4.6 The Committee noted that the submission by INTERTANKO (MEPC 52/4/11) contained comments to the unified interpretations submitted by IACS and proposed some additional interpretations and amendments to Annex VI and the NOx Technical Code.

　

4.7 The Committee noted that the proposed unified interpretations were interpretations suggested by the industry and that flag States may adopt their own unified interpretations.

　

4.8 Having considered the three submissions, the Committee agreed to instruct DE 48 to consider, as a matter of urgency, the proposed unified interpretations and report its considerations to MEPC 53.

　

　

4.9 The Committee recalled that MEPC 49 approved the draft amendments to Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 on the introduction of the Harmonized System of Survey and Certification (HSSC) into Annex VI.

　

4.10 The Committee recalled that annex 3 to resolution A.948(23) on "Revised Guidelines under the Harmonized System of Survey and Certification" only addressed the survey guidelines for Annexes I and II of MARPOL 73/78 and did not include Survey Guidelines for Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78.

　

4.11 The Committee recalled that the Survey Guidelines were required for compliance with regulations 5 and 6 of Annex VI and Chapters 2 and 6 of the NOx Technical Code in order to ensure unified and consistent implementation.

　

4.12 The Committee, having considered a submission by the United Kingdom (MEPC 52/4/10), instructed FSI 13 to develop, as a matter of priority, the Survey Guidelines under HSSC for Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 under its agenda item "Review of the Survey Guidelines under HSSC", and to submit them to MEPC 53 for approval, before requesting the Assembly to amend resolution A.948(23) to include the Survey Guidelines for Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78.

　

4.13 As suggested by Japan, the Committee also instructed the FSI Sub-Committee to develop the Guidelines on port State control for Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78.

　

　

4.14 The Committee recalled that funding for the present sulphur-monitoring project would run out at the end of 2003 and that MEPC 51 considered the possibilities for a voluntary scheme for funding. MEPC 51 welcomed the offer by the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and possibly others and urged other Members to provide additional funding for the continuation of the monitoring project.

　

4.15 The Committee instructed the Working Group to consider the funding possibilities further, taking into consideration the comments made by delegations.

　

4.16 The Committee agreed to bring the issue to the attention of the Council in order to consider a more permanent solution for funding and reporting of the sulphur-monitoring project.

　

4.17 The Committee recalled that MEPC 49, in accordance with the Guidelines for monitoring the worldwide average sulphur content of residual fuel oils supplied for use onboard ships, adopted by MEPC resolution 82(43), established the rolling average of sulphur content covering the years 2000 to 2002 as 2.7% m/m.

　

4.18 The Committee noted the submission by the Netherlands (MEPC 52/4/8) and agreed that on the basis of the samples taken during the years 2001 to 2003 with an average value of 2.7, 2.6 and 2.7%, respectively, a new three-years rolling average referred to in paragraph 4 of the Guidelines, can now be established as 2.67% and that the reference value referred to in paragraph 5 of the Guidelines can be established as 2.7%.

　

　

4.19 The Committee recalled that the following amendments to Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 and the NOx Technical Code had been approved by the Committee:

　

4.20 The Committee instructed the Working Group to make a final review of the proposed amendments with a view to circulation prior to adoption at MEPC 53 in July 2005.

　

　

4.21 The Committee recalled that regulation 14 of Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 on sulphur oxides (SOx) states that the sulphur content of any fuel used onboard ships shall not exceed 4.5% m/m. Inside SOx emission control areas the sulphur content shall not exceed 1.5% m/m. At present, only the Baltic Sea area was designated as a SOx emission control area. The North Sea area was approved as a SOx emission control area, but the Committee, before the entry into force, could not adopt the necessary amendments to regulation 14(3) of Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78.

　

4.22 The Islamic Republic of Iran in its submission MEPC 52/4/12 suggested, due to technical limitations in compliance with SOx emission control area requirements established by regulation 14(4) of Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78, with reference to article 1(a) of the IMO Convention and due to lack of accessibility to bunker fuel oils with 1.5% sulphur content, the establishment of a timetable for uniform global reduction of the sulphur content in bunker oils to a desired level, without maintaining existing or introducing any new specific SOx emission control areas.

　

4.23 The Committee considered the document from the Islamic Republic of Iran and decided to invite Parties to submit proposed amendments to Annex VI and the NOx Technical Code to MEPC 53 for consideration.

　

4.24 In this connection, the Committee also noted the submission by Friends of the Earth International (MEPC 52/4/4) which, with reference to the global average of sulphur content of less than 3% in bunker fuel oils, the increased emission of SOx, NOx, PM and PAH and the consequential risk to health and acidification of forests an lakes, suggested the lowering of the "Global Cap" of sulphur in fuel oils to 1.5% m/m and the adoption of more SOx emission control areas.

