1 spreker 00.00. ovam.pdf · marpol ¾ international convention for the prevention of pollution...

00.00.20091 spreker

The Belgian model: an example to other countries?

Gudrun JanssensPolicy Advisor Public Waste Agency for Flanders – OVAMBrussels - 14th October

00.00.20093 spreker

Belgian model: an example to other countries?

Applicable legislation concerning PRFsIMO Regulations and Guidelines

European Directive on Port Reception Facilities (PRFs)

ISO standards

Practical implementation in Belgian ports

Belgian model: an example?

00.00.20094 spreker

IMO Regulations and Guidelines

The MARPOL 73/78 Convention

Important requirements

MEPC Guidelines

00.00.20095 spreker


MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocols of 1978 and 1997, relating thereto, and amendments

Preamble: “desire to achieve the complete elimination of intentional pollution of the marine environment”

Belgium: Party to MARPOL• Ratified MARPOL Annexes I - VI

00.00.20096 spreker


Important requirements MARPOL

Record books & garbage management plans and placards• Which ships? Which Residues? Described in MARPOL• Review Annex V

Discharge MARPOL Residues into the sea / the shore (PRF)

• Where and which ships? Described in MARPOL• Each Party has to ensure the provision of adequate Port Reception

Facilities (PRFs) that meet the needs of ships using them, without causing undue delay

• Obligation often delegated to the Port Authority (PA)

00.00.20097 spreker


Delivery of MARPOL residues to PRFs is excluded from the Basel Convention

BASEL Convention• Waste, deriving from normal operation of a ship is excluded, when

covered by another international instrument

Waste Shipment Regulation EC/1013/2006 excludes• waste, deriving from normal operation of a ship, when covered by

another international instrument• + waste generated on board ships, until such waste is offloaded in

order to be recovered or disposed of !!!

00.00.20098 spreker


MEPC Guidelines

Guidelines for ensuring the Adequacy of PRFs -MEPC.83(44)

Guide to Good Practice for PRF Providers and Users -MEPC.1/Circ.671

Advanced Notification Form (ANF)Waste Delivery Receipt (WDR)Report Alleged inadequacies

http://gisis.imo.orgList inadequaciesDatabase existing PRFs

00.00.20099 spreker


MEPC Guidelines

Comprehensive Manual on PRFs

Try to provide answers to practical questions

e.g. adequacy? Undue delay,…?

Supplemented to MARPOL

00.00.200910 spreker


Applicable legislationIMO Regulations and Guidelines


ISO standards



00.00.200911 spreker

Directive 2000/59/EC

1. Ensure availability of adequate port reception facilities

2. Development waste reception and handling plans

3. 24 Hours notification

4. Mandatory discharge

5. Cost recovery system

00.00.200912 spreker


1. Mandatory discharge for ship generated waste

Deliver all ship generated waste before leaving port

Exemption: when sufficient storage capacity untill port of delivery

Nevertheless mandatory when reasonable doubt about port reception facilities in port of delivery

Different from IMO Regulations

00.00.200913 spreker


1. Cost Recovery System for ship generated waste

System principles• no incentive to discharge at sea• all ships contribute, irrespective of the use

− exemption possible for “frequent and regular” ships− fee covers at least 1/3 cost of PRF’s, incl. treatment and disposal

waste• cost port reception facilities covered through collection of fee from ships

Mandatory: different IMO Regulations

00.00.200914 spreker




ISO Standards



00.00.200915 spreker




ISO Standards



00.00.200916 spreker


Target groups:

Commercial ports

Fishing ports

Marinas

Inland waterways

For each target group: tailor made approach

00.00.200917 spreker


Commercial ports

Antwerp, Zeebrugge and Ghent

Ostend: slight differences

Open market system

Ship entering commercial port pays separate waste fee:• a fixed part• a recoverable part

» Notification ok» proof waste was/will be delivered to PRF

= enforcement !

00.00.200918 spreker


Cost Recovery System in commercial port

00.00.200919 spreker


Financial incentives to discharge:• if ship discharges in EU port: refund• + if ship discharges waste in Flemish port, discount from

waste fund

Use of PRF is encouraged!• Positive financial benefit for ship when delivering waste

Tracking system whether waste was / will be delivered to PRF

By monitoring: create ship discharge past

EnforcementPSC: team enforcement Directive 2000/59Yearly audit waste fund

00.00.200920 spreker


Fishing PortsZeebrugge, Ostend, Nieuwpoort: 130 vessels

No notification needed!

