Emission Control Area (ECA)
2015 - SOx Requirements
Advisory to INTERTANKO Members
December 2014
CONTENTS
1
Introduction.............................................................................................. 2
2
The regulatory regime ............................................................................. 2
2.1
International Maritime Organization (IMO) ........................................................................ 2
2.2
Regional Regulations for SOx emissions limitations ...................................................... 3
3
The alternative fuels for 2015 ECA compliance ................................... 4
4
Fuel system changes and documentation ............................................ 4
5
Flag and Port State Control Regimes .................................................... 6
5.1
IMO ........................................................................................................................................ 6
5.2
Paris MoU ............................................................................................................................. 7
5.3
EU .......................................................................................................................................... 7
5.4
USCG/EPA ............................................................................................................................ 8
www.intertanko.com
1
1
Introduction
This document aims to provide guidance and assistance to INTERTANKO Members on
practical actions for consideration regarding flag Administrations, Port State Control and Port
Authorities means for controlling the enforcement of ECA SOx Emissions requirements from
1st January 2015 and other regional similar requirements. It addresses practical matters in
case the compliance mode is through fuel switch over from HFO to 0.10% sulphur content
MGO or 0.10% sulphur content other hybrid marine fuels.
The list of items addressed in the Guidance is not exclusive, which means that there might
be other practical considerations to account for. The Guidance covers:
(a) a review of the regulatory regime;
(b) a brief review of the alternatives fuels for achieving compliance;
(c) documentation and fuel system changes ships should consider for a safe fuel
switchover procedure; and
(e) Port State Control regimes including specific local/regional procedures, clarifications and
advice on how ships should address these and provide sufficient evidence on
compliance;
(d) some frequenlyt asked questions and answers.
2
The regulatory regime
2.1
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
The international regulatory regime for air emission limitations from ships is regulated
through provisions of Annex VI to MARPOL 73/78 Convention. As from 1 January 2015,
MARPOL Annex VI will require that the maximum sulphur content in fuels used by ships in
ECAs shall be of 0.10% by weight.
Emission Control Areas (ECAs) - Currently, there are four approved ECA regions (as
detailed in the figure below): the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the North American ECA – 200
nautical miles offshore USA and Canada, including Hawaii, St. Lawrence Waterway and the
Great Lakes and the United States Caribbean Sea ECA
2
2.2
Regional Regulations for SOx emissions limitations
In addition to the IMO regulations, there are two regional regulations with provisions limiting
SOx emissions from ships:
The EU Sulphur Directive which is a replica of MARPOL Annex VI provisions but it has an
additional provision requiring ships to use fuel with a sulphur content of maximum 0.10%
when “at berth” (including at anchor) in the EU ports. In 2015, this provision would become
obsolete in the EU ports located in the Baltic Sea and North Sea but it will continue to be
applicable in EU ports located outside these two current ECAs.
California Air Resources Board (CARB) - From 1 December 2014, ships have to use 0.10%
fuel content marine distillates within 24 nautical miles from the California shore line. The rule
can be seen at www.arb.ca.gov/ports/marinevess/documents/fuelogv13.pdf.
Since California shore lines is part of the North American ECA, from 1 January 2015 ships
will have to be compliant with the new ECA emission limits corresponding to the use of a
marine fuel with a maximum 0.10% sulphur content. CARB has issued an advisory (Marine
Notice 2014-1) stating that it will allow vessels to comply with the CARB Ocean-Going
Vessel (OGV) Fuel Regulation when the vessel complies with the North American Emission
Control Area (NA ECA); i.e. using alternative emission control technologies (scrubbers) or
non-distillate low sulphur (0.1% by mass) marine fuels instead of marine distillates with
similar sulphur content. The Marine Notice could be seen at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/ports/marinevess/documents/marinenote2014_1.pdf
The Marine Notice provides information that, based on the CARB OGV Fuel Regulation
“sunset provision”, CARB staff will evaluate the emissions reductions achieved by the ECA
Regulation and compare them with the emissions reductions achieved by the California OGV
Fuel Regulation. This evaluation will take into consideration the exemptions and alternative
technologies allowed under the ECA Regulations that are different from the specific fuel
standards in the California regulation. Staff will also evaluate the extent to which the
enforcement programme implemented by the US Coast Guard and the US Environmental
Protection Agency (US EPA) will be as effective as the programme being implemented to
enforce the California OGV Fuel Regulation. However, during the evaluation period (“sunset
review period”), which may go beyond 1 January 2015 and which is estimated to be finalised
not later than April 2015, CARB Regulations remain in effect and will continue to be
enforced.