　

　

4.25 The Committee recalled that, as instructed by MEPC 42, there had been ongoing co-operation between the Secretariats of IMO and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technical Advice (SBSTA) on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ship's use of bunker oils in recognition of the Kyoto Protocol requirements.

　

4.26 The Committee recalled that MEPC 49, at the invitation of SBSTA 18, instructed the Secretariat to initiate an informal meeting or workshop of experts between the two Secretariats with the participation of member experts of the Working Group on Air Pollution, before SBSTA 20 (June 2004). The Committee noted that this informal meeting was held on 21 April 2004 in IMO and the outcome of the Meeting was reported in document MEPC 52/4.

　

4.27 The Committee welcomed the on-going co-operation between the secretariats of IMO and UNFCCC and noted the outcome of SBSTA 20 (MEPC 52/4/3).

　

4.28 The Committee noted the importance of the work of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on the revision of the "Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories" and urged Members to take an active part in the revision of the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines.

　

　

4.29 The Committee recalled that the Assembly, by resolution A.963(23), adopted "IMO Policies on Practices related to the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships" and that this resolution, together with Conference resolution 8 from the 1997 International Air Pollution Conference and the IMO Study on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships, established the basis for the IMO work on reduction or limitation of greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping.

　

4.30 The Committee recalled that MEPC 49 agreed to establish an intersessional correspondence group under the leadership of Norway and approved the Terms of Reference as set out in annex 8 to document MEPC 49/22.

　

4.31 The Committee recalled that the report of the intersessional correspondence group (MEPC 51/4) was presented to MEPC 51 by Mr. Sveinung Oftedal (Norway), the Co-ordinator of the correspondence group.

　

4.32 The Committee recalled that several States expressed the view at MEPC 51 that the work of IMO in relation to the implementation of resolution A.963(23) should be led by Annex I countries of UNFCCC, and in accordance with the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities and the transfer of technological and financial assistance from the developed countries to the developing countries as agreed to at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio, 1992 and embodied in the Kyoto Protocol, 1997.

　

4.33 The Committee recalled that the majority of delegates that spoke were of the view that the work of the correspondence group was done in compliance with the requirements of resolution A.963(23) and was in general supported by the shipping industry. In order to develop an even more environmentally friendly mode of transport, the development of an emission baseline and index figures were urgently needed. Finally, the growth in international shipping activities was a direct consequence of the growth in international trade.

　

4.34 The Committee recalled that MEPC 51 could not reach any agreement on the issue and therefore agreed to postpone further consideration on greenhouse gas emissions limitation or reduction to MEPC 52, including consideration of the correspondence group report and to allocate ample time for consideration on this issue.

　

4.35 After consideration, the Committee agreed to consider the greenhouse gas emission issues in two steps: Step 1 should include all technical matters related to GHG limitations or reductions, and Step 2 should cover the political related issues including equal application or common but differentiated responsibilities.

　

　

4.36 The Committee recalled that resolution A.963(23) urges the MEPC to develop a methodology to describe GHG efficiency of a ship and to develop guidelines by which this may be applied in practice.

　

4.37 The Committee recalled that documents submitted to MEPC 51 (MEPC 51/4, MEPC51/4/2, MEPC 51/INF.10) were introduced at MEPC 51. However, the report of the intersessional correspondence group was not considered from a technical point of view.

　

4.38 The Committee noted the submission by Norway, Germany and the United Kingdom (MEPC 52/4/2), containing the outline of draft Guidelines for ship CO2 indexing, and agreed that this submission, together with the submission MEPC 52/4/9 by India and MEPC 52/4/5 by FOEI, would provide a good starting point for considerations related to the development of a CO2 indexing scheme as a voluntary mechanism to be used during a trial period.

　

4.39 The Committee agreed that a CO2 indexing scheme should be simple and easy to apply and should take into consideration matters related to construction and operation of the ship, and market-based incentives.

　

4.40 The Committee agreed that "weather routeing" should not be considered further as a possible future mandatory measure for the reduction of GHG emissions.

　

4.41 The Committee agreed to instruct the Working Group on Air Pollution to examine on the technical points of view the draft Guidelines for ship CO2 emission indexing and to make suggestions on how to further develop the scheme, taking into considerations comments made by delegations at plenary.

　

　

4.42 India, in its submission MEPC 52/4/9, reiterated its views that the text of the Kyoto Protocol with regard to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and the requirements of transfer of technology and financial assistance should be taken into consideration when developing the IMO policy on GHG reduction or limitation. It also considered that the issue on common but differentiated responsibilities should be brought to the attention of the Assembly for further consideration.

