Business

BIMCO: The International Maritime Organization in the shadow of COVID-19

Marine fuel related proposed amendments such as procedures for sampling and verification of the sulphur content of fuel oil, EEDI, and IGF Code taking a back seat.

Published

6 years ago

May 13, 2020

Admin

Aron Soerensen, Head of Maritime Technology & Regulation at BIMCO, on Monday (11 May) published an outline of postponed International Maritime Organization (IMO) meetings due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the IMO’s plans to accommodate future meetings to address pressing issues:

The IMO, based in London, is following the guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UK Government when it comes to planning and hosting the future meetings. At the time of writing, there is no schedule for future meetings.

Despite the postponements, IMO has, so far, retained the original deadlines for submitting papers. Normally, there are a lot of papers submitted to each meeting by the participants (member-states, NGOs etc), for example there were 102 submissions for MEPC 75.

Below you can find the most important of the postponed meetings – from the point of view of BIMCO members.

Key environmental topics postponed

The 75th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC75) was originally scheduled to take place at the end of March 2020. The MEPC deals with pertinent topics related to the marine environment. The committee adopts new regulations and amends existing regulations.

Some important proposed amendments are up for adoption at this session:

MARPOL Annex VI concerning procedures for sampling and verification of the sulphur content of fuel oil and the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI).
The BWM convention regarding commissioning testing of BWMS.

The other important topics, which will be discussed at this meeting, include the architecture of short-term GHG reduction measures, further development of a possible future phase 4 of the EEDI-regime, discussions about the industry proposal for a Research and Development programme for reduction of GHG emissions and how to reduce marine plastic litter from ships.

BIMCO does not expect the postponement to have any critical impact, although the new EEDI regulations and the procedures from sampling and verification of fuel sulphur content are important for shipowners.

Deadly serious business

The 102nd session of the Marine Safety Committee (MSC 102) was originally scheduled to take place in May. The MSC is a committee where topics related to safety and security of ships and seafarers are regulated.

Some important proposed amendments are up for adoption at this session:

International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code
Chapter II-1 of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, as amended,
The International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or other Low-flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code),
The International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code).

Owing to the number of fire incidents on containerships, member states asked the IMO to include the item on the MSC agenda to allow a discussion on this issue with a view of strengthening fire safety regulations of large container ships.

Also, on the table is the topic of piracy and armed robbery and security of ships in West-Africa including the Gulf of Guinea, which BIMCO and other industry associations have highlighted in a submission to the committee.

MSC 102 will continue the work on how to enhance the safety of ships relating to the use of fuel oil. The intention is to enhance the mandatory SOLAS-requirements and develop guidelines for ships on how to address situations where indicative test results suggest that the oil fuel supplied may not comply with SOLAS. In this context, BIMCO continues to advocate for a mandatory bunker licensing scheme as the only way to address fuel oil quality and safety issues.

GHG is a priority

Intersessional Working Group on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, originally scheduled from 23 to 27 March 2020 has been postponed but is prioritised due to the importance of advancing the development of short-term GHG measures.

The work on GHG emissions has a deadline for short term reduction measures in 2023. If the intersessional working group and MECP 75 are held in 2020, this part of IMO’s environmental work can be finalised within this deadline.

One year away from mandatory electronic exchange

Facilitation committee 44 (FAL 44), and the IMO Expert Group on Data Harmonization, which were originally scheduled to be held in April, are going to discuss the digitalisation aspect of data exchange and how to increase the efficiency of ship-shore communications.

From April 2019, with a two year’s implementation time, new mandatory requirements on electronic exchange of information from ships to the relevant onshore parties when approaching a port, will require public authorities to have systems in place to assist ship clearance processes. These matters were high on the agenda at the postponed meetings.

BIMCO has been pushing hard for a common and uniform implementation of the data models used in the interface for ship-shore communication.

If the postponement of the FAL drags for a long time, BIMCO is concerned that the foundation electronic exchange of information will be damaged to an extent where we may have to start from scratch.

Future IMO meetings

IMO committees and sub-committees work between the sessions by correspondence. For example, a lot of the groundwork in the development of regulations and guidelines takes place between the actual physical meetings through correspondence between the interested members. When arguments for or against certain items are known well in advance of a meeting through correspondence, it is normally easier for members states to reach consensus and therefore intersessional initiatives help speed up the process.

A revised meeting programme has not yet been issued by the IMO and it is impossible to predict when physical meetings will be allowed to take place again. The IMO is considering every possible option to handle the logistical challenge of accommodating all the postponed meetings.

