EN    EN  
 EUROPEAN  
COMMISSION 
Brussels, 10.3.2015  
COM(2015) 128 final 
2013/0224 (COD) 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
 
pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 
 
concerning the 
position of the Council at first reading on the adoption of a Regulation of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon 
dioxide emissions from maritime transport and amending Regulation (EU) N° 525/2013 
(Text with EEA relevance) 
 
 
EN 2   EN 2013/0224 (COD) 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
 
pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on  the Functioning of the European Union 
 
concerning the 
position of the Council at first reading on th e adoption of a Regulation of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on the monitori ng, reporting and verification of carbon 
dioxide emissions from mariti me transport and amending Regulation (EU) N° 525/2013  
(Text with EEA relevance) 
1. Background 
Date of proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council 
(document COM (2013) 480 final – 2013/0224 COD):  28 June 2013.  
Date of the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee:  16 October 2013  
Date of the position of the European Parliament, first reading:  16 April 2014  
Date of transmission of the amended proposal:  n/a 
Date of adoption of the position of the Council:  5 March 2015  
2. Objective of the proposal from the Commission 
The Commission proposes to create an EU -wide legal framework for collecting and 
publishing verified annual data  on CO2 emissions and energy efficiency from all large ships 
(over 5 000 gross tons) that use EU ports, irresp ective of where the ships are registered. This 
is the first step of the EU strategy to redu ce greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport 
as outlined by the Commission Co mmunication adopted in June 20131 and should also bring a 
valuable contribution to ongoing debates in th e International Maritim e Organisation (IMO). 
The key features of the monitoring, reporting and verification scheme resulting from this 
proposal are as follows: 
(a) Scope: ships above 5000 gro ss tons calling at ports und er the jurisdiction of a 
Member State fall under the MRV rules. Exclusion of small emitters (small and 
medium size ships below 5000 GT) which repres ent about 40% of the fleet, but only 
10% of the total emissions. 
(b) A few categories of ships are exempted: warships, fish catching and processing 
ships, wooden ships and government ships used for non-commercial purposes. 
(c) In accordance with the principles of intern ational maritime law, MRV rules apply in 
a non-discriminatory manner to all ships calling at EU ports , regardless of their flag. 
                                                 
1 Commission Communication on "Integrating maritime transport emissions in the EU's greenhouse gas 
reduction policies"  COM (2013) 479 final. 
 
EN 3   EN (d) Coverage of journeys from and to EU ports: from 1 January 2018, ships will need to 
monitor their CO2 emissions and other releva nt efficiency parame ters for their intra-
EU Union voyages (those between ports of  call under the jurisdiction of a Member 
State), for their incoming voyages (from the la st non-EU port of call to the first port 
of call under the jurisdicti on of a Member State) and for their outgoing voyages 
(from a port of call under the ju risdiction of a Member Stat e to the first non-EU port 
of call). 
(e) Emissions from vessels within ports will also need to be monitored, reported and 
verified. This is intended to encourage the use of available shore-based emission-
reduction technologies. 
(f) Already available data from log books, noon reports and bunker delivery notes will 
be used. 
(g) After being monitored, this data will need to be independently verified and then 
annually reported in an aggregated manner to the Commission and to the ship's flag 
state. 
(h) The Commission will report on verified annual aggregated data on a "per ship" basis, 
including both CO2 emission and efficiency parameters. 
(i) A limited number of tasks will be assigned to the European Maritime Safety Agency 
(EMSA), mainly related to the enforcement database, in line with its founding 
regulation. 
(j) Enforcement by MSs acting either as Flag St ates or as Port St ates (either through 
Port State Control (under 19§2) or thr ough MRV specific inspections (under 19§3)) 
are to check that a valid Document of Co mpliance (DoC) is on board of ships when 
visiting ports under their jurisdiction, and to follow-up by sanctions, if appropriate. 
(k) Link with international developmen ts by reviewing the Regulation and 
proposing/aligning, if appropr iate, relevant amendments  based on internationally 
agreed developments, notably in IMO. 
3. Comments on the position of the Council 3.1. General comments on the Council Position The Commission point of view is  that the informal negotiations  led to a balanced package 
with satisfactory solutions on a number of important issues such as the scope of the 
Regulation, the monitoring and reporting of cargo, data confidentiality and transparency of 
information or the enforcement provisions. The Commission is therefore in a position to support the outcome as reflected in the Council position. 
The Commission nevertheless makes a specific statement relating to the use made by the 
Council of the possibility fo reseen under Article 5(4) of  Regulation 182/2011 (the "no 
opinion" clause) for implementing acts. The Commission does not oppose it, but it strongly 
believes that the use of such a provision need s to be justified and will therefore make the 
statement in Annex to this Communication.
 
