# Ναυτιλιακά Θέματα - Shipping Subjects > Shipping Forum > MARPOL >  Environmental issues

## Petros

*Threat from Lebanon oil spill still great say experts*

AS FINANCIAL aid begins to trickle in to deal with the oil spill affecting at least 100 miles of Lebanon’s coastline, international officials leading the response have emphasised that a month after the bombing of the Jieh power plant caused the spill the environmental threat has not diminished.

lloyds list.

----------


## Petros

The introduction of invasive species into new environments by ships’ ballast water attached to ships’ hulls and via other vectors, has been identified as one of the four greatest threats to the world’s oceans. The other three are land-based sources of marine pollution, overexploitation of living marine resources and physical alteration/destruction of marine habitat.

Shipping moves over 80% of the world’s commodities and transfers approximately 3,1 Mton annually of which 1,9 Mton are transported internationally. Ballast water is absolutely essential to the safe and efficient operation of modern shipping, providing balance and stability to ships. However, it may pose a serious ecological, economic and health threat.


*What is ballast water?*


Ballast is any material used to weight and/or balance an object. One example is the sandbags carried on conventional hot-air balloons, which can be discarded to lighten the balloon’s load, allowing it to ascend. Ballast water is water carried by ships to ensure stability, trim and structural integrity.
Ships have carried solid ballast, in the form of rocks, sand or metal, for thousands of years. In modern times, ships use water as ballast.

It is much easier to load on and off a ship, and is therefore more efficient and economical than solid ballast. When a ship is empty of cargo, it fills with ballast water. When it loads cargo, the ballast water is discharged.
*A potentially serious environmental problem arises when ballast water is discharged.*

There are thousands of marine species that may be carried in ships’ ballast water; basically anything that is small enough to pass through a ships’ ballast water intake ports and pumps.

These include bacteria and other microbes, small invertebrates and the eggs, cysts and larvae of various species.

The problem is compounded by the fact that virtually all marine species have life cycles that include a planktonic stage or stages.

Even species in which the adults are unlikely to be taken on in ballast water, or example because they are too large or live attached to the seabed, may be transferred in ballast during their planktonic phase.

Source: Διαφορες
Η Μεταφραση θα γινει: 31 Νοεμβριου 2006

----------


## Petros

NOAA this week urged ship captains to use new recommended routes when entering or leaving the Florida ports of Jacksonville and Fernandina, and Brunswick, Ga., as well as in Cape Cod Bay off Massachusetts. These new routes are expected to reduce the chances of ship strikes with endangered right whales.


The recommended routes take into account safety and economic impact to the mariner. Although the routes are voluntary, they will appear on both electronic and paper NOAA nautical charts no later than November 30. The new designations will help mariners decrease whale strikes by reducing vessel activity in areas frequented by ships and whales.


North Atlantic right whales are among the most endangered marine mammal populations in the world, and are highly vulnerable to ship collisions. Pregnant females and females with calves are known to have been struck by ships along the east coast in recent years. The right whale population is small--around 300--and many scientists believe recovery has stalled, making the few reproductively active females even more important to population recovery. Right whales typically travel south from waters off Canada and New England to calving and nursery areas off Florida and Georgia in winter, traversing areas frequented by large ships. 


Females and their calves then return to more northerly feeding grounds, aggregating in Cape Cod Bay during the spring, also an area with substantial ship traffic. NOAA scientists have been working to better understand the year-round distribution of right whales along the east coast. The agency has also studied ship traffic, particularly around large east coast ports. 


Combining these results, and working with the U.S. Coast Guard, NOAA scientists placed the recommended routes where vessels would be less likely to encounter right whales, in addition to minimizing economic impacts and insuring safety of navigation.


