IMO Working Group on the Evaluation of Safety and Pollution Hazards (ESPH 10) Meets During

IMO Working Group on the Evaluation of Safety and Pollution Hazards (ESPH) meets during BLG 12

INTERTANKO participated in the latest session of the IMO Working Group on the Evaluation of Safety and Pollution Hazards held during the Twelfth Session of the Bulk Liquids and Gases (BLG 12) in London from 4-8 February 2008.

During her introduction at BLG 12, Mrs. Marja Tiemens-Idzinga informed the working group that this would be her last meeting as Chairman of the ESPH Working Group. INTERTANKO echoed all of the kind words that were said at the close of the Working Group on 6 February, in appreciation of all of Mrs. Tiemens-Idzinga’s hard work relative to the monumental task of Revising MARPOL Annex II and amending the IBC Code.

Areas discussed during ESPH included:

The Evaluation of New Products

 Only two new products were reviewed. One product, ethoxylated tallow amine (>95%), which was originally submitted by Singapore to ESPH 13, was resubmitted for inclusion in List 5 of the next MEPC.2 Circular: the product was approved.  The other submission by the USA was withdrawn and will be resubmitted to ESPH 14. The recommended classifications and carriage requirements for ethoxylated tallow amine (>95%) are set out at Annex 1 of the ESPH Final Report (the final ESPH report will be included in the INTERTANKO Weekly News as soon as it is available).

Evaluation of Cleaning Additives

26 products were proposed for evaluation in accordance with MEPC.1/Circ 590 (the revised tank cleaning additives guidance note and reporting form). Out of the 26 proposed, 23 of the products met with the criteria outlined in the Circular (these will be listed in the final EPH report).

Review of the MEPC.2 Circular

Although it was customary for ESPH to consider products that have been subject to tripartite agreements and reported to the IMO for inclusion in the MEPC.2/Circ MEPC.2, because of its proximity to the 1 Jan 2007 Annex II implementation date, Circ 13 does not contain any tripartites due to expire this year. The focus of this ESPH was on the scope of MEPC.2/Circular 14.

With respect to List 1 (Pure or Technically Pure Products) it was agreed that the next circular should contain:

 tripartites still showing an expiry date;  entries having “all countries/no expiry date” but which were finalised after the adoption of the 2009 IBC Code Amendments;  entries included in the 2009 IBC Code Amendments that have been changed and are reflected in their List 1 profiles. This information, as well as any new entries, will form the basis of the draft of next MEPC.2/Circular (Circ.14)

Regarding List 2 Products (Pollutant Only Mixtures Containing at Least 99% by Weight of Components Already Assessed by IMO) there was discussion regarding the chemical names to be used for specifying in the third column of List 2 “contains”. ESPH agreed that the information in this column should always reflect the complete product name as specified in Chapters 17 and 18 of the IBC Code or Lists 1 or List 5 (Substances Not Shipped In Pure Form But As A Component In Mixtures) of the MEPC.2/Circ. It was noted, however that there may be occasions on which usage of the complete information (in the case of a product with a long chemical name) may pose problems for shipping documentation and product data classification systems. The use of complete information ensures full compliance with the MEPC.1/Circ.512 (2006 Revised Guidelines for the Provisional Assessment of Liquid Substances).

One other issue discussed relative to List 2 of the MEPC.2/Circ was the use of the words, “mineral oil” in the “contains” column. ESPH discussed the possibility of mineral oil as a stand alone entry and its possible inclusion in List 5. The various industries affected were encouraged to submit additional data on the use and classification of mineral oil in products such as lube oil additives. If a safety concern exists for what appears to be a list 5 product, it may have to undergo a full evaluation. Representatives from industry also noted, however, that in some cases the component may have hazards but the mixture does not.

New Date for the MEPC.2/Circ.14

On 1 January 2009 amendments to the IBC Code will take effect. If the usual MEPC.2/Circ date of 17 December were used there would be 15-day gap in which certain products moving from List 1 to the IBC Code would not have a home. The current MEPC.2/Circ remains valid and the new Circular will take effect 1 January 2009. MEPC.2/Circ.14 will still be issued on 17 December to be consistent with IMO logistical timelines.

Review of Chapter 19 of the IBC Code

Although BLG 11 recommended a review of Chapter 19 by the ESPH, it was the decision of ESPH that this work requires specialised expertise. At ESPH delegations were encouraged to make this expertise available to the IMO. It is the hope of the Work Group that information will be provided by ESPH 14. The target completion date for this work is 2009.

Consideration of the application of the requirements for the carriage of biofuels and biofuel blends

For the purposes of this debate the ESPH has agreed to use definitions of biodiesel (100 percent FAME) and bioethanol (ethanol) found in paragraph 3 of BLG 11/10.

Based on this information and the instructions from BLG 12 on 5 February, an extended discussion led to the following action points being developed:  On board blending (as defined in the ESPH 13 report BLG 12/3 para 9.11.2 and 9.11.4) should be included in the terms of reference for the ESPH Working Group.

 The boundaries of Annex I and Annex II might be an item for further consideration but will require a new work programme item to be approved by BLG.

 More information is needed on all aspects of biofuels and biofuel blends. It is crucial that the industries affected by any possible carriage requirements submit information well in advance of the 1 July 2009 deadline as agreed by BLG 12.

 Utilising the “interim limits" contained in the document originally proposed by the U.K., Sweden and IPTA may possibly not allow any Oil Discharge Monitoring Equipment (ODME) to function correctly. Further testing to establish ODME operational limits for the different biofuel blends is necessary.

 There may be Annex I compliance issues relative to the “interim limits” reiterated in BLG 12/3 Para 9.3.2:

.2 when declaring and shipping bio-fuels blended with base petroleum fuels, the under-mentioned products can be carried under MARPOL Annex I provided the following limits are not exceeded:

.1 blended bio-diesel with a maximum limit of 15% bio-diesel and 85% ordinary diesel, B15; or .2 blended bio-ethanol with a maximum limit of 15% bio-ethanol and 85% ordinary gasoline/petrol, E15; or .3 gasoline/alcohol mixtures with a maximum limit of 15% alcohol and 85% ordinary gasoline/petrol, E15;

 Proposed “band 2 blends”, which are blends with more than 1%, but less than 85%, petroleum oil and which may possibly be carried as an Annex II Pollution Category X, ST2, with worst case minimum carriage requirements assigned (based on analogous products such as pygas, butylbenzene, fatty acid methyl esters) will be required to be submitted as a tripartite cargo if fixed carriage conditions are to be pursued.

Although the 1 July 2009 deadline was proposed by BLG 12, it was also noted by some delegations that a more realistic period of three years (similar to that of a tripartite) should be allowed.

Next meeting of ESPH 14

The next meeting of the ESPH Group (ESPH 14) is scheduled for 27-31 October 2008 at the IMO Headquarters in London.

A full report of the proceedings including a copy of the full report and subsequent Annexes will be contained in the next issue of the Weekly News.

Contact: Margaret Doyle