3.2. European Parliament's amendmen ts at first reading (in brief) 
The Council did not explicitly consider a num ber of EP's amendments. The Commission's 
views on these EP's amendments is described below.  
The EP first reading opinion put forw ard the following main amendments: 
 
EN 4   EN (a) Inclusion of broader references to "gree nhouse gas emissions" instead of "CO 2 
emissions" (Ams. 1, 9, 10, 12, 17, 21, 23, 24, 29, and 31). Partly accepted by the 
Commission.  The EP first reading opinion subst itutes in several instances the words 
"CO 2 emissions" by "GHG emissions" so as to highlight the need to address "other 
than CO2" maritime emissions over time. The Commission is of the view that the objective of the proposed Regulation shall remain focused on CO2 which is by far 
the most significant GHG emission from th e maritime sector. However, and as long 
as the scope of the Regulation remain s untouched, some wider wording along the 
EP's amendments can be acceptable. The Council has retained  CO2 as the only 
emission covered, as in the Commission proposal, while accepting some broader wording on GHG emissions and air pollutants in the recitals (recital 1a new) and 
others). 
(b) Including fishing and processing ships under the MRV (Am. 26) Rejected by the 
Commission The EP is in favour of including under the MRV scheme "fishing and 
processing ships" which were excluded from the proposal. The Commission view is 
that these categories represented a neglig ible amount of emissions and presented 
some enforcement problems. The Council fi nally kept these categories out of the 
Regulation as in the Commission proposal  
(c) Inclusion of a lightened MRV monitoring obligations for vessels operating only 
EU-related voyages and performing multiple voyages per day: "short sea 
shipping regime" (Am. 58). Part ly accepted by the Commission . The EP includes 
an exemption from "per voyage" monitoring obligations for ships only operating EU-
related journeys and performing multiple voyages a day (such as ferries). The objective is to streamline required monitori ng obligations for ships performing a high 
number of, potentially similar, journeys ev ery day. In order to avoid that in those 
cases, monitoring becomes unnecessarily too onerous, "per voyage" monitoring will 
not be strictly required as an intermedia te step while annual reporting obligations 
remain untouched. As a matter of princi ple, the Commission supports the inclusion 
of such a lightened regime which seeks a balance between the need to base ship's 
annual reporting on accurate data existin g on board and the administrative burden 
this would entail for a part icular type of trade or ci rcumstances defined in an 
objective manner. The Council retained th e EP's idea while preferred setting a 
threshold related to the numb er of voyages scheduled annua lly so as to provide for 
more legal certainty for the operators. 
(d) Deletion of 'cargo carried' and 'transport work' from the scope of data 
monitored as well as related energy effi ciency calculations (Ams. 29, 30, 43, 53-
55, 59, 73, 91 and 93). Rejected by the Commission . The EP has proposed the 
deletion of "cargo carried" and related operational energy  efficiency calculations, 
based on "transport work". The Council has retained them as monitoring parameters as put forward in the Commission's proposal.  
(e) Strengthening technical efficiency by requiring certified Energy Efficiency 
Design Index (EEDI) also for existing ships (Ams. 61 and 71)  Rejected by the 
Commission . The EP has proposed to require cer tification of EEDI  for all ships 
categories under the MRV to which the EED I applies, as a c ounterproposal to the 
deletion of cargo and the weakening of operational efficiency. The Council has 
retained the Commission propos ed scope of EEDI, only appl ying to new ships (built 
or repaired after 2013).  
 
