Exceptions, trial exemptions and equivalents under MARPOL Annex VI

Emissions caused by equipment damage, trials of new technology, and the use of equivalent equipment are subject to different provisions. Each case has its own conditions and approval requirements.

Annex VI distinguishes exceptions, exemptions granted by the Administration, and approved equivalents. These procedures have different scopes and decision-makers.

Emissions for safety and for saving life are outside the rules from the start

1 Regulations of this Annex shall not apply to: .1 any emission necessary for the purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea; or

The text says shall not apply. This is not an exemption granted to you. There is nothing to apply for and no document to be issued.

The exception applies only to emissions necessary for the ship’s safety or saving life at sea. Emissions for fuel savings or schedule compliance do not qualify. The circumstances of the event determine whether the exception applies.

Emissions from damage must meet both exception conditions

.2 any emission resulting from damage to a ship or its equipment: .2.1 provided that all reasonable precautions have been taken after the occurrence of the damage or discovery of the emission for the purpose of preventing or minimizing the emission; and .2.2 except if the owner or the master acted either with intent to cause damage, or recklessly and with knowledge that damage would probably result.

Damage alone is insufficient. Both conditions must be met.

The first is that all reasonable precautions to prevent or minimize the emission have been taken. The timing is written into the provision: after the damage occurred, or after the emission was discovered. So the time the damage was identified, what was done afterwards, and when it was done become the material for the judgement.

The second removes the case where the owner or the master acted with intent to cause damage, or recklessly and knowing damage would probably result. What is judged is not the company’s procedure but the acts of the owner and the master. The first condition asks about what was done after the fact, the second about intent before it.

Trial exemptions require Administration approval and depend on cylinder displacement

2 The Administration of a Party may, in cooperation with other Administrations as appropriate, issue an exemption from specific provisions of this Annex for a ship to conduct trials for the development of ship emission reduction and control technologies and engine design programmes.

The Administration of a Party grants the exemption, cooperating with other Administrations where appropriate. It is available only if specific Annex or revised NOx Technical Code provisions could impede the research. The number of ships must be kept to the minimum necessary.

The duration splits on the per cylinder displacement of the engine.

Per cylinder displacement	Ceiling on the trial	What comes with it
Up to 30 L	18 months	Where more time is needed, one further 18 month renewal may be permitted
At or above 30 L	5 years	A progress review at each intermediate survey, renewable up to 5 years

The branch at or above 30 L carries a withdrawal condition as well. Where the testing has not adhered to the conditions of the permit, or the technology or programme is determined unlikely to produce effective results in reducing emissions, the permit may be withdrawn on the basis of that review. The longer the period runs, the more the provision builds in a mid-course check.

One place inside this exemption cannot be opened.

A permit issued under this regulation shall not exempt a ship from the reporting requirement under regulation 27 and shall not alter the type and scope of data required to be reported under regulation 27.

Holding a trial permit leaves the reporting duty under regulation 27 in place. The type and scope of the data to be reported do not change with the permit either. Fuel oil consumption data goes in on the same terms while the trial runs.

An engine of exactly 30 L needs care: the source uses up to 30 L in the first limb and at or above 30 L in the next. Do not rewrite that boundary or automatically select the longer trial period. Confirm the applicable limb and permitted duration in the Administration’s trial authorization.

An equivalent is recognized only if it is at least as effective at reducing emissions

1 The Administration of a Party may allow any fitting, material, appliance or apparatus to be fitted in a ship or other procedures, alternative fuel oils, or compliance methods used as an alternative to those required by this Annex if such fitting, material, appliance or apparatus or other procedures, alternative fuel oils, or compliance methods are at least as effective in terms of emissions reductions as those required by this Annex, including any of the standards set forth in regulations 13 and 14.

What can be recognized is broad. Not only a fitting, material, appliance or apparatus, but also other procedures, alternative fuel oils and compliance methods. The test, on the other hand, is nailed to one thing. It has to be at least as effective in terms of emissions reductions. The provision says in so many words that the standards in regulations 13 and 14 are included.