This Notice acknowledges that the US ECA requirements contain alternate compliance
provisions that are NOT included in the CARB regulations and it identifies the two
differences:


the ECA allows the use of scrubbers and
the CARB requirements for fuel that meets the specs for distillate fuels.
In response to some Members’ request for clarification on these two aspects, the CARB
Notice stated that they “will allow vessels complying with the ECA Regulation ... to
comply with the California OGV Fuel Regulation by using the Temporary Experimental
or Research Exemption or “Research Exemption” (subsection (c) (6) in both title 13,
CCR, §2299.2 and title 17, CCR, §93118.2) during the sunset review period.”
In this regard, the Notice provides a form that the vessel operator can complete and submit
to CARB, but the form must be submitted before the vessel enters California waters.
Once a vessel operator has provided the requested information on the form, the vessel “will
3
be deemed to meet the requirements of the Research Exemption in the California OGV
Fuel Regulation.”
According to this, to satisfy the requirements of the Research Exemption, vessel operators
will need to provide information on their emission control strategy, including the following:
3

for vessel operators using scrubbers: information describing the equivalent emissions
control technology being employed (i.e. open and/or closed loop exhaust scrubber),
and any available measurement data that the operator has on the emissions of diesel
particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen and sulphur oxides from the vessel with the
equivalent emission reduction strategy being employed. This documentation should
include the vessel’s International Air Pollution Prevention (IAPP) certificate and
attachments where applicable.

for vessel operators using non-distillate fuels at or below 0.1% sulphur content:
Identify the fuel type being used (e.g. marine fuel grade under ISO 8217), and ISO or
ASTM specifications the fuel meets, as applicable. Provide any additional data the
operator has on fuel properties that may impact emissions of diesel particulate
matter, oxides of nitrogen and sulphur oxides.
The alternative fuels for 2015 ECA compliance
After 1 January 2015, ships are required to use in ECAs a fuel with ultra-low sulphur content
(i.e. 0.10% by weight), or alternatively use of exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS) also
called scrubbers, which will ensure same or lower amount of SOx emissions. This Advisory
addressed compliance through use of ultralow sulphur content fuels only.
The two fossil fuels which currently could have such a low sulphur fuel are the MGO (grades
DMA and DMZ from ISO 8217:2010) or liquefied natural gas (LNG). However, there is a new
DMB grade developed by CEPSA and new hybrid ultralow sulphur fuels recently launched
by some oil majors. The specifications of these hybrid fuels are not included in the ISO 8217.
It is INTERTANKO’s view that use of LNG as a fuel for compliance with 2015 ECA would be
extremely rare. It is anticipated that not many existing tankers would be retrofitted to use
LNG as fuel in the near future.
It is also anticipated that the hybrid fuels, if available, would be in very limited amounts and
would be supplied at a handful number of ports.
Therefore, almost all ships using fuel switch over as means of compliance will use an
ultralow sulphur content marine gas oil (MGO).
4
Fuel system changes and documentation
Regulation 14.6 of MARPOL Annex VI requires that SOx emissions from ships should be
compliant with ECA limits at the time the ship crosses the imaginary border of such an ECA.
Reg. 14.6 Those ships using separate fuel oils to comply with paragraph 4 of this regulation
and entering or leaving an Emission Control Area set forth in paragraph 3 of this regulation
shall carry a written procedure showing how the fuel oil change-over is to be done, allowing
sufficient time for the fuel oil service system to be fully flushed of all fuel oils exceeding the
applicable sulphur content specified in paragraph 4 of this regulation prior to entry into an
Emission Control Area. The volume of low sulphur fuel oils in each tank as well as the date,
time, and position of the ship when any fuel-oil-change-over operation is completed prior to
4
the entry into an Emission Control Area or commenced after exit from such an area, shall be
recorded in such log-book as prescribed by the Administration
In simple words, the fuel switch over procedure should be started in such a manner that
achieves compliance when entering an ECA (i.e. crossing the imaginary border line of an
ECA as defined in MARPOL 73/78 Convention).
