final text of the draft OSV Chemical Code, to effect any editorial corrections that may be identified, including updating references to renumbered paragraphs. 5.8 The Sub-Committee noted the view of the Group that the OSV Chemical Code should be made mandatory in the future and encouraged interested Member States to submit proposals for a relevant new output to the Committees after the adoption of the Code by the Assembly. Completion of the work on the output 5.9 The Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to note that the work on this output had been completed. 6 REVISED GUIDANCE ON BALLAST WATER SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 6.1 The Sub-Committee noted that the entry-into-force conditions of the BWM Convention had been met on 8 September 2016 with the accession of Finland and that the Convention would therefore enter into force on 8 September 2017. The Sub-Committee also noted that the number of Contracting Governments was currently 54, representing 53.30% of the world's merchant fleet tonnage. 6.2 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3 had invited Member Governments and international organizations to submit further information and proposals related to ballast water sampling, analysis and contingency measures to future sessions, with a view to further developing and improving the relevant guidance documents and guidelines. 6.3 The Sub-Committee further recalled that MEPC 58, having adopted the Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2) (resolution MEPC.173(58)), had instructed the Sub-Committee to develop a circular providing sampling and analysis guidance.

PPR 4/21


Guidelines for sampling of ballast water (G2) 6.4 In introducing document PPR 4/6 (IMarEST), proposing amendments to the Guidelines on ballast water sampling (G2) (resolution MEPC.173(58)) to incorporate a standard sample port, the observer from IMarEST requested the Sub-Committee to note a correction to paragraph 3 of the document, which should read as follows:

"To date, many ships have been outfitted with sample ports that are in compliance with the Guidelines (G2). However, the current Guidelines are not specific and as a result there are many variations of sample ports installed. This variety may challenge efficient and practical port State control inspections. Further, the current inclusion of the sample probe in the ship's supply allows these to be permanently or semi-permanently installed, with possible false positive results due to sampling port contamination."

6.5 The observer from IMarEST also proposed that, prior to the revision of Guidelines (G2), document PPR 4/6 could be used in the revision of the Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in accordance with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1). 6.6 The observer from ISO informed the Sub-Committee of their ongoing work on revising the Ballast Water Sampling Standard ISO 11711-1 and encouraged IMarEST to participate in this work for possible incorporation of relevant parts of the proposal in document PPR 4/6 in the revised standard. 6.7 While the proposal to incorporate a standard sample port in the Guidelines (G2) was supported in principle by some delegations, concerns were expressed regarding the consequences of introducing prescriptive shipboard arrangements, the suitability of standardized sampling ports for all ships and ballast water management systems (BWMS) and other details of the proposal. Some delegations expressed the view that there was no need to revise the Guidelines (G2) and that an ISO standard might be more appropriate to address the issue. 6.8 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee invited IMarEST, taking into account the comments made, to work with interested delegations to refine the proposal in document PPR 4/6 and submit a new proposal to PPR 5 for consideration in the context of the guidance set out in BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1. The Sub-Committee noted in this connection that work on draft amendments to the Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2) would require a new output, to be approved by the Committee. Uncertainties related to ballast water sampling for compliance 6.9 In introducing document MEPC 70/4/16 (Turkey), which had been referred to PPR 4 by MEPC 70 for further consideration, the delegation of Turkey provided supplemental information on difficulties encountered during ballast water sampling for compliance. The full text of the supplemental information is set out in annex 14. 6.10 While noting that some delegations supported amending article 9 of the BWM Convention to reflect the four-stage approach of the Guidelines for port State control under the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.252(67)), the Sub-Committee did not agree to the proposal in document MEPC 70/4/10. However, it agreed to take the views expressed in the document, on instrumental monitoring tools installed in association with BWMS, into account when considering document MEPC 70/4/11 (Republic of Korea) under agenda item 7 (see paragraph 7.8).

PPR 4/21


Extension of target completion year 6.11 The Sub-Committee reiterated its invitation to Member Governments and international organizations to submit further information and proposals related to ballast water sampling, analysis and contingency measures to future sessions, with a view to further developing and improving relevant guidance. 6.12 In view of the forthcoming entry into force of the BWM Convention and the need for further work related to guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis, the Sub-Committee agreed to invite MEPC 71 to extend the target completion year for this output to 2019. 7 REVIEW OF THE GUIDELINES FOR APPROVAL OF BALLAST WATER

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (G8) 7.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 70 had adopted the 2016 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) (resolution MEPC.279(70)), superseding the guidelines adopted by resolution MEPC.174(58). The Sub-Committee also recalled that, in this context, MEPC had invited submissions to PPR 4 on the methodologies that may be used for determining the viability of organisms and had instructed PPR 4 to consider annex 1 to the report of the Correspondence Group on the Review of Guidelines (G8) (MEPC 70/4/3) related to System Design Limitations. The Sub-Committee further recalled that MEPC 70 had referred document MEPC 70/4/11 (Republic of Korea), proposing a standardized format for operation logging data of BWMS, to it for consideration. Determination of viability of organisms 7.2 The Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/7 (Denmark and Norway) on analysis methods for determining the viability of organisms in the 10 to 50 µm size class, and documents PPR 4/7/1, PPR 4/7/2 and PPR 4/INF.10 (United States), commenting on document PPR 4/7 and providing further information on analysis methods. 7.3 In the ensuing discussion, general support was expressed with regard to the proposed analysis methods (FDA/CMFDA + Motility and MPN Dilution Culture + Motility), while noting that additional methodologies may also exist. Establishment of the Drafting Group on Ballast Water Management 7.4 Having agreed on the need for generic guidance on the matter, the Sub-Committee established the Drafting Group on Ballast Water Management and instructed it to prepare a draft BWM circular with information on methods that may be used for determining viability of organisms, taking into account documents PPR 4/7, PPR 4/7/1, PPR 4/7/2 and PPR 4/INF.10 as well as comments and decisions made in plenary, Report of the drafting group 7.5 The Sub-Committee approved the report of the drafting group (PPR 4/WP.7) in general and, having considered the relevant parts dealing with this agenda item, agreed to the draft BWM circular on Guidance on methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms for type approval of ballast water management systems, as set out in annex 4, for submission to MEPC 71 with a view to approval.

PPR 4/21


System Design Limitations 7.6 As instructed by MEPC 70, the Sub-Committee considered annex 1 of the report of the Correspondence Group on the Review of Guidelines (G8) (MEPC 70/4/3), to determine if any of the options for a matrix on System Design Limitations (SDL) for type approved BWMS could be usefully developed into separate guidance for use in conjunction with Guidelines (G8). 7.7 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee recognized the general support for the need to develop guidance on SDL, but not necessarily in the form of a matrix. While noting that much work on the matter had been done when reviewing Guidelines (G8), the Sub-Committee agreed that more information was needed and consequently invited further proposals on the matter to a future session. Standardized format for operation logging data 7.8 As instructed by MEPC 70, the Sub-Committee considered document MEPC 70/4/11 (Republic of Korea) on a standardized format for operation logging data of BWMS. In this context, the Sub-Committee also took into account the views expressed in the relevant parts of document MEPC 70/4/16 (Turkey) on instrumental monitoring tools installed in association with BWMS. 7.9 In the ensuing discussion, the Sub-Committee noted a comment that if such a standardized format was to be developed, the self-monitoring parameters should be appropriate for the specific approved BWMS and in line with the manufacturer's requirements for ensuring that the BWMS was operating correctly. 7.10 The Sub-Committee was not able to conclude on the matter and, therefore, invited submissions to a future session to facilitate further consideration of the issue, with a view to ensuring the proper monitoring and implementation of the ballast water performance standard, taking into account the comments made and the proposal in document MEPC 70/4/11, as well as the self-monitoring parameters proposed in document PPR 2/5 (Germany and Republic of Korea). 8 PRODUCTION OF A MANUAL ENTITLED "BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT –

HOW TO DO IT" 8.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3, having considered document PPR 3/7 (IMarEST), containing the second draft of the manual entitled Ballast Water Management – How to do it (the Manual), had established a drafting group and had instructed it to prepare the final text of the Manual, excluding sections affected by ongoing work at the Committee, and submit a written report to PPR 4. The Sub-Committee recalled also that the Governments of Canada and Denmark had provided financial support for this activity and thanked them for their contributions. 8.2 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration document PPR 4/8 (Chair of the Drafting Group), containing the report of the drafting group established at PPR 3 and the updated draft of the Manual. Having noted that annex 1 to the document contained a list of nine items that the group could not finalize at PPR 3, the Sub-Committee agreed to address only those items that required its consideration and input to the work of the group.

PPR 4/21


Review of legal aspects 8.3 The Sub-Committee considered item 1 on the list in annex 1 to document PPR 4/8,

corresponding to legal aspects (chapters 5 and 6 of the Manual), and action point 3 of the

group (PPR 4/8, paragraph 25.3). In this regard, the Sub-Committee requested the Secretariat to review chapters 5 and 6 of the draft Manual prior to its consideration by MEPC 71, and provide any comments or advice to the Committee. Retention on board of the ballast water record book 8.4 In considering item 5 on the list in annex 1 to document PPR 4/8, the Sub-Committee recalled that, at PPR 3, the need to improve references in the Manual to the requirement for retention on board of the ballast water record book had been identified; however, the Sub-Committee had not made a decision on this point and the group had not been in a position to make such a decision either. The Sub-Committee noted that this affected the finalization of sections 8.6 and 15.2 of the Manual and instructed the group to consider how to finalize these sections and make any relevant recommendations to the Sub-Committee. Chemical treatment – classification societies' installation guidelines 8.5 In considering item 8 on the list in annex 1 to document PPR 4/8 and the paragraph in square brackets in section 16.2.3 of the draft Manual, the Sub-Committee noted that, at PPR 3, the group could not agree whether that paragraph was necessary and had therefore placed it in square brackets. Following an intervention by the observer from IACS, proposing that the paragraph should be more generic on the scope of classification societies' requirements, rather than identifying specific hazards, or that certain text in it should be deleted, the Sub-Committee agreed to retain the paragraph and instructed the group to finalize it, taking into account the comment made, making the text more generic. Instructions to the drafting group 8.6 The Sub-Committee instructed the Drafting Group on Ballast Water Management, established under agenda item 7 (see paragraph 7.4), to prepare the final text of the draft Manual entitled Ballast Water Management – How to do it, using document PPR 4/8 as the basis and taking into account the comments and decisions made in plenary. Report of the drafting group 8.7 Having considered the relevant parts of the report of the drafting group (PPR 4/WP.7, paragraphs 7 to 13 and annex 2), the Sub-Committee took action as described in the following paragraphs. 8.8 The Sub-Committee concurred with the view of the group that the updated draft of the manual entitled Ballast Water Management – How to do it should be considered as final, with the exception of sections 12.2.3 and 17.2, which the group had agreed could be more efficiently finalized by the Ballast Water Review Group at MEPC 71, and chapters 5 and 6, which would be reviewed by the Secretariat (see paragraph 8.3). 8.9 Consequently, the Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to instruct the Ballast Water Review Group expected to be established at the session, to finalize sections 12.2.3 and 17.2 of the draft Manual.

PPR 4/21


8.10 With regard to the requirement for retention on board of the Ballast Water Record Book, the Sub-Committee, having noted that the relevant text in the Manual was generally in line with regulation B-2.2 of the BWM Convention, and that the concerns raised at PPR 3 were related to potential specific scenarios only and to ambiguities of the previous draft wording, endorsed the group's recommendation that, should any further guidance to address specific scenarios be needed, this would constitute a separate matter to be considered by the Committee. 8.11 In conclusion, the Sub-Committee agreed to the updated version of the manual Ballast Water Management – How to do it as set out in annex 5, for submission to MEPC 71, with a view to its finalization and approval. Completion of the work on the output 8.12 The Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to note that the work on this output had been completed. 9 CONSIDERATION OF THE IMPACT ON THE ARCTIC OF EMISSIONS OF BLACK

CARBON FROM INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING 9.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 68 had approved the Bond et al. definition for Black Carbon for international shipping, for the primary reason that this definition is measurement method neutral and widely supported by the scientific community. The Sub-Committee also recalled that the target completion year for this output was 2017. 9.2 The Sub-Committee further recalled that MEPC 70 had noted that PPR 3 had developed a measurement reporting protocol for voluntary data collection of Black Carbon and had invited interested Member Governments and international organizations to use the protocol and submit data to PPR 4 (MEPC 70/18, paragraph 5.4). 9.3 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration the following documents:

.1 PPR 4/9 (EUROMOT), PPR 4/9/1 and PPR 4/INF.6 (Japan), PPR 4/9/2, PPR 4/9/3 and PPR 4/INF.7 (Finland), and PPR 4/9/4 and PPR 4/INF.9 (Canada and Germany), providing results of Black Carbon measurements using the protocol for voluntary data collection of Black Carbon prepared at PPR 3 and various measurement methods, including those that had been identified as example methods to measure Black Carbon at PPR 2, for fuels with various sulphur contents and at various engine loads; and

.2 PPR 4/9/5 (FOEI, WWF, Pacific Environment and CSC), calling for urgent

action on control measures to reduce Black Carbon emissions in order to address the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, and proposing the establishment of an ad hoc technical committee to progress the work.

9.4 The Sub-Committee noted the information contained in document PPR 4/INF.8 (Canada and Netherlands), providing a summary of the proceedings of a technical workshop on marine Black Carbon emissions held in Vancouver, Canada, from 7 to 8 September 2016. 9.5 In the ensuing discussion, the majority of delegations that took the floor supported the continuation of measurement studies and research in order to collect more data on marine Black Carbon emissions that would allow the Sub-Committee to make decisions on measurement methods. In this regard, it was noted that it may be impossible to identify one

PPR 4/21


method to measure all the properties listed in the approved definition of Black Carbon and that it may be better to focus on measuring only a specific property or properties, for which reliable method(s) can be identified. Several delegations also supported the revision and improvement of the reporting protocol, to be used for such further studies. 9.6 Some delegations were in favour of initiating the consideration of control measures, i.e. the final step in the Sub-Committee's work plan for consideration of Black Carbon emissions. Other delegations expressed the view that it was premature to consider control measures at this stage and that the work on measurement methods should be concluded first. In this regard, some delegations recalled that the Organization had been considering this matter for a long time, the Sub-Committee's work plan had been agreed at MEPC 62 and there was an urgent need to progress it further. One delegation suggested that sufficient progress had been achieved to enable the Committee to resume its consideration of the matter, while further work on measurements and data collection could continue at the same time. 9.7 With regard to the modalities for continuing with the work plan, several delegations proposed that a working or correspondence group could be established, while other delegations were of the view that it would be premature to establish any group at this stage. 9.8 In addition, the following specific comments, inter alia, were made:

.1 if necessary, the definition of Black Carbon may be reconsidered; .2 the 0.50% sulphur limit will become effective from 1 January 2020 and will

lead to reductions in Black Carbon emissions from international shipping; .3 any control measures should be proportionate, cost-effective and have

demonstrable benefits, determined by cost-benefit analyses; and .4 there is a need for more data on Black Carbon emissions from low-speed

engines, Tier II engines and for fuels with a maximum sulphur content of 0.50% m/m.

9.9 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee agreed that the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships should further develop and finalize the reporting protocol for voluntary Black Carbon measurements, taking into account the comments and proposals made in plenary. 9.10 In addition, the Sub-Committee invited Member Governments and international organizations to use the protocol and submit further data and information derived from its application to PPR 5, with a view to identifying the most appropriate measurement method(s), focusing on fuel oils with a maximum sulphur content of 0.50% m/m, in light of the decision of MEPC 70 to confirm the effective date of implementation as 1 January 2020 (MEPC 70/18, paragraph 5.55.3), and giving appropriate attention to low-speed engines, which drive much of the global fleet. 9.11 In view of the target completion year of 2017 for the output and the current progress of the work, whereby the final step (investigation of appropriate control measures) has not started yet, the Sub-Committee also agreed that the Working Group should develop a timeline for the completion of the work.

PPR 4/21


Establishment of the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 9.12 The Sub-Committee established the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships and instructed it, taking into account comments and decisions made in plenary, to: .1 further develop, with a view to finalization, the reporting protocol for voluntary

measurement studies to collect data, focusing on using the definition of Black Carbon to support data collection; and

.2 develop a timeline for finalization of the work on this output. Report of the Working Group 9.13 The Sub-Committee approved the report of the Working Group (PPR 4/WP.6) in general and, having considered the relevant parts dealing with this agenda item, took action as described in the following paragraphs. Reporting protocol for voluntary measurement studies 9.14 The Sub-Committee noted that the Group had agreed to objectives for the further voluntary measurement studies to collect Black Carbon data, however, had been unable to finalize the draft measurement reporting protocol for such studies. Therefore, with a view to finalization of the measurement reporting protocol at PPR 5, the Sub-Committee established a Correspondence Group on Consideration of the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, under the coordination of Canada1, with the following terms of reference: .1 further develop, with a view to finalization , the reporting protocol for voluntary

measurement studies to collect Black Carbon data, based on experience to date of using the reporting protocol in voluntary measurement studies, to improve usability and to address technical issues identified at PPR 4; and

.2 submit a report to PPR 5.

9.15 The Sub-Committee also noted that some delegations had encouraged information to be submitted to PPR 5 on potential control measures to reduce the impact of Black Carbon emissions from international shipping.

Timeline for finalization of the work

9.16 Some delegations expressed the view that it was premature to include control measures in the proposed timeline as the work on measurement methods had not been concluded, while other delegations were of the opinion that work on measurement methods and on control measures could be carried out at the same time and that the timeline had to include the consideration of control measures in any case, as it should address the entire work plan of the Sub-Committee. In this regard, the Sub-Committee recalled that the final step of its work plan, as agreed by MEPC 62 (MEPC 62/24, paragraph 4.20), entailed the investigation of control measures and not their finalization.

1 Coordinator:

Miss Kerri Henry Manager, International Air Emissions Transport Canada Email: [email protected] Tel: 1-613-993-3541

mailto:[email protected]

PPR 4/21


9.17 In this context, the Sub-Committee noted that the delegations of China and the Republic of Korea had wished to associate themselves with the view expressed by Japan, and supported by the Russian Federation, set out in paragraph 11 document PPR 4/WP.6. 9.18 The Sub-Committee noted the timeline developed by the group to finalize the work plan on the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, having recognized that it would be subject to further review as the work progresses, as follows:

.1 development of the definition for Black Carbon emissions from international shipping at PPR 2, consequently approved by MEPC 68;

.2 consideration of measurement method(s) for Black Carbon and identification

of the most appropriate method for measuring Black Carbon emissions from international shipping:

.1 finalization of the reporting protocol for voluntary measurement

studies to collect data at PPR 5 (2018); and

.2 finalization of identification of the most appropriate method for measurement of Black Carbon at PPR 5 (2018);

.3 investigation of appropriate control measures to reduce the impact of Black

Carbon emissions from international shipping: consideration of proposals and finalization of the investigation of appropriate control measures at PPR 6 (2019) for consideration by the Committee.

Extension of the target completion year 9.19 In view of the above, the Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to extend the target completion year for this output to 2019. 10 STANDARDS FOR SHIPBOARD GASIFICATION OF WASTE SYSTEMS AND

ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION 16 OF MARPOL ANNEX VI 10.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3 had established a correspondence group, under the coordination of the United States and had instructed it to further develop draft standards for shipboard gasification waste to energy systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI and to report to this session. 10.2 The Sub-Committee also recalled that MEPC 70, having considered a relevant request by PPR 3, had agreed to change the title of the output to read "Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI" (MEPC 70/18, paragraph 15.17). Report of the correspondence group 10.3 The Sub-Committee, having considered the report of the correspondence group (PPR 4/10 and PPR 4/INF.3, submitted by the United States), noted that the group had:

.1 developed draft standards for shipboard gasification waste to energy systems and associated draft amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI; and

PPR 4/21


.2 requested the Sub-Committee to decide whether amendments to regulation 16 to explicitly incorporate reference to a proposed standard specification are necessary, or whether the current allowance for consideration of an equivalent (regulation 4) is sufficient.

10.4 In the ensuing discussion, the following comments, inter alia, were made:

.1 amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI are not required and the standards should be generic;

.2 if amended, regulation 16 should be technology neutral; .3 regulation 16 should be amended, including the title of the regulation, as the

requirements in both regulation 16 and regulation 4 are not adequate with regard to this issue;

.4 the development of specific standards is not appropriate and the draft standard is very technology specific and would exclude other technologies that reach the same level of purity;

.5 the 2014 Standard specification for shipboard incinerators (resolution

MEPC.244(66)) could be amended to include shipboard gasification of waste systems; and

.6 the draft standard should include discharge water criteria and these criteria

should be harmonized with others, such as those in the EGCS Guidelines. 10.5 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee agreed that amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI would be needed, and that such amendments should not be confined to one specific technology in order to avoid continuous amendments when a new technology is used in the future. Instructions to the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 10.6 Following consideration, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships, established under agenda item 9, to finalize the draft standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI, using the annexes to document PPR 4/10 as the basis, taking into account comments and decisions made in plenary. Report of the Working Group 10.7 Having considered the relevant parts of the report of the Working Group (PPR 4/WP.6, paragraphs 12 to 15 and annex 2), the Sub-Committee took action as described in the following paragraphs. 10.8 The Sub-Committee noted that: .1 the Group, owing to time constraints, could not finalize the draft Standards

and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI; .2 consequential amendments may be required to other requirements under

MARPOL Annex VI, for example, the IAPP Certificate; and

PPR 4/21


.3 the Group had agreed on the need to progress work intersessionally through a correspondence group and prepared draft terms of reference for such a group.

Establishment of a correspondence group 10.9 Consequently, the Sub-Committee established the Correspondence Group on Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI, under the coordination of Canada2, and instructed it, taking into account comments and decisions made in plenary at PPR 4, to: .1 further develop generic draft Standards for shipboard gasification of waste

systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI and IAPP Certificate, using annexes to document PPR 4/10 as a basis, and taking into account information in document PPR 4/INF.4; and

.2 submit a report to PPR 5.

Extension of the target completion year

10.10 In view of the above, the Sub-Committee invited the Committee to extend the target completion year for the output to 2019.

11 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISCHARGE OF EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION BLEED-OFF WATER

11.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3 had instructed the Correspondence Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships to further develop the draft Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water and report to this session.

Report of the correspondence group

11.2 The Sub-Committee, having considered the report of the correspondence group (PPR 4/11 and PPR 4/INF.4, submitted by the United States), noted that the group had:

.1 developed draft Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water; and

.2 identified the following three outstanding issues for consideration by the Sub-Committee:

.1 whether treated EGR bleed-off water waste residues should be treated as MARPOL Annex VI or MARPOL Annex I wastes;

.2 whether discharge of EGR bleed-off water within polar waters as defined by the Polar Code should be further restricted; and

.3 whether the Guidelines should include survey and certification provisions.

2 Coordinator:

Mrs. Naomi Katsumi Senior Advisor, Marine Air Emissions Transport Canada

Tel: 613-990-4891 Email: [email protected]

PPR 4/21


11.3 The observer from IACS expressed the view that consideration should be given to the benefits of developing a set of standalone wash water discharge guidelines in light of the increasing number of equipment and systems certified under MARPOL Annex VI, incorporating water systems as part of emission abatement technologies, taking into account the criteria provided in the 2015 Guidelines for exhaust gas cleaning systems (resolution MEPC.259(68)) (2015 EGCS Guidelines). The Sub-Committee noted that this issue had wider implications and should be considered further.

11.4 Having considered whether treated EGR bleed-off water waste residues should be treated as MARPOL Annex VI or MARPOL Annex I wastes, the Sub-Committee agreed that they should be treated as MARPOL Annex VI wastes.

11.5 In this connection, one delegation stated that treated EGR bleed-off water contained black, fine, smoky water which, in addition to causing a clogging problem, could not be detected by 15 ppm bilge alarm system, and suggested that the wash water discharge criteria set out in chapter 10 of the 2015 EGCS Guidelines should apply to treated EGR bleed-off water. 11.6 The Sub-Committee, having noted that MARPOL Annex VI is not referenced in the Polar Code, agreed that, should more stringent discharge criteria be needed for ships operating in polar waters, this should be addressed in the guidelines under development. Consequently, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group to investigate the need for more stringent discharge criteria for ships operating in polar waters, noting that further analysis of samples of discharge water from EGR systems would be needed.

11.7 The Sub-Committee considered whether the Guidelines should include survey and certification provisions and noted the following views:

.1 survey and certification provisions should be included in the guidelines, as the 2015 EGCS Guidelines include such provisions;

.2 survey and certification provisions should not be included in the guidelines due to their non-mandatory nature;

.3 clarification would be needed on what basis EGRs installed on board would be inspected by port State control officers, bearing in mind that EGRs may have not been surveyed and certified given the recommendatory nature of the guidelines; and

.4 consideration should be given to how the use of EGR on board ships could

be identified, noting that the use of an EGCS could be identified in the IAPP Certificate.

Instructions to the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 11.8 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships, established under agenda item 9, to finalize the draft Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water, using annex 1 to document PPR 4/11 as the basis and taking into account the decisions and comments made in plenary.

PPR 4/21


Report of the Working Group 11.9 Having considered the relevant parts of the report of the Working Group (PPR 4/WP.6, paragraphs 16 to 20 and annex 3), the Sub-Committee took action as described in the following paragraphs. 11.10 The Sub-Committee, having considered the draft Guidelines prepared by the Group, agreed to remove the square brackets in paragraphs 3.1.2.1 and 6 and retain the text therein. 11.11 Consequently, the Sub-Committee agreed to the draft MEPC resolution on 2017 Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water, as set out in annex 6, for submission to MEPC 71 for consideration, with a view to adoption. Completion of the work on the output 11.12 The Sub-Committee invited the Committee to note that the work on this output had been completed. 12 IMPROVED AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES APPROVED FOR BALLAST WATER

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND REDUCTION OF ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION 12.1 The Sub-Committee, having noted that no relevant submissions had been received under this output for the last two consecutive sessions, invited MEPC 71 to advise on whether this output should be retained for the next biennium, in accordance with paragraph 5.12 of the Committees' Guidelines (MSC-MEPC.1/Circ.5). 13 UPDATED IMO DISPERSANT GUIDELINES (PART IV) 13.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 2 had established an intersessional correspondence group under the overall coordination of the United States, and instructed it, inter alia, to develop a draft of part IV of the Guidelines for the use of dispersant for combatting oil at sea (IMO Dispersant Guidelines), devoted to sub-sea dispersant application. 13.2 Having considered the report of the correspondence group (PPR 4/13, submitted by the United States), the Sub-Committee noted the progress made on the development of the Guidelines; re-established the group, under the coordination of the United States3; and instructed it to finalize part IV of the IMO Dispersant Guidelines and submit the text to PPR 5 for consideration, with a view to approval by MEPC 73. Extension of the target completion year 13.3 In view of the above, the Sub-Committee invited the Committee to extend the target completion year for the output to 2019.

3 Coordinator:

Mr. Kevin Sligh Senior Technical Adviser United States Coast Guard Tel: (703) 980-4152 (cell) / (202) 372-2250 (work) Email: [email protected] / [email protected]



PPR 4/21


14 UPDATED OPRC MODEL TRAINING COURSES 14.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that the Drafting Group on OPRC related manuals, guidelines and guidance established at PPR 3 had not been able to complete the review of all the course materials provided and had requested the Secretariat to prepare and submit a final draft of the Model Courses to this session for consideration. 14.2 In considering documents PPR 4/14, PPR 4/14/1, PPR 4/14/2, PPR 4/14/3 and PPR 4/14/4 (Secretariat), containing an update on the finalization of the revision process, in addition to the finalized draft materials of the four courses that comprise the OPRC Model Training Courses, namely the introductory level, the tactical level, the operational level and the strategic level, the Sub-Committee welcomed the significant progress made in the finalization of the courses and the important contribution made by a number of Member Governments and non-governmental organizations in this process. 14.3 The delegation of Spain announced that, in support of the efforts made in updating the OPRC Model Training Courses, the Government of Spain would offer assistance with regard to the translation into Spanish of the finalized OPRC Model Training Courses, following their approval by the Committee. Establishment of a drafting group 14.4 Subsequently, the Sub-Committee established a Drafting Group on OPRC model training courses and instructed it to finalize the OPRC Model Training Courses, on the basis of documents PPR 4/14/1, PPR 4/14/2, PPR 4/14/3 and PPR 4/14/4. Report of the drafting group 14.5 Having considered the report of the drafting group (PPR 4/WP.8), the Sub-Committee approved it in general and took action as indicated hereunder. 14.6 The Sub-Committee noted that the group had agreed to a number of modifications to the OPRC Model Training Courses, as outlined in the annex to document PPR 4/WP.8, and had asked the Secretariat to gather all relevant information and materials, including updating all relevant statistics directly prior to publishing and adjusting text to ensure consistency in the language and terminology used across all course materials. 14.7 Following consideration, the Sub-Committee agreed to the final draft of the OPRC Model Training Courses, as set out in documents PPR 4/14/1, PPR 4/14/2, PPR 4/14/3 and PPR 4/14/4, including the amendments outlined in the annex to document PPR 4/WP.8, as set out in annex 7, for submission to MEPC 71, with a view to approval and subsequent publication; and requested the Secretariat to prepare a consolidated version of the text. 14.8 In this connection, the Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to authorize the Secretariat, when preparing the updated OPRC Model Training Courses for publication, to effect any editorial corrections that may be identified, as appropriate. Completion of the work on the output 14.9 The Sub-Committee invited the Committee to note that the work on this output had been completed.

PPR 4/21


15 UNIFIED INTERPRETATION TO PROVISIONS OF IMO ENVIRONMENT-RELATED CONVENTIONS

Unified interpretation of regulation B-4 of the BWM Convention 15.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 70, having considered document MEPC 70/4/10 (Republic of Korea) proposing a unified interpretation for implementing regulation B-4 (Ballast water exchange) of the BWM Convention, had instructed PPR 4 to consider the matter and to advise the Committee accordingly. 15.2 In considering the proposal, the Sub-Committee noted that unified interpretations to the BWM Convention can only be approved by Parties to the Convention once it has entered into force. 15.3 A number of delegations supported the proposal in document MEPC 70/4/10, while others agreed on the need for a unified interpretation in principle, but were of the view that further consideration of the proposal was required to ensure it was fully in line with the requirements of the BWM Convention. Some delegations were of the view that the unified interpretation should take into account the concurrence of MEPC 68 with the view that resolution A.1088(28) on Application of the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004 also applied to ships operating in sea areas where ballast water exchange in accordance with regulations B-1 and D-1 of the Convention is not possible. 15.4 The delegation of Ireland, while recognizing that clarity with regard to the implementation of ballast water exchange under the BWM Convention was needed, did not agree to the proposal. The full text of their statement in this respect is set out in annex 14. 15.5 Consequently, the Sub-Committee agreed to invite refined proposals for a unified interpretation of regulation B-4 of the BWM Convention to the next session for further consideration, with a view to its approval by MEPC 72 when the BWM Convention will have entered into force. 15.6 The delegation of the Republic of Korea, supported by the delegation of Singapore, stated their view that, considering the urgency of the matter, a BWM circular would be more appropriate than a unified interpretation that cannot be approved before entry into force of the Convention. They informed the Sub-Committee of their intention to submit a draft BWM circular on the matter to MEPC 71 for approval and invited interested delegations to participate in its development. Unified interpretation of regulation 36 of MARPOL Annex I 15.7 The Sub-Committee recalled that PPR 3, having considered document PPR 3/18/1 (OCIMF) seeking clarification with regard to the appropriate cargo/ballast operation category of offshore terminal line flush seawater which occurs during routine cargo transfer operations on board an oil tanker, had invited interested Member Governments and international organizations to work together intersessionally and submit a revised proposal to PPR 4 or, in case a new output was needed, to submit a relevant proposal to the Committee in accordance with the Committees' Guidelines. 15.8 In this regard, the Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/15 (OCIMF and INTERTANKO), containing a revised proposal for a unified interpretation of regulation 36.2.10 of MARPOL Annex I.

