Review Finds "Inherent Problem" in IMO BDN Declaration

CIMAC suggested revisions to the IMO language

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) requirements for bunker delivery note (BDN) documentation to prove compliance with sulfur emission rules contain an "inherent problem," according to the International Council on Combustion Engines (CIMAC).

In its "Guideline on the interpretation of marine fuel oil analysis test results with particular reference to sulphur content," published this month, CIMAC reports that its review of Appendix V of MARPOL Annex VI found that the IMO calls for suppliers to certify that "the fuel oil supplied is in conformity with the applicable paragraph of regulation 14.1 or 14.4 and regulation 18.3 of this Annex."

The reference to regulation 14.1 or 14.4 is inappropriate for two reasons, CIMAC says.

First, relevant guidelines permit ships to comply with alternative sulfur oxides (SOx) reduction methods such as the use of exhaust gas scrubbers.

"Therefore, in those instances, it must be recognised that it is fully acceptable that the sulphur content of the fuel oil as supplied is higher than that as given by regulation 14.1 or 14.4," CIMAC said.

Secondly, the regulations refer to "fuel oil used on board ships" rather than fuel supplied to ships, even though suppliers have no way to know whether a vessel operator will use the fuel as is or mix it with other fuel oils on board, or whether the operator is changing fuels appropriately when entering or leaving an Emissions Control Area (ECA).

CIMAC recommends that the bunker delivery note declaration be amended to read: "A declaration signed and certified by the fuel oil supplier's representative that the sulphur content of the fuel oil supplied is in accordance with the value stated on this Bunker Delivery Note and the fuel is in conformity with regulation 18.3 of MARPOL Annex VI."

Methods of enforcement for emissions rules have been a matter of interest to many in the shipping industry, with the International Chamber of Commerce arguing that BDNs should be the primary tool, while others, including the Port of Rotterdam, have looked to direct monitoring of emissions or other methods.