The European Commission (EC) on Tuesday (5 February) sent an “urgent” draft proposal to the European Union (EU) for a new output to draw up harmonised rules on the discharge of liquid effluent from Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems (EGCS).
It seeks to define the areas and conditions under which liquid effluents from EGCS can be discharged into the sea, and to regulate access by ships equipped with such systems.
If approved by the EU on Friday (8 February), the draft will be submitted to the 74th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the IMO in May 2019.
“The sooner uniform and unambiguous regulatory measures are developed and adopted, the better the potential pollution will be controlled and the less significant the economic impacts will be both on industry and administrations,” said the document signed by Director of the General Secretariat of the EC, Jordi Ayet Puigarnau.
“These measures are therefore considered urgent.”
The document suggests the operation of ships installed with EGCS in particular in port waters, coastal areas or ecologically sensitive areas leading to a degradation of the marine environment due to the toxicity of water discharges.
“The potential toxicity of EGCS water discharges, due to the very nature of the pollutant substances present in the exhaust gases, and the increase in the number of these systems require careful consideration to avoid irreversible pollutions of the marine environment,” it states.
It points to a GESAMP report indicating a potential risk to harm the environment with more ships discharging EGCS effluents in a wide variety of harbour configurations and a recommendation by experts that a generalised marine environmental risk assessment should be developed.
“The composition and harmfulness to the marine environment of liquid effluents discharged by the majority of these systems into ports and sensitive sea areas lead States to take local or regional restriction or prohibition measures,” it adds.
“It is proposed that the Committee considers the inclusion of a new output in its programme of work in order to define harmonized rules on the areas and modalities for the discharge of such effluents.”
The full draft document IMO – Union submission to be submitted to the 74th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 74) of the IMO in London from 13 – 17 May 2019 concerning a proposal for a new output to draw up harmonised rules on the discharge of liquid effluent from Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems can be downloaded here.
Photo credit: © European Union, 2019
Published: 8 February, 2019
The vessel TG 90959 TS was escorted back to the home port unit for further investigations and handling.
The domestic oil vessel is in process of being transported from Hai Phong port to the May Chai ward, updates.
The court has allegedly granted HSBC’s bid for Zenrock to be placed under judicial managers from KPMG and the hearing is set for 13 July, 2020.
Second Circuit decision questions if OW Bunker provided the fuel in ‘bad faith’ while insolvent.
Claiming total sum of US $328,350.67 from two unpaid bunkering contracts issued since November 2017.
King & Jurgens explains how Bunker Holdings, Inc. v. Yang Ming Liberia Corp. verdict can help lawyers.
Program introduces periodic assessments, mass flow metering data analysis, and regular training for relevant key personnel to better handle the MFMS to ensure a high level of continuous operational competency.
U.S. Claims Register Summary recorded a total USD 833 million claim from a total 180 creditors against O.W. Bunker USA, according to the creditor list seen by Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times.
Glencore purchased fuel through Straits Pinnacle which contracted supply from Unicious Energy. Contaminated HSFO was loaded at Khor Fakkan port and shipped to a FSU in Tanjong Pelepas, Malaysia to be further blended.
Individuals were employees of surveying companies engaged by Shell to inspect the volume of oil loaded onto the vessels which Shell supplied oil to; they allegedly accepted bribes totalling at least USD 213,000.
MPA preliminary investigations revealed that the affected marine fuel was supplied by Glencore Singapore Pte Ltd who later sold part of the same cargo to PetroChina International (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
‘MPA had immediately contacted the relevant bunker suppliers to take necessary steps to ensure that the relevant batch of fuel was no longer supplied. Further investigations are currently on-going,’ it informs.