Time of initiating the fuel switch over procedure
Determination of the time to initiate the fuel change over procedure is a function of the ship’s
fuel system configuration and the level of the sulphur content of the HFO fuel used outside
ECA. The time for reaching a sulphur level of 0.10% can vary drastically, depending on the
current machinery fuel oil consumption, the volume of the service system and the sulphur
levels in fuels. So, in addition to recording the actual time and location of initiating the switch
over procedure, it would be expected that the ship can explain how compliance is achieved
“on time” based on the two mentioned factors. DNV GL has recently released on a trial
basis a DNV GL fuel change-over calculator on trial basis. It may assist and it can be
accessed at http://www.dnvgl.com/maritime/Low-sulphur-operation.aspx
It is strongly recommended that on board documentation contains clear information on how
ships calculate the initiation of the fuel change over procedure and provide evidence of
compliance.
Modification to the fuel systems on existing ships
Modifications of the fuel system on existing single fuel ships might be necessary.
Modifications may include increase on number and capacity of bunker tanks. Such
modifications have to be agreed with both the equipment manufacturers and classification
Societies.
Members are reminded of the INTERTANKO/OCIMF Recommendation on Fuel Changeover
Processes. Click here to download the INTERTANKO/OCIMF Recommendation on Fuel
Changeover Processes or at: (http://www.intertanko.com/Global/ECA-AnnexI-RecHazard%20Assessment%20of%20Fuel%20Changeover%20Processes.pdf)
INTERTANKO and OCIMF have developed this guidance with the aim of providing a simple
checklist of items which should be part of a Risk Assessment and a Hazard Identification
(HAZID) assessment, for main engines, auxiliary engines and boiler systems in oil tankers
covering the switching to, and long term operation on low sulphur marine distillate fuel.
There are significant differences between the composition and physical properties of low
sulphur marine distillate fuel (MGO or alternatives) and residual fuels (HFO) with regard to
the safe operation of installed systems which should be addressed by specific operational
instructions and procedures. Operators will need to undertake a risk assessment of the fuel
switching process and, based on the results, consider the initial design or the need for
modification to existing equipment, as well as updating instructions and providing associated
training to the crew.
It is recommended that such assessments are conducted in cooperation with classification
societies, equipment manufacturers/ installers and/or other experienced entities and retain
the documentation on board in case PSC would require more in-depth information.
5
On board fuel switch over documentation
Members are advised to develop clear and user friendly fuel switch over procedures that
address the challenges mentioned above. The documentation should be kept on board so
that ships’ crews can have easy access to them and that these are easily displayed for the
PSC as on board compliance documentation. A detailed system inspection and maintenance
plan can be seen as a mitigating measure against possible accelerated wear off of the
equipment.
Crew Training
Crew training is essential for raising awareness of the challenges that the fuel switch over
procedures can pose. Regular training needs to be planned and documented. Crew training
should include risk elements to possible engine failure, power loss or even blackout. Fuel
incompatibility or system failure due to the complete difference between the residual fuels
and ECA fuels should be considered as part of the HAZID assessment and mitigating
measures be included into the documentation and crew training programme.
5
Flag and Port State Control Regimes
5.1
IMO
The IMO Guidelines for Port State Control under the revised MARPOL Annex VI are issued
as Resolution MEPC.181(59) and can be seen at: MEPC 59-24-Add1-PSCGlines.pdf
With regard to compliance by fuel switch over procedure, the PSC officer should initially
examine the following documents:



written procedures covering fuel oil change over operations where separate fuel oils
are used in order to achieve compliance (regulation 14.6);
the bunker delivery notes and associated samples or records thereof (regulation 18);
any notification to the ship’s flag Administration issued by the master or officer in
charge of the bunker operation together with any available commercial
documentation relevant to non-compliant bunker delivery.
In the case where the bunker delivery note or the representative sample as required by
regulation 18 presented to the ship are not in compliance with the relevant requirements, the
Master or officer in charge of bunker operations should have documented this through a
Notification to the ship’s flag Administration and maintained a copy on board to give solid
proof of the lack of compliance at the fuel delivery time for the subsequent scrutiny by PSC.