　

4.43 Norway, in presenting document MEPC 52/4/1, stressed that the submission should be seen as a further development and refining of Norway's submission MEPC 51/4/2 to MEPC 51. The submission pointed out that the tradition of IMO was to develop mechanisms, either voluntary or mandatory, which apply equally to each Member State. The IMO Convention article 1(b) on the purpose of the Organization, the removal of discriminatory action was addressed, and as such, the inclusion of the differentiated approach in any IMO GHG mechanism to be developed would be in conflict with the purpose of the Organization. Further, Norway referred to the well established principle of "no more favourable treatment" in IMO instruments. In conclusion, Norway highlighted that the principle of equal application to IMO Member States should also apply to the IMO work on GHG emissions from international shipping.

　

4.44 In this connection, China made the following observations: IMO was asked to deal with limitation and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by the Kyoto Protocol, which only obliges Annex I countries of UNFCCC to do so. IMO Assembly resolution A.963(23) clearly acknowledged the relevant provisions of the Kyoto Protocol. During the deliberation on the matter, the recommendation of the MEPC that "the Assembly resolution on IMO Policies and Practices related to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships should be based on a common policy applicable to all ships, rather than based on the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol which stated that the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is under the responsibility of the Annex I countries of the Protocol" was rejected by the IMO Assembly. It proves that the above assertion was wrong. If the limitation or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is equally applied to both developed and developing countries, the developing countries will be discriminated for the following reasons: first, 79% of greenhouse gases were emitted by the developed countries; second, the Kyoto Protocol only obliges Annex I countries to pursue reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through IMO; and thirdly, the developing countries are technologically lagging behind. China also pointed out that the reason why IMO did not apply the "common but differentiated responsibility" principle when dealing with matters concerning the Montreal Protocol and the Basel Convention is that these documents did not provide that the developed countries should pursue limitation or reduction of related materials through IMO. In conclusion, China stressed that the "common but differentiated responsibility" principle should be observed by IMO when addressing greenhouse gas emissions from ships.

　

4.45 The Committee considered the submissions by India and Norway in a lengthy debate. The Committee had diverging views and could not reach a conclusion or an agreement on the issue. Following this inconclusive debate, the Chairman said that the issue was under discussion in other fora as well, and it would be advisable to continue the common ground found on technical matters and defer the application issue to a later stage when an agreement had been reached elsewhere.

　

4.46 The Committee noted the submission MEPC 52/4/5 by Friends of the Earth International, in which they expressed a general concern for the consequences of an annual grow of 38 to 72% of GHG emission generated by shipping during the period up to 2020. The increase is considered as the consequence of increased international trade. FOEI suggested a number of short- and long-term measures that IMO should take.

　

　

4.47 The Committee recalled that MEPC 51 agreed to re-establish the Working Group on Air Pollution at this session and agreed to the following Terms of Reference for its work:

　

　

4.48 Having received the report of the Working Group (MEPC 52/WP.9) the Committee took the following actions.

　

4.49 The Committee noted the text of the proposed amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and the NOx Technical Code which were approved by the Committee at previous sessions and editorially reviewed by the Working Group, as set out in annex 1, and requested the Secretary-General to circulate them in accordance with Article 16 of the MARPOL Convention, with a view to their adoption at MEPC 53.

　

4.50 The Committee agreed to bring the issue of the sulphur-monitoring project to the attention of the Council with a view to its continuation and future funding via the regular budget of the Organization.

　

4.51 The Committee noted the progress by the Group on the draft Guidelines on the CO2 indexing scheme following the review of resolution A.963(23).

　

4.52 The Committee invited those Members which were in a position to carry out trials, using the draft Guidelines on CO2 indexing scheme, to do so and to report to MEPC 53.

　

4.53 The Committee noted the view that, in the future, the Guidelines for the five other GHGs covered by the Kyoto Protocol should be considered.

　

4.54 The Committee, by majority, approved in general the report of the intersessional correspondence group (MEPC 51/4).

　

4.55 The Committee noted that trials of the CO2 Indexing Scheme would be undertaken and might be carried out intersessionally by Japan, Germany, Norway, Marshall Islands, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and INTERTANKO, and reported to MEPC 53.

　

4.56 The Committee approved a one-day open Technical Workshop on GHG Indexing Scheme to be held in IMO on the Friday prior to MEPC 53 under the condition that it would be organized without additional cost to the Organization. In this respect, the Committee welcomed the offer by Japan and the United Kingdom to provide funding and in-kind support, respectively, for the Workshop.

　

4.57 In order to progress the development of the IMO CO2 indexing scheme and to facilitate the implementation of Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78, the Committee agreed to reconvene the Air Pollution Working Group at MEPC 53 (see also paragraph 20.9).

　

4.58 The Committee approved the report of the Working Group in general.

　

4.59 The delegation of China, supported by Saudi Arabia, suggested that there should be two readings of the Working Group report before it is submitted to the Plenary for consideration.