EN 5   EN (f) Adding ships' 'ice class' and informatio n on severe winter conditions to the 
information included in the Monitoring plan and emissions reports (Ams. 33, 
40, 44, 60 and 70). Accepted by the Commission . The EP is in favour of adding a 
package of amendments aiming at ensuring that "ice class" (indicating whether the 
ship has been specifically designed for naviga tion in sea-ice conditi ons) is part of the 
core information to be reported under th e MRV. The Council has retained the EP's 
main idea but has converted such a reporting into a voluntary one. 
(g) Introduction of a reference to Direct ive 2003/4/EC on public access to 
environmental information (Am. 69). Rejected by the Commission . The EP's 
concerns about MRV collected data, gi ving undue insights in to commercially 
protected information, has led the EP to introduce a reference to existing EU 
legislation on access to environmental info rmation (namely Directive 2003/4/EC on 
access to information) applicable only to MS. The Commission understands that MRV annual aggregated data do not typically gi ve an insight into business secrets; it 
could however show some openness so as to assess whether in a concrete case and 
due to specific circumstances, protection of a legitimate commercial interest would be undermined. The Council has reformulated  the EP's idea and developed it into a 
reference to Regulation 1367/2006 on access to  environmental information applying 
to EU institutions and bodies (Aarhus Re gulation) which contains a clause on 
protected commercially interest to be asse ssed against public interest in disclosure.  
(h) Tacit extension of the Commission's empowerment to adopt delegated acts 
(Article 24 (1)). Accepted by the Commission. 
The EP proposes that delegation of powers la st five years and is tacitly extended for 
periods of identical durati on, unless the EP or the Council oppose this extension. The 
Commission can accept this clause which i ndeed represents standard wording. The 
Council has also reta ined the usual tac it extension formula.  
(i) Biennual assessment of non-CO2 im pacts (Am. 82). Accepted by the 
Commission. The EP has proposed a new obligation for the Commission under the 
Monitoring Mechanisms Regulation (MMR) to biennually assess the maritime 
transport sector's overall impact on th e global climate including through non-CO
2 
emissions. The Commission could accept the EP proposal subject to some 
reformulation. The Council has retained the EP's idea but converting it into a (biennual) obligation to be carried out at the time th e general report on reported 
MRV emissions will be produced by the Commission pursuant to Article 21(3).  
3.3. New provisions introduced by the Co uncil and the Commission's stance. 
The Council has inserted a number of changes which do not significantly weaken the proposal 
and also a number of new provisions into th e text which the Commi ssion can accept. These 
provisions are as follows: 
(a) Inclusion of a lighter regime of monitori ng for "short sea shipping" (Article 9 
(2) new) The Council has included new provisi ons enabling for ships exclusively 
operating journeys within the scope of the proposal and having more than 300 
scheduled voyages per year, to benefit fr om an exemption from the "per voyage" 
monitoring obligations (Article 9§ 2 new) . The wording of the Council exception is 
quite similar to the amendment put forwar d by the EP (Am. 58) and the Commission 
can go along such a lightened regime as described in the Council text (which 
provides more legal certainty in the form  of an annual threshold). "Per voyage" 
monitoring of fuel consumption and CO2 for ships performing a high number of 
potentially similar activities (as ferries) exclusively within the scope of the MRV 
 
EN 6   EN Regulation is not absolutely necessary as other documents and data existing on board 
(as BDN) can be used by the verifier to assess the way CO2 and fuel consumption 
annual data have been calculated. It is ther efore not an intermediate step strictly 
necessary to fulfil the ship's  main annual reporting obligat ions under Article 10 of the 
MRV Regulation which remain applicable in the same way. Per voyage" exemption 
relies also on the condition that it is not necessary to clearly distinguish and separate 
data on a "per voyage" basis (so as to avoi d covering data from journeys outside the 
scope e.g.:between two non EU ports of call). Ships not fulfilling the two abovementioned objective criteria which apply regardless of the flag of the ships will 
not be able to benefit from such an exception.  
(b) Voluntary reporting by companies on the basis of criteria defined in the 
monitoring plan (Article 10(3) new) The Council has introdu ced new provisions 
allowing ships to monitor and later ge t published fuel consumption and CO2 
emission data according to different crit eria (i.e.: laden/ba llast voyages). The 
Commission can go along with the Council's text  
(c) MRV regime of inspections (Article 19 (3)).The Council has proposed to lessen 
MS authorities' obligations regarding sh ips not having notified a Document of 
compliance and not covered by other enforcement mechanisms, and entering a port under MS' jurisdiction. The Commission can go along with the Council's text as this 
would align the mechanisms for enforcement to levels traditionally applied in this 
sector.  
(d) Expulsion order  (Article 20 (3 )).The Council has watered down the conditions 
under which Member States may issue an expul sion order in case of  ships in breach 
of the MRV obligations for "two or more consecutive reporting periods" (instead of 
"more than one reporting period") and "whe re other enforcement measures have 
failed to ensure compliance". Also a reference to international maritime law 
applicable in case of distress of ship s has been added. The Commission can accept 
the Council's text. 
(e) National rules on sanctions and penaltie s and information on national remedies 
(Article 20 (3a) and (4)) A derogation allowing landlocked MS without ships flying 
their flag to be excluded from the obliga tion to set national rules on penalties and 
sanctions has been included as 20 (3a) ne w. Also a new reference on the need to 
inform companies on the national effective remedies available in  case of expulsion 
order has been added under Article 20(4) new. The Co mmission can go along with 
the Council's text on these points.  
(f) Publication of annual data aggregat ed data and comme rcial interest protected 
pursuant Regulation 1367/2006/EC (Aarhus Regulation) applicable to EU 
institutions and bodies (Article 21(2a) ne w). The Council has proposed to reword the 
EP clause regarding protection of commercia l interest by inserting a reference to 
Regulation 1367/2006 on access to environmental information held by EU institutions and bodies (the "Aarhus Regulation"). The Commission can go along 
with the Council's text. 
(g) Delegated acts on verification and accreditation and new Annex III
 on the 
elements to be taken into account by the Commission when adopting these delegated acts (Articles 15(5) and 16(3) and Anne x III new). The Council has added some 
further specification of the content of  the delegated acts on verification and 
accreditation originally foreseen unde r Articles 15 and 16 of the Commission 
proposal by adding a list of non-essential elements to be  taken into account when 
 