Source: www.marinelink.com

----------


## gvaggelas

Each year Helmepa — the Hellenic Marine Environment Protection Association — coordinates
in Greece the International Coastal Cleanup Day, which takes place on the third Saturday of
September. Aim of this International Day of Volunteerism is to measure the level of awareness of all
citizens of the over 80 countries that take part in this initiative, towards the beaches we use for our
pleasure. Following the tragic events of the fires throughout Greece, for which Helmepa expresses
its "grief and anger" coupled with the announcement of the parliamentary elections, the Voluntary
Beach Cleanups in Greece will take place Saturday, September 29.
Those who want to take part in this cleanup of beaches they enjoyed during summer can contact
Helmepa Junior, Tel: 210-9401.364 and 210-9343.088 or by E-mail at: helmepajunior@
helmepajunior.gr

----------


## gvaggelas

The European Commission presented a proposal which further strengthens the existing Community legislation regarding sanctions on those responsible for pollution by ships.
Franco Frattini, the Commission's Vice-President responsible for Justice, Freedom and Security said, "The new directive is an important complement to the Directive on the protection of the environment through criminal law on which we will hopefully reach agreement soon with the Council and the European Parliament. Both instruments are a signal that the Community does not tolerate safe havens for offenders who severely damage our natural resources". 
Jacques Barrot, the Commission's Vice-President responsible for transport policy said, "Following a recent court ruling, we streamline our rules on sanctions against maritime pollution. The large majority of operators carrying polluting and dangerous goods are behaving fully responsibly and correctly. The proposal is focused on the small minority operators for whom this might not be the case and who tarnish the image of the shipping industry. The proposal provides clear disincentives for irresponsible practices. Quality operators and citizens will benefit from the new rules which will increase maritime safety and prevention of pollution". 
The new proposal for a directive will replace Framework Decision 2005/667/JHA "to strengthen the criminal-law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution". This Framework Decision was adopted in 2005 to supplement Directive 2005/35/EC "on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements". Both instruments were adopted out of concern about the illegal operational discharges of polluting substances from ships at sea and in the aftermath of major accidental oil spills. While the Directive contains a precise definition of the infringements along with the rule that they will ''be subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties, which may include criminal or administrative penalties'' (IP 05/888), the Framework Decision included provisions on the nature, type and levels of criminal penalties. In a ruling issued on 23 October 2007, the European Court of Justice, seized by the Commission, annulled the Framework Decision and ruled that the provisions related to the definition of criminal offences and to the nature of sanctions should be adopted in an instrument based on the EC Treaty if necessary to ensure that the Community's rules on maritime safety are fully effective. 
The new proposal follows the lines of the judgment and copies the content of relevant provisions of the Framework Decision into a Directive which will amend the existing Directive 2005/35/EC. 
With today's proposal, the Directive 2005/35/EC would be amended in a way that its content mirrors the original Commission proposal presented five years ago (IP 03/316).
The new directive will clarify that the infringements defined in Directive 2005/35/EC have to be considered as criminal offences and are to be sanctioned by criminal penalties. The Directive will also oblige Member States to ensure that companies can be held liable for criminal offences committed for their benefit and that these companies are subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties of an administrative or criminal nature. 
The annulment of the Framework Decision and the forthcoming negotiations on today's proposed directive do not affect the implementation of the provisions of the existing Directive 2005/35/EC. 


*Source: European Union*

----------


## Leo

Criticism of shipping 'disappointing and disconcerting'   
Tuesday, 01 April 2008 

Shipping should not be a "scapegoat" for damage to the world environment, says the head of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Efthimios Mitropoulos. The IMO Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization, speaking in London at the opening of the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) said the shipping industry had a "fine record "It is against such a background [….] that I have found recent criticism both disappointing and disconcerting," he said.
In particular, he explained, he took issue with shipping being presented "as disproportionately responsible for air pollution" and climate change.
"The criticism, by some politicians, civil servants and certain media representatives, is often ill-founded and inaccurate and seems to confuse work on air pollutants with that aiming at reducing greenhouse gas emissions."
He went on: "Nobody can claim monopoly over the environment and international shipping should not be allowed to become a scapegoat for those who find it a soft target."
"I expect the response of this Organization to challenges that threaten the environment, to be a resounding "yes" to all measures needed to protect and preserve it - as long as they are realistic, pragmatic, workable and cost-effective and as long as efforts to improve one aspect of a ship's performance do not lead to deterioration in other areas of transport and energy." 
The week-long meeting of the MEPC is expected to finalize and approve amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, the regulations to reduce harmful emissions from ships.
Attention is focused on how much support the committee will give to calls to shift the bunker industry away from residual fuel and towards the exclusive use of distillate products.
Before the meeting broke into working groups Mitropoulos told delegates: "Your task will not be easy at times; the stakes are high and the expectations even higher - failure is not, therefore, an option. 
"However, I am confident that, with IMO's renowned spirit of co operation [….] you will rise to the challenge, respond to the expectations and, thus, serve well the worthy cause of protecting and preserving the environment."