A priority list has been drawn up and will be considered by the thirty-second extraordinary session of the IMO Council, which is meeting by correspondence from May-July 2020. We expect that priority will be given to a regular session of the IMO Council, followed by meetings of the MEPC preceded by the Intersessional Working Group on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships and followed by MSC and FAL.

By prioritising the work of the two committees MSC and MEPC, the IMO tries to ensure that items that are up for adoption can take effect without interrupting already made plans and schedules and contribute to the safety at sea and protection of the environment.

Big sub-committee meeting postponement

Sub-committees that have had their meetings postponed are likely to have their work postponed by up to a year. As papers have already been submitted, IMO will have to follow normal procedure that allows a discussion on submissions. There is a limit as to how many papers can be debated during a week-long meeting, so there will probably not be room for any new submissions. Under such circumstances, the 2020 Sub-committee meetings, which were postponed, will have to take place in 2021.

The BIMCO secretariat is prepared and will be ready when IMO finds new dates for the postponed meetings.

Photo credit: International Maritime Organnization
Source: BIMCO
Published: 13 May, 2020

Legal

Singapore police arrest eight over alleged illegal MGO transaction off Tuas

SPF says preliminary investigations found that crew members of a Singapore-registered tugboat misappropriated MGO worth about SGD 10,570 without their company’s knowledge and sold it illegally.

Published

6 hours ago

August 14, 2026

Admin

Singapore police arrest eight over alleged illegal MGO transaction off Tuas

The Singapore Police Force (SPF) on Thursday (13 August) said it has arrested eight men, aged between 25 and 54, for their suspected involvement in an illegal transaction of Marine Gas Oil (MGO).

On 13 August 2026 at about 1.05am, officers from the Police Coast Guard (PCG) conducted a check on a Singapore-registered tugboat in the waters off Tuas and discovered that eight crew members were possibly involved in the illegal transaction of MGO.

“Preliminary investigations revealed that the crew members of the tugboats misappropriated MGO valued at about SGD 10,570 (USD 8,258), without their company’s knowledge,” SPF said in a statement.

“The MGO was sold illegally for their personal financial gain.”

The eight crew members will be charged in court on 14 August 2026 with the offence of theft by servant of property in possession of master under Section 381 of the Penal Code 1871 If convicted, they shall be punished with an imprisonment term that may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

“The Police take a serious view of illegal transaction of MGO in Singapore Territorial Waters and will continue to conduct enforcement and security checks to prevent, deter and detect such illicit activities in Singapore waters,” SPF added.

Photo credit: Singapore Police Force
Published: 14 August, 2026

Port & Regulatory

Gard: Sulphur-related bunker claims rise amid tighter China MSA enforcement

Claims involving excessive sulphur content in marine fuels have been rising, while stricter inspections by the China MSA have heightened the focus on sulphur compliance, particularly in the Bohai Sea.

Published

6 hours ago

August 14, 2026

Admin

Maritime protection and indemnity (P&I) club Gard on Wednesday (12 August) highlighted that claims involving excessive sulphur content in marine fuels have been rising, while stricter inspections by the China MSA have heightened the focus on sulphur compliance, particularly in the Bohai Sea:

Rise in off-spec sulphur claims

Recent claims experience indicates that bunker quality continues to pose a significant operational risk for shipowners. In our earlier review of bunker-related claims during the first five months of 2026, we highlighted a rise in off-specification bunker incidents amid increased pressure on global fuel supply chains following the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East.

Specifically for Sulphur compliance, between January and June 2026, the number of sulphur-related cases increased by more than threefold compared with the same period in 2025. Notably, the number of cases recorded in the first six months of this year has already exceeded the total number reported during the whole of last year by approximately 40%.

While each case is fact-specific, the increase is notable because excessive sulphur content constitutes a MARPOL compliance issue. Unlike many other bunker quality problems, sulphur non-compliance identified through port state inspections can result in vessel delays, enforcement action, and substantial costs associated with debunkering and fuel disposal.

The map below illustrates the geographical distribution of sulphur-related claims recorded during the first six months of 2026, based on the location where the bunkers were stemmed.

