Brussels, 11/01/2016 (Agence Europe) - The European Community Shipowners Association (ECSA) has highlighted many deficient areas in port reception facilities for waste. On Monday 11 January, the organisation made five proposals as part of the revision of the 2000/59/EEC directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and harmful cargo residues (PRF directive) that the Commission intends to introduce at the end of this year.
First and foremost, shipowners are calling on member states and the port reception authorities to introduce standardising measures so that the port reception facilities are adapted to the needs of vessels, without creating any excessive delay, as stipulated by the Marpol Convention 73/78. This international convention aims to prevent ship-generated waste and was drafted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). In this connection, shipowners would like to be systematically consulted when drawing up plans for the reception and treatment of waste and that they are allowed to make amendments to these plans.
The second point tackled involves the system for charging fees. Shipowners regret the excessive flexibility that exists when setting out fees and the prevailing lack of transparency, which leads to many areas of dysfunction and uncertainty. ECSA is calling for the “No-System-Fee System” to be extended according to the recommendations by the HELCOM, Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, whilst respecting the right to deliver ship-generated waste without incurring additional charges. ECSA is also calling for clarification of the notion of “significant contributions” of the costs for treating ship-generated waste. In a statement, the Commission estimated this at 30% of total costs. Thirdly, ship owners want greater flexibility in the “exceptions & exemptions regime…without endangering the goals of the PRF directive”. They are calling for the “dedicated storage capacity” notion to be clarified for ship-generated waste and greater flexibility in the exemption conditions that currently only involve ships engaged in regular shipping.
Fourthly, ECSA would like cargo residue specificities to be taken into account (cargo residue) which, contrary to operational waste (used oils, waste from household tasks) presents a commercial value that is the responsibility of the cargo owner. The organisation explains that setting out explicit conditions would cause a problem because of the difficulties involved in calculating cargo residues before unloading. Maria Deligianni, a policy adviser to ECSA informed EUROPE that “We also want new kinds of waste to be taken into account in the directive, such as those related to air pollution”.
Finally, shipowners would also like enhanced and harmonised implementation of the directive, particularly with regard to reporting procedures, as well as greater harmonisation between SafeSeaNet ports in the information and monitoring system for maritime transport. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)