An equivalent does not stay on board the ship that uses it.

2 The Administration of a Party that allows a fitting, material, appliance or apparatus or other procedures, alternative fuel oils, or compliance methods used as an alternative to those required by this Annex shall communicate to the Organization for circulation to the Parties particulars thereof, for their information and appropriate action, if any.

The Administration that allowed it communicates the particulars to IMO, and IMO circulates them to the Parties. So an equivalent is not an arrangement that ends between the flag State and the company. The other Parties come to know about it.

Regulation 4 mixes sentences of different strength. Communicating is shall. Taking the relevant guidelines developed by IMO into account is should. Not impairing or damaging the environment, human health, property or resources is shall endeavour. Inside one regulation the force of the duty changes from sentence to sentence.

Additional exemptions depend on the activity and craft type

Regulation 3 holds two further openings that rest on different grounds from the three above.

The first is seabed mineral resources. Emissions arising directly from exploration, exploitation and associated offshore processing are exempt from the Annex. That covers flaring of hydrocarbons, the burning of cuttings and muds, the release of gases and volatile compounds entrained in drilling fluids and cuttings, emissions associated solely and directly with the treatment, handling or storage of seabed minerals, and emissions from marine diesel engines dedicated solely to that activity. Where hydrocarbons are produced and then used on site as fuel, regulation 18 does not apply to them once the Administration approves.

The second is the unmanned non-self-propelled barge.

4 The Administration may exempt an unmanned non-self-propelled (UNSP) barge from the requirements of regulations 5.1 and 6.1 of this Annex by means of an International Air Pollution Prevention Exemption Certificate for Unmanned Non-self-propelled (UNSP) Barges, for a period not exceeding five years provided that the barge has undergone a survey to confirm that conditions referred to in regulations 2.1.32.1 to 2.1.32.3 of this Annex are met.

The exemption covers the survey and certification requirements in regulations 5.1 and 6.1. A dedicated exemption certificate is required, with a maximum validity of 5 years and a prior survey confirming the conditions.

Worth confirming

The passages above come from regulations 3 and 4 of the revised MARPOL Annex VI adopted by resolution MEPC.328(76), printed pages 10 to 12.

What separates the three doors in practice is who makes the call.

• The safety door and the damage door are decided on the facts of the day. What is left behind is a record, not a permit.
• The trial exemption and the equivalent are opened by the Administration. The application form and the review procedure differ by flag State.
• How another Party, acting as port State, receives an equivalent is not settled by regulation 4. What the text fixes goes as far as the Administration’s duty to communicate.

Which IMO guidelines the Administration is to take into account and in which revision, the form of a trial exemption permit, and what survey confirms the conditions for an unmanned non-self-propelled barge all vary by flag State and by revision. The order of work is to settle which door the ship is actually standing at, then check the documents that door requires.

A breakdown and a proposed alternative need different evidence

These fictional situations show why an emissions issue does not always start with the same review.

Situation	First evidence to check	What that evidence alone does not establish
Emissions follow equipment damage	Damage and discovery times, prevention and mitigation measures, conduct before the damage	A breakdown report does not automatically establish the exception
A new technology is proposed for sea trials	Administration’s trial permit, affected provisions, duration and conditions	The company’s trial plan is not an exemption permit
Alternative fuel or equipment is proposed for routine use	Administration’s acceptance of the equivalent and its conditions	Manufacturer performance data alone do not establish acceptance

Do not reuse a post-incident report as authorisation for routine use of alternative equipment. Equally, a trial permit does not cover operations outside its scope or remove the reporting obligations that remain.

You can consult the cited source documents

These links lead to the official publishers of the documents discussed here. Match the edition and provisions cited in the article, and check subsequent amendments and flag-state implementation before applying them.

• IMO · MEPC.328(76)

Continue with the related operational guidance

• Bunker delivery note and fuel sample retention periods and custody (MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 18)
• The two sulphur limits in MARPOL Annex VI regulation 14 and the record a fuel changeover leaves