Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty)
Date: 2003-08-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: environmental standard, fuel oil, maritime transport, pollution control measures, sulphur, vessel

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 1.8.2003
COM(2003) 476 final

2002/0259 (COD)

Amended proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels

(presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2)
of the EC Treaty)

2002/0259 (COD)

Amended proposal for a

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels

On 4 June 2003, the European Parliament voted in first reading on the amendments tabled on
the  Proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  amending
Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur  content of marine  fuels1 (COM(2002)595  final
(Volume II) of 20 November 2002).

Article  250(2)  of  the  EC  Treaty  states  that  as  long  as  the  Council  has  not  acted,  the
Commission may alter its proposal at any time during the procedures leading to the adoption
of a Community act.

The  Commission  hereafter  gives  its  opinion  on  the  amendments  adopted  by  the  European
Parliament.

1.

BACKGROUND

Transmission  of 
the  European  Parliament
(COM(2002) 595 final  –  2002/0259(COD))  in  accordance  with  Article  175(1)  of  the  EC
Treaty: 20 November 2002

the  Council  and 

the  proposal 

to 

to 

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee: 14 May 2003

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions: none

2.

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL

The aim of the proposal is to reduce the impact of ships’ emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2 or
SOx)  and  particulate  matter  (PM)  on  environmental  acidification  and  human  health.  Ship
emissions  of  SOx  and  PM  are  directly  related  to  fuel  sulphur  content.  Marine  heavy  fuel
currently  has  an  average  sulphur  (S)  content  of  2.7%  or  27,000  parts  per  million  (ppm),
compared with road fuel which has a new sulphur limit of 10 ppm. The proposal contains new
limits on the maximum sulphur content of marine fuels, specifically:

– 

– 

1

A 1.5% fuel S limit for all ships in the North Sea, Channel & Baltic Sea, in line with
the  SOx  Emission  Control  Area  agreed  at  the  International  Maritime  Organization.
This will help reduce acidification and improve air quality;

A 1.5% fuel S limit for passenger vessels on regular services to/from any EU ports,
in line with established EU policy of high standards for passenger vessels. This will
improve air quality around coasts, and help ensure an EU-wide supply of low S fuel;

Council  Directive  1999/32  relating  to  a  reduction  in  the  sulphur  content  of  certain  liquid  fuels  and
amending Directive 93/12/EEC; OJ L 121, 11.5.1999, p. 13.

2

                                                
– 

3.

A 0.2% fuel S limit for ships at berth in EU ports, and all inland vessels, to reduce
local emissions of SOx and PM, and improve local air quality.

COMMISSION  OPINION  ON  THE  AMENDMENTS  ADOPTED  BY  THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

On  4  June  2003,  the  European  Parliament  adopted  36  amendments  out  of  the  44  that  were
tabled.  Two  amendments  -  numbers  13  and  14  -  were  subject  to  split  votes  where  only  the
tighter deadlines were supported by Parliamentarians, not the tighter fuel sulphur limits.

The  Commission  finds  that  the  majority  of  the  Parliament’s  amendments  are  acceptable  in
full, as they clarify and improve upon the Commission proposal.

Some of the amendments seek to strengthen the proposal considerably – principally through
tighter  fuel  sulphur  limits  in  a  second  phase.  The  Commission  believes  it  is  premature  to
define tighter limits at this stage, so these amendments are not acceptable.

Other  amendments  introduce  new  text  on  the  development  of  abatement  technology  and
economic instruments as an alternative or complement to regulation on fuel sulphur content.
These amendments are acceptable in principle.

Amendments 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 14 (as adopted by split vote), 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 24, 27, 29, 31,
37, 38 and 40 can be accepted by the Commission in full.

Amendments 2, 3, 8, 23, 30, 33, 39 and 43 can be accepted by the Commission in principle
subject  to  re-wording  and/or  clarification.  Amendments  28  and  41  can  be  accepted  in  part,
and Amendment 44 can be accepted in part and in principle.