Distribution of sulphur related claims

China MSA steps up sulphur compliance enforcement

According to our correspondent, Huatai, on 5 June 2026, the maritime authorities of Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning and Shandong jointly launched a special campaign on ship pollution prevention and control in the Bohai Sea region. The campaign involves coordinated supervision by local MSA branches across the region and is expected to last nearly five months. It covers major ports and surrounding port areas in the Bohai Sea region, including Tianjin, Tangshan, Qinhuangdao, Huanghua, Jinzhou, Yingkou and Longkou.

While the initiative is broader than bunker sulphur compliance alone, its scope includes inspections relating to air pollution prevention, SOx emissions, fuel compliance and other high-pollution-risk operations. Enforcement measures are expected to comprise onboard inspections, cross-regional enforcement activities, unannounced spot checks and remote monitoring. These efforts will be supported by a combination of UAV patrols, maritime patrol vessels, shore-based monitoring systems and rapid on-site fuel testing.

As a result, vessels trading in the Bohai Sea region may experience increased scrutiny of fuel compliance documentation, fuel sampling records, onboard fuel management procedures, and the handling or disposal of suspected non-compliant fuel.

Documents typically requested by China MSA

Based on our recent experience, including the case discussed above, and subject to the specific requirements of the local MSA office, owners and operators may be requested to provide supporting documentation such as:

Bunker documentation – Bunker Delivery Notes (BDNs), MARPOL fuel sample records, fuel test reports, and relevant fuel quality certificates.
Statutory certificates – including the International Air Pollution Prevention (IAPP) Certificate and International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) Certificate.
Operational records – engine logbooks, deck and navigation logbooks, Oil Record Book entries, and records relating to fuel transfers, storage and consumption.
Sampling documentation – the Master’s statement and any records demonstrating how fuel samples were drawn, sealed, labelled, handled and retained.
Correspondence records – communications with the authorities, bunker suppliers, charterers and other relevant stakeholders.
Fuel disposal records – approved disposal plans, debunkering documentation, receipts and evidence of final disposal, where applicable.

The exact documentation required will depend on the nature of the investigation, the findings of the inspection, and the requirements of the local enforcement authority.

Possible regulatory consequences in China

Under the Air Pollution Prevention and Control Law of the People’s Republic of China, ocean-going vessels are required to use fuel oil meeting atmospheric pollutant control requirements after berthing. Vessels operating within designated emission control areas must also comply with applicable emission standards. Article 106 provides that where vessel fuel oil fails to meet applicable standards or requirements, the competent maritime authorities may impose fines ranging from RMB 10,000 to RMB 100,000. Liability may extend to shipowners, ship operators and ship managers depending upon the circumstances of the case.

Recommendation

Sulphur compliance should be treated as both a fuel quality and regulatory risk. Owners and operators are encouraged to take preventive steps before bunkering, act promptly if non-compliant fuel is suspected, and preserve evidence carefully if an inspection or claim arises. Under amended

Resolution A.1206(34), Appendix 18, 2.1.5, if the BDN shows compliant fuel, but the master has independent test results of the fuel oil sample taken by the ship during the bunkering which indicates non-compliance, the master may document this by notifying the ship’s flag Administration, with copies to:

the competent authority of the relevant port of destination,
the Administration under whose jurisdiction the bunker deliverer is located,
and to the bunker deliverer.

Photo credit: shraga kopstein on Unsplash / Gard
Published: 14 August, 2026

LNG Bunkering

Shell expands LNG bunkering footprint in Spain with Valencia

As one of the region’s key maritime hubs, the company said Valencia expands the options available to shipowners seeking LNG supply along major shipping routes.

Published

6 hours ago

August 14, 2026

Admin

Shell expands LNG bunkering footprint in Spain with Valencia

British oil giant Shell on Thursday (13 August) said Valencia has joined its growing network of bunkering locations, making LNG available as a marine fuel.

The successful completion of the first LNG bunkering operation in Valencia marked an important milestone for Spain and further strengthened Shell’s LNG supply capabilities across the Mediterranean.

In a video shared by the company, bunkering vessel Alice Consulich was shown supplying an undisclosed volume of LNG to the container ship MSC Sabrina.

“As one of the region’s key maritime hubs, Valencia expands the options available to shipowners seeking LNG supply along major shipping routes,” Shell said in a social media post.

Shell said the achievement reflected the strong collaboration across the maritime value chain, including MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company, the Port of Valencia and Fratelli Cosulich Group.

“We look forward to making more LNG bunker deliveries in Valencia and across the Mediterranean as LNG infrastructure and capabilities continue to expand,” the company said.

Photo credit: Shell
Published: 14 August, 2026