EUROSHORE’s reaction on the Commission report regarding the implementation of Directive 2000/59
In this note: EUROSHORE sets out a number of comments in relation to the implementation process of Directive 2000/59 on the on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues in European ports.
EUROSHORE is an International Trade Association of authorised providers of Port Reception Facilities in Europe and beyond. EUROSHORE was founded in 1998 and now
has members in Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Romania, Turkey and the United Kingdom. The main objective of the Association is to promote the interests of companies that are active in the area of ships waste management.
The objectives are:
- To promote the use of its members port reception facilities
- To promote the efficient and environmentally sound disposal of ships waste
- To promote relevant international policy, procedures and standards of competence for the collection and processing of ships waste
- To promote healthy and fair competition between port reception facilities
2. General considerations
Past activity has seen the Association closely involved in the development and implementation of the European Directive (2000/59/EC) on Port Receptions Facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo-residues.
This monitoring, reviewing and constructive process of dialogue both at the international and regional level enables EUROSHORE members to ensure they are able to provide the shipping industry with adequate and environmentally sound waste management services.
Past activity has seen the Association closely involved in the development and implementation of the European Directive (2000/59/EC) on Port receptions facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo-residues. This monitoring, reviewing and constructive process of dialogue both at the international and regional level enables EUROSHORE members to be properly informed and to support their ability to provide the shipping industry with adequate and environmentally sound waste management services.
EUROSHORE furthermore participates in the international Industry Port Reception Facilities Forum and follows up IMO issues related to port reception facilities.
EUROSHORE is fully aware that ports in the EU are very different when it comes to types of operations, size and traffic. Therefore we believe that a certain level of proportionality in relation to the implementation of Directive 2000/59 is needed. The is reflected also into Directive 2000/59 (see also recital 10 of the Directive: (...) The obligation to ensure the availability of adequate Port Reception Facilities leaves the Member States with a high degree of freedom to arrange the reception of waste in the most suitable manner (...)).
Keeping this proportionality in mind, EUROSHORE also believes that it cannot come as a surprise that some differences in implementation between Member States can now be identified.
EUROSHORE believes that in principal there is nothing wrong with the current text of Directive and its objectives. However, there is some room for improvement on some points. EUROSHORE therefore agrees with the Commission this should be pursued at this time by issuing guidance rather than proposing legislative changes especially when keeping in mind that the Directive is still very recent. To this purpose we support changes in the directive towards a more stringent obligation to deliver waste to reception facilities.
3. Division of tasks and responsibilities
EUROSHORE noticed that there is no clear description of role of the different parties (environmental authorities, port authorities (legal/managerial), waste contractors, port users (ships/agents) and port state control) involved in the implementation of the Directive and their responsibilities.
Due to the different competences a clear division of tasks is sometimes difficult to make.
The statute, role and tasks of a «port authority» are very different in each Member State, and differ even within one Member State. This mainly relates to the drafting of the waste management plan but can also play a role in relation to the collection of fees. Some port authorities have only a limited role in these matters. An enforced involvement of port authorities in relation to the functioning of the waste reception facilities is therefore not always possible.
4. Fee system
EUROSHORE believes that in general the ‘no less than one third’ criteria which was reached after long and difficult negotiations can be improved. We believe that a more harmonised system all over Europe with clear and transparent parameters for the waste fee will have a positive effect especially in these ports were the port authority, due to its particular role is less involved in bringing more waste ashore. We also believe that a 100% indirect fee for the whole EU as recommended by CarlBro will not be easy to realise . Taking into account that a fee system in one port within the same country or between countries impacts the business of a Port Reception Facility, we will welcome all initiatives to harmonise the fee system.
A certain harmonisation of the fee system is therefore recommended but not going so far as a 100% indirect fee system.
Because of the existing differences in costs for operating a waste reception facility between Member States a fully harmonized fee system covering all costs seems to be impossible and should therefore not be an objective.
However, maintaining only a reference to the “no less than one third principle”, without harmonized guidelines and or requirements for the respective calculation and implementation, can be a factor of unfair competition between ports.
For that reason a more harmonized approach on parameters, principles, methods and common principles for calculation and setting the fee. EUROSHORE agrees that the fees should be fair, transparent and non-discriminatory and by establishing such parameters and principles this could be further enhanced. The fee must cover all types of ship generated waste which are mentioned in the EU Directive 2000/59 and must go as a matter of principle to the provisions of port reception facilities. It should not be used as an additional revenue for port authorities.