PPR 4/21


15.9 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee agreed to the unified interpretation of regulation 36.2.10 of MARPOL Annex I, as set out in annex 8, for submission to MEPC 71 for consideration, with a view to approval and dissemination as an MEPC circular. 15.10 In this connection, one delegation stressed that this unified interpretation should only be applied upon the receipt of documentation from the terminal operator on the amount, composition and origin of the flush water. 16 USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORD BOOKS 16.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 66 had established a correspondence group and instructed it to develop draft guidance for the use of electronic record books under MARPOL and any necessary amendments and/or unified interpretations to MARPOL; and to consider the need for any consequential amendments to the Procedures for Port State Control, 2011 (resolution A.1052(27)) (PSC Procedures). 16.2 The Sub-Committee also recalled that MEPC 69 had considered the report of the correspondence group (MEPC 68/9); had taken a number of decisions as summarized in document PPR 4/16 (Secretariat); and had referred consideration of this matter to PPR 4, specifically instructing the Sub-Committee to:

.1 consider whether or not the forms of record books in MARPOL can be accommodated in electronic formats;

.2 explore the extent of flexibility when transferring the forms of record books

under MARPOL into electronic formats; .3 finalize any consequential amendments to the PSC Procedures, based on

its consideration of the issue of flexibility of the format; .4 develop draft amendments to MARPOL to effect electronic record books; and .5 consider the feasibility of using electronic documentation and advise the

Committee accordingly. General comments 16.3 The Sub-Committee noted the general support for the use of electronic record books and the need to expedite the finalization of the draft guidance and associated MARPOL amendments to ensure uniform implementation, given the fact that a number of Member States had already encouraged such practice and were using electronic record books. 16.4 The delegation of the United States, noting that there are both advantages and disadvantages in using electronic record books, expressed the view that substantial further work would be needed for the draft guidance to address any potential technical, legal and procedural issues as the guidance presented leaves discretion to the Administration which may allow electronic record books that do not provide the same level of safety, security, protection or availability as the required written records in MARPOL. They were of the view that Administrations or port States would not be obliged to use or accept electronic record books prior to the entry into force of relevant MARPOL amendments.

PPR 4/21


Forms of electronic record books, including extent of flexibility 16.5 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration document PPR 4/16/1 (Liberia), proposing that, since electronic record books would be new for both shipboard personnel and port State control officers in the initial introduction and in order to gain experience with their use, the form of record books in MARPOL should be maintained for electronic record books for the near future, after which the use of alternative forms may be considered. 16.6 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee agreed that electronic record books should be presented in the form as specified in relevant MARPOL Annexes in order to assist the smooth transition from hard copy record books to electronic ones while not ruling out the need to further explore the extent of flexibility of the forms in the future. Feasibility of using other electronic documentation 16.7 In considering the feasibility of using electronic documentation, the Sub-Committee noted that examples of such documentation under MARPOL included the operational manual for oil discharge monitoring and control system; the operations and equipment manual for crude oil washing operations; the shipboard oil pollution emergency plan; the P&A Manual; garbage management plans and the VOC management plan. The Sub-Committee further noted that, since most of the above-mentioned documentation needs approval by the Administration, using electronic documentation would be similar to using electronic certificates and reference could be made to the Guidelines for the use of electronic certificates (FAL.5/Circ.39/Rev.2), which, however, explicitly exclude manuals, instructions or ships' logs used to record ongoing operations.

16.8 Following consideration, the Sub-Committee agreed that, in order not to further delay the finalization of the draft guidance, it should not cover electronic documentation which requires different verification processes and that this matter may be revisited in the future, based on the experience gained with the use of electronic record books. Draft amendments and interpretations to MARPOL and the 2011 PSC Procedures

16.9 With a view to expediting the work, the Sub-Committee requested the Secretariat to prepare draft amendments to MARPOL to effect electronic record books, together with an updated version of the draft guidance for the use of electronic record books under MARPOL, associated draft unified interpretations of MARPOL, and draft amendments to the Procedures for Port State Control, 2011 (resolution A.1052(27)), for consideration at PPR 5. Extension of the target completion year 16.10 In view of the above, the Sub-Committee invited the Committee to extend the target completion year for the output to 2019. 17 REVISION OF THE 2011 SCR GUIDELINES 17.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 70, following a request by PPR 3, had included a new output on "Revision of the 2011 SCR Guidelines" in the biennial agenda of the Sub-Committee and in the provisional agenda for this session, with a target completion year of 2018, and had forwarded documents MEPC 70/9/1 (EUROMOT) and MEPC 70/15/6 (United States et al.) to this session for consideration (MEPC 70/18, paragraph 15.15).

PPR 4/21


17.2 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration the following documents:

.1 PPR 4/17 (Sweden), expressing the view that Scheme B of the 2011 SCR Guidelines contains unnecessary complications, proposing that onboard confirmation tests should be made on all engines and that classification societies should act as a "share point" where necessary data for certification is received from the engine and the selective catalytic reduction (SCR) manufacturer;

.2 PPR 4/17/1 (Norway), stating that Scheme A and Scheme B should be

considered as equivalent approaches towards certification of an engine with an SCR and proposing several further modifications to the draft amendments to the 2011 SCR Guidelines provided in documents MEPC 70/15/6 and PPR 4/17;

.3 PPR 4/17/2 (Finland), stating that Scheme A and Scheme B should be

considered as equivalent approaches towards certification of an engine with an SCR and proposing several further modifications to the draft amendments to paragraph 3.1.1 of the 2011 SCR Guidelines provided in document MEPC 70/9/1; and

.4 PPR 4/17/3 (Finland), proposing several further modifications to the draft

amendments to the 2011 SCR Guidelines provided in document MEPC 70/15/6.


.1 Scheme A and Scheme B should be treated as equivalents to ensure that both engine and SCR manufacturers have an equal level of access to the market, and, therefore, unnecessary complications, including making available engine emission data to enable pre-certification, should be removed;

.2 Scheme B should be regarded as an alternative to Scheme A, only to be

allowed, as the provisions of the NOX Technical Code require, when this is justified;

.3 should Scheme A and Scheme B be treated as equivalents, then amendments

to paragraph 2.2.5.1 of the NOX Technical Code 2008 would be needed as the current provisions do not allow a free choice and Scheme B can only be used where there are technical and practical reasons for not using Scheme A; and the use of Scheme B is subject to approval by the Administration;

.4 should amendments to the NOX Technical Code 2008 be needed, a

justification to extend the scope of the current output should be prepared for consideration by the Committee;

.5 onboard confirmation testing should not be required under Scheme A for all

parent and member engines;

PPR 4/21


.6 only one party should have full responsibility for the certification of the integrated engine system (i.e. the engine and the SCR system connected to it), and as the highest priority should be given to the robustness of the certification process, it would not be appropriate to introduce the concept of a "share point" for third parties, not least because of any intellectual property issues that would require clarification;

.7 a new provision for ammonia slip, as proposed in document MEPC 70/15/6,

is not required since ammonia slip levels can be controlled by setting an appropriate reductant injection rate; and

.8 individual SCR chambers should not need to be tested.

17.4 The Sub-Committee agreed that unnecessary complications in the application of the 2011 SCR Guidelines needed to be removed, in part to enable the use of new technologies, and that consideration needed to be given as to whether Scheme A and Scheme B are equivalent under the NOX Technical Code, and, if necessary, a justification for the relevant amendments to the Code should be prepared. Additionally, the Sub-Committee noted that the need for onboard confirmation testing under Scheme A was not supported. Instructions to the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 17.5 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships, established under agenda item 9, taking into account comments and decisions made in plenary, to:

.1 consider the need for amendments to the NOX Technical Code 2008 in the context of using Scheme A or Scheme B, and if so, prepare a justification for a revision of the scope of the current output;

.2 prepare a revision of the 2011 SCR Guidelines, using document MEPC 70/15/6 as the basis, and taking into account documents MEPC 70/9/1, PPR 4/17, PPR 4/17/1, PPR 4/17/2 and PPR 4/17/3; and

.3 consider the need for a correspondence group and, if so, prepare terms of

reference for the group. Report of the Working Group 17.6 In considering the relevant parts of the report of the Working Group (PPR 4/WP.6, paragraphs 21 to 29 and annex 4), the Sub-Committee noted an intervention by the delegation of the Russian Federation, supported by the delegations of Bahamas and India, expressing concern about the workload of the Working Group leading to a heavy burden on delegates, especially those whose mother tongue is not English. Furthermore, the delegation expressed regret for the agreement that Scheme A and Scheme B under the NOX Technical Code 2008 should be made equally applicable, as in their view this would complicate matters for shipowners as SCR emission abatement technology was integral to the propulsion machinery and so the documentation for SCR and propulsion machinery should be considered simultaneously; and that the Sub-Committee should not interfere with the market relationships between SCR and marine diesel engine manufacturers to minimize the administrative burden on the Administration.

PPR 4/21


17.7 The Sub-Committee also noted an intervention by the delegation of the Netherlands that paragraph 22.1 of the report should be corrected to read as follows:

".1 to make Scheme B equally applicable to Scheme A the application of the provisions included in Chapter 5 of the NOX Technical Code could be considered;".

17.8 The Sub-Committee further noted an intervention by the delegation of the Bahamas which expressed the view that there were two important principles that should be adhered to, firstly there was a hierarchy in the Organization meaning that Sub-Committees' could not arbitrarily change the decisions of their parent Committees and secondly, guidelines were produced to support implementation of instruments and they could not lead or anticipate an amendment to an instrument. 17.9 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee took action as follows: .1 noted that the SCR Guidelines are subordinate to and only reflect the

requirements of the NOX Technical Code 2008, and do not seek to go beyond the intent of those requirements;

.2 endorsed the group's agreement to retain the existing approach of a single

applicant for NOX certification, noting the procedural problems associated with a "share point" approach to NOX certification data;

.3 endorsed the group's view that Scheme A and Scheme B should be made

equally applicable and that amendments to the NOX Technical Code 2008 are required to effect this;

.4 agreed to invite MEPC 71 to amend the title of the output to read "Revision

of certification requirements for SCR systems under the NOX Technical Code 2008";

.5 agreed, for clarification purposes, to modify paragraph 1.3 of the draft Guidelines to refer only to the provisions set forth in paragraph 2.2.5.1 of the NOX Technical Code 2008; and

.6 agreed to the draft MEPC resolution on 2017 Guidelines addressing

additional aspects of the NOX Technical Code 2008 with regard to particular requirements related to marine diesel engines fitted with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems, as set out in annex 9, for submission to MEPC 71, with a view to adoption.

18 BIENNIAL AGENDA AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR PPR 5 Biennial status report 18.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 70 had approved the revised biennial agenda for 2016-2017 and the provisional agenda for PPR 4 (MEPC 70/18/Add.1, annex 15). 18.2 Taking into account the progress made at this session, the Sub-Committee agreed to the biennial status report, as set out in annex 10, for approval by MEPC 71.

PPR 4/21


Biennial agenda for 2018-2019 and provisional agenda for PPR 5 18.3 Taking into account the progress made at this session and the relevant decisions of MEPC 69 and MEPC 70, the Sub-Committee prepared its proposed biennial agenda for 2018-2019 and the provisional agenda for PPR 5, as set out in annexes 11 and 12, respectively, for approval by MEPC 71. Correspondence groups established at this session 18.4 The Sub-Committee established correspondence groups on the following subjects, due to report to PPR 5:

.1 consideration of the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping (see paragraph 9.4);

.2 standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated

amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI (see paragraph 10.9); and

.3 development of part IV of the IMO Dispersant Guidelines (see

paragraph 13.2). Arrangements for the next session 18.5 The Sub-Committee, taking into account the decisions made under the respective agenda items, anticipated that the following groups may be established at PPR 5: .1 Working Group on Evaluation of safety and pollution hazards of chemicals; .2 Working Group on Ballast water management; .3 Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships; .4 Drafting Group on OPRC Guidelines; and .5 Drafting Group on Use of electronic record books, whereby the Chair, taking into account the submissions received on the respective subjects, would advise the Sub-Committee well in time before PPR 5 on the final selection of such groups. Intersessional meeting 18.6 The Sub-Committee, having noted that MEPC 69 had approved the holding of an intersessional meeting of the ESPH Working Group in 2017, endorsed by C 116, invited the Committee to approve the holding of an intersessional meeting of the group in 2018, for endorsement by the Council. Date of the next session 18.7 The Sub-Committee noted that its fifth session has tentatively been scheduled to take place from 5 to 9 February 2018.

PPR 4/21


19 ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR FOR 2018 In accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Marine Environment Protection Committee, the Sub-Committee unanimously re-elected Mr. S. Oftedal (Norway) as Chair and Dr. F. Fernandes (Brazil) as Vice-Chair, both for 2018. 20 ANY OTHER BUSINESS Guidelines for the use of more than one Engine Operational Profile (Map) 20.1 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 69, having considered document MEPC 69/19/1 (Norway), proposing the development of guidelines for the use of more than one Engine Operational Profile (Map), together with commenting documents MEPC 69/19/3 (EUROMOT) and MEPC 69/19/4 (United States), had referred the proposal to PPR 4 for detailed consideration and advice, so that an informed decision with regard to the proposed new output could be taken at MEPC 71 (MEPC 69/21, paragraphs 19.6 and 19.7). 20.2 In this regard, the Sub-Committee considered document PPR 4/20 (United States), providing information with respect to Engine Operational Profiles (Maps) and explaining why the use of more than one Map for engine certification should not be allowed. 20.3 In the ensuing discussion the following comments, inter alia, were, made:

.1 the use of more than one Map would lead to a relaxation of NOX emission requirements and, therefore, should not be allowed;

.2 multiple Maps are already in use but the provisions set out in MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code 2008 are not clear as to whether they are allowed or not;

.3 the acceptability of the use of more than one Map should be considered by a working group;

.4 the use of multiple Maps can reduce CO2 emissions from marine diesel engines while NOX emissions would increase, therefore, further consideration of the implications of their use is needed; and

.5 the use of more than one Map could be considered under the engine group concept and should be clarified in the NOX Technical Code 2008.

Instructions to the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 20.4 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships, established under agenda item 9, to develop a definition for an Engine Operational Profile (Map); consider the proposal for the development of guidelines for the use of more than one Map; and advise the Sub-Committee accordingly, taking into account documents MEPC 69/19/1, MEPC 69/19/3, MEPC 69/19/4 and PPR 4/20 and comments and proposals made in plenary.

Consistent implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit under regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI

20.5 The Sub-Committee recalled that MEPC 70 had confirmed 1 January 2020 as the effective date of implementation for ships to comply with the 0.50% m/m sulphur content of fuel oil requirement, as set out in regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI. Recognizing

PPR 4/21


concerns expressed regarding the implementation of the requirement, MEPC 70 agreed to forward document MEPC 70/5/2 (Japan et al.) and relevant comments made in plenary to PPR 4, for further consideration. MEPC 70 also instructed the Sub-Committee to draft a justification and scope for a new output on what additional measures may be developed to promote consistent implementation of the 0.50% global sulphur limit, for consideration at MEPC 71. 20.6 The Sub-Committee had for its consideration the following documents:

.1 PPR 4/20/1 (Peru), commenting on document MEPC 70/5/2 and requesting to evaluate the procedure for adequately implementing the 0.50% sulphur limit, taking into account actual individual data per fuel oil manufacturer and per country;

.2 PPR 4/20/2 (Norway), proposing some additional actions for discussion in

relation to the enforcement of the sulphur limit in regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI, including fuel oil sampling, prohibition to carry high sulphur fuel oil, continuous onboard monitoring of SOX emissions and distribution of annual reports in relation to fuel oil notifications;

.3 PPR 4/20/3 (ICS et al.), proposing that the scope for the new output should

focus on measures in four areas that are critical to effective implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit: initial transition issues; impact on machinery systems; verification issues and mechanisms; and any regulatory amendments or guidelines;

.4 PPR 4/20/4 and PPR 4/20/5 (Japan), providing draft text for the justification

for a new output on consistent implementation of the 0.50% global sulphur limit, including the checklists for identifying administrative requirements and burdens and for considering human element issues by IMO bodies;

.5 PPR 4/20/6 (IBIA), providing several elements for discussion related to

developing a plan to achieve consistent implementation of the 0.50% global sulphur limit, including a realistic timescale for effective and uniform global implementation, fuel oil quality and possible scrubber installation bottleneck; and

.6 PPR 4/20/7 (IPIECA), proposing to develop guidance to allow ships to

continue to use fuel oil with a sulphur level above 0.50% under specific conditions and during a strictly limited period of time, to mitigate a peak demand for 0.50% sulphur fuel oil and proposing the consideration of cases where ships cannot obtain sufficient amounts of compliant fuel oils to complete their journey.


.1 supplying fuel oil with a sulphur content exceeding 0.50% to a ship which does not have an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS) should be prohibited;

.2 preparations required by refineries to supply compliant fuel oils and the

availability of compliant fuel oil globally in 2020 should be further considered;

PPR 4/21


.3 provisions to prohibit the supply of non-compliant fuel oil to ships which do not have an EGCS are not needed as strict implementation of port State control would ensure compliance;

.4 supply to and/or carriage of non-compliant fuel oil by ships not having an

EGCS should not be restricted as this may prevent the use of new technologies;

.5 continuous SOX emission monitoring should not be required, noting that even

for demonstrating compliance an EGCS only requires such continuous monitoring under Scheme B;

.6 the installation of valves that can be opened and closed remotely using GPS

signals is premature and should be further considered when fuel oil supply has been stabilized following the effective date of the sulphur cap;

.7 the scope of a new output should be general in nature and therefore the four

areas identified in paragraph 9 of document PPR 4/20/3 would be a good framework and should be further considered by the Working Group;

.8 the use by ships of non-compliant fuel oil after 1 January 2020 in order to

consume such fuel oils received before that date, or for ships that have contracted the installation of EGCS, should not be allowed as it would provide an incentive to not comply by the effective date and may delay implementation;

.9 ISO is finalizing a revision of Standard 8217 Petroleum products — Fuels

(class F) — Specifications of marine fuels, and that a future revision will take into account the implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit;

.10 there are many uncertainties associated with the implementation of

regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI and these need to be appropriately recognized by regulatory authorities when it comes to enforcement;

.11 the practicalities of amending MARPOL Annex VI within the time available

before the effective date enters into force means consideration needs to be given as to what additional measures can be developed;

.12 capacity building, including the use of technology; updating national

regulations to ensure consistent implementation; and port State control training and analysis tools need to be considered;

.13 differentiated regional and/or time shifted implementation should not be

supported; and .14 safety concerns related to the use of 0.50% sulphur fuel oils should be

considered by the Maritime Safety Committee. 20.8 Following discussion, the Sub-Committee agreed that the new output should have highest priority; should not change the Committee's decision on the effective date of implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit; and should be kept general to allow for the accommodation of any emerging implementation issues.

PPR 4/21


Instructions to the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships 20.9 Following consideration, the Sub-Committee instructed the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships, established under agenda item 9, to finalize a justification and scope for a new output on what additional measures may be developed to promote consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI, using documents PPR 4/20/4 and PPR 4/20/5 as the basis and taking into account documents MEPC 70/5/2, PPR 4/20/1, PPR 4/20/2, PPR 4/20/3, PPR 4/20/6 and PPR 4/20/7 and comments made in plenary. Oil Spill Monitoring Handbook 20.10 The Sub-Committee noted document PPR 4/INF.5 (Australia), providing information on a new and comprehensive Oil Spill Monitoring Handbook which has been published by the Australian Government to assist with preparing and planning for undertaking monitoring during a maritime oil spill. Report of the Working Group 20.11 Having considered the relevant parts of the report of the Working Group on Prevention of air pollution from ships (PPR 4/WP.6, paragraphs 30 to 43 and annex 5), the Sub-Committee took action as described in the following paragraphs. Guidelines for the use of more than one Engine Operational Profile (Map) 20.12 The Sub-Committee noted that the Working Group had agreed to the following draft definition for "Engine Operational Profile (Map)" for the purposes of the NOX Technical Code 2008:

"The emission performance resulting from the application of a particular set of NOX influencing settings as a function principally of engine speed and load as applied by an electronic engine management system. Those settings may relate to, but are not limited to, fuel injection, charge air/exhaust valve operation and charge air or exhaust bypass/wastegate controls. Variation from settings is only allowed using approved auxiliary control devices as defined in regulation 2.4 of MARPOL Annex VI."

20.13 The Sub-Committee invited MEPC 71 to approve the new output on "Development of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code on the use of multiple engine operational profiles (Maps) for marine diesel engines", with the following scope:

"Consider whether multiple engine operational profiles (Maps) should be allowed, and if so, what regulatory controls should be applied, noting that these may also need to include amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code 2008, and if not allowed, then what amendments would be necessary to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code 2008 to explicitly prohibit multiple engine operational profiles (Maps)."

Consistent implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit under regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI 20.14 The Sub-Committee agreed to the draft justification and scope for a new output on "Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI", as set out in annex 13, for approval by MEPC 71.

PPR 4/21


20.15 Having concurred with the agreement of the Working Group that intersessional work is required to complete the work in a timely and expeditious manner, the Sub-Committee invited submissions to MEPC 71 commenting on the scope of the proposed new output, including suggestions as to how the work can be organized towards the implementation date. 21 ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMITTEE 21.1 The Marine Environment Protection Committee, at its seventy-first session, is invited to:

.1 endorse the evaluation of products and their respective inclusion in

lists 1 and 3 of MEPC.2/Circ.22, with validity for all countries and with no expiry date (paragraph 3.3.2);

.2 endorse the evaluation of cleaning additives and their inclusion in annex 10

of MEPC.2/Circ.22 (paragraph 3.3.4); .3 endorse the evaluation of cleaning additives and their inclusion in the next

revision of the MEPC.2/Circular, i.e. MEPC.2/Circ.23 to be issued in December 2017 (paragraph 3.12);

.4 subject to concurrent approval by MSC 98, approve, in principle, the draft

revised chapter 21 of the IBC Code, pending finalization of the revision of chapters 17 and 18 of the Code, for subsequent circulation of all three revised chapters with a view to adoption (paragraph 3.14 and annex 1);

.5 approve, subject to concurrent approval by MSC 98, the draft Assembly

resolution on the Code for the Transport and Handling of Hazardous and Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk on Offshore Support Vessels (OSV Chemical Code), for submission to A 30, with a view to adoption (paragraph 5.6 and annex 3);

.6 note the outcome of the Sub-Committee's consideration of document

MEPC 70/4/16 concerning uncertainties on ballast water sampling for compliance monitoring of the BWM Convention, i.e. that the Sub-Committee did not agree with the proposal to amend article 9 of the BWM Convention but took relevant parts of the document into account when considering a standardized format for operation logging data (paragraphs 6.9 and 6.10);

.7 approve the draft BWM circular on Guidance on methodologies that may be

used for enumerating viable organisms (paragraph 7.5 and annex 4);

.8 note the outcome of the Sub-Committee's consideration of matters related to System Design Limitations (SDL) for type approved ballast water management systems, i.e. that more information was needed and further proposals on the matter were invited (paragraphs 7.6 and 7.7);


MEPC 70/4/11 on a standardized format for operation logging data of ballast water management systems, i.e. that the Sub-Committee was not able to conclude on the matter and invited relevant submissions to a future session (paragraphs 7.8 to 7.10);

.10 note that the Sub-Committee agreed the updated version of the Manual and

instruct the Ballast Water Review Group to finalize sections 12.2.3 and 17.2

PPR 4/21


of the draft manual entitled Ballast Water Management – How to do it, with a view to finalization and approval of the Manual for publication (paragraphs 8.9 and 8.11 and annex 5);

.11 note the progress made on the consideration of the impact on the Arctic of

emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping, including the timeline developed for the finalization of the work (section 9);

.12 adopt the draft MEPC resolution on the 2017 Guidelines for the discharge of

exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water (paragraph 11.9 and annex 6);

.13 note that no submissions had been received under the output "Improved and

new technologies approved for ballast water management systems and reduction of atmospheric pollution" for the last two consecutive sessions, and advise on whether this output should be retained for the next biennium (paragraph 12.1);

.14 approve the draft OPRC Model Training Courses and authorize the

Secretariat, when preparing course materials for publication, to effect any editorial correction that may be identified, as appropriate (paragraphs 14.6 to 14.8 and annex 7);


MEPC 70/4/10 on a draft unified interpretation for implementing regulation B-4 (Ballast water exchange) of the BWM Convention, i.e. that the Sub-Committee invited proposals to PPR 5 for further consideration (paragraphs 15.1 to 15.6);

.16 approve the unified interpretation of regulation 36.2.10 of MARPOL Annex I

(paragraph 15.9 and annex 8);

.17 adopt the draft MEPC resolution on 2017 Guidelines addressing additional aspects to the NOX Technical Code 2008 with regard to particular requirements related to marine diesel engines fitted with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems (paragraph 17.9 and annex 9);

.18 amend the title of the output on "Revision of the 2011 SCR Guidelines" to read "Revision of certification requirements for SCR systems under the NOX Technical Code 2008" (paragraph 17.9);

.19 note the biennial status report of the Sub-Committee for the current biennium

(paragraph 18.2 and annex 10); .20 approve the proposed biennial agenda of the Sub-Committee for

the 2018-2019 biennium and the provisional agenda for PPR 5 (paragraph 18.3 and annexes 11 and 12);

.21 approve the holding of an intersessional meeting of the ESPH Working

Group in 2018 (paragraph 18.6); .22 note the outcome of the Sub-Committee's consideration of document

MEPC 69/19/1 containing a proposal for a new output on the development of guidelines for the use of more than one Engine Operational Profile (Map)

PPR 4/21


and approve the new output on "Development of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code on the use of multiple engine operational profiles (maps) for marine diesel engines", for inclusion in the Sub-Committee's biennial agenda for 2018-2019 and the provisional agenda for PPR 5, taking into account the proposed scope of the work (paragraphs 20.12 and 20.13);

.23 approve the new output on "Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3

of MARPOL Annex VI", for inclusion in the Sub-Committee's biennial agenda for 2018-2019 and the provisional agenda for PPR 5, taking into account the justification for such a new output (paragraph 20.14 and annex 12);

.24 note the Sub-Committee's view that intersessional work is required to

complete the work on the proposed output in paragraph 21.23 in a timely and expeditious manner and that the Sub-Committee had invited submissions to MEPC 71 commenting on the scope of the proposed new output, including suggestions as to how the work can be organized towards the implementation date (paragraph 20.15); and

.25 approve the report in general. 21.2 The Maritime Safety Committee, at its ninety-eighth session, is invited: .1 subject to concurrent approval by MEPC 71, to approve, in principle, the draft

amendments to the IBC Code on revised chapter 21, pending finalization of the revision of chapters 17 and 18 of the Code, for subsequent circulation of all three revised chapters and with a view to adoption (paragraph 3.14 and annex 1); and

.2 subject to concurrent approval by MEPC 71, to approve the draft Assembly

resolution on the Code for the Transport and Handling of Hazardous and Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk on Offshore Support Vessels (OSV Chemical Code), for submission to A 30, with a view to adoption (paragraph 5.6 and annex 3).

***

PPR 4/21 Annex 1, page 1


ANNEX 1

DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL CODE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT OF SHIPS CARRYING DANGEROUS CHEMICALS IN BULK

(IBC Code)

(REVISED CHAPTER 21) Chapter 21 Criteria for assigning carriage requirements for products subject to the IBC Code 21.1 Introduction 21.1.1 The following criteria are used for the determination of pollution classification and assignment of appropriate carriage requirements for bulk liquid cargoes being assessed for entry into the IBC Code or lists 1, 3 or 4 of the MEPC.2/Circular. 21.1.2 In developing such criteria, every effort has been made to follow the criteria and cut off points developed under the Globally Harmonized System (GHS). 21.1.3 Although the criteria are intended to be closely defined in order to establish a uniform approach, it must be emphasized that where human experience or other factors indicate the need for alternative arrangements, these shall always be taken into account. Where deviations from the criteria have been recognized, they shall be properly recorded with justifications. 21.2 Contents 21.2.1 This chapter contains the following:

.1 minimum safety and pollution criteria for products subject to chapter 17 of the IBC Code;

.2 criteria used to assign the minimum carriage requirements for products that

meet the safety or pollution criteria to make them subject to chapter 17 of the IBC Code;

.3 criteria used for determining special requirements in chapter 15 of the

IBC Code to be included in column o of chapter 17 of the IBC Code; .4 criteria used for determining special requirements in chapter 16 of the

IBC Code to be included in column o of chapter 17 of the IBC Code; .5 definitions of properties used within this chapter; .6 information on the use of the GESAMP Hazard Ratings; and .7 information on the application of the SVC/LC50 ratio method.

21.2.2 The information included in parentheses following the classification criteria throughout this chapter refers to the GESAMP Hazard Profile ratings set out in appendix I of MARPOL Annex II under the "Abbreviated legend to the revised GESAMP Hazard Evaluation



procedure". The full listing of GESAMP Hazard Profile ratings for evaluated substances are published annually in the GESAMP Composite List as a PPR Circular. It should be noted that ratings in parentheses (based on estimation methods applied by GESAMP) are considered as equivalent to ratings without parentheses for the purpose of assigning carriage requirements. 21.3 Minimum safety and pollution criteria for products subject to chapter 17 of the

IBC Code 21.3.1 Products are deemed to be hazardous and subject to chapter 17 of the IBC Code if they meet one or more of the following criteria:

.1 inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 20 mg/L/4h (see paragraph 21.7.1.3) (C3 = 1, 2, 3 or 4);

.2 dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 2000 mg/kg (see paragraph 21.7.1.2) (C2 = 1, 2, 3, or 4);

.3 oral LD50/ATE ≤ 2000 mg/kg (see paragraph 21.7.1.1) (C1 = 1, 2, 3, or 4);

.4 toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (see paragraph 21.7.2) (D3 = C, M, R, N, T, or I);

.5 cause skin sensitization (see paragraph 21.7.3) (D3 = Ss); .6 cause respiratory sensitization (see paragraph 21.7.4) (D3 = Sr); .7 corrosive to skin (see paragraph 21.7.5) (D1 = 3, 3A, 3B, or 3C); .8 with a Water Reactive Index (WRI) of ≥ 1 (see paragraph 21.7.6); .9 require inertion, inhibition, stabilization, temperature control or tank

environmental control in order to prevent a hazardous reaction (see definitions in paragraph 21.7.10);

.10 flashpoint < 23°C; and have an explosive/flammability range (expressed as

a percentage by volume in air) of ≥ 20%; .11 auto-ignition temperature of ≤ 200°C; and .12 classified as pollution category X or Y or meeting the criteria for rules 11

to 13 in table 2 in paragraph 21.4.5.2. 21.4 Criteria used to assign the minimum carriage requirements for products that

meet the minimum safety or pollution criteria to make them subject to chapter 17 of the IBC Code

21.4.1 Column a – Product name 21.4.1.1 A standardized chemical name, preferably assigned on the basis of the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) or the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) system, shall be used as far as possible. However, where this is unnecessarily complex, then a technically correct and unambiguous alternative name may be used.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjJhejTxOTPAhWHCcAKHUTkBf4QFggeMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fiupac.org%2F&usg=AFQjCNFu1HieFMTUUpqWydH4GTB1bFhaFQ&sig2=mlGp7EWI52m5MHbPZhpS3A



21.4.2 Column b – Deleted. 21.4.3 Column c – Pollution category 21.4.3.1 Column c identifies the pollution category assigned to each product in accordance with MARPOL Annex II, based on table 1 below (see MARPOL Annex II, appendix I). Table 1 – Guidelines for the categorization of Noxious Liquid Substances

Rule

A1 Bio-

accumulation

A2 Bio-

degradation

B1 Acute

toxicity

B2 Chronic toxicity

D3 Long-term

health effects

E2 Effects on

marine wildlife and on benthic habitats

Cat

1 ≥ 5

X 2 ≥ 4 4

3 NR 4

4 ≥ 4 NR CMRTNI1

5 4

Y

6 3

7 2

8 ≥ 4 NR Not 0

9 ≥ 1

10 Fp, F or S

If not Inorganic

11 CMRTNI1

12 Any product not meeting the criteria of rules 1 to 11 and 13 Z

13 All products identified as: ≤ 2 in column A1; R in column A2; blank in column D3; not Fp, F or S (if not organic) in column E2; and 0 (zero) in all other columns of the GESAMP Hazard Profile

OS

21.4.4 Column d – Hazards 21.4.4.1 An "S" is assigned to column d if any of the safety criteria described in paragraphs 21.3.1.1 to 21.3.1.11 are met. 21.4.4.2 A "P" is assigned to column d if the product meets the criteria for assigning ship type 1 to 3 as defined by rules 1 to 14 in the table 2. 21.4.5 Column e – Ship type 21.4.5.1 Assignment of ship types is carried out from both a pollution and safety perspective. The basic criteria for assigning ship types from a pollution perspective is carried out based on the GESAMP Hazard Profile, shown in table 2. An explanation of the details in the columns is provided in appendix I of MARPOL Annex II.

1 Applies if the D3 rating contains any of these letters or any combination thereof.



21.4.5.2 The following criteria are used to assign the ship type:

Ship type 1: Inhalation LC50/ATE≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4) and SVC/LC50 ≥ 20; and/or Dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 50 mg/kg (C2 = 4); and/or WRI = 3; and/or

Auto-ignition temperature ≤ 65C; and/or Explosive range ≥ 50% v/v in air and the flashpoint < 23°C; and/or Rules 1 or 2 of the table 2 shown in 21.4.5.2 (below).