PRF’s: container park + mobile waste contractors

Waste reception and handling plans: same principles

Fee system: subscription system: 1000 euro/year

Access to container park (badge) & discharge of all waste

Every year: recalculation of fee

Freeriders: inspections!

00.00.200921 spreker


Before and after: waste in fishing ports

00.00.200922 spreker


Marinas

Port reception facilities:• containers: glass, paper, cans, small hazardous

waste (paint, oily rags, batteries, etc.)• pumping station: bilges, sewage

Waste reception & handling plans: same plan in every port

Blue Flag (FEE): WRHP mandatory (inland ports!)

Waste fee included in port dues

No notification needed for small recreational crafts

00.00.200923 spreker


Marinas (Nieuwpoort)

00.00.200924 spreker


Inland waterways receiving sea-going vessels

2 major regional authorities: 500 seagoing vessels per year

PRF’s: containers + mobile waste contractors

separate waste fee: 25 euro = 1 m³ garbage (Annex V)

every year: recalculation

notification needed

regional WRHP’s: same for 2 authorities

CCR - Convention on waste for inland navigation!

00.00.200925 spreker




ISO Standards



00.00.200926 spreker


Some strong elements and some weaknesses

No copy - paste but tailor made approach needed

Party State to the IMO? Ratify MARPOL? Which Annexes?

Developed country, developing country?

Different port types = different approaches

00.00.200927 spreker


Strenghts

Mandatory discharge (as in all EU Member States)environmentally sound waste treatment

Cost Recovery System that creates true positive incentive • Ship who delivered: rewarded• Second incentive: direct discount (waste fund)• Reporting system: electronically

Reporting systemClose monitoring ships’ dischargeCross-check with data waste contractors and ships notificationDubious data: PSC inspection

00.00.200928 spreker


Strenghts

Enforcement PSC: Team enforcement waste

Cost Recovery SystemYearly audit

Open market system: Efficient service (competition improves adequacy)Correct price level

Co-operation between competent authorities / stakeholders• PSC, environmental and maritime agencies, port authorities, waste

contractors, ship agents, …

00.00.200929 spreker


Possibilities to improve through EU legislation?

Mandatory discharge ship generated waste• Depend on GISIS

√ database PRFs and reported alleged inadequacies√ objective (in stead of “reasonable doubt”)

• Develop (international) standards, criteria when to discharge?√ What is sufficient storage capacity (IOPP?)

Cargo residues• Part of MARPOL Annex V• Cost Recovery System and mandatory discharge?

00.00.200930 spreker


Enforcement and monitoring• Sirenac information system for the identification of polluting or potentially

polluting ships? Safe Sea Net?• Monitoring: creating ships’s discharge past!• Making ships aware and responsible for the waste they discharge!

What is excluded from Basel convention / WSR?• Waste, deriving from normal operation of a ship is excluded, when

covered by another international instrument• All waste generated on board?• Normal operation of a ship? Guidance from IMO?• When Basel? When MARPOL?• Today? No, near future!

00.00.200931 spreker


EU and its Member States should

Set high standards for EU ports

Try to improve

Take into accountMarine pollution is by its nature transboundary

√ Drifts with ocean currents and winds√ Shipping companies, owners

• Importance of MARPOL √ National and even EU legislation also has it limits

00.00.200932 spreker


Improve international legislation

Clear international guidance on some basic principles

More stringent international legislation on the use of PRFs and on the development of PWMP

• Development of a cost recovery system tailored to the ports’ needs• Mandatory discharge is advisable, but take into account waste treatment

Today?

In the near future because of increasing need for adequate port reception facilties

• E.g water containing cargo residues• Unreasonable to ask Party States to provide PRFs without obliging ships

to use them

00.00.200933 spreker

So we can prevent …

00.00.200934 spreker

and preserve the marine environment …

Thank you for your kind attention !

[email protected]

T: 015 284 361F: 015 434 403

1 spreker 00.00. ovam.pdf · marpol ¾ international convention for the prevention of pollution...

Documents