WE STRONGLY ADVISE MEMEBRS TO INSTRUCT THEIR SHIPS TO ISSUE SUCH
NOTES (i.e. notes of protest) EACH TIME WHEN:
-
the representative sample (so called MARPOL sample) is not taken in accordance
with the IMO Guidelines for sampling of oil in Resolution MEPC.182(59) (MEPC 5924-Add1-Sampling-FuelOil.pdf)
-
the test results of the fuel sample taken by the ships are different from the data
provided in the Bunker Delivery Note from the fuel supplier and the limits are above
the mandated levels.
Issuing a Note of Protest is in line with the IMO Guidelines for PSC under MARPOL ANNEX
VI (resolution MEPC.129(53)) paragraph 2.1.5 which states that “In the case where the
bunker delivery note or the representative sample as required by regulation 18 of this Annex
6
presented to the ship are not in compliance with the relevant requirements, the master or
officer in charge of the bunker operation should have documented that through a Notification
to the ship’s Flag Administration with copies to the port authority under whose jurisdiction the
ship did not receive the required documentation pursuant to the bunkering operation and to
the bunker deliverer. A copy should be retained onboard the ship, together with any
available commercial documentation, for the subsequent scrutiny of port State control.”
We insist on the importance of reporting such deviations as the IMO Guidelines specifies
that it is the Master/crew obligation to document such deviation “ . . in the case where bunker
delivery note or representative sample as required by regulation 18 are not in compliance
with the relevant requirements, the master or crew should have documented that fact.”
Finally, note that the PSC may request information on crews’ familiarisation with the
procedures used by the ship for compliance with ECA SOx emissions limits.
5.2
Paris MoU
The Paris MOU on PSC has recently published Guidelines on application on MARPOL
Annex VI Regulation 18 in an Emission Control Area (ECA) with particular reference to the
requirement to use fuel oil with a sulphur content < 0.1% from January 2015 as well as fuel
oil availability. In summary, the Guidelines state that during an initial inspection within an
ECA or at the first port call after transiting an ECA the Port State Control Officer (PCSO)
will look at:



the bunker delivery note showing a sulphur content of not more than 0.1% m/m for
fuel oil used on-board (MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 18.5);
the representative sample of fuel oil on-board with a sulphur content of not more than
0.1% (MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 18.8.1);
evidence of a written procedure and record of fuel oil changeover to a fuel oil with a
sulphur content of not more than 0.1% before entering the ECA such that this fuel is
being burnt when entering the ECA (MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14.6).
If the above shows a non-compliance the PSCO will conduct a more detailed inspection.
The Guidelines also cover the situation of fuel oil non-availability. In this case it is expected
that the master/owner must present a record of action taken to bunker compliant fuel and
evidence of an attempt to purchase compliant fuel in accordance with its voyage plan. This
may include, for example:




voyage plan and when notice of ECA transit received
date and time of expected transit
description of actions taken to obtain fuel
availability of compliant fuel at first port call in ECA and plans to obtain fuel.
PSCO will take into account the relevant circumstances and evidence to determine the
appropriate action, including not taking control measures. The full guidance can be
obtained from the Paris MOU website.
5.3
EU
EU is preparing an Implementation Act/Procedure linked to their EU Sulphur Directive. EU
seeks to issue the Implementation Act/Procedure by end of 2014 but, at the time we issued
this advisory, the document was not made available. It is predicted that as part of the
Implementation Act/Procedure, EU plans to suggest an additional standard for on
board/Engine Room fuel sampling by PSC to check whether the fuel used by ships are
7
compliant. Such guidelines are not issued but may seek for standard location of sampling
within the fuel system and require such sampling points (at least two) are defined in the
ship’s documents.
Irrespective of if and when such an engine room fuel sampling standard would be made
available, some PSC already board ships and take such samples. The following actions
should be considered by ships:
-
-
sampling is witnessed by the ship’s crew;
there should be at least two samples, both sealed and one kept on board the ship;
clarify with the P&I Club on legality of post such fuel sampling action with regard to
where the fuel samples is taken to, which entity/laboratory is running tests and its
accreditation, how is possible to ensure the veracity of the test results and avoid the
sample is tampered;
very important that ships should have as reference the representative sample
(MARPOL sample) as required by regulation 18 of MARPOL Annex VI which had to
be taken in accordance with IMO Guidelines (MEPC.182(59); should the
representative sample not been taken according to the IMO Guidelines and
particularly taken not in the presence of the receiving ship’s crew, the ship should
issue a Note of Protest.