Ship type 2:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4) and SVC/LC50 < 20; or Inhalation2 LC50/ATE > 0.5 mg/L/4h – ≤ 2mg/L/4h (C3 = 3) and SVC/LC50 ≥ 2; and/or Dermal LD50/ATE > 50 mg/kg – ≤ 200 mg/kg (C2 = 3); and/or WRI = 2; and/or Auto-ignition temperature ≤ 200oC; and/or Explosive range ≥ 40% v/v in air and the flashpoint < 23°C; and/or Any product meeting the criteria of rules 3 to 10 in table 2.

Ship type 3:

Any of the minimum safety or pollution criteria for bulk liquid cargoes subject to chapter 17 of the IBC Code not meeting the requirements for ship types 1 or 2 and not meeting rule 15 of table 2 shown in 21.4.5.2 (below).

Table 2 – Assignment of ship types based on the GESAMP Hazard Profile

Rule A1 A2 B1 B2 D3 E2 Ship Type

1 ≥ 5 1

2 ≥ 4 NR 4 CMRTNI3

3 ≥ 4 NR CMRTNI3

2

4 4

5 ≥ 4 3

6 NR 3

7 ≥ 1

8 Fp

9 CMRTNI3 F

10 ≥ 2 S

11 ≥ 4

3 12 NR

13 ≥ 1

14 All other category Y Substances

15 All other category Z Substances

All "Other Substances" (OS) NA

2 Products with a density >1025 kg/m3 (sinkers) or a water solubility of >50% (dissolvers) that are assigned to

Ship Type 2 based on the inhalation toxicity criteria, should be re-assigned to Ship Type 3.

3 Applies if the D3 rating contains any of these letters or any combination thereof.



21.4.6 Column f – Tank type 21.4.6.1 The tank type is assigned according to the following criteria: Tank type 1G: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4) and SVC/LC50 ≥ 1000; and/or

Dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 50 mg/kg (C2 = 4); and/or; WRI=3; and/or Auto-ignition temperature ≤ 65°C; and/or Explosive range ≥ 40% v/v in air and the flashpoint < 23°C. Based on expert judgement, tank type 1G may be required for specific products (e.g. for molten sulphur, hydrochloric acid)

Tank type 2G: Any of the minimum safety or pollution criteria for bulk liquid cargoes subject to chapter 17 or the IBC Code not meeting the requirements for tank type 1G.

21.4.7 Column g – Tank vents 21.4.7.1 The tank venting arrangements are assigned according to the following criteria:

Controlled: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2, 3 or 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or Toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I); and/or Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or Special carriage control needed; and/or Flashpoint ≤ 60oC; and Corrosive to skin (≤ 4h exposure). (D1 = 3A, 3B, or 3C).

Open: Any of the minimum safety or pollution criteria for bulk liquid cargoes subject to chapter 17 or the IBC Code not meeting the requirements for controlled tank vents.

21.4.8 Column h – Tank environmental control 21.4.8.1 The tank environmental control conditions are assigned according to the following criteria:

Inert: Auto-ignition temperature ≤ 200C; and/or

Reacts with air to cause a hazard; and/or Explosive range ≥ 40% and the flashpoint < 23°C.

Dry: WRI > 1 Pad: Only applies to specific products identified on a case by case basis. Vent: Only applies to specific products identified on a case by case basis. No: Where the above criteria do not apply (inerting requirements may be

required under SOLAS)



21.4.9 Column i – Electrical equipment 21.4.9.1 If the flashpoint of the product is ≤ 60oC or the product is heated to within 15oC of its flashpoint then the electrical equipment required are assigned according to the following criteria, otherwise "–" is assigned in column i' and i":

.1 Column i' – Temperature class:

T1 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 450oC T2 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 300oC but < 450oC T3 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 200oC but < 300oC T4 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 135oC but < 200oC T5 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 100oC but < 135oC T6 Auto-ignition temperature ≥ 85oC but < 100oC

.2 Column i'' – Apparatus group:

Apparatus group MESG at 20oC

(mm) MIC ratio

product/methane

IIA > 0.90 > 0.80

IIB > 0.50 to ≤ 0.90 > 0.45 to ≤ 0.80

IIC ≤ 0.50 ≤ 0.45

.1 The tests shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures

described in IEC 60079-1-1:2002 and IEC 79-3.

.2 For gases and vapours it is sufficient to make only one determination of either the Maximum Experimental Safe Gap (MESG) or the Minimum Igniting Current (MIC) provided that:

for Group IIA: the MESG > 0.90 mm or the MIC ratio > 0.80 for Group IIB: the MESG is > 0.50 mm and ≤ 0.90 mm; or

the MIC ratio is > 0.50 and ≤ 0.80 for Group IIC: the MESG is ≤ 0.50 mm or the MIC ratio is

≤ 0.45

.3 It is necessary to determine both the MESG and the MIC ratio when:

.1 The MIC ratio determination only has been made, and the ratio is between 0.80 and 0.90, when an MESG determination will be required;

.2 The MIC ratio determination only has been made, and the

ratio is between 0.45 and 0.50, when an MESG determination will be required; or

.3 The MESG only has been found, and is between 0.50 mm

and 0.55 mm, when an MIC ratio determination will be required.



.3 Column i"' Flashpoint:

> 60°C Yes ≤ 60°C No Non-flammable NF

21.4.10 Column j – Gauging 21.4.10.1 The gauging equipment is assigned according to the following criteria:

Closed: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or

Dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 1000 mg/kg (C2 = 2, 3 or 4); and/or Toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I);

and/or Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or Severely corrosive to skin (≤ 3 min exposure) (D1= 3C).

Restricted: Inhalation LC50/ATE >2 - ≤10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2), unless in accordance

with 21.7.12; and/or Special carriage control indicates inerting required; and/or Highly corrosive to skin (> 3 min - ≤1h exposure) (D1 = 3B); and/or Flashpoint ≤ 60C.

Open: Any of the minimum safety or pollution criteria for bulk liquid cargoes

subject to chapter 17 or the IBC Code not meeting the requirements for closed or restricted gauging.

21.4.11 Column k – Vapour detection 21.4.11.1 The vapour detection equipment is assigned according to the following criteria:

Toxic (T): Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2, 3, or 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12, and/or

Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or

Toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I).

Flammable (F): Flashpoint ≤ 60oC No (No): Where the above criteria do not apply

21.4.12 Column l – Fire protection equipment 21.4.12.1 The appropriate firefighting media are defined as being appropriate according to the

following criteria related to the properties of the product:



Solubility > 10% (> 100000 mg/L) A Alcohol-resistant foam Solubility ≤ 10% (≤ 100000 mg/L) A Alcohol-resistant foam; and/or B Regular foam WRI = 0 C Water spray (generally used as a

coolant and can be used with A and/or B providing that the WRI = 0)

WRI ≥1 D Dry chemical No No requirements under this Code4

Note: all appropriate media shall be listed.

21.4.13 Column m – Deleted 21.4.14 Column n – Emergency equipment 21.4.14.1 The requirement to have personnel emergency equipment on board is identified by "Yes" in column n according to the following criteria:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4); unless in accordance with 21.7.12 and/or Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or Severely corrosive to skin (≤ 3 min exposure) (D1 = 3C); and/or WRI = 2.

No: indicates that the above criteria do not apply. 21.5 Column o – Criteria for special requirements in chapter 15

21.5.1 The assignment of special requirements in column o shall normally follow clear criteria based on the data supplied in the reporting form. Where it is considered appropriate to deviate from such criteria, this shall be clearly documented in such a way that it can easily be retrieved on demand.

21.5.2 The criteria for making reference to the special requirements identified in chapters 15 and 16 are defined below with comments where relevant.

21.5.3 Paragraphs 15.2 to 15.10 and 15.20

21.5.3.1 Paragraphs 15.2 to 15.10 and 15.20 identify specific products by name with special carriage requirements that cannot be easily accommodated in any other way.

21.5.4 Paragraph 15.11 – Acids

21.5.4.1 Paragraph 15.11 applies to all acids unless they: .1 are organic acids – when only paragraphs 15.11.2 to 15.11.4 and

paragraphs 15.11.6 to 15.11.8 apply; or .2 do not evolve hydrogen – when paragraph 15.11.5 need not apply.

4 This applies where a product as identified as NF in column i''' (see paragraph 21.4.9.1.3).



21.5.5 Paragraph 15.12 – Toxic products 21.5.5.1 All of paragraph 15.12 is added to column o according to the following criteria:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or the product is a respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or the product is toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I).

21.5.5.2 Paragraphs 15.12.3 and 15.12.4 are added to column o according to the following

criterion:

Inhalation LC50/ATE > 2 - ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2), unless in accordance with 21.7.12 21.5.5.3 Paragraph 15.12.3.2 is added to column o according to the following criteria:

Dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 1000 mg/kg (C2 = 2, 3, or 4); and/or Oral LD50/ATE ≤ 300 mg/kg (C1 = 2, 3, or 4).

21.5.6 Paragraph 15.13 – Cargoes protected by additives 21.5.6.1 The requirement to assign paragraph 15.13 to column o is based on the information related to the product's tendency to polymerize, decompose, oxidize or undergo other chemical changes which may cause a hazard under normal carriage conditions, but which would be prevented by the addition of appropriate additives. 21.5.7 Paragraph 15.14 – Cargoes with a vapour pressure greater than atmospheric

at 37.8°C 21.5.7.1 The requirement to assign paragraph 15.14 to column o is based on the following criterion:

Boiling point ≤ 37.8oC 21.5.8 Paragraph 15.16 – Cargo contamination 21.5.8.1 Paragraph 15.16.1 is deleted. 21.5.8.2 Paragraph 15.16.2 is added to column o according to the following criterion: WRI>1 21.5.9 Paragraph 15.17 – Increased ventilation requirements 21.5.9.1 Paragraph 15.17 shall be added to column o according to the following criteria:

Inhalation LC50/ATE > 0.5 - ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or Toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I); and/or Highly to severely corrosive to skin (≤ 1h exposure time) (D1 = 3B or 3C).



21.5.10 Paragraph 15.18 – Special cargo pump-room requirements 21.5.10.1 Paragraph 15.18 shall be added to column o according to the following criterion:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12 21.5.11 Paragraph 15.19 – Overflow control 21.5.11.1 Paragraph 15.19 shall be added to column o according to the following criteria:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or Dermal LD50/ATE ≤ 1000 mg/kg (C2 = 2, 3, or 4); and/or Oral LD50/ATE ≤ 300 mg/kg (C1 = 2, 3, or 4); and/or Respiratory sensitizer (D3 = Sr, see also paragraph 21.7.4); and/or Severely corrosive to skin (≤ 3 min exposure) (D1 = 3C); and/or Auto-ignition temperature ≤ 200oC; and/or Explosive range ≥ 40% v/v in air and flashpoint < 23°C; and/or Classified as ship type 1 on pollution grounds.

21.5.11.2 Only paragraph 15.19.6 shall apply if the product has any of the following properties:

Inhalation LC50/ATE > 2 mg/L/4h - ≤10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2), unless in accordance with 21.7.12; and/or Dermal LD50/ATE > 1000 mg/kg - ≤ 2000 mg/kg (C2 = 1); and/or Oral LD50/ATE > 300 mg/kg - ≤ 2000 mg/kg (C1 = 1); and/or Skin sensitizer (D3=Ss); and/or Highly corrosive to skin (> 3 min - ≤ 1h exposure) (D1 = 3B); and/or Flashpoint ≤ 60oC; and/or Classified as ship type 2 on pollution grounds; and/or Pollution category X or Y.

21.5.12 Paragraph 15.21 –Temperature sensors 21.5.12.1 Paragraph 15.21 is added to column o according to the heat sensitivity of the product. This requirement is related to pumps in cargo pump-rooms only. 21.6 Column o – Criteria for special requirements in chapter 16. 21.6.1 Paragraphs 16.1 to 16.2.5 and 16.3 to 16.5 21.6.1.1 These apply to all cargoes and so are not referenced specifically in column o. 21.6.2 Paragraph 16.2.6 21.6.2.1 Paragraph 16.2.6 is added to column o for products, which meet the following criteria: Pollution Category X or Y and viscosity ≥ 50 mPa·s at 20oC 21.6.3 Paragraph 16.2.9 21.6.3.1 Paragraph 16.2.9 is added to column o for products, which meet the following criterion: Melting point ≥ 0oC.



21.6.4 Paragraph 16.6 – Cargo not to be exposed to excessive heat 21.6.4.1 Paragraphs 16.6.2 to 16.6.4 are added to column o for products, which are identified as requiring temperature control during carriage. 21.7 Definitions 21.7.1 Acute mammalian toxicity LC50 is the concentration in air, LD50 is the amount (dose) of test substance, which causes mortality to 50% of a test species. ATE refers to a dose (concentration) range or extrapolated dose (concentration) leading to lethal effects in mammals, equivalent to an LC50 or LD50. 21.7.1.1 Acutely toxic if swallowed

Oral toxicity (LD50/ATE) GESAMP Hazard Profile Rating C1 Hazard Level mg/kg

High ≤ 5 4

Moderately High > 5 - ≤ 50 3

Moderate > 50 - ≤ 300 2

Slight > 300 - ≤ 2000 1

Negligible > 2000 0

21.7.1.2 Acutely toxic in contact with skin

Dermal toxicity (LD50/ATE) GESAMP Hazard Profile Rating C2 Hazard Level mg/kg

High ≤ 50 4

Moderately high > 50 - ≤ 200 3

Moderate > 200 - ≤ 1000 2

Slight > 1000 - ≤ 2000 1

Negligible > 2000 0

21.7.1.3 Acutely toxic by inhalation5

Inhalation toxicity (LC50/ATE) GESAMP Hazard Profile Rating C3 Hazard level mg/L/4h

High ≤ 0.5 4

Moderately high > 0.5 - ≤ 2 3

Moderate > 2 - ≤ 10 2

Slight > 10 - ≤ 20 1

Negligible > 20 0

21.7.2 Toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure 21.7.2.1 A product is classified as toxic to mammals by prolonged exposure if it meets any of the following criteria: it is known to be, or suspected of being carcinogenic, mutagenic, reprotoxic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic or exposure below the lethal dose is known to cause Specific Target Organ Toxicity.

5 All inhalation toxicity data are assumed to be for vapours and not mists or sprays, unless otherwise indicated.



21.7.2.2 Such effects may be identified from the GESAMP Hazard Profile of the product (D3 = C, M, R, T, N, or I) or other recognized sources of such information. 21.7.3 Skin sensitization 21.7.3.1 A product is classified as a skin sensitizer:

.1 if there is evidence in humans that the substance can induce sensitization by skin contact in a substantial number of persons; or

.2 where there are positive results from an appropriate test.

21.7.3.2 Such effects are identified in the GESAMP Hazard Profile for the product (D3 = Ss). 21.7.4 Respiratory sensitization 21.7.4.1 A product is classified as a respiratory sensitizer:

.1 if there is evidence in humans that the substance can induce specific respiratory hypersensitivity; and/or

.2 where there are positive results from an appropriate test; and/or .3 where the product does not have a GESAMP Hazard Profile and is identified

as a skin sensitizer and there is no evidence to show that it is not a respiratory sensitizer.

21.7.4.2 Such effects are identified in the GESAMP Hazard Profile for the product (D3 = Sr) or other recognized sources of such information, if no profile exists. 21.7.5 Corrosive to skin

Hazard Level Exposure time to cause full

thickness necrosis of skin

GESAMP Hazard Profile

rating (D1) Severely corrosive to skin ≤ 3 min 3C

Highly corrosive to skin > 3 min - ≤ 1h 3B (36)

Moderately corrosive to skin > 1h - ≤ 4h 3A

6 Note: A rating of 3 in the D1 column of the GESAMP Hazard Profile, without any additional letter notation

(A, B or C), means that the severity of corrosivity has not been established. For such cases, a rating of 3 is understood to be equivalent to a rating of 3B for the purpose of assigning carriage requirements.



21.7.6 Water reactive substances7 21.7.6.1 These are classified as follows:

Water Reactive Index (WRI)

Definition

3 Any chemical which is extremely reactive with water and produces large quantities of flammable, toxic or corrosive gas or aerosol

2 Any chemical which, in contact with water, may produce a toxic, flammable or corrosive gas or aerosol

1 Any chemical which, in contact with water, may generate heat or produce a non-toxic, non-flammable or non-corrosive gas

0 Any chemical which, in contact with water, would not undergo a reaction to justify a value of 1, 2 or 3

21.7.7 Air reactive substances 21.7.7.1 Air reactive substances are products that react with air to cause a potentially hazardous situation, e.g. the formation of peroxides that may cause an explosive reaction. 21.7.8 Electrical apparatus – Temperature class

(for products which either have a flashpoint of ≤ 60oC or are heated to within 15°C of their flashpoint)

21.7.8.1 The temperature class is defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) as:

"The highest temperature attained under practical conditions of operation within the rating of the apparatus (and recognized overloads, if any, associated therewith) by any part of any surface, the exposure of which to an explosive atmosphere may involve a risk."

21.7.8.2 The temperature class of the electrical apparatus is assigned by selecting the Maximum Surface Temperature which is closest to, but less than, the product's auto-ignition temperature (see 21.4.9.1.1). 21.7.9 Electrical apparatus – Apparatus group

(for products with a flashpoint of ≤ 60oC) 21.7.9.1 This refers to intrinsically safe and associated electrical apparatus for explosive gas atmospheres which the IEC divide into the following groups:

Group I: for mines susceptible to firedamp (not used by IMO); and Group II: for applications in other industries – further sub-divided according to its

Maximum Experimental Safe Gap (MESG) and/or the Minimum Igniting Current (MIC) of the gas/vapour into groups IIA, IIB and IIC.

21.7.9.2 This property cannot be determined from other data associated with the product; it has to be either measured or assigned by assimilation with related products in a homologous series.

7 Products that are corrosive to skin are also deemed to be corrosive by inhalation.



21.7.10 Special carriage control conditions 21.7.10.1 Special carriage control conditions refer to specific measures that need to be taken in order to prevent a hazardous reaction. They include:

.1 Inhibition: the addition of a compound (usually organic) that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion, oxidation or polymerization;

.2 Stabilization: the addition of a substance (stabilizer) that tends to keep a

compound, mixture or solution from changing its form or chemical nature. Such stabilizers may retard a reaction rate, preserve a chemical equilibrium, act as antioxidants, keep pigments and other components in emulsion form or prevent the particles in colloidal suspension from precipitating;

.3 Inertion: the addition of a gas (usually nitrogen) in the ullage space of a tank

that prevents the formation of a flammable cargo/air mixture; .4 Temperature control: the maintenance of a specific temperature range for

the cargo in order to prevent a hazardous reaction or to keep the viscosity low enough to allow the product to be pumped; and

.5 Padding and venting: only applies to specific products identified on a case

by case basis. 21.7.11 Flammable cargoes 21.7.11.1 A cargo is defined as flammable according to the following criteria:

IBC Code descriptor Flashpoint (degrees Centigrade)

Highly flammable < 23

Flammable ≤ 60 but ≥ 23

21.7.11.2 It should be noted that flashpoints of mixtures and aqueous solutions need to be measured unless all of the components are non-flammable. 21.7.11.3 It should be noted that the carriage of bulk liquid cargoes that have a flashpoint of ≤ 60°C are subject to other SOLAS regulations. 21.7.12 Application of the SVC/LC50 ratio method 21.7.12.1 If the vapour pressure and the molecular weight of a substance are known, an estimate of the maximum vapour concentration in a closed compartment (e.g. a tank) can be calculated. This is called the Saturated Vapour Concentration (SVC). 21.7.12.2 The hazard quotient SVC/LC50

8 is a substance specific value for the velocity of a vapour for achieving a hazardous concentration when emerging from a liquid source (e.g. leak, spillage or tank ventilation), and can be used in the assignment of specific carriage requirements related to inhalation toxicity.

8 ATE values can be considered as equivalent to LC50 values. See paragraph 21.7.1.



21.7.12.3 If a solid substance is transported in an aqueous solution, the vapour pressure9 of this solid rather than that of water may be used in the calculation of the SVC/LC50 ratio. 21.7.12.4 Application of the SVC/LC50 ratio for assigning Ship Type and Tank type 21.7.12.4.1 For the assignment of ship type and tank type, as set out in paragraph 21.4.5 and 21.4.6, the application of the SVC/LC50 ratio method is optional. Should this method be used, the vapour pressure at 20°C shall be used when calculating the SVC/LC50 ratio. 21.7.12.4.2 The SVC mg/L of a substance should be calculated as follows:

1000/2410

101300

20@/ 6

0

xmolL

molg

M

xxPa

PaCpressureVapourLmgSVC

w

where MW is the molecular weight of the substance. 21.7.12.4.3 The SVC/LC50 ratio should be calculated as follows:

hLmgLC

LmgSVCLCSVC

4//

//

50

50

21.7.12.5 Application of the SVC/LC50 ratio for assigning carriage requirements 21.7.12.5.1 For the carriage requirements listed in 21.7.12.5.5, the application of the SVC/LC50 ratio method is optional. If the SVC/LC50 ratio method is used in the assignment of these carriage requirements, the vapour pressure at 40°C shall be used when calculating the SVC/LC50 ratio. If the carriage temperature is higher than 40°C, then the SVC/LC50 ratio should be calculated at that temperature. 21.7.12.5.2 The SVC (mg/l) of a substance should be calculated as follows:

1000/]26[10

101300

40@/ 6

0

xmolL

molg

M

xxPa

PaCpressureVapourLmgSVC

w

where MW is the molecular weight of the substance.

21.7.12.5.3 The SVC/LC50 ratio should be calculated as follows:

hLmgLC

LmgSVCLCSVC

4//

//

50

50

21.7.12.5.4 The SVC (mg/L) formula described in 21.7.12.5.2 is standardized for calculations at 40°C. When using the vapour pressure at higher temperatures in the calculations, the formula must be amended accordingly.

9 If this data is not available, an estimate may be used.



21.7.12.5.5 For the following carriage requirements, the SVC/LC50 ratio method, calculated at 40°C or higher, may be used as an alternative to the acute inhalation toxicity criteria given in paragraphs 21.4 and 21.5:

.1 Column g – Tank vents

Assignment of controlled venting is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2, 3, or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2

.2 Column j – Gauging

Closed gauging is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2 but restricted gauging is required.

Restricted gauging is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE > 2 - ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2

.3 Column k – Vapour detection

Assignment of toxic vapour detection is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2, 3, or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2

.4 Column n – Emergency Equipment

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2

.5 Column o – Special requirements in chapter 15 15.12.1 and 15.12.2 are not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2 15.12.3 and 15.12.4 are not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE >2 - ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2 15.17 is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2 15.18 is not required based on the inhalation hazard only if: Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 0.5 mg/L/4h (C3 = 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2



15.19 is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if:

Inhalation LC50/ATE ≤ 2 mg/L/4h (C3 = 3 or 4) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2, but 15.19.6 applies 15.19.6 is not required based on the inhalation hazard only, if: Inhalation LC50/ATE > 2 - ≤ 10 mg/L/4h (C3 = 2) and SVC/LC50 < 0.2

***



ANNEX 2

PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR ESPH 23 Opening of the session

1 Adoption of the agenda

2 Decisions of other bodies

3 Evaluation of products

4 Evaluation of cleaning additives

5 Review of MEPC.2/Circular – Provisional classification of liquid substances transported in bulk and other related matters

6 Revision of the IBC Code – Chapters 17 and 18

7 Revision of MEPC.1/Circ.512 – Guidelines for the provisional assessment of liquid substances transported in bulk

8 Guidance for the assessing and classifying products under Annexes I and II of MARPOL

9 Amendments to MARPOL Annex II related to the discharge of cargo residues and tank washings of high-viscosity, solidifying and persistent floating products

10 Proposed provisional agenda for ESPH 24

11 Report to the Sub-Committee

***



ANNEX 3

DRAFT ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION

CODE FOR THE TRANSPORT AND HANDLING OF HAZARDOUS AND NOXIOUS LIQUID SUBSTANCES IN BULK ON OFFSHORE SUPPORT VESSELS

(OSV CHEMICAL CODE)

(The text of the draft Assembly resolution on the OSV Chemical Code is contained in document PPR 4/21/Add.1)

***



ANNEX 4

DRAFT BWM CIRCULAR

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT OF SHIPS' BALLAST WATER AND SEDIMENTS, 2004

Guidance on methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms for

type approval of ballast water management systems 1 The Marine Environment Protection Committee at its seventy-first session (3 to 7 July 2017) approved the Guidance on methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms for type approval of ballast water management systems, prepared by the Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response at its fourth session (16 to 20 January 2017), as set out in the annex. 2 Member Governments are invited to bring the annexed Guidance to the attention of all parties concerned.



ANNEX

GUIDANCE ON METHODOLOGIES THAT MAY BE USED FOR ENUMERATING VIABLE ORGANISMS FOR TYPE APPROVAL OF

BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Introduction 1 The Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), at its seventieth session, adopted the 2016 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) (resolution MEPC.279(70)), which call for guidance on methodologies for determining the viability of organisms. 2 The purpose of this Guidance is to provide information on methodologies used for enumerating viable organisms during the type approval of ballast water management systems (BWMS), in order to verify that they meet the ballast water performance standard described in regulation D-2 of the BWM Convention. 3 The selection of analytical methodologies used for determining the concentration of viable organisms is critical in providing confidence that a BWMS complies with the ballast water performance standard described in regulation D-2 of the BWM Convention. 4 This Guidance should be read in conjunction with the BWM Convention, the 2016 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8), the Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2) (resolution MEPC.173(58)), the Guidelines for port State control under the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.252(67)) and the Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in accordance with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1, as may be revised). 5 As instructed by MEPC 64, sampling and analysis procedures to be used for enforcement of the BWM Convention should be no more stringent than what is required for type approval of BWMS. In addition, the Administration should take into consideration methodologies identified for compliance assessment within the Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in accordance with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1, as may be revised). General principles 6 Sampling and analysis should be consistent with the Guidelines (G8) and undertaken to the satisfaction of the Administration to assess compliance of BWMS with the ballast water performance standard described in regulation D-2 of the BWM Convention. 7 Analytical methodologies should determine viability by assessing the presence of one or more essential characteristics of life, such as structural integrity, metabolism, reproduction, motility, or response to stimuli. 8 Analytical methodologies should be appropriate to the ballast water treatment technology being tested. 9 Analytical methodologies should provide assurance that organisms not removed from ballast water have been killed or rendered harmless to the environment, human health, property and resources.

http://globallast.imo.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/MEPC.252-67.pdf



10 The table in this Guidance contains methodologies that may be used to enumerate viable organisms. This Guidance remains open for addition of new methodologies as new or revised methodologies become available. 11 Analytical methodologies should be validated to the satisfaction of the Administration. The methodologies in the table below have been validated to the satisfaction of at least one Administration.

Table: Methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms for type approval of BWMS

Methodologies for enumerating

viable organisms

Organism size class

or indicator

Assessed criteria of viability

Examples of how the

methodologies are applied

Applicability to ballast water treatment

technologies

FDA/CMFDA + Motility

Viable organisms ≥ 10 µm to < 50 µm

Membrane integrity, enzyme activity, motility

PPR 4/7, appendix 1; PPR 4/INF.10

Suitable for assessing treatment technologies intended to kill or remove organisms

MPN Dilution Culture + Motility

Viable organisms ≥ 10 µm to < 50 µm

Reproduction capacity, motility

PPR 4/7, appendix 2

Suitable for assessing all treatment technologies

***



ANNEX 5

DRAFT MANUAL ON BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT – HOW TO DO IT

PREFACE This manual is published by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to provide advice on the process of ratification, implementation and enforcement of the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004 (hereafter the Convention). This manual provides useful practical information to Governments, particularly those of developing countries, Administrations, shipowners, port State control authorities, environmental agencies and other stakeholders on the implications of ratifying, implementing and enforcing the BWM Convention. The aim is to encourage the further ratification and proper implementation and enforcement of the Convention. However, it should be noted that, for legal purposes, the authentic text of the Convention should always be consulted. It is emphasized that the annex to the Convention will be a living document that develops over time, once the Convention enters into force. This manual does not attempt to be fully up to date and the reader is strongly advised to consult any updates of the Convention and relevant guidelines through IMO documents and publications.



TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction: The Ballast Water Management Convention PART I: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS 2 Structure and components of the Convention 3 Rights and obligations under the Convention PART II: MEETING OBLIGATIONS 4 Means of meeting obligations PART III: LEGAL ASPECTS 5 Integrating the Convention into national law 6 Legal aspects of enforcement PART IV: IMPLEMENTATION 7 Implementing Section A – General provisions 8 Implementing Section B – Management and control requirements for ships 9 Implementing Section C – Special requirements in certain areas 10 Implementing Section D – Standards for ballast water management 11 Implementing Section E – Survey and certification requirements for ballast water

management 12 Ballast water sampling 13 Approval of ballast water management systems (Guidelines (G8)) 14 Approval of ballast water management systems using Active Substances (Procedure (G9)) 15 Duties of shipowners 16 Ballast water management options available for ships PART V: TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF ENFORCEMENT 17 Non-compliance detection and response 18 Guidance for port State control PART VI: ORGANIZATION 19 Training of personnel 20 Guidelines, circulars and other IMO publications relevant to the BWM Convention



ABBREVIATIONS BWE: Ballast Water Exchange BWMP: Ballast Water Management Plan BWMS: Ballast Water Management Systems BWRB: Ballast Water Record Book COLREG: Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea DBPS: Disinfection By-Products DMEL: Derived Minimal Effect Levels DNEL: Derived No-Effect Levels FPSOs: Floating Production Storage and Offloading Units FSUs: Floating Storage Units GISIS: Global Integrated Shipping Information System HES: Human Exposure Scenario IBWMC: International Ballast Water Management Certificate LL: International Convention on Load Lines MADC: Maximum Allowable Discharge Concentration MARPOL: International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships MEPC: Marine Environment Protection Committee MoUs: Memoranda of Understanding PBT: Persistency, Bioaccumulation and Toxicity PNEC: Predicted No Effect Concentrations PSC: Port State Control PSCO: Port State Control Officer QAPP: Quality Assurance Project Plan QMP: Quality Management Plan RO: Recognized Organization SDL: System Design Limitations SMS: Safety Management System SRA: Same Risk Area SOLAS: International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea UNCLOS: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea



CHAPTER 1 – Introduction: The Ballast Water Management Convention 1.1 Harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens present a major threat to marine ecosystems and shipping has been identified as a significant pathway for introducing species to new environments. The problem has increased with the introduction of steel hulls, allowing ships to use water instead of solid materials as ballast, and in particular over the last few decades as trade and traffic volumes have expanded. The effects of the introduction of non-indigenous species have, in many areas of the world, been devastating. Quantitative data show the rate of bio-invasions is continuing to increase significantly. As the volumes of seaborne trade continue overall to increase, the problem may not yet have reached its peak. 1.2 The Convention aims to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate risks to the environment, human health, property and resources arising from the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens, by establishing standards and procedures for the management and control of ships' ballast water and sediments. 1.3 Under the Convention, ships to which the Convention's provisions apply will be required to manage their ballast water and sediments to a certain standard, according to a ship-specific ballast water management plan (BWMP). Ships will also have to carry a ballast water record book (BWRB) and an International Ballast Water Management Certificate (IBWMC). The ballast water management standards will be phased in over a period of time. Initially, ships subject to the Convention's ballast water requirements will be required to exchange ballast water mid-ocean. In due course these ships are required to meet a performance standard that limits the number of organisms in discharged ballast water. 1.4 Parties to the Convention are given the option to take additional measures, which are subject to criteria set out in the Convention and relevant guidelines for the uniform implementation of the Convention.

1.5 The Convention consists of articles and annexes which include legal requirements, technical standards and regulations for the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments. There are various resolutions and circulars developed by the Organization relating to the Convention.

PART I: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS CHAPTER 2 – Structure and components of the Convention

The Ballast Water Management Convention is a legal instrument composed of various parts (preamble, articles and annex). The preamble conveys agreed principles and the articles of the Convention bind the contracting Parties with the regulations set out in the annex to the Convention. The Convention is supplemented by resolutions and circulars that provide technical and procedural guidance which is non-mandatory. These components are described briefly below as they are referred to in this manual.