*Source: Sustainable Shipping* 
Δημοσιέυτηκε στo: Hellenic Shipping News
Λυπάμαι το άρθρο είναι μόνο στα Αγγλικά.

----------


## Leo

Friday, 04 April 2008 

The world's top maritime body has tentatively agreed new sulphur limits for ship fuels that will slash air pollutants, but cost the oil and ship industry dear, an industry source close to the talks said on Thursday. At a major U.N. International Maritime Organisation (IMO) meeting in London this week countries gathered to thrash out how best to reduce harmful ship pollutants, like sulphur dioxide, and tackle climate changing gases. The industry source who is involved in the negotiations said countries party to the IMO had provisionally agreed on sulphur limits in ship fuels, a bugbear of the industry and a critical milestone, late last night.
The final figures and timetable will be agreed by the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee on Friday, the source said, adding he would be surprised if it changed radically.
Negotiations on tackling climate changing CO2 gases emitted from ships were still continuing, he said.
"This will be a massive shakeup for the refining industry, they (oil industry) tell us they will be extremely challenged to meet these figures," said Simon Bennett, secretary at the International Chamber of Shipping commenting of the figures.
"It has been reported that this will have far wider implications for the availability and price of diesel for road transport," Bennett said, emphasizing that cleaner distillate fuels would increasingly make up a substantial part of the fuel mix in the future.
The world's 50,000 ocean-going vessels, which carry more than 90 percent of the world's traded goods by volume, currently mostly burn fuel oil rich in sulphur.
ACTION PLAN
The industry source said the revision of the marine pollution laws known as MARPOL Annex VI are as follows:
-- By 2010 all Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA), currently there are only two, in the Baltic (May 2006) and North Sea (Nov 2007), to have a ship fuel sulphur limit of 1 percent from current 1.5 percent.
*It is envisioned that nations will declare new SECA in the future, with the European Union and North America likely declared as huge SECA.
-- By 2012 global sulphur limit reduced to 3.5 percent on ship fuels from the current 4.5 percent.
-- By 2015 All SECA limits to be reduced to 0.1 percent from 1.5 percent. Japan and Australia and other regions likely to have full SECA by then alongside EU and Americas.
-- By 2020 global limit reduced to 0.5 applied of ship fuels. Deadline will have a review two years beforehand to make sure oil industry can produce enough fuels.
-- By 2025 absolute deadline for 0.5 percent fuel across world.
Critics, including the European Commission and regulatory bodies in the United States, have said progress through the U.N. agency to date has been too slow. The wide-reaching revisions may go some way to silencing those critics, experts say.
"All of this is going to be extremely expensive and cost the shipping industry billions of dollars, the cost of bunker fuels is going to increase quite dramatically," ICS's Bennett said, outlining the ramifications for industry.
Bennett, who welcomed the overall initiative on pollutants, said fuels currently represent 50 percent of operating costs for container ships, for example, which carry manufactured goods.
*
Source: Reuters* 
Από το Hellenic Shipping News

----------


## Leo

ΠΗΓΗ: *BIMCO*

BIMCO has proposed the development of a new concept in the realm of shipping, namely that of Quality Coastal States.

It was on the occasion of BIMCO’s Conference on Future Maritime Policy for the EU on 15 November 2006, the first event during the consultative period that focused on the international perspective, that BIMCO’s President Knud Pontoppidan suggested the idea of Quality Coastal States.