5.4
USCG/EPA
The US Coast Guard has issued a notice stating that both the USCG and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) will soon take action to ensure compliance with the forthcoming
0.10% fuel sulphur limits in the North American and US Caribbean Sea Emission Control
Areas (ECAs), which come into effect on 1 January 2015.
In addition to checking Bunker Delivery Notes and related records, the agencies are
developing plans for joint boardings that will include fuel oil sampling and in-the-field
screening for sulphur levels. You can download the notice here.
Members are reminded that USCG/EPA expect and require that their ships are prepared in
advance of 31 December 2014 so that any ship which enters an ECA zone as of 00:00 hrs, 1
January 2015 has to either switch to a low sulphur marine distillate oil or switch on scrubbers
installed on board, which could meet the required SOx emissions. Among others, by end
December 2014, ships might need to document in terms of:





having sufficient 0.10% sulphur content fuel on board for trips through the ECA;
the fuel system adapted to switch from residual fuels to distillates in a safe and clean
manner;
“safe change-over” implies, i.a. fuel pumps adapted to avoid leaks and seizures,
control of a safe temperature decrease in the fuel system (a maximum rate of 2°C
/min recommended by engine makers and it should be strictly followed), consider
cooling and chilling of the low sulphur marine fuel, change and use of right base
number of lubricants/cylinder oil, keep a predetermined pressure on the fuel system
to avoid leaks, etc.;
“clean change-over” implies avoiding contamination of the low sulphur content fuel by
a proper design of the fuel system (segregation between the systems is ideal; will
reduce the amount of expensive low sulphur content fuel to be used to flash off the
system); storage for various cylinder oil grades; return fuel pipes designed to bring
the returned fuel to the right tanks; monitor compatibility when switching from
residuals to a distillate fuel with a low aromatic hydrocarbon content, etc.;
training of personnel to understand the correct sequence when switching from
residual fuel to low sulphur marine fuel; on board change-over procedure with
8

sequence, timing and relevant instruction of the fuel change-over from residual to
distillate but also from distillate to residual fuel (as required by regulation 14.6 of
MARPOL Annex VI);
testing the system ahead of the deadline.
Based on experience with ECA compliance so far, ships may encounter problems with either
(a) non availability of the ECA complaint fuel or (b) ECA fuel supplied to ship but having a
sulphur content above the limit, as indicated by fuel sample testing and despite the fact that
the value in the BDN shows compliance. In both cases, ships should issue Notes of Protests
to their Administrations with copies to the port authority where the fuel was supplied and a
copy to the PSC to the next port of call, as appropriate. Most Flag Administrations and test
laboratories have standard formats for Notes of Protests.
In these two cases, the advice from the USCG/EPA are as follows:
(a) Vessel attempted to purchase compliant fuel but was unable to do so
When the ship made attempts to purchase ECA compliant fuel prior to entry into US waters
and the fuel was not available, the ship must file and submit an electronic FONAR (Fuel Oil
Non-Availability Report) to the EPA. The electronic FONAR form can be requested through
Electronic Fuel Oil Non-Availability Disclosure Portal – FOND Instructions. The completed
FONAR must be submitted through this same electronic portal. Instructions for filing a
FOND can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/marpol-annex-vi under the
section entitled “Low Sulfur Fuel Non-availability”.
However, it must be understood that a FONAR is NOT a WAIVER, it is a statement of noncompliance with the ECA requirement.
b) ECA fuel supplied to ship with BDN indicating compliance but ship’s fuel sample testing
indicates that the sulphur level exceeds the mandated limit.
In this scenario, the ship is NOT required to file a FONAR/FOND. The ships is however
expected to issue a Notice of Protest with the Flag Administration and a copy kept on board.
If the allegedly non-compliant supply was in an US port, EPA expects the ship reports the
event via an email to marine-eca@epa.gov which includes a copy of the BDN, a copy of the
Notice of Protest and all relevant information relating to the bunker supplier, the vessel and
the specifics of the bunker load in question.
More details on guidance from USCG/EPA can be seen at the USCG frequently asked
questions document:
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cgcvc/cvc2/general/marpol_annex_vi/USCG_ECA_faqs_Rev_2-1114.pdf
9