2.1 Articles of the International Convention for the Control and Management of

Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004

Article 1 – Definitions Article 2 – General obligations Article 3 – Application Article 4 – Control of the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens

through ships' ballast water and sediments Article 5 – Sediment reception facilities



Article 6 – Scientific and technical research and monitoring Article 7 – Survey and certification Article 8 – Violations Article 9 – Inspection of ships Article 10 – Detection of violations and control of ships Article 11 – Notification of control actions Article 12 – Undue delay to ships Article 13 – Technical assistance, cooperation and regional cooperation Article 14 – Communication of information Article 15 – Dispute settlement Article 16 – Relationship to international law and other agreements Article 17 – Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession Article 18 – Entry into force Article 19 – Amendments Article 20 – Denunciation Article 21 – Depositary Article 22 – Languages

2.2 Annex – Regulations for the control and management of ships' ballast water

and sediments 2.2.1 Section A – General provisions This section includes definitions and provisions related to application, exemptions, exceptions and equivalent compliance, as follows:

Regulation A-1 Definitions Regulation A-2 General applicability Regulation A-3 Exceptions Regulation A-4 Exemptions Regulation A-5 Equivalent compliance

2.2.2 Section B – Management and control requirements for ships This section highlights the requirements for ships to implement the Convention, including the timeline for transitioning to the performance standard and the locations permitted for BWE. This includes having on board and implementing a BWMP approved by the Administration (refer to Guidelines (G4), resolution MEPC.127(53)), maintaining a ballast water record book to log ballast water operations and adopting measures for sediment management (refer to Guidelines (G1), resolution MEPC.152(55)). Regulations include:

Regulation B-1 Ballast water management plan Regulation B-2 Ballast water record book Regulation B-3 Ballast water management for ships Regulation B-4 Ballast water exchange Regulation B-5 Sediment management for ships Regulation B-6 Duties of officers and crew



2.2.3 Section C – Special requirements in certain areas This section covers the process relating to additional measures that a Party, individually or jointly with other Parties, may impose on ships to prevent, reduce, or eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through ships' ballast water and sediments. Regulations include:

Regulation C-1 Additional measures Regulation C-2 Warnings concerning ballast water uptake in certain areas and

related flag State measures Regulation C-3 Communication of information

Guidance can be found in Guidelines (G13) (resolution MEPC.161(56)).

2.2.4 Section D – Standards for ballast water management This section details the standards and requirements for ballast water management. The standards include those for ballast water exchange and for biological performance, related to water quality for discharge. There are also requirements for the approval of BWMS, testing and evaluation of prototype ballast water treatment technologies, and review criteria. Regulations include:

Regulation D-1 Ballast water exchange standard Regulation D-2 Ballast water performance standard Regulation D-3 Approval requirements for ballast water management systems Regulation D-4 Prototype ballast water treatment technologies Regulation D-5 Review of standards by the Organization

2.2.5 Section E – Survey and certification requirements for ballast water management This section details the requirements for the survey of ships and the issuance of an International Ballast Water Management Certificate. Regulations include:

Regulation E-1 Surveys Regulation E-2 Issuance or endorsement of a Certificate Regulation E-3 Issuance or endorsement of a Certificate by another Party Regulation E-4 Form of the Certificate Regulation E-5 Duration and validity of the Certificate

2.2.6 Appendices to annex There are two appendices to the annex to the Convention, containing a model Certificate and ballast water record book, to be followed by Administrations and other stakeholders.

Appendix I Form of International Ballast Water Management Certificate Appendix II Form of ballast water record book

2.3 Technical guidelines 2.3.1 The following guidelines relating to the uniform implementation of the Convention have, inter alia, been developed and adopted starting from the 53rd session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 53). The guidelines are kept under review by the MEPC and will be updated as new technologies emerge and additional knowledge becomes available.



.1 Guidelines for sediment reception facilities (G1);

.2 Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2);

.3 Guidelines for ballast water management equivalent compliance (G3);

.4 Guidelines for ballast water management and the development of ballast water management plans (G4);

.5 Guidelines for ballast water reception facilities (G5);

.6 Guidelines for ballast water exchange (G6);

.7 Guidelines for risk assessment under regulation A-4 of the BWM Convention (G7);

.8 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8);

.9 Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of Active Substances (G9);

.10 Guidelines for approval and oversight of prototype ballast water treatment technology programmes (G10);

.11 Guidelines for ballast water exchange design and construction standards (G11);

.12 Guidelines on design and construction to facilitate sediment control on ships (G12);

.13 Guidelines for additional measures regarding ballast water management including emergency situations (G13);

.14 Guidelines on designation of areas for ballast water exchange (G14); and

.15 Guidelines on port State control under the BWM Convention.

2.3.2 In addition to the above, there are numerous resolutions and circulars developed by the Organization and the list of these is included in chapter 20.

2.4 Actions required

Those concerned with the ratification and implementation of the Convention should study the documents outlined in this chapter. Further study and in-depth understanding will be necessary for those concerned with particular aspects of ratification and implementation. Information on the legal and practical implementation is given in the other chapters of this manual.

CHAPTER 3 – Rights and obligations under the Convention

Many of the articles of the Convention set down definite requirements. These are in addition to the regulations of the annex and some require specific actions by the Parties. The resolutions and circulars adopted by the Organization relevant for the Convention are non-mandatory. However, these provide valuable technical and operational guidance that Parties to the Convention are encouraged to follow.

3.1 Definitions

3.1.1 Most of the definitions contained in article 1 are straightforward but a number of definitions are worth mentioning, in order to make it quite clear what the Convention does and does not cover.

3.1.2 With respect to the definition of "Administration", this means the Government of the State under whose authority the ship is operating. With respect to a ship entitled to fly a flag of any State, the Administration is the Government of that State. With respect to floating platforms, including floating storage units (FSUs) and floating production storage and offloading units (FPSOs), the Administration is the Government of the coastal State over which exploration and exploitation of the sea-bed is occurring.1

1 In the context of this manual "Administration" simply refers to the appropriate Government authority with

responsibility for implementing and/or enforcing the requirements of a legal instrument.



3.1.3 "Ballast water" means water with its suspended matter taken on board a ship to control trim, list, draught, stability or stresses of the ship. It is to be noted that this definition focuses on the function and purpose of the water, hence not all water present in a ship falls under the definition of "ballast water" (e.g. water present in the hopper area of a dredger). 3.1.4 "Ballast water management" means any mechanical, physical, chemical and/or biological process, used either singularly or in combination to remove, render harmless or avoid the uptake or discharge of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. 3.1.5 "Harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens" means aquatic organisms or pathogens which, if introduced into the sea, including estuaries, or into freshwater courses, may create hazards to the environment, human health, property or resources, impair biological diversity or interfere with other legitimate uses of such areas. 3.1.6 "Sediments" means matter settled out of ballast water within a ship. 3.1.7 "Ship" means a vessel of any type whatsoever operating in the aquatic environment and includes submersibles, floating craft, floating platforms, FSUs and FPSOs. 3.2 General obligations 3.2.1 Under article 2 (General obligations) Parties undertake to give full and complete effect to the provisions of the Convention and the annex in order to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments. Parties may also take, individually or jointly with other Parties, more stringent measures, consistent with international law. Parties should ensure that ballast water management practices do not cause greater harm than they prevent to their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of other States. 3.2.2 Furthermore, the Parties shall endeavour to cooperate under the auspices of the Organization to address threats and risks to sensitive, vulnerable or threatened marine ecosystems and biodiversity in areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction in relation to ballast water management and to avoid, as far as practicable, the uptake of ballast water with potentially harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. 3.3 Application 3.3.1 The Convention applies to:

.1 ships entitled to fly the flag of a Party; and .2 ships not entitled to fly the flag of a Party but which operate under the

authority of a Party. 3.3.2 The Convention does not apply to:

.1 ships not designed or constructed to carry ballast water; .2 ships of a Party which only operate in waters under the jurisdiction of that

Party, unless the Party determines that the discharge of ballast water from such ships would impair or damage their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of adjacent States;



.3 ships of a Party which only operate in waters under the jurisdiction of another Party, subject to the authorization of the latter Party for such exclusion. No Party shall grant authorization if doing so would impair or damage their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of adjacent or other States. Any Party not granting such authorization shall notify the Administration of the ship concerned that this Convention applies to such ship;

.4 ships which only operate in waters under the jurisdiction of one Party and on

the high seas, except for ships not granted an authorization pursuant to subparagraph .3, unless such Party determines that the discharge of ballast water from such ships would impair their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of adjacent or other States;

.5 any warship, naval auxiliary or other ship owned or operated by a State and

used, for the time being, only on government non-commercial service. However, each Party shall ensure, by the adoption of appropriate measures not impairing operations or operational capabilities of such ships owned or operated by it, that such ships act in a manner consistent, so far as is reasonable and practicable, with the Convention; and

.6 permanent ballast water in sealed tanks on ships, that is not subject to

discharge. 3.3.3 With respect to ships of non-Parties to this Convention, Parties shall apply the requirements of this Convention as may be necessary to ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to such ships. 3.3.4 The Organization developed Guidance on entry or re-entry of ships into exclusive operation within waters under the jurisdiction of a single Party (BWM.2/Circ.52). The Organization has also approved circulars on the application of the Convention to mobile offshore units and offshore support vessels (BWM.2/Circ.46 and BWM.2/Circ.44). 3.4 Control of the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through

ships' ballast water and sediments Each Party shall require that ships subject to the Convention comply with its requirements and shall take effective measures to ensure that those ships comply with those requirements. Furthermore, each Party shall develop national policies, strategies or programmes that promote the attainment of the objectives in the Convention for ports and waters under its jurisdiction. This includes creating a national approach to ballast water management by ships that are not subject to the Convention. The objectives of the Convention are set out in its preamble. 3.5 Sediment reception facilities Under article 5 (Sediment reception facilities) Parties undertake to ensure that ports and terminals where cleaning or repair of ballast tanks occurs have adequate facilities for the reception of sediments. Guidance for sediment reception facilities can be found in the technical Guidelines (G1) (resolution MEPC.152(55)).



3.6 Scientific and technical research and monitoring Article 6 (Scientific and technical research and monitoring) calls for Parties individually or jointly to promote and facilitate scientific and technical research on ballast water management and to monitor the effects of ballast water management in waters under their jurisdiction. 3.7 Survey and certification Ships are required to be surveyed and certified (article 7 – Survey and certification). Other Parties should accept a certificate issued under the authority of a Party to the Convention. 3.8 Violations The Convention requires Parties to prohibit violations and to establish sanctions under their law and take procedures against offenders. Article 8 also requires that Administrations informed of violations shall investigate the matter. National legislation implementing the Convention should reflect these requirements and a maritime Administration is required to fulfil these obligations. The sanctions shall be adequate in severity to discourage violations of the Convention. 3.9 Inspection of ships Ships may be inspected by PSCOs (article 9 – Inspection of ships), who can verify that the ship has a valid certificate and BWMP, inspect the BWRB and/or sample the ship's ballast water. A detailed inspection may be carried out if the ship does not carry a valid certificate or there are clear grounds to justify it. In such cases, the Convention states that the Party carrying out the inspection shall take such steps as will ensure that the ship shall not discharge ballast water until it can do so without presenting a threat of harm to the environment, human health, property or resources. 3.10 Detection of violations and control of ships If a ship is detected to have violated this Convention, the flag State, and/or the port State, may take steps to warn, detain or exclude the ship. If the ship poses a threat to the environment, human health, property or resources, the Party in whose water the ship is operating shall prohibit discharges until the threat is removed. Parties to the Convention agree to cooperate in monitoring compliance with the Convention and detecting violations. A Party may also inspect a ship when it enters the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction, if a request for an investigation is received from any Party, together with sufficient evidence that a ship is operating or has operated in violation of a provision in this Convention. 3.11 Notification of control actions If an inspection indicates a violation, the ship shall be notified. A report shall be forwarded to the Administration, including any evidence of the violation. In addition, the RO responsible for the issuance of Certificates shall be notified. The port State authority concerned shall also notify the next port of call about the violation including all relevant information if it did not take necessary steps to prevent the ship from discharging ballast water.



3.12 Undue delay to ships All possible efforts shall be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed. Where undue delay does occur, the ship is entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. A competent and efficient maritime Administration is required in order to fulfil this obligation. 3.13 Technical assistance, cooperation and regional cooperation Under article 13 (Technical assistance, cooperation and regional cooperation) Parties undertake, directly or through the Organization and other international bodies, as appropriate, in respect of the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments, to provide support for those Parties which request technical assistance to train personnel; to ensure the availability of relevant technology, equipment and facilities; to initiate joint research and development programmes; and to undertake other action aimed at the effective implementation of the Convention and of guidance developed by the Organization related thereto. 3.14 Communication of information Parties to the Convention undertake to provide the Organization with documents as follows (for circulation, where appropriate, of the information to all Parties):

.1 any requirements and procedures, including laws, regulations and guidelines, for implementation of the Convention;

.2 the availability and location of any reception facilities for the environmentally

safe disposal of ballast water and sediments; and .3 any requirements for information from a ship which is unable to comply with

the provisions of the Convention. 3.15 Dispute settlement Parties shall settle any dispute between them concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention using peaceful means of their own choice.

3.16 Relationship to international law and other agreements

Nothing in the Convention shall prejudice the rights and obligations of any State under customary international law as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 3.17 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession The Convention is open for accession by any State. States may become Parties to the Convention by ratification, acceptance, approval, or by accession.

3.18 Entry into force

Article 18 provides the conditions and timing of entry into force of the Convention, being twelve months after the date on which not less than thirty States, the combined merchant fleets of which constitute not less than 35% of the gross tonnage of the world's merchant shipping, have either signed it without reservation as to ratification, acceptance or approval, or have deposited the requisite instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession in accordance with article 17.



3.19 Amendments Article 19 provides the procedures for amendments to the Convention. It should be noted that any Party may propose an amendment to this Convention. Proposed amendments need to be submitted to the Secretary-General of the Organization or to a conference of Parties and amendments follow the procedure described in article 19.2. 3.20 Denunciation This Convention may be denounced by any Party at any time after the expiry of two years from the date on which this Convention enters into force for that Party. Denunciation shall be effected by written notification to the Depositary, to take effect one year after receipt or such longer period as may be specified in that notification. 3.21 Depositary The Convention is deposited with the Secretary-General of the Organization. 3.22 Languages The Convention is established in the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish languages.

PART II: MEETING OBLIGATIONS CHAPTER 4 – Means of meeting obligations 4.1 Participation 4.1.1 Ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to the Convention, and its subsequent implementation, require the participation of the following stakeholders, including but not limited to:

.1 Government of the State (the political body having power to conclude international agreements)

.2 Administration – legal; .3 Administration – maritime; .4 Shipowners and operators; and .5 Port authorities.

4.1.2 Each stakeholder should know exactly what its institutional rights, obligations and responsibilities are, the responsibilities of its staff and the requirements to be imposed on ships and ports. 4.1.3 As previously stated, in the context of this document Administration refers to the appropriate Government authority with responsibility for implementing and/or enforcing the requirements of a legal instrument.



4.2 Consultation When a State is considering ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the Convention, the organizations that fall within the stakeholder categories listed in paragraph 4.1 above should be consulted in order to be properly prepared to implement and enforce all of the obligations and requirements. 4.3 Government of the State 4.3.1 The political desire of a State to accept, approve, accede to or ratify the Convention is fundamental. The common principles adopted by Parties to the Convention, and their specific objectives in adhering to it, are set out in the preamble of the Convention. Governments may wish to become parties to the Convention because of:

.1 concerns relating to the environment, human health, property and resources; .2 concerns over water quality, which affects the population, or sea areas under

their jurisdiction; .3 desire to have uniform enforcement of the Convention; .4 benefits to their shipowners (worldwide acceptance of ships); .5 benefits to their ports (means of control of pollution); or .6 concern for the worldwide environment.

4.3.2 Advice to governments may come from the public at large, from their own maritime or environmental Administration and from their maritime industry. 4.4 Administration – legal Once the political desire has been established and a decision made to become a Party, it is necessary to consider the means of ratifying or acceding to and implementing the Convention in domestic law. 4.5 Administration – maritime The responsible Administration will have by far the greatest administrative task in the implementation of the Convention. It is likely that this body will provide advice to the legal branch and the Government of a State on the one hand, and will advise the shipping industry and port authorities on the other. The maritime Administration also has responsibility for matters including the approval of BWMS, the approval of BWMPs, and survey and certification requirements in accordance with relevant guidelines. 4.6 Shipowners and operators Shipowners will need to select and equip ships for their operational needs and train seafarers, especially their merchant marine officers, in order to meet the requirements of the Convention. This includes ensuring that the BWMP is being executed. An outline of these requirements is given in part IV of this manual (chapters 7 to 11) in line with the respective sections of the annex to the Convention. Further information on duties of the shipowners can be found in chapter 15.



4.7 Port authorities Port authorities may be requested to provide adequate sediment reception facilities as described in Guidelines (G1) (resolution MEPC.152(55)) and ballast water reception facilities capable of handling the quality and volume of the discharged water. Guidance on provisions for port reception facilities can be found in Guidelines (G5) (resolution MEPC.153(55)). 4.8 Obligations All stakeholders involved with the Convention need to consider and meet their obligations with respect to: .1 preparation of legislation, including regulations to implement the

Convention's requirements into their domestic law;

.2 capability for sampling and analysis of ballast water;

.3 adequate science capacity, e.g. to review ballast water risk assessments to address exemptions, additional measures or early warnings;

.4 survey and certification;

.5 inspection;

.6 design and construction requirements;

.7 equipment requirements;

.8 operational requirements;

.9 documentation;

.10 procedures; and

.11 agreements with other Governments.

4.9 Developing a compliance strategy for the Convention 4.9.1 Why compliance? Under article 8.2 of the Convention, any violation of its requirements within the jurisdiction of any Party shall be prohibited and sanctions shall be established under the law of that Party. In accordance with this obligation, a Party to the Convention will need to implement a range of monitoring, compliance and enforcement mechanisms. Enforcement of the Convention should primarily focus on preventing the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens and not simply on apprehending and punishing violators. The extent to which education, incentives, monitoring and policing programmes are used by a State to ensure compliance with the Convention depends upon the type of jurisdiction that the State enjoys over a ship. 4.9.2 Strategies for verifying compliance 4.9.2.1 An effective compliance programme should incorporate all of the following elements:

.1 compliance monitoring through routine inspections, surveys, and/or examinations (including arrangements for sampling and analysis of ballast water);

.2 reporting procedures; .3 adequate investigations of violations reported or otherwise detected;



.4 a system of adequate sanctions in respect of violations;

.5 education and public awareness programmes; and .6 cooperation and coordination with other Parties.

4.9.2.2 A compliance programme should be adaptable enough to allow compliance priorities to respond to prevailing circumstances. One or more of its elements may be more salient for a State Party depending on key variables, including the state of the national fleet, the type of ships calling at ports of the State Party, the emergence of new equipment, procedural Convention standards, the availability of human and technological resources within the Administration and the familiarity of relevant stakeholders with the Convention. 4.9.2.3 In setting priorities for a compliance strategy, the Administration should undertake an exercise to identify which ships have the highest potential for being in violation, or where a violation would be most significant. 4.9.3 Awareness Any compliance strategy should take into consideration that resources spent on education and prevention are likely to result in increased environmental protection through compliance and will also save resources that might have been spent on prosecution. Education and prevention strategies are necessary to sensitize all potential stakeholders about how they can assist in protecting the marine environment from the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. In this way, they may prove a cost-effective resource for Parties with limited financial or policing resources. 4.9.4 Cooperation and coordination of PSC Article 10.4 of the Convention, as well as several important resolutions, lay the ground work for the doctrine of cooperation and interchange as a mutual effort of enforcement among Parties to the Convention. Such cooperation is an important tool in fostering clarity and uniformity in implementation and compliance objectives, in collecting evidence and in enforcement procedures. Cooperation may take several forms, such as joint investigations of violations, supplying information about a particular ship, gathering evidence of a violation, and prosecutions. Reciprocal arrangements in respect of investigations and compliance monitoring will be particularly valuable for Parties which are geographically proximate and/or which share common mechanisms for enforcement. Such arrangements can be formally achieved through Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) on PSC. Nine MoUs on PSC are in existence worldwide (see Figure 1). Proper regional cooperation and exchange of boarding results among participating Administrations are an effective enforcement tool and can also reduce the requirement for individual States to board all vessels.



Figure 1: Overview of the nine MoUs on PSC

PART III: LEGAL ASPECTS

[CHAPTER 5 – Integrating the Convention into domestic law2

5.1 General It is assumed that every State Administration will have a legal department or lawyers, which may be attached to its Administration or to a larger administrative department such as, for example, a Department of Transport. It is further assumed, for the purposes of this manual, that these legal administrators (or lawyers) will have primary responsibility for the legislation that is necessary to implement the Convention. Whatever the form of the Administration, it must be considered desirable for a single body to be given the overall responsibility for ratification, legislation and implementation. The legal system will vary from State to State, but the principal legal actions necessary for integrating the Convention into national law and implementation are likely to be as outlined in Figure 2 and in the following paragraphs.

Figure 2: Integrating the Convention into domestic law and implementation

2 Chapters 5 and 6 are in square brackets because they are currently kept in abeyance pending a legal review

to be conducted by the Secretariat prior to the approval of the manual by the MEPC.

Administration

Enabling legislation

Ports

Order, regulations or other

subordinate legislation

Ships

Political decision to accede to the Convention



5.2 Parties to the Convention – instrument of accession 5.2.1 States may become Parties to the Convention by:

.1 signature not subject to ratification, acceptance, or approval; or .2 signature subject to ratification, acceptance, or approval, followed by

ratification, acceptance or approval; or .3 accession.

5.2.1.2 Ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument to that effect with the Secretary-General of the Organization. In acceding, governments indicate their acceptance and approval of the Convention and their readiness to implement its requirements. 5.3 Entry into force 5.3.1 The Convention shall enter into force twelve months after the date on which not less than thirty States, the combined merchant fleets of which constitute not less than 35% of the gross tonnage of the world's merchant shipping, have either signed it without reservation as to ratification, acceptance or approval, or have deposited the requisite instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession in accordance with article 17 of the Convention. 5.3.2 For States that have deposited an instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession in respect of the Convention after the requirements for entry into force thereof have been met, but prior to the date of entry in force, the ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall take effect on the date of entry into force of the Convention or three months after the date of deposit of the instrument, whichever is the later date. Any instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession deposited after the date on which the Convention enters into force shall take effect three months after the date of deposit. 5.3.3 After the date on which an amendment to the Convention is deemed to have been accepted under article 19, any instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession deposited shall apply to the Convention as amended. 5.4 Enabling legislation 5.4.1 It is necessary to consider whether existing legislation gives the power through which the Convention may be integrated into the national legal system. This facility may exist in maritime legislation such as a Mercantile Marine Act, Merchant Shipping Act, or similar legislation. A decision is then necessary on whether any such existing maritime legislation needs amending or whether new legislation, specifically for the purpose of implementing the Convention, is required. It is advisable to look at how other international maritime conventions, such as the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), the International Convention on Load Lines (LL), Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG), or the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), have been introduced. It is important that implementation of amendments to the Convention and associated resolutions and recommendations be permitted.



5.4.2 It should be noted that the Convention enters into force three months after the deposit of an instrument of accession. The implementing legislation should therefore enter into force no later than at that time. To ensure that this will be the case, the preparation of such legislation should be initiated well in advance of the accession to the Convention. This timing is obviously particularly important if the implementing legislation is to be adopted by a parliament, congress, etc. 5.5 Order The legal system of some States may permit regulations to be made directly under the enabling legislation; others require an "order" approved by their Government (e.g. parliament, assembly, congress, legislative assembly, etc.) to bring the various parts of subsidiary legislation into effect. 5.6 Regulations The regulations that compose the annex to the Convention can, to a large extent, be produced as national regulations with very minor changes. However, due to varying degree of jurisdiction needing to be maintained, some of the regulations may not be straightforward to reproduce in national legislation. CHAPTER 6 – Legal aspects of enforcement 6.1 What are violations? 6.1.1 It is important that legislation or regulations implementing the Convention establish the elements of a Convention violation such that enforcement personnel or courts are able to ascertain whether clear objective evidence of a violation is present. Unlike detecting violations in other international conventions (e.g. MARPOL Annex I), detecting marine organisms which exceed the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) may not be straightforward. While documentary evidence (such as the BWRB) plays a major role in detecting violations of the BWE standard in regulation D-1, scientific evidence (gathered primarily through the analysis of a ballast water discharge sample) is the key for detecting violations of the discharge standard in regulation D-2. Further information on BWE and discharge standards (regulations D-1 and D-2) can be found in chapter 10. 6.1.2 While it is recognized that States have different standards of proof under their individual legal systems, in general, States should allow for the reception of a wide variety of credible evidence, including circumstantial evidence, to indicate violations of the Convention. The gathering, presentation and admitting of evidence for violations must be carefully developed by States, where practicable in cooperation with other States, for the effective enforcement of the Convention. 6.2 Sanctions 6.2.1 Article 8.1 of the Convention states that any violation of the requirements of this Convention shall be prohibited and sanctions shall be established under the law of the Administration of the ship concerned, wherever the violation occurs. The Administration shall promptly inform the Party that reported the alleged violation, as well as the Organization, of any action taken. If the Administration has not taken any action within one year after receiving the information, it shall so inform the Party that reported the alleged violation. 6.2.2 Article 8.2 of the Convention states that any violation of the requirements of this Convention within the jurisdiction of any Party shall be prohibited and sanctions shall be established under the law of that Party.



6.2.3 The type of sanctions applicable to varying violations under the Convention is a matter for determination by the individual Party and may be a function of several legal, political and economic circumstances. Moreover, the approach to sanctions in civil law and in common law jurisdictions may also differ. As sanctions can be very effective as a compliance tool, it would be beneficial for States to prescribe sanctions that are in harmony with applicable systems in neighbouring States or territories. This would help to avoid the perception that some States have less stringent sanctions than others, which may in turn insinuate a "safe haven" to the potential violator. On the other hand, sanctions may take voluntary mitigation efforts and self-reporting into account. Such a progressive system is easier and less expensive to police and preserves prosecutorial assets for larger cases where substantial harm has occurred. 6.2.4 Flag States should adopt sanctions for those activities that defeat the purposes of the regulations, such as falsification of records required by the Convention. It is to be noted that there are requirements for BWMSs to incorporate control and monitoring equipment and to store the operational and performance data for at least 24 months. These data provide vital evidence on the operation and performance of the BWMS which can be cross referenced with the BWRB entries and ship log entries to identify potential violations. 6.2.5 Sanctions for these types of violations may be deemed criminal and could thereby serve as an important tool in promoting truthfulness in reporting, monitoring and other regulatory requirements. It is important to note that swift and certain sanctions for violations will have an important deterrent effect. It is also important to note that merely providing for the imposition of sanctions in national legislation will not, on its own, achieve significant benefits. Such sanctions should be supported by effective technical procedures for gathering evidence.]

PART IV: IMPLEMENTING THE REGULATIONS CHAPTER 7 – Implementing Section A: General provisions 7.1 Definitions 7.1.1 Seven terms are defined in regulation A-1: "anniversary date", "ballast water capacity", "company", "constructed", "major conversion", "from the nearest land" and "Active Substance". These seven terms are fundamental for the comprehension of various provisions of the Convention. 7.1.2 With regard to the term "major conversion", the IMO has adopted circular BWM.2/Circ.45, which clarifies that a new installation of BWMS should not be treated as a major conversion. The circular also clarifies what is meant by a "change of ship type" according to regulation A-1.5.2. 7.2 General applicability 7.2.1 Regulation A-2 is a key section that provides functional requirements for the Convention to achieve its goal. It states that, except where expressly provided otherwise, the discharge of ballast water shall only be conducted through ballast water management in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. 7.2.2 More generally, section A of the annex to the Convention deals with the scope of the regulations. When implementing the Convention, the Government of a State Party to the Convention first has to define precisely the scope of those regulations. For example, a decision needs to be made as to whether a Government wants to use the Convention as the basis for domestic ballast water requirements, or whether it will take a different approach to satisfying article 4.2.



7.3 Exceptions 7.3.1 Exceptions are circumstances where the requirements of regulation B-3, or any measures adopted by a Party pursuant to article 2.3 and section C, may not apply. Those circumstances are: .1 the uptake or discharge of ballast water and sediments necessary for the

purpose of ensuring the safety of a ship in emergency situations or saving life at sea; or

.2 the accidental discharge or ingress of ballast water and sediments resulting

from damage to a ship or its equipment:

- provided that all reasonable precautions have been taken before and after the occurrence of the damage or discovery of the damage or discharge for the purpose of preventing or minimizing the discharge; and

- unless the owner, Company or officer in charge willfully or recklessly

caused damage; or

.3 the uptake and discharge of ballast water and sediments when being used

for the purpose of avoiding or minimizing pollution incidents from the ship; or .4 the uptake and subsequent discharge on the high seas of the same ballast

water and sediments; or .5 the discharge of ballast water and sediments from a ship at the same location

where the whole of that ballast water and those sediments originated and provided that no mixing with unmanaged ballast water and sediments from other areas has occurred. If mixing has occurred, the ballast water taken from other areas is subject to ballast water management in accordance with the Annex to the Convention.

7.3.2 Ships that apply exceptions can only do so when facing those situations listed above. Those ships are otherwise required to comply with all other applicable regulations of the Convention. According to the PSC Guidelines (resolution MEPC.252(67)) the use of exceptions should be recorded in the BWRB including an appropriate reasoning that the exception was justified. 7.3.3 The first three cases in regulation A-3 are similar to those found in other maritime treaties, whereas the fourth and fifth are specific to ballast water and might raise issues to be addressed, therefore extra attention needs to be paid to them. 7.4 Exemptions 7.4.1 Regulation A-4 affords the government of a State or States the possibility, in the waters under their jurisdiction, to grant exemptions to certain ships so that they are not required to apply regulations B-3 (Ballast water management for ships) or C-1 (Additional measures).



7.4.2 While this regulation primarily addresses the port State authorities, the flag State authority should be involved to address enquiries raised by the port State authorities involved with the request, e.g. updating the BWMP. An exemption decision can only be granted if all States that may be affected by the exemption agree that the risk assessment demonstrates there is an acceptably low risk to the environment, human health, property and resources. 7.4.3 Therefore, the government of a State Party to the Convention needs to anticipate that work on its exemptions policy should be undertaken sufficiently in advance of the Convention entering into force, in order to be able to provide stakeholders with the necessary information to apply for an exemption. 7.4.4 Exemptions can be granted for a determined period, not exceeding five years, to certain ships and according to certain conditions:

– the ship operates exclusively between specified ports or locations;

– the ship takes up only ballast water coming from those specified ports or locations; and

– a risk assessment should be performed following Guidelines (G7) prior to the

exemption request. Administrations may grant exemptions in accordance with regulation A-4 based on the Same Risk Area (SRA) concept subject to consultation and agreement between States that may be affected by such exemptions.

7.4.5 Exemptions are meant to apply to individual ships or groups of similar ships on specified voyages or similar specified voyages and particular attention needs to be paid to short-sea shipping in this specific case. The exemptions are subject to intermediate review, and may need to be withdrawn where the actual risk associated with the voyage has increased substantially since the risk assessment was conducted. 7.4.6 The Guidelines for risk assessment under regulation A-4 of the BWM convention (G7) provide assistance in the granting of exemptions, including procedures for consulting on and granting exemptions, and for reviewing and withdrawing them. When being used these need to be adapted to the local conditions. These local conditions can include both biogeography and biodiversity and these conditions should be used by the Government of the State to define its exemptions policy and to ensure clear internal guidelines are followed in decision making. 7.4.7 The study of an exemption request and its possible granting procedure can be developed in three stages:

– risk assessment (according to Guidelines (G7)) when asking for exemption;

– study of this assessment by all the potentially affected States concerned; and

– communication of any granted exemption to the Organization.

7.4.8 The Parties may undertake the risk assessment themselves in order to grant exemptions, or require the shipowner or operator to undertake the risk assessment. In any event the Party granting an exemption is responsible for evaluating the risk assessment, verifying the data and information used and ensuring the risk assessment is conducted in a thorough and objective manner in accordance with Guidelines (G7).



7.5 Equivalent compliance 7.5.1 A simplified application of the Convention can be used in relation to certain pleasure craft and craft used for search and rescue, in accordance with regulation A-5 and taking into account the Guidelines for ballast water management equivalent compliance (G3) (resolution MEPC.123(53)). 7.5.2 Ships should aim to comply with the Convention, but otherwise achieve equivalent compliance instead. Amongst its provisions, the guidelines recommend, taking into account the nature of the ship, that ballast water should be exchanged prior to discharge in accordance with regulation B-4 (or otherwise managed in accordance with the requirements of the Administration) in order to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens to the maximum extent practicable. CHAPTER 8 – Implementing Section B – Management and control requirements for ships 8.1 Ballast water management for ships 8.1.1 The Convention requires, inter alia, the development of individual ships' BWMPs, the maintenance of appropriate records and the compliance with certain concentration-based discharge limits which are dependent on the date of construction and ballast-water capacity of the ship in question. 8.1.2 The Convention stipulates two standards for discharged ballast water. The D-1 standard covers BWE while the D-2 standard is a ballast water performance standard. The Convention requires either the D-1 or the D-2 standard after entry into force on 8 September 2017. 8.1.3 As per resolution A.1088(28), the applicable date of compliance with the D-2 standard is that of the first IOPP renewal survey after entry into force of the Convention for all existing ships. Ships constructed after entry into force will be required to meet the D-2 standard on delivery. 8.1.4 Article 4 of the Convention (Control of the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through ships' ballast water and sediments) calls for Parties to: .1 require ships to which the Convention applies flying their flag or operating

under their authority to comply with the requirements of the Convention and to take effective measures to ensure that those ships comply with those requirements; and

.2 with due regard to their particular conditions and capabilities, to develop

national policies, strategies or programmes for ballast water management in ports and waters under their jurisdiction that accord with, and promote, the attainment of the objectives of the Convention.