The concept developed from the opinion that whilst there has been attention given to quality flag states and quality ships, the coastal states have been ignored. The time is therefore right to draw attention to the coastal states, as they have many important responsibilities relating to safe and secure shipping and the protection of the marine environment.
For example, coastal states deliver essential services to ships, such as waste reception facilities, places of refuge, innocent passage and aids to navigation. BIMCO has proposed that the EU Future Maritime Policy should promote the concept of Quality Coastal State, and in doing so develop the related roles and criteria to qualify.

It is of concern that many coastal states are of the opinion that they have many rights but no obligations. This may be illustrated by the fact that none of the coastal states of the Mediterranean have confirmed to the IMO that they are in compliance with MARPOL Annex V with regard to reception facilities.  This is despite the fact that Annex V has been in force in the very same countries since 1988. This means that the Mediterranean Sea is not yet a Special Area under MARPOL Annex V. In the meantime, Flag States must ensure that all ships calling EU ports are fully compliant with MARPOL Annex V.
 
BIMCO feels that a quality coastal state is one that; 
Fulfils its international duties and obligations by ratifying and implementing internationally agreed conventions, not only in respect of implementation into national law, but also with respect to the day-to-day practices within the coastal waters, at the ports and, last but certainly not least, in the courts.
·         Follows the IMO Guidelines such as the IMO/ILO Guidelines on the fair treatment of seafarers. 
·         Provides adequate waste reception facilities and arrangements to protect the local marine environment and resources. 
·         Maintains its aids to navigation and provides vessel traffic services, where appropriate. 
·         Provides ships in distress with a place of refuge rather than risking environmental disaster by denying it. 
·         Ensures that all steps are taken to facilitate the safe passage of ships through its waters, including making transit pilotage available without hampering innocent passage where transit pilotage is deemed necessary in the interest of the state. 
·         Gives incentives to quality ships calling at its ports and/or navigating within its waters.

BIMCO has pointed out to the Commission that in developing its Future Maritime Policy, the EU could contribute significantly to safe and environmentally friendly maritime transport by helping member states become Quality Coastal States, and by measuring and benchmarking their respective progress.
The list is by no means exhaustive and we would like to develop the concept of Quality Coastal State further. We therefore invite you to comment on what you believe is a Quality Coastal State.

----------


## Leo

**
*Industry poll supports IMO emissions revisions* Thursday, 08 May 2008 An industry poll on sustainableshipping.com has recorded widespread support for the targets set by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) for the revision of MARPOL Annex VI. In the poll, 38&#37; of respondents agreed that "the target limits are good and the timeframes realistic". Still subject to final approval, the IMO agreed in April that the global sulphur cap will be reduced to 3.50% in January 2012, with a long-term global target of just 0.50% in 2020, subject to a review in 2018. 
Nearly one-third of respondents, or 31%, however, voted that these measures were not enough and that "new lower limits are needed sooner".
The European Union has sent a strong signal that the revised Annex VI will probably be enough satisfy European regulators, but government officials from the US have said that even the limits in emissions control areas (ECAs) under the revised annex - 1.00% in March 2010 and to 0.10% in January 2015 - might not be enough to meet California's expectations.
Concern has also been expressed that there would be insufficient low-sulphur fuel available to meet the IMO's targets and 31% of poll respondents agreed that "there will be a shortage of fuel as the long-term sulphur limits are too low".
Such concerns have already been raised by the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), which has consultative status at the IMO.
In a paper presented to the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) it noted that, "the oil industry did not expect that sufficient fuel at 0.10% and 0.50% would be available...in all regions by 2015 and 2020, respectively."
Supply will therefore be one part of the future fuel equation faced by shipowners in bunker markets.
Prices in bunker markets today were at new all-time highs in key global ports. The new poll on sustainableshipping.com asks respondents to assess the likely impact of fuel costs on sailing schedules and speeds.
Go to sustainableshipping.com Forums or see below to express your view.