EUROSHORE can support a more harmonized approach of the notification form and preferably in line with the IMO notification form under discussion. EUROSHORE prefers, from an operational point of view to have more detailed information about the type of waste (preferably by using international codes, the origin of the waste and other practical and relevant information such as pumping speed, size of couplings etc.).
Port authorities expect ships to notify them of their waste disposal requirements before they arrive in order to provide adequate facilities. So there is no need for them to get these details about origin, parameters etc of waste which is more relevant for collection and price setting.
Port authorities, where possible, could collect more actively waste statistics based on the notifications. It should, however, be determined what extra work load and additional financial means are needed for that.
First of all it should be determined which kind of statistics (information) are needed.
Not only from a ship perspective the notifications may constitute a lot of work, also port authorities receive a lot of unnecessary information.
One of the important issues which could perhaps also be dealt with within the notification process is the maximum storage capacity, the amount of waste retained on board and the exemption of delivering all waste.
EUROSHORE shares the general consensus that the setting and application of exemptions needs to be improved. Especially the terms scheduled, frequent and regular traffic could be subject to a more harmonized set of rules (e.g. A predestined route from which small deviations are allowed. The vessel has to call at the port at least (...) every (...)). But also questions such as should the renewal of the exemption be granted automatically if all the considered factors for attribution of exemption are maintained, or the validity of the exemption and a list of documentation that may constitute evidence to grant exemption deserve further attention.
EUROSHORE recognizes that there is a lack of consistency within the EU on the operation of exemption provisions according Article 9 of Directive 2000/59. EUROSHORE believes that guidelines on such exemptions could be a possible way forward.
Especially with the idea in mind of promotion of short sea shipping this should be better organised as it leads to economically and also environmentally unwanted practices.
EUROSHORE welcomed the idea of setting up an European database which contains on the one hand information on licensed waste contractors which are authorized by the competent authority, the disposal of ships’ waste and which could collect all existing exemptions and provide more clarity on this . Guidelines could also be provided which set out under what conditions types of ships could be exempted.
7. Cargo residues
In relation to the disposal of cargo residues EUROSHORE believes that a better control and enforcement through port state control and also by compliance inspections of port authorities within their area of jurisdiction is most important based on a risk analysis to avoid unwanted situations. EUROSHORE also believes that the creation of a whole new set of legislation in this matter should be avoided., but that the existing MARPOL legislation should be better implemented. In case of unclear definitions, further clarification could be worked out. The same principle of indirect fees could be further investigated in order to improve the delivery of cargo residues ashore.
EUROSHORE also welcomes new legislation such as the proposal for a Directive on ship source pollution modifying directive 2005/35/EC could further reduce disposals of waste on open sea.
8. Waste management plans.
In order to provide valuable information to the shipping industry in time about location, capacities, opening hours and all other relevant information about the port reception facilities in a certain port we would like to recommend that waste management plans will be available via the website of the respective ports. We also recommend strongly the involvement of the port reception facilities as an important stakeholder next to the shipping lines in the development of waste management plans as foreseen in annex 2 of the EU Directive.
9. Waste delivery certificates
EUROSHORE recommends the use of an uniform waste delivery certificate detailing the volumes and the types of waste which was collected by the licensed and authorised waste contractor. EUROSHORE prefers an IMO document, but if this is not possible, we prefer an harmonised model all over Europe in which the English language is used (minimum as second language)
In order to realise the compliance with the EU Directive 2000/59, we strongly recommend that the EU and the Member States should provide more means and personnel in order to carry out the necessary controls.
In principle, we believe that a ship should be obliged to discharge all its waste if the next port of call is unknown or if the next port of call has insufficient capacities to receive the waste. We believe that a ship with a destination outside the EU should dispose , by matter of principle, all its waste.
By means of this paper EUROSHORE raises a number of questions in relation to the implementation of Directive 2000/59 on which a more harmonized approach could be useful. EUROSHORE stresses that it in principle still supports the provisions of the Directive and it is willing to discuss the development of guidance with the European Commission, Member States and other stakeholders.
For further information, please contact:
P/A Entrepotkaai 1