8.1.5 Compliance with the Convention can be achieved, inter alia, through the following options:

.1 as an interim measure exchange the ballast water as specified by regulation D-1 until regulation D-2 applies for the specific ship;

.2 treat the ballast water by using a type approved ballast water management

system to meet the performance standard in regulation D-2; or



.3 implement other methods of ballast water management accepted as alternatives to the requirements described in regulation B-3, paragraphs 1 to 5, provided that such methods ensure at least the same level of protection to the environment, human health, property or resources, and are approved in principle by the MEPC.

8.2 BWMS and other methods 8.2.1 BWMS, treatment methods and technologies have developed rapidly in preparation for the anticipated ratification and subsequent entry into force of the Convention. Current options include:

.1 mechanical treatment, e.g. filtration, separation or destruction;

.2 physical treatment, e.g. ultraviolet light, heat treatment, deoxygenation;

.3 chemical and electrochemical treatment. i.e. those making use of Active Substances;

.4 combinations of the above; and

.5 in addition, sediment management, either by separation and return to local

uptake water (compliant to the Convention) or by removal for disposal.

8.2.2 Alternative methods of compliance could include discharge of ballast water to an approved reception facility. Ships shall discharge ballast water in accordance with the standards set out in section D of the Convention and in accordance with regulation B-3. 8.2.3 More information on ballast water management options for ships can be found in chapter 16. 8.3 BWE 8.3.1 BWE allows for implementation of the Convention by initially requiring ships to carry out an exchange of ballast water taken in port or coastal areas with water from the open sea, defined as 200 nautical miles from the nearest land whenever possible, but in all cases at least 50 nautical miles from the nearest land, and in water at least 200 metres in depth. This procedure aims at reducing the number and viability of organisms discharged in ports or coastal areas following transportation in ballast tanks. Aquatic organisms taken up with ballast water from the open sea are likely to be far fewer in number and less capable of causing a transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens into the receiving coastal waters, particularly when these receiving waters are fresh. 8.3.2 A ship shall not be required to deviate from its intended voyage, or delay the voyage, in order to comply with any particular requirement for distances from the nearest land or water depths. A ship conducting BWE shall not be required to comply with regulation D-1 if the master reasonably decides that such exchange operation would threaten the ship's stability or in general the safety of the ship, its crew, or its passengers because of adverse weather, ship design or stress, equipment failure, or any other extraordinary condition. Further information on BWE methods can be found in chapter 16. 8.3.3 The Convention does not require the use of BWE once a ship is required to comply with the D-2 standard. The BWE standard (regulation D-1) and the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) are discussed further in chapter 10.



Designation of areas for BWE 8.3.4 The Organization has developed Guidelines on designation of areas for ballast water exchange (G14) (resolution MEPC.151(55)), addressing how States may designate areas, in consultation with adjacent or other States, as appropriate, where ships may conduct BWE. Generally there are four integral steps to follow in designating an area as a BWE area: .1 identification of the area, considering the legal aspects, navigational

constraints, etc.; .2 risk assessment; .3 designation of the area, in accordance with national and international laws

and obligations; and .4 communication to the Organization prior to implementation. 8.3.5 The use of designated ballast water exchange areas and any impacts on the aquatic environment, human health, property or resources of the port State or those of other States should be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis. Ballast water exchange in Polar areas 8.3.6 The BWMP for ships entering Polar waters needs to take into account the issues related to BWE in cold environments and in particular in Polar conditions. Further information can be found in the Guidelines for ballast water exchange in the Antarctic treaty area (resolution MEPC.163(56)) and in the Polar Code. 8.4 Sediment management 8.4.1 The Convention does not require ships to dispose of sediments; however, if they wish to do so they would have to do it in compliance with the BWMP. 8.4.2 Aquatic organisms can settle out of ballast water and can continue to exist within the sediments that accumulate within ballast water tanks. These organisms can survive for long periods after the water they were originally in has been discharged. They may thereby be transported from their natural habitat and discharged in another port or area where they may cause harm or damage to the environment, human health, property and resources. 8.4.3 Each Party to the Convention undertakes to ensure that, in ports and terminals designated by that Party where cleaning or repair of ballast tanks occurs, adequate facilities are provided for the reception of sediments. Such reception facilities shall operate without causing undue delay to ships and shall provide for the safe disposal of such sediments that does not impair or damage their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of other States. 8.4.4 Sediment management is essential for any form of ballast water management. Ships will not be able to comply with the Convention if proper disposal of sediments from ballast water management is not carried out on an adequate scale. Ships should, without compromising safety or operational efficiency, be designed and constructed with a view to minimize the uptake and undesirable entrapment of sediments, facilitate removal of sediments and provide safe access to allow for sediment removal and sampling. The Guidelines on design and construction to facilitate sediment control on ships (G12) (resolution MEPC.209(63)) provide details on ballast water tanks and how their internal structure should be designed to avoid the accumulation of sediments.



8.4.5 Ships should, during ballasting operations, as far as practicable, make every effort to limit the uptake of ballast water with potential high concentrations of sediments. 8.5 BWMP 8.5.1 The Convention requires every ship to carry a ship-specific BWMP approved by its flag State or a RO on behalf of the flag State. Regulation B-1 specifies that a BWMP shall: .1 detail safety procedures for the ship and the crew associated with ballast

water management as required by the Convention; .2 provide a detailed description of the actions to be taken to implement the

ballast water management requirements and supplemental ballast water management practices as set forth in the Convention;

.3 detail the procedures for the disposal of sediments, at sea and to shore; .4 include the procedures for the coordination of shipboard ballast water

management that involves discharge to the sea with the authorities of the State into whose waters such discharge will take place;

.5 designate the officer on board in charge of ensuring that the plan is properly

implemented; .6 contain the reporting requirements for ships provided for under

the Convention; and .7 be written in the working language of the ship. If the language used is

not English, French or Spanish, a translation into one of these languages shall be included.

8.5.2 In addition to the mandatory aspects of the BWMP listed above, the guidelines also offer more details and provide a standard format for the BWMP. A BWMP should, inter alia, contain: .1 plans/drawings and a description of the ballast system; .2 information on ballast water sampling points and sampling procedures; .3 operational or safety procedures and restrictions; .4 description of the method(s) used on board for the ballast water management

and sediment control, including procedures for the disposal and handling of sediments;

.5 duties of the ballast water management officer; .6 recording requirements; and .7 crew training and familiarization.

8.5.3 Pursuant to BWM.2/Circ.52, ships (e.g. mobile offshore units) that need to enter or re-enter into exclusive operation pursuant to article 3.2(b)-(d) should also include a procedure in their approved BWMP for thoroughly cleaning their ballast tanks, piping and equipment.



8.5.4 The BWMP should be reviewed taking into account guidelines developed by the IMO. Any changes would then need to be reapproved by the flag State or recognized organization on behalf of the flag State. The BWMP will be available for review by port State control inspectors and other authorities in connection with verifying compliance with the Convention's requirements. 8.5.5 The IMO has adopted circular BWM.2/Circ.40, which recognizes that regulation B-1 requires the BWMP to take into account guidelines developed by the Organization, but does not mandate specific compliance with Guidelines (G4). Although earlier guidance in resolution A.868(20) remains in effect, Guidelines (G4) have effectively superseded it. However, for practical reasons, the IMO decided that BWMPs approved in accordance with resolution A.868(20) should remain valid until the plan requires revision due to the installation of a BWMS. 8.6 BWRB 8.6.1 The Convention specifies that all ships shall have on board a BWRB, which shall at least contain the information specified in appendix II to the annex to the Convention (see regulation B-2.1). The BWRB may be in an electronic format, or integrated into other record/log book systems. Entries in the BWRB shall be signed by the officer in charge of the operation and each completed page shall be signed by the master. 8.6.2 All ballast water operations shall be fully recorded without delay and the entries in the BWRB should be made as follows: .1 when ballast water is taken on board; .2 whenever ballast water is circulated, transferred between tanks or treated for

ballast water management purposes; .3 when ballast water is discharged into the sea; .4 when ballast water is discharged to a reception facility; .5 accidental or other exceptional uptake or discharge of ballast water; .6 additional operational procedure and general remarks; .7 exemptions; and .8 exceptions including emergency procedures. 8.6.3 The minimum information to be entered in the BWRB (as detailed in appendix II) includes date/time and location, port or facility of uptake (latitude/longitude), depth if out of port, as well as estimated amount of ballast water uptake or discharge in cubic metres, and whether the BWMP was implemented prior to discharge. The BWRB entries shall be maintained on board the ship for a minimum period of two years after the last entry has been made and thereafter in the Company's control for a minimum period of three years. The BWRB will be available for review by port State control inspectors and other authorities in connection with verifying compliance with the Convention's requirements.



8.7 Duties of officers and crew 8.7.1 Regulation B-6 states that officers and crew shall be familiar with their duties in the implementation of ballast water management particular to the ship on which they serve and shall, appropriate to their duties, be familiar with the ship's BWMP. Officers and crew engaged in ballast water operations shall be familiarized and trained in the operation of the installed BWMS and their associated duties. In addition to instructions in the general aspects of ballast water management and the requirements of the Convention, ship-specific training should include operational procedures and maintenance of the BWMS and all related safety considerations, as detailed in the BWMP and the BWMS operating manual.

8.7.2 To facilitate the implementation, administration and execution of the BWMP, a qualified and responsible officer shall be designated (regulation B-1.5). The duties of the designated officer should be specified in the BWMP; such duties could include but are not limited to:

.1 having responsibility for proper implementation of the BWMP including familiarization and training of officers and crew with ballast water management related duties;

.2 ensuring that the ballast water management operations follow procedures laid down in the BWMP;

.3 preparing the ballast water declaration/reporting form prior to arrival in port;

.4 providing assistance to crew and officers under port State control and other inspections;

.5 witnessing any sampling of ballast water that may need to be undertaken;

.6 ensuring that sediment management is implemented and carried out in accordance with the BWMP;

.7 monitoring and ensuring that the BWRB is properly kept up to date;

.8 overseeing that other ballast water management and sediment management tasks specified by the BWMP are carried out; and

.9 having operational responsibility during BWE.

8.7.3 More detailed information about the general principles of ballast water management and guidance on the structure and content of BWMP can be found in the Guidelines for ballast water management and the development of ballast water management plans (G4) (resolution MEPC.127(53)).

CHAPTER 9 – Implementing Section C – Special requirements in certain areas

Article 2.3 provides that nothing in the Convention shall be interpreted as preventing a Party from taking more stringent measures consistent with international law. The Convention also provides that special requirements in certain areas may be necessary to prevent, reduce, or eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. These requirements are in addition to the prescriptive measures detailed in Section B. Section C, dealing with these special requirements, includes three regulations:

.1 Regulation C-1, Additional measures;

.2 Regulation C-2, Warnings concerning ballast water uptake in certain areas and related flag State measures; and

.3 Regulation C-3, Communication of information.



It is to be noted that regulations C-1 and C-2, while both working towards the intent of the Convention, are different in focus. Regulation C-1 is focused on ballast water discharge and concerns the process for a Party to establish more stringent measures. Regulation C-2 is focused on ballast water uptake and requests Parties to identify and communicate the timing and location of certain areas where ballast water should not be taken up. Section C is important to the intent of the Convention. Regulation C-1 sets out the process for a Party to implement its own additional ballast water management requirements. Ensuring that such additional measures are effectively communicated is critical to avoid confusion and ensure compliance. Regulation C-2 encourages Parties to monitor their own waters and inform ship operators when such conditions (e.g. sewage outfalls, tidal conditions, and outbreaks, infestations, or populations of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens) may exist. It is therefore important that Parties monitor their own waters and effectively inform challenging conditions to ships. This chapter provides the following guidance relative to Section C of the Convention: .1 Process for a Party to introduce additional measures (regulation C-1); .2 Process for a Party to communicate ballast uptake warnings (regulation C-2);

and. .3 Practical guidance for ship operators for compliance with regulations C-1

and C-2. 9.1 Additional measures 9.1.1 Regulation C-1 sets out the process for a Party to introduce additional measures that may increase protection of its own waters. It should be repeated that these are additional measures beyond the minimum measures required in Section B. 9.1.2 The development and implementation of such measures requires careful consideration. Parties are advised to consider the following as they assess additional measures: .1 scientific evaluation of the benefits, effectiveness and potential unintended

consequences of such additional measures; .2 practicality of implementing measures that might affect ship operations; .3 impact of such measures on port logistics; and .4 method for compliance monitoring and enforcement of such measures. 9.1.3 The Party shall communicate its intention to establish additional measures to the Organization at least six months prior to the projected date of the implementation of the measures. Information is contained in Guidelines (G13) (resolution MEPC.161(56), paragraph 3).



9.1.4 A Party may adopt an additional measure to address an emergency or epidemic situation. In these circumstances the requirement to advise the Organization six months in advance does not apply. However, if such a measure is adopted, the Party should, as soon as possible, notify adjacent and other States that may be affected, the shipping industry in general, and ships operating in areas of concern, and the Organization. Such information should contain: .1 the precise coordinates of the area; .2 the need for such additional measures; .3 a description of the additional measures; .4 any arrangements that may be provided to facilitate ships' compliance with

the additional measures; and .5 the effective date when the measures apply and when the measure is no

longer in effect.

9.2 Warnings concerning ballast water uptake in certain areas and related flag State measures

9.2.1 Regulation C-2 sets out the process for a Party to notify ships of areas within its waters where ballast water should not be taken up, e.g. in order to avoid transporting harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens to other locations. Some warnings might be temporary, while others might need to remain in effect permanently. 9.2.2 A harmful algal bloom is an example where a temporary warning may be required. Such blooms result when sunlight and nutrients encourage the rapid reproduction of algal organisms to very high concentrations. Some blooms result in potentially harmful toxins. Such blooms could have concentrations of organisms that are much higher than BWMS are designed to treat. As a result, a ship taking up ballast water where a harmful algal bloom is occurring, risks transporting that bloom to another location. 9.2.3 A sewage outfall is an example of a location where a permanent warning is appropriate. In such locations, there may regularly occur high levels of pathogens due to high nutrient levels. The result could be either the transport of such pathogens to other locations, or inhibiting the treatment process due to effects such as high levels of dissolved organic carbon. 9.2.4 The Convention provides clear guidance on the process for a Party to introduce and issue such warnings in regulation C-2. 9.3 Practical guidance for ship operators for compliance with regulations C-1 and C-2. 9.3.1 Ships must comply with additional measures (regulation C-1) and should observe warnings (regulation C-2) issued by Parties. Such measures and warnings, generally described above, are subject to be issued, changed and expired as needed to provide appropriate protection. As such, ship operators and masters are advised to routinely check through their flag State and other sources, such as the port States where the ship is expected to call.



9.3.2 Guidelines (G13) provides practical guidance at an appendix flowchart (Procedure for introducing additional measures) under regulation C-1 for a Party or Parties to use when determining if measures in addition to those in Section B of the Convention are necessary in order to prevent, reduce or eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through ships' ballast water and sediments. This is provided in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Flow chart – Procedure for introducing additional measures 9.3.3 Crews are advised to familiarize themselves with any requirements for record keeping and reporting associated with any additional measures, as well as any additional water quality discharge requirements (e.g. maximum allowable discharge concentrations of Active Substances, or limitations of marine ballast water discharges to fresh water recipient areas).



CHAPTER 10 – Implementing Section D – Standards for ballast water management 10.1 BWE standard 10.1.1 The BWE standard is set out in regulation D-1, as follows:

.1 ships performing BWE in accordance with this regulation shall do so with an efficiency of at least 95% volumetric exchange of ballast water; and

.2 for ships exchanging ballast water by the pumping-through method, pumping through three times the volume of each ballast water tank shall be considered to meet the standard described in paragraph 1. Pumping through less than three times the volume may be accepted provided the ship can demonstrate that at least 95% volumetric exchange is met.

10.1.2 The conditions under which BWE should take place are discussed in chapters 8 and 16 of this manual. The BWE procedures are to be included in the BWMP and approved by the flag Administration. Further details regarding BWMPs and ballast water management via the exchange method can be found in the Guidelines for ballast water management and development of ballast water management plans (G4) and the Guidelines for ballast water exchange (G6). 10.1.3 Sampling for compliance verification of BWE can involve checking the ballast water salinity. Additional information regarding sampling and analysis to verify compliance with regulation D-1 can be found in the Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in according with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1, as amended). 10.1.4 A ship that will operate with BWE should be designed and constructed taking into account considerations set out in the Guidelines for ballast water exchange design and construction standards (G11) (resolution MEPC.149(55)) in order to assist compliance with regulation D-1 of the Convention. These Guidelines have been developed to give guidance to shipbuilders, ship designers, owners and operators of ships in designing safe, environmentally acceptable, technically achievable, practicable, and cost-effective BWE. 10.2 Ballast water performance standard 10.2.1 Regulation D-2 of the Convention specifies the biological performance standard for ballast water discharge, but does not prescribe the method(s) a ship should use to meet the requirements. The most effective and efficient method to meet the performance standard will vary depending on various factors for each ship. The majority of ships are expected to install an approved ballast water management system to achieve the performance standard. Therefore, to implement and achieve the ballast water performance standard in regulation D-2, a ship's officer in charge of ballast water management shall follow the appropriate procedures specified in the approved BWMP. 10.2.2 The ballast water performance standards in regulation D-2 are summarized in Table 1.



Table 1: Performance standards (regulation D-2)

Organism category Performance standard

Organisms, size ≥ 50 µm(a) < 10 viable organisms/m3

Organisms, size ≥ 10 and < 50 µm(a) < 10 viable organisms/mL

Toxicogenic Vibrio cholerae < 1 cfu(b)/100 mL

Escherichia coli < 250 cfu(b)/100 mL

Intestinal Enterococci < 100 cfu(b)/100 mL

(a) Minimum dimension. (b) cfu: Colony-forming unit.

10.2.3 Information on the approval of BWMS can be found in chapters 13 and 14 of this manual, while information on sampling both for enforcement and for type approval testing can be found in chapter 12. In addition, options available for ships to meet the ballast water performance standard, including ballast water treatment and use of other methods, are discussed in chapter 16. 10.2.4 Should sampling for verification of compliance with regulation D-2 be deemed necessary, additional information can be found in the Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in according with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1, as amended). 10.3 Approval requirements for BWMS 10.3.1 Regulation D-3 stipulates the basis for BWMS approval and directs Administrations, manufacturers and shipowners to the guidelines and procedures developed for the approval process. 10.3.2 BWMS used in order to comply with this Convention must be approved by the Administration taking into account the Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8). In addition, BWMS that make use of Active Substances shall be approved by the Organization in accordance with the Procedure for approval of BWMS that make use of active substances (G9). Further information on the approval of BWMS can be found in chapters 13 and 14 of this manual. 10.4 Prototype ballast water treatment technologies 10.4.1 Regulation D-4 contains provisions for the evaluation and testing of promising ballast water treatment technologies. For a ship participating in such a programme approved by the Administration, the ballast water performance standard in regulation D-2 shall not apply until five years from the date on which the ship would otherwise be required to comply or from the date of installation of this technology. Throughout this period, the treatment technology must be operated consistently and as designed. 10.4.2 Details regarding the application of regulation D-4 and a sample statement of compliance for a prototype ballast water treatment technology can be found in the Guidelines for approval and oversight of prototype ballast water treatment technology programmes (G10).



CHAPTER 11 – Implementing Section E – Survey and certification requirements for ballast water management

Survey and certification guidelines for the purpose of complying with the Convention are provided in the Interim Survey Guidelines under the Harmonized System of Survey and Certification (BWM.2/Circ.7) in accordance with regulation E-1 of the Convention. The guidelines are kept in abeyance until the Convention enters into force. The interim survey guidelines are to be updated to the most recent HSSC Guidelines (at the time of writing resolution A.1053(27), as amended by resolution A.1076(28)). Readers are advised to be familiar with the content of that document and keep track of possible effective dates. 11.1 Surveys 11.1.1 Surveys are required for all ships of 400 gross tonnage and above excluding floating platforms, floating storage units (FSUs) and floating production, storage and offloading units (FPSOs) to which the Convention applies. The Administration shall establish appropriate measures for ships that are not subject to these provisions in order to ensure that appropriate provisions of the Convention are complied with. 11.1.2 Certificates or endorsements are to be issued indicating completion of the survey. Before the ship is put in service an initial survey is required to verify that the BWMP and the ship's structure, equipment, systems, fittings, arrangements and material or processes comply fully with the requirements of the Convention, following which the certificate is issued. Ships are also subject to annual surveys, which must occur within three months before or after each anniversary date. The intermediate survey will take place within three months before or after the second or third anniversary date, and shall take place on one of the annual surveys as mentioned above. An additional survey, either partial or general, shall be made after any change, replacement or significant repair is made to the system. The survey should ensure that any such change, replacement, or significant repair has been effectively made, so that the ship complies with the requirements of the Convention. All surveys shall be endorsed on the certificate. The certificate must also be renewed at a full renewal survey, at a date specified by the Administration but not exceeding every five years, to verify full compliance (structure, equipment, systems, fittings, arrangements and material or processes) with the applicable requirements of the Convention. These survey requirements are outlined in Figure 4.

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Initial survey* Annual

survey Annual or

intermediate survey

Annual or intermediate

survey

Annual survey

Renewal survey

Figure 4: Schedule for survey and certification

* Before the ship is put in service or before the Certificate is issued for the first time.

11.2 Certification 11.2.1 Regulations E-2 to E-5 set out the requirements with regard to the issuance and endorsement of the IBWMC, as well as its form, duration and validity. An outline of the main provisions is given in this section. Issuance or endorsement of a Certificate 11.2.2 An International Ballast Water Management Certificate shall be issued, either by the Administration or by any person or organization duly authorized by it, after successful completion of an initial or renewal survey, in accordance with regulation E-1. In every case,



the Administration assumes full responsibility for the Certificate. The Certificate shall be endorsed, again either by the Administration or by any person or organization duly authorized by it, after successful completion of an annual or intermediate survey. 11.2.3 A Certificate issued under the authority of a Party shall be accepted by the other Parties as having the same validity as a Certificate issued by them. Moreover, at the request of the Administration, a ship may be surveyed and a Certificate issued or endorsed, by or under the authority of another Party. A Certificate so issued shall have the same force and receive the same recognition as a Certificate issued by the Administration. 11.2.4 With respect to ships of non-Parties to the Convention, Parties shall apply the requirements of the Convention as may be necessary to ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to such ships. An International Ballast Water Management Certificate cannot be issued to a ship entitled to fly the flag of a State which is not a Party. Ships flying the flag of a non-Party may be issued with a statement or certificate of compliance with the Convention. 11.2.5 The full requirements for the issuance or endorsement of a Certificate are set out in regulations E-2 and E-3. 11.2.6 Appendix I to the annex to the Convention contains the form of the Certificate, which is to be followed when drawing up a Certificate. Regulation E-4 sets out the language requirements for the Certificate. 11.2.7 IMO approved circular BWM.2/Circ.40, which contains guidance on the issuance of International Ballast Water Management Certificates prior to entry into force of the Convention. It recognizes that it would be impracticable to prepare, review and approve BWMPs and survey and certify all ships of 400 GT and above within the 12-month period between the date when the conditions for entry into force have been satisfied and the actual entry-into-force date of the Convention. In light of this, the guidance sets out a process for issuing certificates prior to entry into force of the Convention. Duration and validity of the Certificate 11.2.8 A Certificate shall be issued for a period not exceeding five years. When the renewal survey is completed, the new Certificate shall be valid to a date not exceeding five years from the date of expiry of the existing Certificate. Paragraphs 1 to 7 of regulation E-5 set out in detail the provisions regarding the duration and validity of the Certificate and the conditions and circumstances under which the validity may be extended, but in no case for a period longer than three months. Moreover, regulation E-5.8 addresses the case where an annual survey may be completed prior to three months before the anniversary date. 11.2.9 In certain cases a Certificate shall cease to be valid. This is addressed in detail in regulation E-5.9; a summary of such cases is as follows:

.1 if the ship's relevant structure, equipment, systems, fittings, arrangements and material are changed, replaced or significantly repaired and the Certificate is not endorsed;

.2 upon transfer of the ship to the flag of another State; .3 if the relevant surveys are not completed within the specified periods; or .4 if the Certificate is not endorsed in accordance with regulation E-1.1.



11.2.10 In addition, according to the procedure in Guidance on entry or re-entry of ships into exclusive operation within waters under the jurisdiction of a single Party (BWM.2/Circ.52), the Certificate of a ship should be withdrawn if the ship enters or re-enters into exclusive operation pursuant to article 3.2 (b)-(d). 11.3 Recognized Organizations (ROs) 11.3.1 In practice, the term RO may usually be taken to mean a classification society; however, this does not preclude the use of other organizations and the contents of this paragraph would be relevant were any to be considered. The Administration should decide which organizations it will entrust with the authority to act on its behalf for the Convention purposes. These are likely to be the same as those authorized to act under other conventions, but they may be reduced or added to as necessary. Much will depend on the size of the flag fleet, the presence or otherwise of a national classification society which can meet its needs and the classification societies normally used by ships coming onto the State's register. It is essential that ROs are clearly aware or the extent of delegation permitted. The Administration should give guidance in a written agreement stating whether the ROs are to survey to the full requirements of the Convention. Clear instructions should be issued:

.1 laying down the action to be taken in the event of temporary non-compliance with the Convention;

.2 on the interpretation of regulations; .3 on the issuance of exemptions where this is left to the discretion of the

Administration; .4 on the approval of equipment on behalf of the Administration; and .5 on the survey of ships not classed, and on the ready provision of information

to the Administration when requested.

11.3.2 With these points in mind, an Administration may consider the service an organization is prepared and able to provide. 11.3.3 The general criteria to be met by ROs acting on behalf of a maritime Administration should include the following:

.1 the RO should have sufficient experience and skill in performing technical surveys;

.2 the RO should be represented in all regions where the ships flying the flag of the

Administration operate, which requires a minimum number of personnel; and .3 the RO should be able to fulfil a continuing quality-assurance programme.

11.3.4 MEPC 65 adopted the Code for Recognized Organizations (RO Code) through resolution MEPC.237(65), which took effect on 1 January 2015. Although the RO Code does not apply directly to the BWM Convention, it provides useful information on establishing a relationship with an RO to act on behalf of a flag State in connection with statutory certification and other services, as well as guidelines for flag State oversight.



CHAPTER 12 – Ballast water sampling To assess whether a ship is in compliance with the BWE standard (regulation D-1) or the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) of the Convention, samples may need to be taken and analysed. Ballast water samples taken will need to be representative of the physical nature (related to regulations D-1 and D-2) and/or the viable organism concentration (related to regulation D-2) of the whole of the ballast water discharge. Ballast water may be many thousands of cubic metres in volume held in several different and often complex shaped tanks. In addition, water and the organisms in it may not be homogeneously distributed in a ballast water tank. Sampling needs to be executed in a way that minimizes the impact on the number of viable organisms present in the water. To achieve consistency in on board compliance testing of ballast water, uniform protocols for sampling and analysis of ballast water are essential. BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1 gives guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis in accordance with the Convention and Guidelines (G2). The purpose of this guidance is to provide general recommendations on methodologies and approaches to sampling and analysis to test for compliance with the standards described in regulations D-1 and D-2, especially during the trial period until methods are agreed upon. There are two different occasions where the sampling for the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) is employed:

.1 sampling for type approval testing of BWMS (BWMS) (land-based and shipboard tests); and

.2 sampling for compliance.

12.1 Sampling for type approval testing of BWMS (land-based and shipboard tests) 12.1.1 Sampling and analysis of ballast water in accordance with Guidelines (G8) is undertaken as part of the type approval process for BWMS during both shipboard and land-based test cycles. Note that sampling for type approval is generally discharge or uptake sampling rather than in-tank sampling. 12.1.2 Shipboard test cycles are undertaken on an installed BWMS during normal ship ballasting operations. Land-based testing is undertaken under controlled conditions at an approved testing facility. Results are measured against the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) and also compared to intake levels for the organisms, which must meet required challenge conditions for a valid test. Validated methods for sample collection, handling, storage and analysis should be used. Sampling for the type approval process should meet the criteria set out in the guidelines for sample sizes and replication. 12.2 Sampling for compliance Sampling ballast water for compliance on ships in accordance with Guidelines (G2) may be undertaken for two reasons:

.1 to evaluate levels of viable organisms in ballast water during discharge and/or in ballast tanks; and

.2 to evaluate the physical characteristics of the water (e.g. salinity) during discharge and/or in ballast tanks.



12.2.1 Main aspects of sampling and analysis 12.2.1.1 BWM.2/Circ.42 provides general recommendations on methodologies and approaches for ballast water sampling and sample analysis to test for compliance with the standards described in regulations D-1 and D-2 of the Convention. 12.2.1.2 Sampling and analysis for compliance testing is a complex issue. According to the Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2), testing for compliance can be performed in two steps. As a first step, prior to a detailed analysis for compliance, an indicative analysis of ballast water discharge may be undertaken to establish whether a ship is potentially in compliance with the Convention. 12.2.1.3 When testing for compliance, the sampling protocol used should result in a representative sample of the whole discharge of the ballast water from any single tank or any combination of tanks being discharged. Representative sampling reflects the relative concentrations and composition of the populations (organisms and/or chemicals) in the volume of interest. Samples should be taken in accordance with the annex, part 1 and/or part 2 of the Guidelines on ballast water sampling (G2). 12.2.1.4 There are four options to address ballast water sampling and sample analysis. Ships' ballast water may be sampled indicatively and in detail. Also, the samples taken may be analysed indicatively and in detail. The indicative options are more likely to be used to confirm gross exceedance of the D-2 standard, whereas the detailed options are more likely to be used to confirm compliance (Table 2).

Table 2: Options of ballast water sampling and analysis of samples

Sampling Analysis of a sample

Indicative

A small proportion of the volume of interest can be used to indicate or confirm gross exceedance of the D-2 standard. A larger proportion of the volume of interest may be sampled if required.

An indicative analysis of a ballast water sample means a compliance test that is a relatively quick indirect or direct measurement of a representative sample of the ballast water volume of interest.

Detailed

A large proportion of the volume of interest can be used to indicate and confirm compliance. A smaller proportion of the volume of interest may be sampled if required. Two different potential detailed sampling approaches can therefore be considered: (1) sampling the entire discharge from a vessel during a port visit; (2) collecting a representative sample of the ballast water being discharged during some chosen period of time, e.g. one sample or a sequence of samples.

A detailed analysis of a ballast water sample means a compliance test that is likely to be more complex than indicative analysis and is a direct measurement of a representative sample used to determine the viable organism concentration of a ballast water volume of interest.