Amendments 13, 22, 25, 26, 32 and 42 are not accepted by the Commission.

The  Commission's  detailed  position  with  regard  to  the  amendments  of  the  European
Parliament is as follows:

3.1.

Amendments accepted fully by the Commission

Amendments  1,  4,  5,  6  and  40  propose  new  and  amended  recitals  which  help  clarify  and
justify the objectives of the directive.

Amendment  7  and  18  are  linked.  Amendment  7  introduces  a  new  recital  referring  to
Article 299 of  the Treaty, requiring  consideration  of  the  special  characteristics  of  outermost
regions  (French  overseas  departments,  Azores,  Madeira  and  the  Canaries).  Amendment  18
exempts these regions from having to ban the sale of high sulphur diesel oil provided local air
quality standards are met.

Amendment 10 deletes Article 4, paragraphs 3 and 4 from the existing directive, removing the
possibility for Member States to apply for a derogation from the sulphur limit for inland gas
oil.

Amendments 14, 15, 16, 17, and 21 bring forward a number of the directive’s provisions, to
be  implemented  6  months  after  entry  into  force;  Amendment  16  also  adds  text  requiring
bunker delivery notes to be signed by a representative of the receiving ship.

3

Amendment 37 brings forward the deadline for transposition of the directive from 12 months
to 6 months.

Amendment  24  changes  the  title  of  the  article  on  Sampling  and  Analysis  to  become
Monitoring  &  Penalties.  Amendment  27  requires  fuel  oil  samples  to  be  taken  while  being
delivered for use on board ships. Amendment 29 requires Member States to lay down rules on
effective penalties which are proportionate and dissuasive.

Amendment 31 corrects an oversight, adding the word “oil” after “heavy fuel”.

Amendment 38 clarifies the definition of ships at berth.

3.2.

Amendments accepted in part or in principle by the Commission

Amendment  2  introduces  a  new  recital  stating  that  ship  emissions  contribute  to  global
warming, ozone formation and eutrophication. This is true, but reducing the sulphur content
of  marine  fuel  will  do  little  to  reduce  these  impacts.  They  are  however  addressed  in  the
Commission’s parallel Communication on an EU strategy to reduce emissions from seagoing
ships. The Commission therefore proposes a new Recital 4.a as follows:

“Emissions  from  shipping  other  than  sulphur  dioxide  and  particulate  matter  also
contribute  to  global  warming,  ozone  formation  and  eutrophication.  Member  States
should take actions to reduce these emissions as recommended in the EU strategy to
reduce atmospheric emissions from seagoing ships COM(2002)595 Volume I”.

Amendment 3 introduces a new recital 4.b stating that ship emissions should be included in
the  scope  of  the  National  Emissions  Ceilings  Directive  2001/81/EC.  Inland  and  domestic
coastal shipping emissions are already included in the scope of the NEC directive. It is more
difficult  to  quantify  ship  emissions  in  international  waters,  and  to  allocate  these  fairly  to
individual Member States. The Commission therefore proposes a new Recital 4.b as follows:

“Emissions from shipping in international waters should be taken into account in the
context  of  any  review  of  Directive  2001/81/EC  setting  emission  ceilings  for
atmospheric pollutants”.

Amendment 8 amends Recital 7, to call for uniform fuel sampling  and dissuasive penalties.
This  is  desirable,  as  shipping  is  an  international  industry.  However  the  justification  of  the
amendment  suggests  marine  fuels  should  be  sampled  not  just  for  sulphur  but  also  for  other
dangerous substances, and the Commission wishes to make clear that this is outside the scope
of the directive.