*Source: Sustainable Shipping*
*Από το : Hellenic Shipping News*

----------


## Leo

*Coast Guard enforces nontank vessel response plan rule* Wednesday, 27 August 2008 

The U.S. Coast Guard announced today the beginning of enforcement of the requirements for owners and operators of large cargo vessels other than tankers, known as nontank vessels, to prepare and submit plans for responding to a worst case oil spill from their vessels. Should a nontank vessel be found operating in a U.S. port or waterway without a properly submitted response plan, the Coast Guard Captain of the Port will exercise authority under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972 and impose operational controls, as necessary, on the vessel to safeguard the port. 
A nontank vessel is described as a self-propelled vessel of 400 gross tons or greater that operates on the navigable waters of the U.S., carries oil of any kind as fuel for main propulsion and is not a tank vessel. Tank vessels are required to hae response plans under 33 CFR part 155, subpart D, and are currently screened by the Coast Guard for compliance prior to port entry. 
"Oil carried as fuel in large cargo ships can result in a major oil spill in the event of an accident," said Rear Adm. Brian M. Salerno, assistant commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard's Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship Directorate. "Although we work to prevent accidents in the first place, this enforcement policy will make sure that cargo ships, such as tankers, have pre-identified and arranged for the resources needed to respond effectively, should an accident occur." 
The risks associated with oil spills from large nontank vessels are significant, as seen during the November 7, 2007, oil spill by the containership Cosco Busan in San Francisco Bay. The Coast Guard Maritime Transportation Act of 2004 amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and required owners and operators of nontank vessels to prepare and submit by August 9, 2005, plans for responding to a worst case discharge and to a substantial threat of such a discharge of oil from their vessels. 
The Coast Guard published a Federal Register Notice on June 23, 2008, informing nontank vessel owners and operators that the Coast Guard will begin actively enforcing the 2004 Act by screening all nontank vessels prior to their port arrival for plan submission. Each plan, among other things, ensures by contract or other approved means the availability of private personnel and equipment necessary to remove to the maximum extent practicable a worst case discharge (including a discharge resulting from a fire or explosion), and to mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge. It also describes the training, equipment testing, periodic unannounced drills and response actions of the crew. 
To devote resources to those nontank vessels that pose the greatest risk in the event of a worst case oil spill, the Coast Guard's screening and enforcement efforts will focus on those nontank vessels of 1,600 gross tons or greater. Nontank vessels of less than 1,600 gross tons are considered to pose less of a threat, but are still required to submit response plans. The Coast Guard will continue working with nontank vessel owners and operators to ensure vessels covered under this regulation meet the requirements. 

*Source: MarineLog/Hellenic Shipping News*

----------


## Leo

Wednesday, 17 September 2008 

An international convention banning the use of organotins and other harmful substances in anti-fouling paints applied on ships' hulls enters into force on 17 September 2008. The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships (AFS Convention) was adopted on 5 October 2001 by IMO and the terms for its entry into force (ratification by 25 States representing 25 per cent of the world's merchant shipping tonnage) were reached last year. The Convention has, to date, been ratified by 34 States, with a combined 52.81 per cent of world merchant shipping tonnage.

Under the Convention, ships are not permitted to apply or re-apply organotin compounds which act as biocides in their anti-fouling systems; ships either shall not carry such compounds on their hulls or external parts or surface or, in the case of ships that already carry such compounds on their hulls, will have to apply a coating that forms a barrier to prevent them leaching from the underlying non-compliant anti-fouling systems. 
The Convention also establishes a mechanism to evaluate and assess other anti-fouling systems and prevent the potential future use of other harmful substances in these systems.

The Convention applies to ships flying the flag of a Party to the Convention, as well as ships not entitled to fly their flag but which operate under their authority, and to all ships that enter a port, shipyard or offshore terminal of a Party. It applies to all ships, including fixed or floating platforms, floating storage units (FSUs) and floating production storage and off-loading units (FPSOs).