12.2.2 Sampling locations 12.2.2.1 Sampling of ballast water may be performed at various locations on board a ship depending on the purpose. Sampling may be undertaken either from the ballast water tanks (via manholes, through sounding pipes, or through air pipes) or directly from the discharge line. In-tank sampling via manholes, sounding and air pipes should only be used in cases where BWE (regulation D-1) is monitored or for regulation D-2 when the treatment of the ballast water is executed during the uptake or in-tank during holding times. In-tank sampling for regulation D-2 must not be performed when ballast water treatment is undertaken or completed on discharge. 12.2.2.2 Obtaining a representative sample directly from a ballast tank when they vary so much in size, shape, complexity and position is challenging. Sampling from a number of different locations, both spatially and with depth and also from different tanks, should be considered. Two or more samples are preferred to single or composite samples. Detailed sampling and analysis for regulation D-2 from manholes, sounding pipes or air pipes is not recommended as it is challenging to obtain sufficient sample sizes and does not give accurate results. 12.2.2.3 The sampling of discharged ballast water (generally to verify compliance with regulation D-2 or for type approval testing of BWMS) should be done via the ballast water discharge pipe as close to the discharge point as possible. The Guidelines (G8) require BWMS to have sampling points so arranged in order to collect representative samples of the ship's ballast water installed. The Guidelines (G2) recommend that sampling points should have an isokinetic pipe and valve system that allows the taking of a representative sample of ballast water from within the discharge pipe. It is recommended that the position of the sampling point be established using methods such as computational fluid dynamics. 12.2.2.4 Sampling for compliance with the BWE standard (regulation D-1) is a forensic process (i.e. it requires knowledge of source water parameters and comparison with measured parameters) that can be done in-tank or via a discharge sample point. However, it is most likely to be done in-tank prior to the discharge of ballast water. [12.2.3 Experience building phase and trial period for sampling and analysis3 12.2.3.1 Ballast water sampling and analysis is still evolving and, as a result, has in some cases not been adequately validated for PSC use. Consequently, the required sampling and analysis methods are not yet integrated into PSC procedures and therefore their use in determining compliance with the Convention cannot yet be assessed. 12.2.3.2 MEPC 65 agreed in principle with recommendations related to a trial period as set out in annex 6 to document BLG 17/18 in order to trial and validate ballast water sampling approaches. The trial period could extend to three years or more as appropriate following entry into force. The results of the trial will be monitored and reviewed by the MEPC and, when appropriate, the trial will be halted or extended. The goal at the end of the trial period will be to have a suite of accepted procedures that can be used for sampling and analysing ballast water in a globally consistent way. 12.2.3.3 It should be noted that the Guidance for sampling and analysis for trial use in accordance with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1, as amended) provides that port States should refrain from applying criminal sanctions or detaining a ship based on sampling during the trial period agreed by the Organization. This does not

3 Section 12.2.3 is in square brackets because they are currently kept in abeyance pending a legal review to

be conducted by the Secretariat prior to the approval of the manual by the MEPC.



prevent the port State from taking preventive measures to protect its environment, human health, property or resources. The port State will retain its right to exercise enforcement jurisdiction, including sanctions and detaining ships, during the trial period if an alleged violation is proven by means other than sampling and analysis.] CHAPTER 13 – Approval of BWMS 13.1 Regulation D-3 of the Convention sets out the approval requirements for BWMS. All BWMS used to comply with the Convention must be approved by the Administration of the ship, taking into account guidelines developed by the Organization. In addition, BWMS that make use of Active Substances require the additional approval of the MEPC (see Chapter 14).

13.2 MEPC 70 adopted the 2016 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) (resolution MEPC.279(70), superseding resolution MEPC.174(58)). These Guidelines are aimed primarily at Administrations, or their designated bodies, in order to assess whether BWMS meet the standard described in regulation D-2 of the Convention. Approval of a system is intended to screen-out BWMS that would fail to meet the standard described in regulation D-2. Approval of a system, however, does not ensure that a given system will work on all ships or in all situations. To satisfy the Convention, a discharge must comply with the D-2 standard throughout the life of the ship.

13.3 BWMS installed on ships on or after 28 October 2020 should be approved taking into account the 2016 Guidelines (G8), while BWMS installed on board ships prior to that date should be approved taking into account either resolution MEPC.174(58), but preferably the 2016 Guidelines (G8). Administrations should apply the 2016 Guidelines (G8) not later than 28 October 2018 when approving BWMS, but they are encouraged to start doing so as soon as possible.

13.4 The Convention requires that BWMS used to comply with this Convention must be safe in terms of the ship, its equipment and the crew. In addition, the Guidelines contain a number of technical specifications that a BWMS should meet in order to obtain type approval. These include general principles that BWMS should be effective in meeting the D-2 standard and safe for the environment when used during short and long voyages, e.g. regardless of temperature. In addition, the design of the BWMS should account for the fact that, regardless of the BWMS technology employed, viable organisms remaining after treatment may reproduce in the interval between treatment and discharge. The technical specifications also address matters such as the robustness of design and construction, safety considerations and the need for risk mitigation measures with respect to any substances of a dangerous nature, maintenance arrangements, calibration, and the provision of control and monitoring arrangements (including a self-monitoring system to verify correct operation of the system).

13.5 In order to receive a type approval, the manufacturer of the BWMS submits information to the type-approving Administration regarding the design, construction, operation and functioning of the BWMS. Following a readiness evaluation by the Administration, the BWMS undergoes tests in accordance with procedures described in the Guidelines, with specified challenge conditions (i.e. salinity, organic carbon, suspended solids and number of organisms). These tests include trials of the BWMS at a land-based test facility (where conditions are controlled), shipboard testing (to reflect actual use by ship crews during or after the voyage), environmental testing (to demonstrate the robustness of the equipment), a temperature assessment (to confirm operation at very warm and cold temperatures), and an evaluation of regrowth. During each test, the composition of the treated ballast water (analysed according to sampling and analysis procedures set out in the Guidelines) is compared to the performance standard described in regulation D-2. Successful fulfilment of the requirements and procedures outlined in the Guidelines leads to the issuance of a Type Approval Certificate by the Administration.



13.6 In addition to the standard tests identified within the Guidelines, the BWMS manufacturer separately identifies the key water quality and operational parameters (known as System Design Limitations (SDL)) that may affect the operation of the BWMS, and makes a claim about the values of these parameters for which the BWMS is designed to operate correctly to meet the D-2 standard. The Administration validates these claims, and then reports them on the Type Approval Certificate for information only. Because BWMS manufacturers may include a margin of error in making claims, this information should not necessarily be interpreted as the exact parameter values beyond which the BWMS is incapable of operation. 13.7 Following type approval, the type approving Administration submits a report to the Organization that includes the results of all tests and evaluations set out in the Guidelines. This report is made public by the Organization to provide transparency on the type approval process. 13.8 As noted, BWMS used to comply with the Convention must be approved by the Administration, taking into account Guidelines (G8). This approval may be conveyed on a Type Approval Certificate (which may be based on testing already carried out under supervision by another Administration) and/or issuance of the International Ballast Water Management Certificate. CHAPTER 14 – Approval of ballast water management systems using Active Substances 14.1 Overview of the Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems

that make use of Active Substances (G9) 14.1.1 The principles of the approval process are based upon regulations D-3 and D-5. These provide that BWMS should be safe for the ship, its equipment and crew. As the technologies should not cause more environmental impact than they solve, these systems must also meet the standards of environmental acceptability. For this reason, it is required that BWMS that make use of Active Substances undergo a separate approval procedure additional to that of Guidelines (G8), as described in the Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of Active Substances (G9) and the associated Methodology for the conduct of work. The Procedure (G9) describes not only the technical aspects but also the role and duties of all stakeholders in the process, including manufacturers, Administrations and the Organization. 14.1.2 In support of the evaluation process a special expert group was established to advise the MEPC on the approval of such systems, namely the Ballast Water Working Group of the Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP-BWWG). GESAMP-BWWG, established in November 2005, reviews all proposals submitted to the Organization for approval of BWMS that make use of Active Substances and reports to the Organization on whether such proposals present unreasonable risk to the environment, human health, property or resources in accordance with the criteria specified in Procedure (G9). The Group evaluates the appropriateness of the operation or design in order to prevent any unreasonable risks mentioned above caused by the use of a BWMS. However, the Group does not evaluate the biological efficacy of BWMS in accordance with Guidelines (G8). GESAMP-BWWG has also developed a Methodology for information gathering and conduct of work. 14.1.3 Regular updates of information on obtained Basic and Final Approvals are made in accordance with section 8.3 of Procedure (G9). The technical requirements have been revised based on experience with the approval process.



14.2 Applicability Procedure (G9) applies to the approval of BWMS that make use of Active Substances to comply with the Convention in accordance with regulation D-3. 14.3 Definitions Active Substances are defined by the Convention as "substances or organisms, including a virus or a fungus that have a general or specific action on or against harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens". Procedure (G9), section 2, should be referred to for additional definitions. 14.4 Procedures for approval and certification 14.4.1 Manufacturers are required to submit information on their technology in a proposal dossier to a national Administration. Administrations should check the quality and completeness in the dossiers against the applicable version of the Methodology before the official submission of the application for Basic or Final Approval to the Organization. Eventually, approval may be granted by the MEPC based on the independent advice provided by GESAMP-BWWG. 14.4.2 In the process of GESAMP-BWWG reviewing the dossiers submitted by Administrations and reporting to the Organization its findings, they may request additional data from Administrations. The approval scheme is two-staged; Basic Approval has to be granted first, followed by Final Approval. GESAMP-BWWG will report its evaluation of the BWMS to the MEPC. In connection with the submission of the application for approval a fee is paid to the Organization to cover the costs incurred by the Organization in respect of the scientific services provided by GESAMP-BWWG. 14.4.3 The approval scheme for Active Substances or Preparations and BWMS that make use of Active Substances is detailed in Figure 5.



Figure 5: Approval scheme for Active Substances or Preparations and BWMS that make use of Active Substances

14.4.4 Additionally, in paragraph 8.2.1, Procedure (G9) allows that BWMS, which have already been granted Basic Approval, may be used for evaluation of multiple BWMS for Final Approval. The detailed framework of the use can be found in circular BWM.2/Circ.27. 14.5 Summary of Procedure (G9) requirements 14.5.1 Equipment manufacturers should include in their dossiers a chemical identification of chemical compounds, including Active Substances, Preparations and any other Relevant Chemicals, even those generated on board. For BWMS that make use of Active Substances, for example BWMS using sodium hypochlorite solution, electrolysis, and/or ozonation, special attention is drawn to the formation of disinfection by-products (DBPs) due to possible effects on the environment and human health. The description of chemical



compounds should include a dataset which includes physical and chemical properties, mammalian toxicity, environmental fate and effects. Following production of this information, a risk characterization should be described that is based upon information on persistency, bioaccumulation and toxicity (PBT) and specified testing on toxicity of the treated ballast water. The evaluation includes criteria on both human safety and environmental protection. 14.5.2 The requirements for Basic Approval are more general, as theoretical studies, literature data and small-scale testing can fulfil the data and information requirements. For Basic Approval, GESAMP-BWWG reviews the comprehensive proposal, along with any additional data submitted, as well as other relevant information available to the Group, and reports to the Organization. 14.5.3 For Final Approval, more detailed tests and full assessments are required, based on full-scale testing of the BWMS. The application for Final Approval should include tests performed as part of the land-based type approval process using the treated ballast water discharge and must specifically address any concerns identified and recommendations made during the consideration for Basic Approval. Results are based on tests under type approval testing under Guidelines (G8), e.g. full-scale testing. Note that the Final Approval dossier should also confirm the evaluation carried out during Basic Approval of the risks to the ship and personnel including consideration of the storage, handling and application of the Active Substance (also refer to circular BWM.2/Circ.20). 14.6 Quality assurance and quality control procedures The testing body should implement a quality control program during testing in accordance with the recognized international standards that are acceptable to the Administration. In summary, the quality control program should consist of the following:

.1 Quality Management Plan (QMP) that addresses the quality management structure and policies of the testing body; and

.2 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) which is a project-specific technical

document pertaining to the BWMS being tested, the test facility, and other testing implementation details.

14.7 Technical specifications 14.7.1 In Procedure (G9), sections 4 to 7 describe the technical requirements, while more detailed guidance on technical requirements is found in circular BWM.2/Circ.13/Rev.3. The Methodology gives thorough guidance on all aspects needed for a complete dataset. The required data contain detailed physical and chemical properties of the Active Substance or Preparation. This includes reactivity towards materials, vapour pressure, and melting and boiling points; as well as data on effects on aquatic plants, invertebrates and fish and other biota. This in turn includes acute and chronic toxicity, endocrine disruption and carcinogenic and mutagenic effects. It should be noted that for certain substances their specific effects on sediment organisms or the bio-magnification, persistence in the food web and potential effects need to be described. 14.7.2 The Methodology additionally outlines the mammalian toxicity data that should be submitted for approval. In summary, the topics include acute toxicity, effects on skin and eye, repeated-dose toxicity, chronic toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity/genotoxicity and toxicokinetics.



14.7.3 For compounds that are commonly described in ballast water treatment, data is gathered in a database held by the Organization, which will be made available through the Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS). For compounds identified in the database, no other data needs to be added in the proposal, unless it is scientifically justified. 14.7.4 Using these data, a risk characterization is conducted by including a hazard identification. Other elements are dose (what concentrations are expected) and exposure (what is the intensity, frequency and exposure to an agent). All information leads to risk characterization (how does the data lead to a quantification of risks). 14.7.5 Based upon information on persistency, bioaccumulation and toxicity (PBT), the risk for environmental effects is characterized in combination with actual testing on the toxicity of treated ballast water. Environmental concentrations at receiving water would be calculated with the Marine Antifoulant Model for PEC calculation for Ballast Water (MAMPEC-BW 3.0), using the dataset and measurements from the testing. The resulting environmental concentrations are compared to safety thresholds, e.g. predicted no effect concentrations (PNEC). Human exposure scenario (HES) models were developed to compare the exposure to human based thresholds, e.g. Derived No-effect Levels (DNEL) and/or Derived Minimal Effect Levels (DMEL). 14.7.6 As was mentioned in section 14.5 above, the requirements for Basic Approval are more general and the data may be derived from theoretical studies, literature data and may include small-scale testing to fulfil data requirements. For Final Approval, toxicity testing is specified in detail and should be derived in combination with ballast water management system efficacy testing for Guidelines (G8) type approval. Following the risk assessment, several risk mitigation or risk management options may be included. For example, specific requirements exist on the methods to monitor the Maximum Allowable Discharge Concentration (MADC) of Active Substances. 14.8 Typical documentation requirements for the approval process For a submission to the Organization, all data reports and references are included in the actual dossier. For example, this includes full test reports from chemical and toxicological laboratories, data sources and technical information on systems (refer to circular BWM.2/Circ.37). 14.9 Appendix to Procedure (G9) The appendix provides Administrations with an approval scheme for BWMS that make use of Active Substances, outlining the Basic and Final Approval process (see Figure 5 above). CHAPTER 15 – Duties of shipowners 15.1 Duties and obligations 15.1.1 The shipowner's and operator's duties and obligations under the Convention include ensuring that ships have the ability at all times to be compliant with the requirements set up in the Convention by implementing a BWMP. These include, but are not limited to, meeting the applicable BWE or performance standards (regulations D-1 or D-2, respectively) and undertaking sediment management, if sediments are to be discharged. 15.1.2 Alternatively, if exceptions or exemptions have been granted to the ship (refer to sections 7.3 and 7.4 of this manual), the shipowner and operator must ensure that they are properly documented and entered into the BWRB. It is to be noted that exceptions are situation



specific, hence record keeping and communication is the only way of demonstrating compliance. In contrast, exemptions are required to be granted by the Administration prior to the intended voyage(s). 15.1.3 In order to ensure a proper implementation of the BWMP, an officer on board must be designated in a timely manner and provided with necessary training. 15.1.4 All ships to which the Convention applies must have on board the following: .1 a ship-specific BWMP approved by the Administration; .2 a valid IBWMC, if the ship is 400 gross tonnage and above; and .3 a BWRB. 15.1.5 If the ship has a BWMS, it must be approved in accordance with Guidelines (G8) and, if applicable, Procedure (G9). 15.2 Complying with the Convention In order to comply with the Convention, the shipowner and operator must ensure that: .1 all shipboard ballast operations are safely executed in accordance with one

of the available options available under the Convention, e.g. in compliance with regulation D-1 or D-2, as applicable; by application of any other approved methods (regulation B-3.7); by participation in a programme approved by the Administration to test and evaluate prototype technologies (regulation D-4); or in accordance with any exception or exemption granted under the Convention (regulations A-3 and A-4);

.2 the on-board BWMS, if applicable, is fitted with sampling points located in

suitable and accessible areas; .3 a competent officer is assigned for ballast water management and the officer

and crew are trained in order to carry out their respective ballast water management duties;

.4 all ballast water and sediment operations are carried out in accordance with

the ship's BWMP with due regard to the safety of the ship, its cargo and crew; .5 the BWMS, if installed, is operated and maintained in accordance with the

manufacturer's instructions and provided with sufficient spares and consumables, as required;

.6 the BWRB is correctly maintained and kept up to date at all times; and .7 the BWRB entries shall be maintained on board the ship for a minimum

period of two years after the last entry has been made and thereafter in the Company's control for a minimum period of three years.



15.3 Training of the crew 15.3.1 Shipowners must ensure, in accordance with regulation B-6 (Duties of officers and crew), that the officers and crew are properly trained and competent to carry out their assigned ballast water management duties and functions. 15.3.2 The training of the crew may include, but not be limited to, the following: .1 introduction to ballast water management;

.2 familiarization with the ship's BWMP and assigned duties;

.3 emergency procedures, including exposure to chemicals, if used;

.4 operation and maintenance of the ship's BWMS, if fitted; and

.5 making entries and record keeping in the ship's BWRB.

15.3.3 Officers and crew involved in the shipboard ballast operations and the operation and maintenance of the BWMS have to be competent in their specific assigned duties.

15.3.4 Ideally the training and familiarisation for the Convention and associated tasks should be included in the company's safety management system (SMS). The detailed framework for managing the risks incurred by the use of chemicals (i.e. Active Substances and Preparations) can be found in circular BWM.2/Circ.27.

CHAPTER 16 – Ballast water management options available for ships

The Convention defines two ballast water management standards:

.1 regulation D-1 specifies the BWE standard; and

.2 regulation D-2 specifies the ballast water performance standard.

16.1 BWE 16.1.1 BWE aims at reducing the number and viability of organisms discharged at ports and in coastal waters following transportation in ballast tanks. BWE is to meet the BWE standard as per regulation D-1 described in chapter 10. 16.1.2 Three methods of BWE are detailed in the Guidelines for ballast water exchange (G6):

.1 sequential method – a ballast tank is first emptied and then refilled with replacement ballast water to achieve at least a 95% volumetric exchange;

.2 flow-through method – replacement ballast water is pumped into a ballast tank allowing water to flow through overflow or other arrangements. At least three times the tank volume of each tank shall be considered to meet the standard; and

.3 dilution method – replacement ballast water is filled (pumped) through the top of the ballast tank with simultaneous discharge from the bottom at the same flow rate and maintaining a constant level in the tank throughout the ballast exchange operation. At least three times the tank volume is to be pumped through the tank.

16.1.3 Designation of areas for BWE is discussed in chapter 8 of this manual.



16.2 Ballast water treatment 16.2.1 Once subject to it, pursuant to regulation B-3, a ship shall be required to meet the performance standard of regulation D-2. The most common approach is the installation of a shipboard BWMS. 16.2.2 There are different BWMS available and in development. Generally these technologies can be categorized into three types based on their primary mechanism: mechanical, physical and chemical. 16.2.1 Mechanical treatment 16.2.1.1 Mechanical treatment can be done, for example, by filtration, cyclonic separation and electro-mechanical separation. Mechanical treatment is generally only done at intake and is not influenced by the length of the voyage. 16.2.1.2 Screen and disk filters can be used at ballast water intake to reduce sediment and organisms. Mesh sizes of these filter screens vary and the smaller the mesh size the more will be filtered prior to intake. Filters with a mesh size of 50 µm or less are commonly applied in BWMS to contribute to achieving the standard described in regulation D-2. 16.2.1.3 Most filters are self-cleaning with back flushing cycles. Waste water from the back flush is discharged directly overboard. Together with the resistance of the filter this self-cleaning procedure will form pressure drops and affect the flow rate negatively. 16.2.1.4 Cyclonic separation uses centrifugal forces to separate solid particles from water. However, this is only possible with particles having a specific gravity higher than that of water. Electro-mechanical separation works with a flocculent injection that attaches to the sediment and organisms. Solid particles are then removed by filtration and magnetic separation. 16.2.1.5 Mechanical treatment is often used in conjunction with physical and/or chemical treatment methods (see below). 16.2.2 Physical treatment 16.2.2.1 Physical treatment can be done, for example, by ultraviolet irradiation (UV), de-oxygenation, cavitation and ultrasound. 16.2.2.2 UV is used to eliminate or damage organisms (phytoplankton, zooplankton, human pathogens and bacteria) to such extent that they are not able to reproduce. The effectiveness is dependent on the turbidity and the transmittance rate in water. Most ballast water management systems that use UV irradiation combine it with prior mechanical treatment. Often UV treatment is performed at intake and discharge of ballast water. 16.2.2.3 Removing dissolved oxygen in the ballast water is called de-oxygenation and affects aerobic organisms (i.e. those that require oxygen). Oxygen is replaced by inert gases (often nitrogen). Although de-oxygenation can be positive in order to prevent corrosion, it is important to use inert gas, which does not react chemically, to avoid any oxidative or hydrolytic effects. De-oxygenation may require a longer tank holding time, which should be considered when having a fleet employed on short voyages. 16.2.2.4 In the shipping industry, cavitation normally negatively affects materials and should be prevented. However, if controlled, the cavitation method can be used in order to damage membranes of organisms, ensuring that they are not able to reproduce when discharged into



the environment. Care should be taken to protect against the possible effects of hydrodynamic forces and ultrasonic oscillations on materials and the environment, including humans. This treatment can be applied on long and short voyages and is often combined with another physical treatment method. 16.2.3 Chemical treatment 16.2.3.1 Ballast water can be chemically treated by administering chemicals (Active Substances) or Preparations, or by producing Active Substances on board (see chapter 14 for more information). Care should be taken when using disinfectant Active Substances; they can kill living organisms in the water but also affect humans. Commonly used Active Substances are sodium hypochlorite, ozone and hydrogen peroxide, which are expressed as TRO. Sodium hypochlorite can also be generated on board by using an electrolytic cell and having enough salinity in the ballast water. Active Substances should be depleted or be neutralized before discharging into the environment. The Maximum Allowable Discharge Concentration (MADC) of the concentrations of the Active Substances and neutralizing agents, if any, are to be listed in the Type Approval Certificate of the BWMS. 16.2.3.2 Classification societies normally impose strict installation guidelines in cases of BWMS that make use of chemical treatment and/or could emit dangerous gases/liquids. 16.2.4 Combinations of treatment techniques Treatment technologies can be combined and differ in rate of application, holding time, power consumption and effects on other ship equipment or structures. A combination of different treatments can reduce the limitations of an individual technology. Therefore, many BWMSs use a combination of two or more technologies, e.g. filtration combined with UV, filtration combined with chemical injection/ electro-chlorination, etc. 16.3 Discharge to a reception facility 16.3.1 The Organization has developed Guidelines for ballast water reception facilities (G5) (resolution MEPC.153(55)). The availability of ballast water reception facilities in ports to receive, process and redistribute ballast water would be an important tool in implementing the Convention. Shore facilities would be responsible for and capable of managing the ballast water to meet the required standards. Discharging to a shore facility could also facilitate sediment management under the Convention. Many ports lack the necessary infrastructure to accommodate the intake or supply of ballast water to and from the ship. A floating reception facility (e.g. BWTBoat) is a ballast water reception facility as described in regulation B-3.6 and Guidelines (G5) and does not need approval in accordance with regulation B-3.7 to receive ballast water. 16.3.2 It is to be noted that ballasting and deballasting activities are running in parallel with the ships' loading and unloading operations. Any disturbance in the flow of ballast water will immediately affect these operations. Finally, the flow in ballast water is not in an equilibrium for each port or region, which implies a net in- or outflow to/from certain regions in the world. Nevertheless, for certain areas or ports shore facilities could be a feasible option, in particular in environmentally sensitive areas. 16.3.3 There are other factors such as engineering, operational and logistics affecting the feasibility of using a shore facility or a floating facility. The above issues must be carefully considered before proceeding, along with paying due attention to the differences in regulatory considerations.



16.4 Other methods Other methods of ballast water management may also be accepted, provided that such methods ensure at least the same level of protection to the environment, human health, property or resources and are approved in principle by the MEPC. The Organization has developed guidance with regard to the criteria to be used for such evaluations, which can be found in the Procedure for approving other methods of ballast water management in accordance with regulation B-3.7 of the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.206(62)). 16.5 Application of the Convention to offshore support vessels 16.5.1 The Organization has agreed on common procedures for application of the Convention to offshore support vessels in circular BWM.2/Circ.44. These procedures are intended to relate to the activities of offshore support vessels. Operationally, these vessels differ from the operational models associated with deep-sea trading ships by being designed to operate in near-coastal waters characterized by carrying materials to facilities and vessels working in offshore energy fields. 16.5.2 The purpose of these procedures is to provide options available for complying with the requirements of the Convention. 16.6 Application of the Convention to mobile offshore units 16.6.1 The Organization has agreed on common procedures for application of the Convention to mobile offshore units, included in circular BWM.2/Circ.46. The procedures are divided into operations at the location of operation and during transit to other areas. 16.6.2 Circular BWM.2/Circ.52 provides guidance on entry or re-entry into exclusive operation pursuant to articles 3.2(b)-(d), which will assist Administrations with respect to situations including ships (e.g. mobile offshore units) that may be assigned to extended operations in waters under the jurisdiction of a single Party following an international voyage or voyages. This Guidance sets out a process for ceasing application of the Convention to a ship in such circumstances. 16.7 Application of the Convention to hopper dredgers The Organization has agreed on the applicability of the Convention to hopper dredgers in circular BWM.2/Circ.32. Hoppers are not considered to be ballast tanks because the hopper wall forms part of the vessel hull therefore water in the hopper is considered as outboard water.

PART V: TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF ENFORCEMENT Chapter 17 – Non-compliance detection and response After entry into force of the Convention, there will be two standards enforced for ships depending on the applicability regime. Detection of non-compliance will be based on the applicable exchange or performance standards (regulation D-1 or D-2, respectively) and the method of achieving the respective standards. Non-compliance with regulation D-1 (BWE standard) may be difficult to detect without conducting a salinity check of the discharge sample. If some other method (regulation B-3.7) is used by a ship then the detection may not be possible without discharge sample analysis. However, such other methods may entail key performance indicators that provide a fair assessment of possible compliance.



The technological advancements in the field of detection and monitoring pave the way for indicative analysis of ballast water discharges. These direct or indirect monitoring tools may be useful in identifying gross exceedance of the D-2 standards. 17.1 Detection A BWMS approved in accordance with Guidelines (G8) will include a continuous self-monitoring function during the period in which the BWMS is in operation that should record the proper functioning or failure of the BWMS. When risk of non-compliance is envisaged, the ballast water may not be safe to discharge and the port of call should be notified. Prevention should always be the first aim. If the situation is beyond the stage of prevention then contingency planning becomes an actual need. Such contingency measures are to be identified and included in the approved BWMP. Further guidance can be found in the Guidelines for ballast water management and development of ballast water management plans (G4). [17.2 Response – contingency measures4 17.2.1 Contingency measures to meet the challenges of either polluted (with residual Active Substances) or not at all (or not adequately) disinfected ballast water are best placed on shore and preferably in the port of call. If no ballast water reception facility is available in the port of call, the nearest port or location holding a contingency facility should be sought. The facility can consist of a reception facility for polluted/untreated ballast water or a treatment unit available in the port of call that can process the ballast water by a port-based treatment system. 17.2.2 The Organization's guidance for emergency situations (BWM.2/Circ.17), although specifically targeted at a risk of release of harmful organisms and pathogens, nevertheless contains several items that also apply for pollution. An emergency response should take into account the nature of the pollution (what chemicals and/or contaminants and at which expected quantities), the natural characteristics of the area of release and the contingency capacity of the country or region likely to be affected. In order to minimize damage and to enable rapid normalization of the operation of ports and ships, industry cooperation will be needed at the time of the emergency. Although this is perceived as a rather complex operation, in practice, such measures are likely to be simple and may only be identifiable for situations where ballast water discharges from certain ships need to be prevented. 17.2.3 If polluted, contaminated or ineffectively treated ballast water is accidentally or intentionally released, then ways to mitigate the damage have to be identified. Again the characteristics of the contamination and of the area(s) affected are crucial, together with knowledge of the contingency preparedness in the area. A risk assessment may be needed. It is also needed to notify all stakeholders of an emergency situation; according to BWM.2/Circ.17, this should be the responsibility of an appointed (lead) agency overseeing the emergency situation and procedures. 17.2.4 As to mitigation measures, much can be learnt from pollution response knowledge from other sources of pollution in dissolved form, such as dissolved chemicals. It is unlikely that pollution resulting from ballast water operations will be in solid or oily form; hence techniques to contain such sources of pollution (such as booms around the spill or discharge) will not be applicable.

4 Section 17.2 is in square brackets because they are currently kept in abeyance pending a legal review to be

conducted by the Secretariat prior to the approval of the manual by the MEPC.



17.2.5 Support from shore-based contingency measures, such as initiatives facilitated by ports, should strongly be encouraged. If such shore-based facilities are not available, as an interim measure, the port State should identify locations where BWE can take place. Identification of such exchange areas need to be conducted with a comprehensive risk assessment.] CHAPTER 18 – Guidance for PSC 18.1 PSC refers to the inspection of foreign ships in national ports of a Party to verify that the condition of the ship and its equipment comply with the requirements of the national/ international regulations and that the ship is manned and operated in compliance with those rules. 18.2 A ship to which the Convention applies may be subject to inspection for the purpose of determining whether the ship is in compliance with the Convention, in accordance with its article 9. Article 8 requires that sanctions be established for violating the Convention, while article 10 of the Convention provides for warnings, detentions and exclusions. Article 10 also sets out control actions that shall be taken by a Party if a ship poses a threat to the environment, human health, property and resources. Article 11 sets out mandatory notifications where a sanction, detention, warning, exclusion or control action has been used. 18.3 Irrespective of the methods applied to manage ballast water (presented in chapter 16) the discharged water should meet the quality standard as indicated in regulation D-1 for BWE or D-2 for ballast water performance, as applicable. It is the obligation of PSC or other designated authorities to ensure adequate control and, when required, inspection of the BWRB and management practices.

18.4 The Organization developed Guidelines for port State control under the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.252(67)) intended to be used to verify compliance with the requirements of the Convention; these guidelines are not intended to limit the rights the port State has in verifying compliance with the Convention. The PSC inspection can be described as a four-stage process:

.1 the first stage, the "initial inspection", should focus on documentation and ensuring that an officer has been nominated for ballast water management on board the ship and to be responsible for the BWMS, and that the officer has been trained and knows how to operate it;

.2 the second stage – the "more detailed inspection" where the operation of the BWMS is checked and the PSCO clarifies whether the BWMS has been operated adequately according to the BWMP and the self-monitored operational indicators verified during type approval procedures. Undertaking a detailed inspection is dependent on the conditions of article 9.2 of the BWM Convention;

.3 the third stage – sampling is envisaged to occur during this stage of PSC which relies on indicative analysis, to identify whether the ship is meeting the ballast water management performance standard described in regulation D-2, or whether detailed analysis is necessary to ascertain compliance; and

.4 the fourth stage, if necessary, incorporates detailed analysis to verify

compliance with the D-2 standard.



18.5 If a ship is found to be in violation of the Convention, the PSCO may take steps to warn, detain or exclude the ship or grant such a ship permission to leave in order to discharge ballast water elsewhere (such as a designated BWE area) or to undertake repairs. In exercising his/her functions, the PSCO should use professional judgement to determine whether to detain the ship until any noted deficiencies are corrected or to permit the ship to sail with deficiencies, which do not pose an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment.

PART VI: ORGANIZATION

CHAPTER 19 – Training of personnel 19.1 Consideration of training requirements for personnel 19.1.1 The need for training of personnel for the purpose of implementing the Convention depends on several factors and will need to be assessed by each State. This is a matter for the marine Administration and the environmental protection authorities, its national shipping industry and other stakeholders to explore. 19.1.2 The following points need to be considered:

.1 are the Administration's own staff sufficiently conversant with the Convention and relevant guidelines?

.2 are the staff of the maritime Administration technically competent to fulfil their obligations?

.3 do more appropriately qualified staff need to be recruited and trained?

.4 are the national shipowners conversant with the Convention?

.5 what training do ships' masters and crew need? 19.1.3 In exploring the possibilities for training, the following options may be considered:

.1 cooperation with other, more experienced, maritime Administrations;

.2 raising the technical competence of the Administration staff to an adequate standard by training or recruitment or both;

.3 organizing national seminars/courses or regional training schemes for surveyors, inspectors, administrators, lawyers, shipowners, masters and crew, possibly through IMO's Integrated Technical Cooperation Programme, and taking also advantage of the available training materials developed by e.g. the GloBallast Partnerships project and the e-CME ballast water compliance monitoring and enforcement project of the World Maritime University;

.4 taking advantage of learning opportunities at the World Maritime University, especially for those capable of benefiting and subsequently returning to responsible positions in the maritime Administration and shipping industry;

.5 including the BWM Convention in the curriculum for seafarers' courses and examinations for certificates; and

.6 requesting shipowners to arrange training for senior ship officers to ensure that they are aware of the on-board procedures and legislation.