EN 7   EN developing these delegated acts under a new Annex III to the Regulation. This helps 
to circumscribe the scope of the delegated acts and can therefore be accepted by the 
Commission. 
(h) Deletion of MS' reporting obligatio ns on maritime emissions under the 
Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (MMR) (Article 26).The Council has deleted 
any additional MS' reporting obligation to be fulfilled under the Monitoring 
Mechanism Regulation (MMR) based on data  gathered under the MRV. MS annual 
reports of data are no strictly necessary as the Commission will directly receive the data from companies and will also establish annual reports. Therefore the Commission could accept the Council position.  
(i) Development of parameters for monitoring cargo "per ship type" including 
through additional implemen ting acts (Annex II part B ).In the Council text 
"cargo" and "transport work" are part of the parameters to be monitored and reported, 
as in the Commission proposal. However, the Council has introduced a number of 
proposals regarding parameters for monito ring cargo and transport work adapted by 
specific ship type to be part of the MRV.  Annex II part B contains therefore a 
number of additional provisi ons reflecting existing the st ate of the art regarding 
parameters for monitoring cargo for ro-ro and container ships (in addition to the ones for passenger ships from the Commission proposal).  
For other ships, the Council suggests that weight and volume are taken into account 
as monitoring parameters as appropria te, and enables the Commission through 
implementing acts to further specify, and if  necessary revise, how the obligation to 
monitor cargo is to be implemented. The Commission can accept this approach. The 
inclusion of ship-specific parameters for mon itoring of cargo is relevant also to foster 
international developments, and notably progress in IMO. 
(j) Amendment to Directive 2009/16/EC Directiv e of the European Parliament and 
of the Council on Port State Control  ("PSC Directive) (Art. 26a). The Council has 
proposed to amend Annex IV of the Port St ate Control Directive in order to add the 
Document of compliance issued under the MRV Regulation, to th e list of documents 
to be checked by Port State Control officer s when carrying out PSC inspections. This 
would facilitate the implem entation of the enforcement mechanisms foreseen under 
the Regulation, and shall be accepted by the Commission. 
(k) No opinion clause  Article (Art. 25(2))  The Council had recourse  to the possibility 
foreseen under Regulation 182/2011 to intr oduce a "no-opinion clause" in relation to 
the implementing acts under the MRV Re gulation. The Commission will keep its 
standard position indicating th at the inclusion of such a clause shall be accompanied 
by explanations on the specific reasoning just ifying it in the presen t case: e.g. in the 
form of a recital. 
4. Conclusion The Commission considers that the text agreed  by the Council remains close to the initial 
Commission proposal while including a number of amendments that the Commission can 
support in order to facilitate an agreement to be reached with the EP  at the level of the 
Council's common position. 
 
EN 8   EN  
STATEMENT 
Statement by the Commission on th e revision of Regulation e 20xx/xx/EC  
 
The Commission underlines that it is contrary to the letter a nd to the spirit of Regulation 
182/2011 (OJ L 55 of 28.2.2011, p. 13) to invoke  Article 5, paragraph 4, second 
subparagraph, point (b) in a syst ematic manner. Recourse to th is provision must respond to a 
specific need to depart from the rule of prin ciple which is that the Commission may adopt a 
draft implementing act when no opinion is deliv ered. Given that it is an exception to the 
general rule established by Artic le 5, paragraph 4, recourse to second subparagraph, point (b) 
cannot be simply seen as a "discretionary power" of the Legislator, but mu st be interpreted in 
a restrictive manner and t hus must be justified.