Anti-fouling systems
Anti-fouling paints are used to coat the bottoms of ships to prevent sealife such as algae and molluscs attaching themselves to the hull – thereby slowing down the ship and increasing fuel consumption.
The AFS Convention defines "anti-fouling systems" as "a coating, paint, surface treatment, surface, or device that is used on a ship to control or prevent attachment of unwanted organisms".
In the early days of sailing ships, lime and later arsenic were used to coat ships' hulls, until the modern chemicals industry developed effective anti-fouling paints using metallic compounds. These compounds slowly "leach" into the sea water, killing barnacles and other marine life that have attached to the ship.

But studies showed that these compounds persist in the water, killing sealife, harming the environment and possibly entering the food chain. One of the most popular anti-fouling paints, developed in the 1960s, contained the organotin compound tributyltin (TBT), which has been proven to cause deformations in oysters and sex changes in whelks.

Today, there are a variety of effective anti-fouling systems available which do not contain TBT, such as organotin-free anti-fouling paints and biocide-free non-stick coatings which have an extremely slippery surface - preventing fouling occurring and making it easier to clean when it does.

*Source: IMO*

----------


## Leo

An interesting article found on the MARINELOG magazine (issue August 2008.), Green Technologies supplement, which you will find attached.

GREEN.pdf

----------


## Leo

China announced its first comprehensive system of regulations to combat and control marine pollution from ships on the 9th September this year.

The regulations are due to take effect from 1st March 2010, and contain provisions that will significantly impact shipowners, including mandatory requirements for a ship’s emergency response plan to be submitted to the China MSA, and for ships to pre-contract with approved pollution response companies before entering Chinese ports. 

The “Regulation of the People’s Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Marine Pollution from Ships” was promulgated by the State Council on 9th September 2009, repealing the 1983 Regulation on Prevention of Ship-induced Sea Pollution – and the new Regulation will take effect on 1st March 2010. 

The China Maritime Safety Administration (MSA) is the responsible agency for the specific supervision and administration of prevention and control of marine pollution by ships and relevant ship operation activities affected by these new regulations. Under the new law, after a ship pollution accident, the MSA can take cleanup, salvage and wreck removal measures, or any other necessary steps to reduce the pollution damage, and the costs of such measures will have priority of compensation. 

The pre-contracting requirements of the regulations will affect ships carrying polluting hazardous cargo and all other ships over 10,000 gross tons. 

The Club is studying the issues that are likely to arise from this initiative and will provide further guidance to assist Members with timely compliance in due course.

Source: UK P&I Club

----------


## Leo

*Amendments to MARPOL Annex VI - 1 July 2010*

The main change to the MARPOL Annex VI which enters into force 1 July 2010 includes:
·Reduction in Sulphur content (Sox):
1. 1 July 2010 the sulphur limitation applicable in Emission Control Areas (SECA) will be 1.00% (10,000 ppm) 
2. 1 January 2012 the global sulphur cap will be reduced to 3.50% (35,000 ppm) 
3. 1 January 2015 the sulphur limitation applicable in Emission Control Areas (SECA) will be 0.10% (1,000 ppm) 
4. 1 January 2020 the global sulphur cap will be reduced to 0.50% (5000 ppm) 
·Reductions in NOx emissions for “Tier II” marine engines installed on a ship constructed on or after 1 January 2011 to 14.4 g/kWh (currently 17.0 g/kWh); and with the most stringent controls for "Tier III" engines installed on ships constructed on or after 1 January 2016, operating in Nox Emission Control Areas
·Existing diesel engine with a power output of more than 5,000 kW and a displacement per cylinder at or above 90 liters installed on a ship constructed on or after 1 January 1990 but prior to 1 January 2000, will have to comply with the “Tier I” emission limit (17.0 g/kW) when Approved Methods for the engines are available and certified
·Ozone depleting substances (ODS), Regulation VI/13 - Ships fitted with rechargeable systems using ODS shall maintain an Ozone Depleting Substances Record Book which may be part of an existing log-book or an electronic log or record system.
·Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Regulation VI/15 - Crude Oil Carrier shall carry a VOC Management Plan which shall be approved by the Administration. 