19.2 Administration personnel 19.2.1 A training programme is necessary to make administrative and inspection personnel knowledgeable about the requirements of the Convention and also to make flag State surveyors suitably trained in surveying ships for technical compliance with ballast water management. Inspection personnel must also be made knowledgeable about ballast water stripping operations. Further, it is of the utmost importance that all involved stay informed on any amendments to the various guidelines and guidance documents. 19.2.2 In most cases consideration should be given to conveying this information in the national language. It is recommended however to provide adequate information to local instructors in the first instance. Combined training activities, in which experienced instructors initially work in parallel with local instructors, teaching courses for administrative and inspection personnel, may be beneficial. Such training should concentrate both on the content of the Convention in general and on practical surveying procedures. 19.2.3 The timing for such training must be adjusted to suit the planned entry into force of the requirements in the acceding State, so that sufficient time is given for thorough introduction to the practical requirements, but also that the content of the instructions is not forgotten while the actual implementation is still being prepared. When the schedule for the accession and implementation of the Convention has been decided, such training should be initiated. It may be necessary to engage outside instructors to cover both theoretical and practical aspects of inspection. 19.3 Ships' officers In addition to general awareness on the protection of the marine environment, ships' officers need instructions about the requirements and regulations of the Convention as a whole and instructions regarding the handling and operation of the equipment being installed on board ships in particular. For experienced officers this additional information could be given in relatively short courses. 19.4 Main topics to form part of a ballast water management training programme:

.1 articles and regulations of the Convention; .2 guidelines accompanying the Convention; .3 BWMP development, implementation and operation; .4 ballast water management safety procedures; .5 safety procedures for BWE operations, if applicable; .6 ballast water management techniques and methodologies;

.7 how to operate and maintain a BWMS;

.8 national and regional requirements;

.9 BWRB keeping;

.10 safety procedures for sediment control and handling; and

.11 handling, storage and preparation of chemicals and Active Substances.



The training procedures should cover crew familiarization and training of relief crews, and the training should be fully documented and correspond to the training requirements specified in the BWMP. More detailed information concerning crew training provisions can be found in Part B of the Guidelines for ballast water management and the development of ballast water management plans (G4) (resolution MEPC.127(53)). CHAPTER 20 – Guidelines, circulars and other IMO publications relevant to the Convention A number of the regulations contained in the annex of the Convention require procedures, equipment, etc., to be based on guidelines developed by IMO. Some of these guidelines exist as separate publications. A complete up-to-date list of resolutions and BWM circulars can be found on the IMO website (www.imo.org). 20.1 Guidelines for the uniform implementation of the BWM Convention

.1 Guidelines for sediment reception facilities (G1) (resolution MEPC.152(55))

.2 Guidelines for ballast water sampling (G2) (resolution MEPC.173(58))

.3 Guidelines for ballast water management equivalent compliance (G3) (resolution MEPC.123(53))

.4 Guidelines for ballast water management and development of ballast water management plans (G4) (resolution MEPC.127(53))

.5 Guidelines for ballast water reception facilities (G5) (resolution MEPC.153(55))

.6 Guidelines for ballast water exchange (G6) (resolution MEPC.124(53))

.7 Guidelines for risk assessment under regulation A-4 of the BWM Convention (G7) (resolution MEPC.162(56))

.8 2016 Guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) (resolution MEPC.279(70) superseding resolution MEPC.174(58))

.9 Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of Active Substances (G9) (resolution MEPC.169(57))

.10 Guidelines for approval and oversight of prototype ballast water treatment technology programmes (G10) (resolution MEPC.140(54))

.11 Guidelines for ballast water exchange design and construction standards (G11) (resolution MEPC.149(55))

.12 2012 Guidelines on design and construction to facilitate sediment control on ships (G12) (resolution MEPC.209(63))

.13 Guidelines for additional measures regarding ballast water management including emergency situations (G13) (resolution MEPC.161(56))

.14 Guidelines on designation of areas for ballast water exchange (G14) (resolution MEPC.151(55))

http://www.imo.org)/



20.2 Guidelines related to the implementation of the Convention

.1 Guidelines for port State control under the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.252(67))

.2 Information reporting on type approved ballast water management systems (resolution MEPC.228(65))

.3 Procedure for approving other methods of ballast water management in accordance with regulation B-3.7 of the BWM Convention (resolution MEPC.206(62))

.4 Guidelines for ballast water exchange in the Antarctic treaty area (resolution MEPC.163(56))

.5 Application of the international convention for the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments, 2004 (resolution A.1088(28))

20.3 Circulars related to the implementation of the Convention

.1 Guidance on entry or re-entry of ships into exclusive operation within waters under the jurisdiction of a single Party (BWM.2/Circ.52)

.2 Application of the BWM Convention to Mobile Offshore Units (BWM.2/Circ.46)

.3 Clarification of "major conversion" as defined in regulation A-1.5 of the BWM Convention (circular BWM.2/Circ.45)

.4 Options for ballast water management for Offshore Support Vessels in accordance with the BWM Convention (BWM.2/Circ.44)

.5 Amendments to the Guidance for Administrations on the type approval process for ballast water management systems in accordance with Guidelines (G8) (BWM.2/Circ.28) (BWM.2/Circ.43)

.6 Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for trial use in accordance with the BWM Convention and Guidelines (G2) (BWM.2/Circ.42/Rev.1)

.7 Issuance of Ballast Water Management Certificates prior to entry into force of the BWM Convention and Ballast Water Management Plans approved according to resolution A.868(20) (BWM.2/Circ.40)

.8 Information that should be made available in proposals for approval of ballast

water management systems in accordance with the Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of Active Substances (G9) (BWM.2/Circ.37)

.9 Guidance on scaling of ballast water management systems (BWM.2/Circ.33)

.10 Applicability of the Ballast Water Management Convention to hopper dredgers (BWM.2/Circ.32)



.11 Framework for determining when a Basic Approval granted to one ballast water management system may be applied to another system that uses the same Active Substance or Preparation (BWM.2/Circ.27)

.12 Engineering Questionnaire on Ballast Water Management Systems (BWM.2/Circ.21)

.13 Guidance to ensure safe handling and storage of chemicals and preparations used to treat ballast water and the development of safety procedures for risks to the ship and crew resulting from the treatment process (BWM.2/Circ.20)

.14 Guidance document on arrangements for responding to emergency situations involving ballast water operations (BWM.2/Circ.17)

.15 Methodology for information gathering and conduct of work of the GESAMP-BWWG (BWM.2/Circ.13 and revisions)

.16 Harmonized implementation of the Guidelines for approval of Ballast Water Management Systems (G8) (BWM.2/Circ.8)

.17 Interim Survey Guidelines for the purpose of the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments under the Harmonized System of Survey and Certification (resolution A.948(23)) (BWM.2/Circ.7).

***



ANNEX 6

DRAFT MEPC RESOLUTION

2017 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISCHARGE OF EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION (EGR) BLEED-OFF WATER

THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION COMMITTEE, RECALLING Article 38(a) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (the Committee) conferred upon it by international conventions for the prevention and control of marine pollution from ships, RECALLING ALSO that, at its fifty-eighth session, it adopted, by resolution MEPC.176(58), a revised MARPOL Annex VI (hereinafter referred to as "MARPOL Annex VI") and, by resolution MEPC.177(58), a revised Technical Code on Control of Emission of Nitrogen Oxides from Marine Diesel Engines (hereinafter referred to as "NOX Technical Code 2008"), NOTING regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex VI which makes the NOX Technical Code 2008 mandatory under that Annex, NOTING ALSO that the use of NOX-reducing devices is envisaged in the NOX Technical Code 2008 and that exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) systems are such NOX-reducing devices for compliance with the Tier II and/or Tier III NOX limit, RECOGNIZING the need to develop guidelines for the discharge of EGR bleed-off water, HAVING CONSIDERED, at its seventy-first session, draft guidelines for the discharge of EGR bleed-off water, prepared by the Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response, at its fourth session, 1 ADOPTS the 2017 Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) bleed-off water, as set out at annex to the present resolution; 2 INVITES Administrations to take the annexed Guidelines into account in developing provisions for regulating the discharge of EGR bleed-off water; 3 REQUESTS Parties to MARPOL Annex VI and other Member Governments to bring the annexed Guidelines to the attention of shipowners, ship operators, shipbuilders, marine diesel engine manufacturers and any other interested parties; 4 AGREES to keep these Guidelines under review in light of experience gained with their application.



ANNEX

2017 GUIDELINES FOR THE DISCHARGE OF FEXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION (EGR) BLEED-OFF WATER

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Regulation 13.5.1 of MARPOL Annex VI requires marine diesel engines on ships constructed in 2016 and later to meet the Tier III NOX emission levels when operating in a NOX Emission Control Area. 1.2 One method for reducing NOX emissions is to use Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR), which is an internal engine process resulting in a NOX reduction which will meet the requirements of the regulation. By means of this process, condensate of exhaust gas will be generated and discharged as bleed-off water, which should be handled differently depending on the fuel oil sulphur content. EGR may also be used as a Tier II compliance option. 1.3 These Guidelines cover the discharge of EGR bleed-off water. They are recommendatory in nature; however, the Administrations are invited to base their implementation on these Guidelines. 2 GENERAL 2.1 Purpose The purpose of these Guidelines is to specify requirements for the discharge to the sea of bleed-off water when using EGR. 2.2 Application These Guidelines apply to any EGR system on a marine diesel engine, certified in accordance with MARPOL Annex VI, installed on board a ship. 2.3 Definitions 2.3.1 "Bleed-off water" means water to be discharged directly, or via a holding tank, to the sea from an EGR water treatment system. 2.3.2 "EGC" means exhaust gas cleaning. 2.3.3 "EGCS Guidelines" means the 2015 Guidelines for exhaust gas cleaning systems (resolution MEPC.259(68), as may be amended). 2.3.4 "EGR record book" means a record of the maintenance and servicing of the monitoring equipment required by these Guidelines. This may be met by following the relevant requirements of the EGCS Guidelines or the Revised Guidelines and Specifications for Pollution Prevention Equipment for Machinery Space Bilges of Ships (resolution MEPC.107(49)), as amended by resolution MEPC.285(70), as appropriate. This record would include the date, time, location and quantity of residues delivered ashore from the EGR water treatment system or may be recorded in the EGCS Record Book.



3 DISCHARGE OF EGR BLEED-OFF WATER INTO THE SEA 3.1 Bleed-off water when using fuel oil not complying with the relevant limit value

in regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI 3.1.1 The bleed-off water discharged to the sea from an EGR water treatment system may or may not be combined with the discharge water from an EGC system. In either case, this discharge to the sea should be documented, monitored and recorded, as appropriate, in accordance with the relevant requirements of the EGCS Guidelines. Upon request, the Administration should be provided with bleed-off water samples according to appendix 3 of the EGCS Guidelines, as applicable. 3.1.2 Bleed-off water which is retained onboard in a holding tank should not be discharged to the sea, except when:

.1 the ship is en route1 and outside polar waters2, ports, harbours or estuaries; and

.2 the bleed-off water discharged meets the provisions of paragraph 3.1.1.

3.2 Bleed-off water when using fuel oil complying with the relevant limit value in

regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI 3.2.1 In case the EGR system is in operation and the sulphur content of the fuel oil used for the engine complies with regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI, the discharge of bleed-off water should meet the requirements of paragraph 3.1, unless the following conditions are satisfied:

.1 the ship is en route1 outside polar waters2, ports, harbours or estuaries;

.2 the sulphur content of the fuel oil used for the engine when the EGR system is in operation complies with the relevant requirements of regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI;

.3 the oil content3 and turbidity/suspended particle matter of the bleed-off water

discharge is continuously monitored and recorded; and

.4 the oil content3 of the discharge does not exceed 15 ppm and turbidity/suspended particle matter does not exceed 25 FNU (formazin nephlometric units) or 25 NTU (nephlometric turbidity units) or equivalent units.

3.2.2 When the EGR system is operated in polar waters2, ports, harbours or estuaries, the discharge of bleed-off water to the sea should comply with section 3.1.

1 Refer to Unified Interpretation to regulation 15.2.1 of the revised MARPOL Annex I (MEPC 55/23, annex 18).

2 Refer to the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code) (resolutions MEPC.264(68)

and MSC.385(94)).

3 Refer to the Revised Guidelines and Specifications for Pollution Prevention Equipment for Machinery Space

Bilges of Ships (resolution MEPC.107(49), as amended by resolution MEPC.285(70)).



3.2.3 Bleed-off water which is retained on board in a holding tank should not be discharged to the sea, except when:

.1 the ship is en route1 and outside polar waters2, ports, harbours or estuaries; and

.2 the bleed-off water discharged meets the provisions of paragraph 3.2.1.

4 RESIDUES FROM EGR WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS 4.1 Residues from EGR water treatment systems should be delivered ashore to adequate reception facilities. Such residues should not be discharged to the sea or incinerated on board. 4.2 Each ship fitted with an EGR unit should record the storage and disposal of bleed-off water residues in an EGR record book, including the date, time and location of such storage and disposal. 5 BLEED-OFF WATER ADDITIVES 5.1 In case additives are used for enhancing the bleed-off water quality, an assessment of the additive should be performed and documented unless the below substances are used and documented with Material Safety Data Sheet:

.1 neutralization agent (caustic substance), such as Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) or Sodium Carbonate (Na2CO3); and

.2 flocculants, which are used for marine approved oily-water separating

equipment. 5.2 For those technologies which make use of chemicals, additives, preparations or create relevant chemicals, not including those in paragraph 5.1, in situ, there should be an assessment of the bleed-off water additives. The assessment could take into account relevant guidelines such as the Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of active substances (G9) (resolution MEPC.169(57)), and, if necessary, additional bleed-off water discharge criteria should be established. 6 SURVEY AND CERTIFICATION The bleed-off discharge system and the EGR record book should be subject to survey on installation and at initial, annual/intermediate and renewal surveys by the Administration. The bleed-off discharge system and the EGR record book may also be subject to inspection by port State control.

***



ANNEX 7

OPRC MODEL TRAINING COURSES

(The text for the OPRC model training courses is contained in documents PPR 4/21/Add.2 and Add.3)

***



ANNEX 8

DRAFT UNIFIED INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION 36.2.10 OF MARPOL ANNEX I

Regulation 36 – Oil Record Book Part II – Cargo/Ballast operations Terminal hose flush water Regulation 36.2.10 Interpretation: When the master of an oil tanker agrees to accept terminal hose flush water from a Single Point Mooring (SPM) or a Conventional Buoy Mooring (CBM), that flush water should be categorized as the disposal of residues under regulation 36.2.10. Appropriate entries should be made under Item J of Part II of the Oil Record Book. The following are examples of how these entries should be made:

.1 At the load port where the flush water is received by the tanker, use the suggested wording for remarks:

(J) 55 At the request of (terminal xxxx), terminal line flush water (sea water)

has been loaded into the ship's xxx tank 56 xxx m³ flush water 57.4 Transferred from terminal xxxx line/hoses. Total quantity in xxx tank

….. m3; and .2 At the discharge port where the flush water is disposed of by the tanker: (J) 55 xxx tank 56 xxx m³, quantity retained in tank: xxx m3 57.1 a quantity of xxx m3 terminal line flush water received at the loading port terminal (xxx) was disposed/transferred to terminal xxx facility.



ANNEX 9

DRAFT MEPC RESOLUTION

2017 GUIDELINES ADDRESSING ADDITIONAL ASPECTS OF THE NOX TECHNICAL CODE 2008 WITH REGARD TO PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO MARINE

DIESEL ENGINES FITTED WITH SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION (SCR) SYSTEMS

THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION COMMITTEE,

RECALLING Article 38(a) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (the Committee) conferred upon it by international conventions for the prevention and control of marine pollution from ships,

RECALLING ALSO that, at its fifty-eighth session, it adopted, by resolution MEPC.176(58), a revised MARPOL Annex VI (hereinafter referred to as "MARPOL Annex VI") and, by resolution MEPC.177(58), a revised Technical Code on Control of Emission of Nitrogen Oxides from Marine Diesel Engines (hereinafter referred to as "NOX Technical Code 2008"), NOTING regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex VI which makes the NOX Technical Code 2008 mandatory under that Annex, NOTING ALSO that the use of NOX-reducing devices is envisaged in the NOX Technical Code 2008 and that selective catalytic reduction systems (hereinafter referred to as "SCR systems") are such NOX-reducing devices for compliance with the Tier III NOX limit, NOTING FURTHER that, at its sixty-second session, it adopted, by resolution MEPC.198(62), the 2011 Guidelines addressing additional aspects to the NOX Technical Code 2008 with regard to particular requirements related to marine diesel engines fitted with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Systems (hereinafter "the 2011 Guidelines"), and at its sixty-eighth session, amendments thereto, by resolution MEPC.260(68),

RECOGNIZING the need to update the 2011 Guidelines accordingly,

HAVING CONSIDERED, at its seventy-first session, a draft revision of the 2011 Guidelines, prepared by the Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response, at its fourth session,

1 ADOPTS the 2017 Guidelines addressing additional aspects to the NOX Technical Code 2008 with regard to particular requirements related to marine diesel engines fitted with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Systems, as set out at annex to the present resolution;

2 INVITES Administrations to take the annexed Guidelines into account when certifying engines fitted with SCR systems;

3 REQUESTS Parties to MARPOL Annex VI and other Member Governments to bring the annexed Guidelines to the attention of shipowners, ship operators, shipbuilders, marine diesel engine manufacturers and any other interested parties;

4 AGREES to keep these Guidelines under review in light of experience gained with their application; 5 SUPERSEDES the 2011 Guidelines, adopted by resolution MEPC.198(62), as amended by resolution MEPC.260(68).



2017 GUIDELINES ADDRESSING ADDITIONAL ASPECTS TO THE NOX TECHNICAL CODE 2008 WITH REGARD TO PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO MARINE

DIESEL ENGINES FITTED WITH SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION (SCR) SYSTEMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 GENERAL

2.1 Purpose 2.2 Application 2.3 Definitions

3 PRE-CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE

3.1 General 3.2 Technical File and on board NOX verification procedures 3.3 Measures to minimize reductant slip 3.4 Pre-certification procedure 3.5 EIAPP certificate

4 FAMILY AND GROUP CONCEPTS FOR ENGINE SYSTEMS FITTED WITH SCR 5 TEST PROCEDURES FOR SCHEME A

5.1 General 5.2 Calculation of gaseous emissions

6 TEST PROCEDURES FOR SCHEME B

6.1 General 6.2 Verification test procedures for an engine 6.3 Test procedures for SCR chambers 6.4 Calculation of the specific emission 6.5 Test report to be submitted to the Administration

7 ON BOARD CONFIRMATION TEST FOR SCHEME B



1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The use of NOX-reducing devices is envisaged in section 2.2.5 of the NOX Technical Code 2008 (NTC 2008) and a Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) system is one of such devices. 1.2 The NTC 2008 contains two ways for pre-certification of engine systems fitted with NOX-reducing devices:

.1 engine fitted with SCR: Approval in accordance with paragraph 2.2.5.1 of the NTC 2008. Test according to chapter 5 of the NTC 2008; and

.2 a simplified measurement method in accordance with section 6.3 of the

NTC 2008 as regulated in paragraph 2.2.5.2 (Primary failure case) of the Code. 1.3 According to paragraph 2.2.5.1 of the NTC 2008, where a NOX-reducing device is to be included within the EIAPP certification, it must be recognized as a component of the engine, and its presence shall be recorded in the engine's Technical File. The engine shall be tested with the NOX-reducing device fitted unless, due to technical and practical reasons, the combined testing is not appropriate and the procedures specified in paragraph 2.2.4.1 of the NTC 2008 cannot be applied, subject to approval by the Administration. In the latter case the provisions of Scheme B as set out in these Guidelines should be applied. 1.4 Administrations are invited to take these Guidelines into account when certifying engines fitted with SCR. 2 GENERAL 2.1 Purpose The purpose of these Guidelines is to provide guidance in addition to the requirements of the NTC 2008 for design, testing, surveys and certification of marine diesel engines fitted with an SCR system to ensure its compliance with the requirements of regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex VI. 2.2 Application These Guidelines apply to marine diesel engines fitted with SCR for compliance with regulation 13 of MARPOL Annex VI. 2.3 Definitions Unless provided otherwise, the terms in these Guidelines have the same meaning as the terms defined in regulation 2 of MARPOL Annex VI and in section 1.3 of the NTC 2008. 2.3.1 "Engine system fitted with SCR" means a system consisting of a marine diesel engine, an SCR chamber and a reductant injection system. When a control device on NOX-reducing performance is provided, it is also regarded as a part of the system. 2.3.2 "Catalyst block" means a block of certain dimension through which exhaust gas passes and which contains catalyst composition on its inside surface to reduce NOX from exhaust gas.



2.3.3 "SCR chamber" means an integrated unit, which contains the catalyst block(s), and into which flows exhaust gas and reductant. 2.3.4 "Reductant injection system" means a system, which consists of the pump(s) to supply reductant to the nozzle(s), the nozzle(s) spraying reductant into the exhaust gas stream and control device(s) of the spray. 2.3.5 "AV (area velocity) value" means a value of the exhaust gas flow rate passing through the catalyst blocks (m3/h) per total active surface area of the catalyst blocks in the SCR chamber (m2). Therefore, unit of AV value is (m/h). The exhaust gas flow volume is the volume defined at 0°C and 101.3 kPa. 2.3.6 "SV (space velocity) value" means a value of the exhaust gas flow rate passing through the catalyst block(s) (m3/h) per total volume of the catalyst block(s) in the SCR chamber (m3). Therefore, unit of SV value is (1/h). The exhaust gas flow volume is the volume defined at 0°C and 101.3 kPa. 2.3.7 "Total volume of the catalyst block" means the volume (m3) based on outer dimensions of the catalyst block. 2.3.9 "LV (linear velocity) value" means a value of the exhaust gas flow rate passing through the catalyst blocks (m3/h) per catalyst block's section (m2) in a normal direction of exhaust gas flow. Therefore, unit of LV value is (m/h). The exhaust gas flow volume is the volume defined at 0°C and 101.3 kPa. 2.3.9 "Block section" means the cross-sectional area (m2) of the catalyst block based on the outer dimensions. 2.3.10 "NOX reduction rate η" means a value deriving from the following formula. Unit of

is (%):

100)(

inlet

outletinlet

c

cc

Where:

inletc is NOX concentration (ppm) as measured at the inlet of the SCR chamber;

outletc is NOX concentration (ppm) as measured at the outlet of the

SCR chamber.

2.3.11 "Catalyst block casing or frame" means a casing or frame of an assembly (module) of several catalyst blocks. 3 PRE-CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE 3.1 General 3.1.1 Engine systems fitted with SCR should be certified in accordance with chapter 2 of the NTC 2008. In cases where combined engine/SCR systems cannot be tested on a test bed owing to technical and practical reasons nor an on board test can be performed fully complying with the requirements of chapter 5 of the NTC 2008 the procedures provided by Scheme B of these guidelines should be applied.



3.1.2 The applicant for certification should be the entity responsible for the complete system "Engine system fitted with SCR". 3.1.3 The applicant should supply all necessary documentation, including the Technical File for the complete system, a description of the required on board NOX verification procedure and, where applicable, the description of the confirmation test procedure. 3.2 Technical File and on board NOX verification procedures 3.2.1 In addition to the information supplied in paragraph 3.1.3 of these Guidelines and items in section 2.4 of the NTC 2008, engine systems fitted with SCR should include the following information in its Technical File:

.1 reductant: component/type and concentration; .2 reductant injection system including critical dimensions and supply volume; .3 design features of SCR specific components in the exhaust duct from the

engine exhaust manifold to the SCR chamber. The design features are to be specified by the applicant and may include, but are not limited to:

.1 any restrictions specified by the applicant relating to exhaust duct

configuration/design, including the position and number of bends in exhaust duct along with orientation and geometry, exhaust duct changes of diameter and arrangements fitted to manipulate exhaust flow, where applicable;

.2 minimum distance between reductant injection point(s) and SCR

chamber; .3 position of reductant injection equipment within duct and the

direction of reductant injection, e.g., counter flow or parallel flow; .4 reductant mixing arrangements; .5 reductant lances, nozzles, atomizing arrangement; .6 inlet plenum design, top entry or bottom entry; .7 where an SCR by-pass arrangement is stipulated by the applicant,

the control specifications, identification of the by-pass valve and its control device; and

.8 where an integrated reductant injection and SCR chamber

arrangement is supplied as a packaged item to be fitted into an exhaust duct, the parameters of such a unit which may affect NOX emissions;



.4 catalyst block specification and arrangement in the SCR chamber. The details of the catalyst block specification and the arrangement of catalyst blocks within the SCR chamber may include, but are not limited to:

.1 installation of blocks within the SCR chamber, including the number

of blocks, number of layers and the SCR chamber casing and frame to prevent exhaust gas slip;

.2 catalyst block geometry; .3 limiting characteristics such as CPSI (cells per square inch) and

ranges for physical parameters such as the space velocity (SV), area velocity (AV) and linear velocity (LV), or a part number or specification number specified by the applicant on the catalyst block;

.4 catalyst material: this may be identified by means of a part number

or specification number. The means to ensure a correct catalyst block installed on board against the Technical File, where a part number or specification number specified by the applicant on the catalyst block casing or frame is acceptable;

.5 arrangement of soot blowing equipment; .6 inspection and access arrangements. The inspection of the SCR

chamber should be limited to ensuring that the correct catalyst blocks are fitted during assembly of the SCR and the inspection of spare catalyst blocks can be accepted to demonstrate compliance at surveys other than at the initial assembly of the SCR; and

.7 any baffle plates or other devices installed within the SCR chamber

for exhaust gas and reductant flow distribution; .5 inlet parameters including allowable exhaust gas temperature (maximum

and minimum) at the inlet of the SCR chamber; .6 cross-unit parameters: allowable pressure loss (Δp) between inlet and outlet

of SCR chamber and in the exhaust duct caused by SCR components. Where there is any element of the SCR system upstream and/or downstream of the SCR chamber which affects the allowable pressure loss, then this allowable pressure loss (∆p) is to be based on the entire SCR system;

.7 aspects related to the fuel oil quality resulting in continued compliance of the

engine with the applicable NOX emission limit to assure continued NOX reduction may include, but not be limited to:

.1 the maximum allowable sulphur content of fuel oil which can be

combusted, while maintaining compliance; and .2 guidance on applicable fuel oil composition and fuel oil contaminants

under operational conditions;



.8 factors related to the deterioration rate of SCR performance, e.g. exchange condition for SCR catalyst blocks and recommended exchange time of SCR catalyst blocks:

.1 where a feedback or a feed forward reductant control strategy is

incorporated with a NOX measurement device, this is acceptable as a means of monitoring catalyst condition/degradation. The exchange criteria of catalyst blocks against the reading of the NOX measurement device is to be specified by the applicant as well as the maintenance, service, and calibration requirements for the NOX measurement device;

.2 where a feed forward reductant control strategy is adopted without

a NOX measurement device, the application is to provide the details of:

.1 the expected deterioration curve under expected operating

conditions or the life of catalyst under expected operating conditions;

.2 factors which can influence catalyst NOX reduction efficiency;

and .3 guidance on how to assess catalyst NOX reduction

efficiency based on periodical spot checks or monitoring as specified by the applicant, if applicable; records are to be kept for inspection during annual, intermediate and renewal surveys. The frequency of periodical spot checks is to be defined by the applicant considering the expected deterioration of the catalyst. The frequency for spot-checks should be at least after installation and once every 12 months; and

.3 other strategies on monitoring the catalyst condition/degradation

are subject to the approval of the Administration. .9 controlling arrangements and settings of the SCR, e.g., model, specification

of control device. This is to include, but not be limited to:

.1 the reductant injection control strategy which may be a feed forward reductant injection control or feedback reductant injection control strategy;

.2 instrumentation and sensors which are part of the SCR control

arrangement, as applicable;

.3 crew instructions for allowable adjustment of control parameters including details of how to prevent unauthorized alteration of the system configuration parameters, programmable logic controller (PLC) data, and central processing units (CPU) as applicable;



.4 where a NOX measurement device is used, the following details should be included:

.1 type/model (identification number);

.2 calibration, zero and span check procedures and the

periodicity of such checks, if applicable;

.3 calibration gases to be carried on board if applicable; and

.4 Maintenance and/or exchange requirements;

.5 where the engine system fitted with SCR has different operating modes (e.g. modes for Tier II and Tier III compliance separately), details of the control philosophy for selecting different modes of operation and recording the mode of operation together with means of changing between modes; and

.6 auxiliary control devices, as mentioned in regulation 13.9 and

defined in regulation 2.4 of MARPOL Annex VI, respectively, may be used on engine systems fitted with SCR, covering starting and stopping, low load operation and reversing operation, subject to the approval of the Administration;

.10 measures to minimize reductant slip. The maximum reductant slip may be

specified by the applicant. Supporting information, including reductant injection rates under certain engine loads, the catalyst temperature or exhaust gas temperature when reductant injection occurs, etc. may be included in order to prevent reductant slip from exceeding the specified maximum level. Reductant slip monitoring in the exhaust duct downstream of the SCR or an equivalent means may be accepted as a means to minimize reductant slip. Alternatively, means of alleviating reductant slip (for example through the use of an ammonia slip catalyst or active catalyst thermal management) may be accepted as a means to minimize reductant slip;

.11 parameter check method as the verification procedure: with regard to the

application of the parameter check method, requirements given in paragraph 2.3.6 of the NTC 2008 and guidance given in appendix VII, paragraph 2 of the NTC 2008 should be taken into account in assessing the adequacy of a proposed procedure with analysers meeting or exceeding the requirements of appendix III of the NTC 2008; and

.12 any other parameter(s) specified by the applicant.

3.3 Measures to minimize reductant slip When SCR uses urea solution, ammonia solution or ammonia gas as reductant, measures to prevent reductant slip should be provided to avoid the supply of an excessive amount of reductant in the system. The reductant injection system should be designed to prevent emissions of any harmful substance from the system.



3.4 Pre-certification procedure Test and pre-certification of an engine system fitted with SCR should be conducted either by Scheme A (as given in section 5 of these Guidelines), or by Scheme B (as given in sections 6 and 7 of these Guidelines), as appropriate. 3.5 EIAPP certificate 3.5.1 An Engine International Air Pollution Prevention (EIAPP) Certificate (see appendix I of the NTC 2008) should be issued by the Administration after approval of the Technical File. 3.5.2 When an applicant chooses the Scheme B for pre-certification, the IAPP initial survey should not be completed until the on board initial confirmation test provides compliant results. The applicant remains the responsible entity until final acceptance of the system. 3.5.3 When the engine is to be certified to both Tier II and Tier III, the EIAPP Certificate should be completed for both Tier II and Tier III with a single Technical File covering both Tier modes. 4 FAMILY AND GROUP CONCEPTS FOR ENGINE SYSTEMS FITTED WITH SCR 4.1 The requirements in chapter 4 of the NTC 2008 apply equally to engine systems fitted with SCR. 4.2 The parent engine is to be the engine system fitted with SCR with the highest NOX emission value of the group/family as specified in section 4.3.9.1 and 4.4.8.1 of the NTC 2008. In cases where there is more than one combined engine/SCR system with the same highest NOX emission value given to two decimal places (cycle value in g/kWh) within an engine family or an engine group, the parent engine is the system with the highest raw NOX value emitted from the engine. 4.3 The parent engine for Tier II compliance is not necessarily the same parent of the combined engine/SCR system for Tier III compliance.

5 TEST PROCEDURES FOR SCHEME A

5.1 General

5.1.1 A test for a combined system of an engine fitted with an SCR in Scheme A is to ensure compliance with the applicable NOX emission limits of MARPOL Annex VI, as required. The test bed measurement procedures of chapter 5 of the NTC 2008 should apply.

5.1.2 Notwithstanding paragraph 5.1.1, the applicant may choose to test the combined system of an engine fitted with an SCR with a by-pass arrangement without that by-pass installed for the purpose of test bed measurement. Any effect to the fluid dynamics or reductant distribution caused by the absence of the by-pass arrangement is to be presented by the applicant.

5.2 Calculation of gaseous emissions

5.2.1 The calculation method in section 5.12 of the NTC 2008 is also applied to engine systems fitted with SCR. No allowance is made for the reductant solution injected into the exhaust gas stream in respect of its effect on exhaust gas mass flow rate calculation (appendix VI) or dry/wet correction factor (equation (11), paragraph 5.12.3.2.2 of the NTC 2008). The NOX correction factor for humidity and temperature (equations (16) or (17), paragraphs 5.12.4.5 and 5.12.4.6, respectively, of the NTC 2008) should not be applied.



5.2.2 For an engine system fitted with SCR, the following parameters should be measured and recorded in the engine test report in accordance with section 5.10 of the NTC 2008:

.1 injection rate of reductant at each load point (kg/h); .2 exhaust gas temperature at the inlet and outlet of the SCR chamber (°C); .3 pressure loss (kPa): it is necessary to measure the pressure at inlet and at

outlet of the SCR chamber and to calculate pressure loss Δp. It would also be permissible to measure the pressure loss ∆p of the SCR chamber with a differential pressure sensor. The allowable Δp limit should be confirmed; and

.4 other parameter(s) as specified by the Administration.

6 TEST PROCEDURES FOR SCHEME B 6.1 General 6.1.1 A test for an engine system fitted with SCR in Scheme B is to ensure that the system complies with the applicable NOX emission limits in MARPOL Annex VI, as required. The test procedures in Scheme B are as follows:

.1 an engine is tested to obtain the NOX emission value (g/kWh) in accordance with paragraph 6.2.1 of these Guidelines;

.2 the SCR NOX reduction rate may be calculated by modelling tools, taking into account geometrical reference conditions, chemical NOX conversion models as well as other parameters to be considered;

.3 for every type of catalytic element, an SCR chamber, not necessarily to full scale, is to be tested in accordance with section 6.3 of these Guidelines in order to generate data for the calculation model as that used in paragraph 6.1.1.2 of these Guidelines;

.4 the NOX emission from the engine system fitted with SCR, which is calculated in accordance with section 6.4 of these Guidelines using the NOX emission value from the engine and the NOX reduction rate of SCR chamber. At this point the Technical File will be completed and this NOX emission value will be entered into the supplement of the EIAPP certificate; and

.5 the NOX emission performance of the engine combined with the SCR is verified by a confirmation test in accordance with the procedure in paragraph 7.5 of these Guidelines.

6.1.2 The calculation of gaseous emissions in paragraph 6.1.1.1 of these Guidelines should be undertaken in accordance with paragraph 5.2.1 of these Guidelines. 6.2 Verification test procedures for an engine 6.2.1 The purpose of the test of an engine is to establish the emission values for use in section 6.4 of these guidelines. These measurements should be in accordance with chapter 5 of the NTC 2008.



6.2.2 Paragraph 5.9.8.1 of the NTC 2008 requires engine conditions to be measured at each mode point, for an engine system. This equally applies in the case of an engine fitted with SCR. Additionally, exhaust gas temperature at the intended inlet of the SCR chamber should be determined and recorded in the test report as required by section 5.10 of the NTC 2008. 6.3 Test procedures for SCR chambers

6.3.1 General

6.3.1.1 The SCR chamber for validation testing may be either a full scale SCR chamber or a scaled version. A SCR chamber should demonstrate the reduction in NOX concentrations (ppm) expected in exhaust gas measured in section 6.2 of these Guidelines. Therefore, NOX reduction rate of the SCR chamber should be determined for each individual mode point. Where undertaken on a scaled version of the SCR chamber the scaling process should be validated to the satisfaction of the Administration. 6.3.1.2 The scaling process is to correspond with the modelling tool of paragraph 6.1.1.2 of these Guidelines, and take into account geometrical reference conditions, and chemical NOX conversion models, and other parameters which have influence on NOX conversion rate in the modelling tool. If the scaling process could not be validated satisfactorily by theoretical analysis or calculations taking into consideration the complex conditions in the SCR chamber, such as uniformity of gas speed, reductant, a combined engine and SCR system validation test in accordance with Scheme A should be undertaken.

6.3.1.3 The modelling tool of paragraph 6.1.1.2 of these Guidelines is acceptable for use in other engine groups which operate within the same defined boundary conditions.

6.3.2 Test conditions at each mode point

6.3.2.1 Exhaust gas, catalyst, reductant and an injection system should satisfy the following conditions at each mode point:

.1 Exhaust gas flow Exhaust gas flow rate for the test should be scaled accordingly to account for the dimension of the catalyst model.

.2 Exhaust gas component

Exhaust gas for the test should either be diesel engine exhaust gas or simulated gas. Where diesel exhaust gas is used it should correspond, in terms of concentrations, to the exhaust gas in section 6.2 of these Guidelines, in terms of NOX, O2, CO2, H2O and SO2 (±5% of the required concentration for each emission species). Where simulated gas is used it should correspond, in terms of concentrations, to the exhaust gas in section 6.2 of these Guidelines, in terms of NO, NO2, O2, CO2, H2O and SO2 (±5% of the required concentration for each emission species) balance N2. An exemption for one or more of the above-mentioned gas species' concentration requirements may be allowed subject to a demonstration test showing that the gas or gases do not affect the NOX reduction rate by more than 2%.



.3 Exhaust gas temperature The temperature of exhaust gas used for the test should correspond to the temperatures obtained from testing in section 6.2 of these Guidelines, ensuring that the SCR chamber is activated at every load point, other than as provided for by 3.1.4 of the NTC 2008, and that no ammonia bisulphate formation, or reductant destruction, takes place.

.4 Catalyst blocks and AV, SV value The catalyst blocks used in the test should be representative of the catalyst blocks to be used in the SCR chamber in service. AV, SV or LV value should, in the case of full scale tests, be within -5% or above of the required value as obtained in testing from section 6.2 of these Guidelines. In the case of scaled tests it should correspond to the above.

.5 Reductant

The reductant concentration on the surface of the tested catalyst should be representative of the reductant concentration on the surface of the catalyst during actual engine operation. Ammonia gas may be used as a reductant for the SCR chamber test, provided that it results in an equivalent concentration on the catalyst surface.

6.3.3 Stability for measurement All measurements should be recorded after they have stabilized. 6.3.4 List of data to be derived from the model 6.3.4.1 Operating data which is to be given in the Technical File should be derived from the modelling process or otherwise justified. 6.3.4.2 Exhaust gas analysers should be in accordance with appendix III and appendix IV of the NTC 2008 or otherwise to the satisfaction of the Administration. 6.3.5 Test report for SCR chamber Data recorded under paragraph 6.3.1.1 of these Guidelines should be recorded in the test report as required by section 5.10 of the NTC 2008. 6.4 Calculation of the specific emission 6.4.1 The NOX emission value of the engine system fitted with SCR should be calculated as follows:

ni

i F

F

ni

i mgasi

x

i

ii

WP

Wq

1 i

1100100

gas

Where:

i NOX reduction rate (%) derived in accordance with section 6.3 of these Guidelines;

imgasq = Mass flow of NOX gas measured in accordance with

section 6.2 of these Guidelines;



iFW = Weighting factor;

iP = Measured power at individual mode points in accordance

with section 6.2 of these Guidelines.

The weighting factors and number of modes (n) used in above calculation shall be according to the provisions of section 3.2 of the NTC 2008.

6.4.2 The NOX emission value (g/kWh) calculated in accordance with paragraph 6.4.1 of these Guidelines should be compared to the applicable emission limit. This emission value is entered into 1.9.6 of the Supplement to the EIAPP certificate (appendix I of the NTC 2008). 6.5 Test report to be submitted to the Administration The test report referenced under paragraphs 6.2.2 and 6.3.5of these Guidelines, together with the data from section 6.4 of these Guidelines should be consolidated into the overall documentation to be submitted to the Administration. 7 ON BOARD CONFIRMATION TEST FOR SCHEME B 7.1 After installation on board of an engine system fitted with SCR and before entry into service an initial confirmation test should be performed on board. 7.2 The engine system fitted with the SCR should be verified as corresponding to the description given in the Technical File. 7.3 The confirmation test should be undertaken as close as possible to 25%, 50% and 75% of rated power, independent of test cycle. 7.4 At each mode point of the confirmation test the operating values as given in the Technical File should be verified. 7.5 NOX emission concentrations should be measured at the inlet and outlet of the SCR chamber. The NOX reduction rate should be calculated. Both values should either be dry or wet. The value obtained for NOX reduction rate should be compared to the initial confirmation test required value at each mode point as given in the Technical File. Reduction efficiency values obtained at each of the test points should not be less than the corresponding values as given in the Technical File by more than 5%. 7.6 The NOX analyser should meet the requirements of chapter 5 of the NTC 2008. 7.7 When an engine system fitted with SCR is in a group defined in chapter 4 of these Guidelines, the confirmation test should be conducted only for the parent engine system of the group. Where the parent engine system of the group is not the first one to complete the onboard confirmation test as required by chapter 7 of these Guidelines, the onboard confirmation test is to be done for all installed engine systems within the engine group unless it is an identical NOX specification member engine or the parent engine system has been installed and tested successfully. Where the parent engine system is not available to be installed on board, the first installed member engine system of the engine group can be chosen and adjusted to the worst case NOX emission for confirmation test on board instead. The test results should be verified as described in the Technical File.

***



ANNEX 10

BIENNIAL STATUS REPORT 2016 -2017

SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE (PPR)

Output number

Description

Target completion

year

Parent organ(s)

Associated organ(s)

Coordinating organ(s)

Status of output for

Year 1


Year 2 References

1.1.2.3 Unified interpretation of provisions of IMO safety, security, and environment-related Conventions

Continuous MSC / MEPC III / PPR / CCC / SDC / SSE / NCSR

Ongoing Ongoing MEPC 70/18/Add.1, annex 13. PPR 4/21, annex 8

2.0.1.2 Revised guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis

2017 MEPC PPR III In progress Postponed MEPC 68/21, paragraphs 7.14 and 17.26

5.2.1.2 Amendments to the IGF Code and development of guidelines for low-flashpoint fuels

2016 MSC PPR / SDC / SSE / HTW

CCC No work requested

No work requested

MSC 94/21, paragraphs 18.5 and 18.6; MSC 95/22, paragraph 3.97

5.2.1.15 Consequential work related to the new Code for ships operating in polar waters

2017 MSC / MEPC PPR / SSE SDC No work requested

No work requested

MSC 93/22, paragraphs 10.44, 10.50 and 20.12; MSC 95/22, paragraphs 3.87 to 3.93; MEPC 68/21, paragraph 6.13; MEPC 68/21/Add.1, annex 10

7.1.2.1 Review of the guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8)

2017 MEPC PPR No work requested

Postponed MEPC 70/18, paragraph 4.16.2

7.1.2.3 Code for the transport and handling of limited amounts of hazardous and noxious liquid substances in bulk on offshore support vessels

2017 MSC / MEPC SDC / SSE PPR In progress Completed PPR 4/21/Add.1, annex 3




Output number

Description

Target completion

year

Parent organ(s)

Associated organ(s)



Year 1


Year 2 References

7.1.2.5 Production of a manual entitled "Ballast Water Management – how to do it"

2017 MEPC PPR In progress Completed PPR 4/21, annex 5

7.1.2.6 Revised section II of the Manual on Oil Pollution-Contingency planning

2017 MEPC PPR Completed PPR 3/22, annex 5

7.1.2.7 Guide on Oil Spill Response in Ice and Snow Conditions


7.1.2.8 Updated IMO Dispersant Guidelines

2017 MEPC PPR In progress Postponed

7.2.2.1 Safety and pollution hazards of chemicals and preparation of consequential amendments to the IBC Code

Continuous MEPC PPR Ongoing Ongoing PPR 4/21, annex 1

7.2.2.3 Review of MARPOL Annex II requirements that have an impact on cargo residues and tank washings of high viscosity, solidifying and persistent floating products and associated definitions, and preparation of amendments (2018)


7.2.2.4 Guidance for exceptions and exemptions under regulations A-3 and A-4 of the BWM Convention

2017 MEPC PPR No work requested

No work requested




Output number

Description

Target completion

year

Parent organ(s)

Associated organ(s)



Year 1


Year 2 References

7.2.3.2 Updated OPRC Model training courses

2017 MEPC PPR Extended Completed PPR 4/21, paragraph 14.8

Notes: MEPC 70 agreed to extend the target completion year to 2017.

7.3.1.2 Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI


Notes: MEPC 70 approved that the title of the output should be amended to read "Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI"

7.3.1.7 Amendments to bunker delivery note to permit the supply of fuel oil not in compliance with regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI


7.3.1.8 Guidelines for on-board sampling and verification of the sulphur content of the fuel oil used on board ships


7.3.1.9 Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation bleed-off water

2017 MEPC PPR Extended Completed PPR 4/21, annex 6

Notes: MEPC 70 agreed to extend the target completion year to 2017.

7.3.1.11 Revision of the 2011 SCR Guidelines

2018 MEPC PPR In progress MEPC 70/18, paragraph 15.15

Note: MEPC 70 agreed to the addition of this new output.




Output number

Description

Target completion

year

Parent organ(s)

Associated organ(s)



Year 1


Year 2 References

7.3.2.2 Impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping


8.0.3.1 Requirements for access to, or electronic versions of, certificates and documents, including record books required to be carried on ships

2017 FAL MSC / MEPC / LEG / III / PPR

No work requested

Postponed MEPC 69/21, paragraph 9.8

13.0.3.1 Improved and new technologies approved for ballast water management systems and reduction of atmospheric pollution

Annual MEPC PPR Completed Completed

14.0.1.1 Analysis and consideration of recommendations to reduce administrative burdens in IMO instruments including those identified by the SG-RAR

2017 Council III / HTW / PPR / CCC / SDC / SSE / NCSR

MSC / MEPC / FAL / LEG

Completed MEPC 70/18, paragraph 13.4

***



ANNEX 11

PROPOSED BIENNIAL AGENDA FOR THE 2018-2019 BIENNIUM

Planned output number

Description Parent organ(s) Coordinating organ(s)

Associated organ(s)

Target completion year

1.1.2.3 Unified interpretation to provisions of IMO safety, security, and environment related Conventions

MSC / MEPC III / PPR / CCC / SDC / SSE / NCSR

Continuous

2.0.1.2 Revised guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis

MEPC III PPR 2017 2019

5.2.1.2 Amendments to the IGF Code and development of guidelines for low-flashpoint fuels

MSC CCC PPR / SDC / SSE / HTW

2016

5.2.1.15 Consequential work related to the new Code for ships operating in polar waters

MSC / MEPC SDC PPR / SSE 2017

7.1.2.1 Review of the guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) Revised guidance on methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms

MEPC PPR 2017 2019

7.1.2.3 Code for the transport and handling of limited amounts of hazardous and noxious liquid substances in bulk on offshore support vessels

MSC / MEPC PPR SDC / SSE 2017

7.1.2.5 Production of a manual entitled "Ballast Water Management- how to do it"

MEPC PPR 2017

7.1.2.6 Revised section II of the Manual on Oil Pollution-Contingency planning

MEPC PPR 2017

7.1.2.7 Guide on Oil Spill Response in Ice and Snow Conditions

MEPC PPR 2016

7.1.2.8 Updated IMO Dispersant Guidelines (Part IV) MEPC PPR 2017 2019

Proposed modifications to the Sub-Committee's 2016-2017 biennial agenda, as set out in annex 15 to document MEPC 70/18/Add.1. Outputs printed in bold have been

selected for the draft provisional agenda for PPR 5, as shown in annex 12. Struck-out text indicates proposed deletions and shaded text indicates proposed changes. Output numbers subject to change by A 30.





Associated organ(s)


7.2.2.1 Safety and pollution hazards of chemicals and preparation of consequential amendments to the IBC Code

MEPC PPR Continuous

7.2.2.3 Review of MARPOL Annex II requirements that have an impact on cargo residues and tank washings of high viscosity, solidifying and persistent floating products and associated definitions, and preparation of amendments (2018)

MEPC PPR 2017 2018

7.2.2.4 Guidance for exceptions and exemptions under regulations A-3 and A-4 of the BWM Convention

MEPC PPR 2017

7.2.3.2 Updated OPRC Model training courses MEPC PPR 2017

7.3.1.2 Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI

MEPC PPR 2017 2018

7.3.1.7 Amendments to bunker delivery note to permit the supply of fuel oil not in compliance with regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI

MEPC PPR 2016

7.3.1.8 Guidelines for onboard sampling and verification of the sulphur content of the fuel oil used on board ships

MEPC PPR 2016

7.3.1.9 Guidelines for the discharge of exhaust gas recirculation bleed-off water

MEPC PPR 2017

7.3.1.11 Revision of the 2011 SCR Guidelines Revised certification requirements for SCR systems under the NOX Technical Code

MEPC PPR 2018

7.3.2.2 Impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping

MEPC PPR 2017 2019

8.0.3.1 Requirements for access to, or electronic versions of, certificates and documents, including record books required to be carried on ships

FAL MSC / MEPC / LEG / III / PPR

2018





Associated organ(s)


13.0.3.1 [Improved and new technologies approved for ballast water management systems and reduction of atmospheric pollution]

MEPC PPR Annual

14.0.1.1 Analysis and consideration of recommendations to reduce administrative burdens in IMO instruments including those identified by the SG-RAR

Council MSC / MEPC / FAL / LEG

III / HTW / PPR / CCC / SDC / SSE / NCSR

2017

- Review of the 2015 Guidelines for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems (resolution MEPC.259(68))

MEPC PPR 2019

- Revised Guidelines for the application of MARPOL Annex I requirements to FPSOs and FSUs

MEPC PPR 2019

- Guide on practical methods for the implementation of the OPRC Convention and the OPRC-HNS Protocol

MEPC PPR 2019

- Amendments to regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI to require a dedicated sampling point for fuel oil

MEPC PPR SSE 2019

- Review of the IBTS Guidelines and amendments to the IOPP Certificate and Oil Record Book

MEPC PPR 2019

- Development of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code on the use of multiple engine operational profiles (Maps) for marine diesel engines

MEPC PPR 2019

- Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI

MEPC PPR 2019

***



ANNEX 12

PROPOSED PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR PPR 5

Opening of the session

1 Adoption of the agenda 2 Decisions of other IMO bodies 3 Safety and pollution hazards of chemicals and preparation of consequential

amendments to the IBC Code 4 Review of MARPOL Annex II requirements that have an impact on cargo residues

and tank washings of high viscosity and persistent floating products 5 Revised guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis 6 Revised Guidance on methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable

organisms 7 Consideration of the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from

international shipping 8 Standards for shipboard gasification of waste systems and associated amendments

to regulation 16 of MARPOL Annex VI [9 Revised certification requirements for SCR systems under the NOX Technical Code] 10 Review of the 2015 Guidelines for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems (resolution

MEPC.259(68)) 11 Amendments to regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI to require a dedicated sampling

point for fuel oil [12 Improved and new technologies approved for ballast water management systems and

reduction of atmospheric pollution] [13 Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI] [14 Development of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical Code on

the use of multiple engine operational profiles (Maps) for marine diesel engines] 15 Revised Guidelines for the application of MARPOL Annex I requirements to FPSOs

and FSUs 16 Review of the IBTS Guidelines and amendments to the IOPP Certificate and Oil

Record Book 17 Updated IMO Dispersant Guidelines (Part IV) 18 Guide on practical methods for the implementation of the OPRC Convention and the

OPRC-HNS Protocol



19 Use of electronic record books 20 Unified interpretation to provisions of IMO environment-related Conventions 21 Biennial agenda and provisional agenda for PPR 6 22 Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for 2019 23 Any other business 24 Report to the Marine Environment Protection Committee

***



ANNEX 13

JUSTIFICATION FOR A NEW OUTPUT ON CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION 14.1.3 OF MARPOL ANNEX VI

Introduction 1 This justification has been developed in accordance with paragraph 4.6 of the annex and annex 1 of the Organization and method of work of the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine Environment Protection Committee and their subsidiary bodies (MSC-MEPC.1/Circ.5), taking into account the Organization's objectives (resolutions A.900(21) and A.909(22)) and the High-level Action Plan for the Organization and priorities for the 2016-2017 biennium (resolution A.1098(29)). Background 2 MEPC 70, having considered an assessment of fuel oil availability, decided that the fuel oil standard in regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI shall become effective on 1 January 2020. 3 In addition, MEPC 70, in recognizing the concerns expressed regarding implementation, agreed to forward document MEPC 70/5/2 and relevant comments made in plenary to PPR 4, for further consideration and to draft a justification and scope for a new output on what additional measures may be developed to promote consistent implementation of the 0.50% global sulphur limit, for consideration at MEPC 71 (MEPC 70/18, paragraph 5.55.4). 4 In this regard, PPR 4 prepared the justification for a new output on consistent implementation of the 0.50% global sulphur limit and the scope for the new output. IMO objectives 5 This work item will contribute to strategic direction 2 "IMO will foster global compliance with its instruments governing international shipping and will strive for their uniform implementation by Member States". It should also contribute to high-level action 2.0.1 "Monitor and improve conventions, etc., and provide interpretation thereof if requested by Member States". Need 6 Implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit in 2020 will significantly reduce SOX

emissions to the atmosphere from the world's fleet, but this new international regulatory standard will also introduce a significant change in the daily operating cost of ships operating outside ECAs. Those additional costs are of a magnitude that could cause serious commercial distortion if there is uneven implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit. To illustrate this point, the additional daily operating cost for a ship burning 100 tonnes of fuel oil a day to comply with a 0.50% sulphur limit could be US$15,000 to US$30,000 per day compared with using non-compliant fuel oil. This is based on a historical price differential ranging from US$150 to US$300 per tonne. Differentials have varied greatly as a result of crude oil price fluctuations. Products emerging to meet the global 0.50% sulphur limit are expected to cost less than traditional marine distillates, but a substantial price differential is nevertheless anticipated with various forecasts suggesting a wide range.



7 There would occur a significant gap between the costs of operators complying with this regulation and of those not complying. Therefore, without consistent implementation to all ships, it is impossible to ensure a level playing field for use of the 0.50% sulphur limit fuel oil, with the result that the expected improvement of the environment and human health could not be achieved.

8 Concerns also need to be resolved/mitigated on fuel oil quality and ships safety commented on by several Member States and NGOs at MEPC 70 and MSC 97 for consistent and effective implementation.

Analysis of the issue

9 Consistent and effective implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit is critical for commercial considerations and to achieve the environmental benefits sought through regulation 14 of MARPOL Annex VI. This point was explicitly recognized by the International Transport Forum (ITF) and OECD in their recent report "Reducing Sulphur Emissions from Ships", OECD/ITF 2016. In addition, inconsistent implementation would increase the uncertainty concerning actual market demand for 0.50% sulphur marine fuel oil, which in turn would increase the difficulty for the marine fuel oil supply chain to plan effectively to meet global demand and for ship operators to assess the viability of investing in exhaust gas cleaning systems.

Analysis of implications

10 A completed checklist for identifying administrative requirements and burdens is set out in annex 1.

Benefits

11 Recognizing the concerns above, it would be useful to explore what actions may be taken to ensure consistent and effective implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI as well as actions that may facilitate effective policies by Member States.

Industry standards

12 There are industry standards, including ISO Standard 8217, relevant to these issues.

Output and scope

13 The intended output on "Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI", includes the following scope:

.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 18.2.4 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 14.1.3 and 14.4.3;



.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 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI; and

.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 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI.

Human element 14 A completed checklist for considering human element issues by IMO bodies is set out in annex 2. Urgency 15 The proposed output is considered urgent since MEPC 70 decided that the fuel oil standard in regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI (0.50% m/m sulphur limit) shall become effective on 1 January 2020. In order to apply this regulation efficiently, the proposed output has to be completed by the end of 2019. 16 The issues to ensure consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI are significant. The Committee should consider a process to give careful consideration to what additional measures may be taken to promote consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI. 17 A new high priority item should be added to the next biennial agendas (2018 to 2019) of the Committee and the PPR Sub-Committee, beginning in 2018 with completion in 2019. It is expected that two sessions (PPR 5 and PPR 6) are sufficient to complete this work. Action requested of the Committee 18 The Committee is invited to add to the biennial agenda of the PPR Sub-Committee for 2018 to 2019 and the provisional agenda for PPR 5 a new output on "Consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI".



ANNEX 1

CHECKLIST FOR IDENTIFYING ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND BURDENS

This checklist should be used when preparing the analysis of implications required for submissions of

proposals for inclusion of unplanned outputs. For the purpose of this analysis, the terms "administrative

requirements" and "burdens" are as defined in resolution A.1043(27) on Periodic review of administrative requirements in mandatory IMO instruments, i.e. administrative requirements are an obligation arising from future IMO mandatory instruments to provide or retain information or data, and administrative burdens are those administrative requirements that are or have become unnecessary, disproportionate or even obsolete. Instructions:

(A) If the answer to any of the questions below is YES, the Member State proposing an

unplanned output should provide supporting details on whether the burdens are likely to involve start-up and/or ongoing cost. The Member State should also give a brief description of the requirement and, if possible, provide recommendations for further work (e.g. would it be possible to combine the activity with an existing requirement?).

(B) If the proposal for the unplanned output does not contain such an activity, answer

NR (Not required).

1. Notification and reporting? Reporting certain events before or after the event has taken place, e.g. notification of voyage, statistical reporting for IMO Members, etc.

NR

Yes □ Start-up □ Ongoing

Description: (if the answer is yes)

2. Record keeping? Keeping statutory documents up to date, e.g. records of accidents, records of cargo, records of inspections, records of education, etc.

NR

Yes □ Start-up x Ongoing

Description: (if the answer is yes) In detecting against ships using fuel oil that exceed the limit of 0.5%, PSC officer records it.

3. Publication and documentation? Producing documents for third parties, e.g. warning signs, registration displays, publication of results of testing, etc.

NR



4. Permits or applications? Applying for and maintaining permission to operate, e.g. certificates, classification society costs, etc.

NR

Yes □ Start-up x Ongoing

Description: (if the answer is yes) Certificates

5. Other identified burdens?

NR





ANNEX 2

CHECKLIST FOR CONSIDERING HUMAN ELEMENT ISSUES BY IMO BODIES

Instructions: If the answer to any of the questions below is: (A) YES, the preparing body should provide supporting details and/or recommendation for further work. (B) NO, the preparing body should make proper justification as to why human element issues were not considered. (C) NA (Not Applicable) – the preparing body should make proper justification as to why human element issues were not considered applicable.

Subject Being Assessed: (e.g. Resolution, Instrument, Circular being considered) consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI

Responsible Body: (e.g. Committee, Sub-committee, Working Group, Correspondence Group, Member State) The Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR)

1. Was the human element considered during development or amendment process related to this subject?

Yes No NA

2. Has input from seafarers or their proxies been solicited? Yes No NA

3. Are the solutions proposed for the subject in agreement with existing instruments? (Identify instruments considered in comments section)

Yes No NA

4. Have human element solutions been made as an alternative and/or in conjunction with technical solutions?

Yes No NA

5. Has human element guidance on the application and/or implementation of the proposed solution been provided for the following:

inistrations? Yes No NA

Yes No NA

Yes No NA

Yes No NA

6. At some point, before final adoption, has the solution been reviewed or considered by a relevant IMO body with relevant human element expertise?

Yes No NA

7. Does the solution address safeguards to avoid single person errors? Yes No NA

8. Does the solution address safeguards to avoid organizational errors? Yes No NA

9. If the proposal is to be directed at seafarers, is the information in a form that can be presented to and is easily understood by the seafarer?

Yes No NA

10. Have human element experts been consulted in development of the solution?

Yes No NA

11. HUMAN ELEMENT: Has the proposal been assessed against each of the factors below?

CREWING. The number of qualified personnel required and available to safely operate, maintain, support, and provide training for system.

Yes No NA

PERSONNEL. The necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience levels that are needed to properly perform job tasks.

Yes No NA

TRAINING. The process and tools by which personnel acquire or improve the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to achieve desired job/task performance.

Yes No NA

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY. The management systems, programmes, procedures, policies, training, documentation, equipment, etc. to properly manage risks.

Yes No NA

WORKING ENVIRONMENT. Conditions that are necessary to sustain the safety, health, and comfort of those working on board, such as noise, vibration, lighting, climate, and other factors that affect crew endurance, fatigue, alertness and morale.

Yes No NA



HUMAN SURVIVABILITY. System features that reduce the risk of illness, injury, or death in a catastrophic event such as fire, explosion, spill, collision, flooding, or intentional attack. The assessment should consider desired human performance in emergency situations for detection, response, evacuation, survival and rescue and the interface with emergency procedures, systems, facilities and equipment.

Yes No NA

HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING. Human-system interface to be consistent with the physical, cognitive, and sensory abilities of the user population.

Yes No NA

Comments:

***



ANNEX 14

STATEMENTS BY DELEGATIONS ITEM 1

Statement by the delegation of Malaysia

"Our first intervention for this new year is we would like to bring your attention as well to a marine casualty incident which had occurred on 3 January 2017. At approximately 2330hrs (Malaysian Time), a collision had occurred in the southern part of Peninsular Malaysia at Port of Pasir Gudang between two container vessels, MV Wan Hai 301, registered in Singapore and APL Denver, registered with Gibraltar. After this collision, both vessels have had mechanical damage and some of loss of cargo due to the impact but very fortunate there was no loss of life nor injury. Further to this, APL Denver had a breach in the fuel tank and consequently approximately 50 tonnes of marine fuel oil spilt to the sea. The Johor Port Authority immediately raised the Oil Spill Response Team, together with corresponding response team from neighbouring countries. The primary focus was to contain and stabilize the leak on the vessel. Among the steps taken was to secure the vessels so that appropriate response was given to the master, crew, and owners. Both vessels were also assessed so that all aspects of structural integrity were preserved to prevent any escalation of damage to the environment. Further to the incident, the spill is being dealt with from both, national and international response tiers. The location of the incident is within the very proximity to several mangrove swamps as well as several fish hatcheries and the Pulau Ubin, Singapore. The resort township of Tanjong Puteri is also approximately 1.5 nautical miles from the scene of the incident. The respective flag states have been notified in accordance to the Casualty Investigation Code as well as a Malaysian Investigation Team has also been set up in accordance to the Malaysian Merchant Shipping Ordinance. Clean up activities have commenced in several areas of coast within the proximity being assessed by National Health Authorities and Department of Environment for consequential damage. We would like to take this opportunity to record our gratitude to the Maritime Port Authority of Singapore for their prompt response and assistance. Further, we would like to also commend both masters the ship's crew, the owners and their respective clubs for their extended cooperation and further assistance so to as facilitate the combating of this incident."

Statements have been included in this annex as provided by delegations, in the order in which they were

given, sorted by agenda item, and in the language of submission (including translation into any other language if such translation was provided). Statements are accessible in all official languages on audio file at: http://docs.imo.org/Meetings/Media.aspx



ITEM 6 Statement by the delegation of Turkey

"Supplemental information on difficulties encountered during ballast water sampling for compliance:

.1 control officers who are responsible for taking ballast water sampling should have experience on plankton sampling. It is very important and first condition;

.2 different habitats may be created by marine species therefore the Person

dutied for sampling should have information on that; .3 they should perform every tricks of equipment which are used to take ballast

water sampling. It is formidable; .4 it's strongly advised that the person responsible for taking the sampling and

evaluating should have the same qualifications and should be same person if it is possible; and

.5 even if ballast water sampling is taken and evaluated by biologist, it is

essential that they should have get experience or pre-works on that. Thus, variations and faults of sampling can be assessed easily."

ITEM 15

Statement by the delegation of Ireland "Ireland thanks the Republic of Korea for document MEPC 70/4/10, which addresses an important issue. Point 1 of that document on background clearly identifies the issue, noting that a ship will be required to conduct ballast water exchange (regulation D-1) or comply with the ballast water performance standard (regulation D-2) from the entry into force (8 September 2017) of the BWM Convention (up until the first IOPP renewal survey, when D-2 applies) Ireland suggests that PPR Sub-Committee should fully debate this issue for the purpose of finding clarity and reporting to MEPC 71. While agreeing with the problems that have been outlined in the document, Ireland does not agree with the Republic of Korea's proposal of a unified interpretation for the implementation of D-1, via regulation B-4. The annex to document MEPC 70/4/10 proposes far more than a clarifying interpretation of the existing regulation B-4; it suggests a substantial change in the current meaning and compliance requirement; potentially infringing on Article 2, the General Obligations of the BWM Convention. Regardless of the suggested changes, Ireland considers that an amendment in the interpretation or text of regulation B-4 does not actually alter the compliance requirements for ships after the entry-into-force date. As an explanation: In the BWM Convention, the option of ballast water exchange, has expired. Assembly Resolution A.1088(28) was drafted to provide an agreed amendment to those expired dates. Resolution A.1088 (28) did not change the compliance requirements of the Convention. It provided a reprieve for the D-1 exchange standard in circumstances where that standard is possible. Regulation B-4 Ballast water exchange provides the necessary information for a ship to implement the BW exchange standard D-1. Regulation B-4 is linked in its entirety to the D-1 standard.



Therefore, if ballast water exchange areas are not available because of geographical, technical, safety or environmental reasons; then the D-1 standard is not available as an applicable means for compliance with the Convention. Accordingly, the linked regulation B-4, explaining how to meet D-1 is not applicable. Amending regulation B-4 does not, in any way exempt, diminish or change the compliance requirements of a ship with the BWM Convention when ballast water exchange is not an option. The ships must simply use another method to comply. Currently, examples of those other methods may be D-2, ballast water performance standard; B-3 points 6 and 7, or via regulation A-4, a risk accessed exemption for Regulation B-3 or C-1. Ireland respectfully suggests that it is not appropriate, at this late stage, to fuel further confusion regarding the compliance methods that are available to meet the obligations of this Convention. In conclusion, Ireland cannot support the proposed interpretation in document MEPC 70/4/10 but hopes that following this debate, a firm and clear conclusion is reached and reported, regarding the BWM Convention's compliance methods and obligations from 8 September this year."

___________

SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND · PDF fileSUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION...

Documents

Transcript of SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION AND · PDF fileSUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION PREVENTION...