The NOX Technical Code has been amended in line with the revised requirements of MARPOL Annex VI and was adopted as the NOx Technical Code 2008, with entry into force 1 July 2010, and includes provisions for direct measurement and monitoring methods, a set of certification procedures for existing engines, and test cycles to be applied to Tier II and Tier III engines.

Reduction in Nitrogen Oxides (Regulation Vi/13) - The provisions of this regulation apply to all diesel engines of a power equal to or above 130kW, with the exception of engines used for emergency purposes. Each engine falling under the scope of this regulation is issued with an Engine International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate (EIAPP).

The reduction in NOx is managed through three tiers of requirements:
·Tier 1 (1 January 2000 - 31 December 2010) This is the level of emissions which is currently in force and applies to engines installed on board ships constructed on/after 1 January 2000. It will apply to engines installed on board ships constructed until 31 December 2010. No changes have been made to the requirements in force. 
·Tier 2 (1 January 2011) will apply to engines installed on board ships constructed on/after 1 January 2011 or to engines subjected to a major modification on/after 1 January 2011. Tier 2 is aiming to reduce by 2.5 g/kWh (about 80% reduction) of the level of emissions of Tier 1. 
·Tier 3 (1 January 2016) will apply to engines installed on board ships constructed on/after 1 January 2016 or to engines subjected to a major modification on/after 1 January 2016 when the ships will be sailing in controlled emission areas (NECAs). 

Review Provision - Paragraph 10 of the revised reg.VI/13 provides for a review which will be conducted from 2012 to 2013. The aim of the review will be to ensure that technologies are available to implement the Tier 3 standard. If not, the implementation could be delayed.

Exemptions - Recreational crafts of a length less than 24 m and ships fitted with a total propulsive power of less than 750 kW (if it is demonstrated that their design or construction prohibit compliance with the standard) are exempted from complying with Tier 3.

Regarding the requirement for ships having ozone depleting substances onboard please note the below extract from MARPOL Annex VI - Chapter III - Requirements for Control of Emissions from Ships - Regulation 12 - Ozone Depleting Substances:

Each ship subject to regulation 6.1 of MARPOL Annex VI shall maintain a list of equipment containing ozone depleting substances.

Each ship subject to regulation 6.1 which has rechargeable systems that contain ozone depleting substances shall maintain an Ozone Depleting Substances Record Book. This Record Book may form part of an existing log-book or electronic recording system as approved by the Administration.

Entries in the Ozone Depleting Substances Record Book shall be recorded in terms of mass (kg) of substance and shall be completed without delay on each occasion, in respect of the following:
.1 Recharge, full or partial, of equipment containing ozone depleting substances
.2 Repair or maintenance of equipment containing ozone depleting substances
.3 Discharge of ozone depleting substances to the atmosphere:
.3.1 Deliberate; and
.3.2 Non-deliberate;
.4 Discharge of ozone depleting substances to land-based reception facilities; and
.5 Supply of ozone depleting substances to the ship.

Please note that ozone depleting substances that may be found onboard ships include, but are not limited to:
Halon 1211 Bromochlorodifluoromethane
Halon 1301 Bromotrifluoromethane
Halon 2402 1, 2-Dibromo -1, 1, 2, 2-tetraflouroethane (also known as Halon 114B2)
CFC-11 Trichlorofluoromethane
CFC-12 Dichlorodifluoromethane
CFC-113 1, 1, 2 . Trichloro . 1, 2, 2 . trifluoroethane
CFC-114 1, 2 . Dichloro .1, 1, 2, 2 . tetrafluoroethane
CFC-115 Chloropentafluoroethane

*Source: BIMCO*

----------


## Leo

*Source: IMO* 

Attached IMO MEPC.1/Circ. 736 
*Guidance for the recording of operations in the Oil Record Book* 
*Part 1. Machinery space operations (All Ships)*

MEPC_1_Circ_736.pdf

----------


## ChiefMate

Πραγματι πολυ χρησιμα Captain!
Με την ευκαρια,δεν διορθωνει καποιος το ονομα του thread?

----------