Amendment 23 introduces a transition period until 2010 before tanker boilers have to comply
with the proposed low sulphur fuel limit at berth in ports, in response to safety concerns about
switching  to  low  viscosity  gas  oils  in  older  tanker  boilers.  Safe  fuel  switching  is  possible
provided the crew follows procedures carefully.  This is  essentially a  matter  of  training,  and
the Commission believes that a shorter transition period - until 2008 – would allow time for
this training. The Commission therefore proposes to amend Article 4b, as follows:

4

“1. Member States shall take all necessary steps to ensure that marine fuels are not
used by any…ships at berth in Community ports as from:

(i)

[…*] if their sulphur content exceeds 0.20% by mass

(ii)

1 January 2008 if their sulphur content exceeds 0.10% by mass

2. Member States shall ensure that marine gas oils are not sold in their territory if the
sulphur content of those marine gas oils exceeds the limits set out in Paragraph 1.

3. Paragraph 1(i) shall not apply to fuels used in the boilers of tankers.

[* six months after entry into force of the directive]

Amendment 28 has two parts, of which only Part 1 is acceptable.

(cid:1)  Part 1 brings forward the start of fuel sampling by six months, to begin on the same date as

the relevant fuel limits enter into force.

(cid:1)  Part 2 introduces text requiring a minimum of 50% of the samples taken to be inspected.
The  Commission  believes  this  makes  little  sense.  We  assume  that  for  economic  and
practical reasons competent authorities inspect most if not all of the fuel samples taken.

Amendment 30 states that the  European Maritime Safety Agency  shall  include reporting on
air  pollution  in  its  mandate,  and  that  it  shall  assist  Member  States  and  the  Commission  in
monitoring  the  directive’s  implementation.  However,  Article  2  (b)  and  2(c)  of  Regulation
1406/2002 provides for such follow up in the context of the general pollution prevention task
of the Agency. The Commission and Member States can request assistance by the Agency on
various aspects relating to the implementation of this Directive, including the reporting on air
pollution. For clarification, specific changes to the mandate of the Agency are possible only
with  a  modification  to  Regulation  1406/2002.  The  Commission  therefore  proposes  the
following new recital 10a:

“The European Maritime Safety Agency shall provide assistance to the Commission
and  Member  States,  as  appropriate,  in  monitoring  the  implementation  of  this
Directive.”

Amendments 33 and 43 are linked; 33 deletes the existing text on exhaust gas cleaning in the
Article 7 review clause, and 43 introduces a new  Article  4ba  setting  out  detailed conditions
for  trials  and  subsequent  use  of  exhaust  gas  cleaning.  While  the  new  text  has  merit,  it  is
lengthy and prescriptive, and is addressed to the Commission rather than the Member States.
The Commission therefore prefers the approach set out below, incorporating most of the text
on trials in Amendment 43, and adding to the existing text in the review clause.

(i) Introducing a new Article 4c:

“Article 4c

Trials for new abatement technologies

1. Member States may issue permits to vessels within their territories which are
involved in trials of emission abatement technologies, including exhaust gas
cleaning, provided that

5

–  the Commission is notified in writing at least 6 months before trials begin

–  permits for trials do not exceed 18 months in duration

–  all vessels involved install tamper-proof equipment for the continuous monitoring

of funnel gas emissions and use it throughout the trial period

–  there are proper waste management systems in place for any waste  generated by

the abatement techniques throughout the trial period

–  there  is  an  assessment  of  impacts  on  the  marine  environment,  particularly
ecosystems in enclosed ports, harbours and estuaries throughout the trial period

–  full results are provided to the Commission, and made publicly available, within 6

months of the end of the trials.

2.
During  these  trials  the  use  of  low  sulphur  marine  fuels,  as  required  under
Articles  4a  and  4b,  shall  not  be  mandatory,  provided  that  Member  States  can
demonstrate  that  vessels  involved  in  the  trials  achieve  emissions  reductions  which
are at least equivalent to the low sulphur fuel limits in force.

(ii)

Amending Article 7, paragraph 3 as indicated:

“3.
Taking into account any IMO guidelines on exhaust gas cleaning systems and
other  technological  methods  to  limit  SOx  emissions,  and  the  effects  of  such
technologies  on  the  environment,  including  marine  ecosystems  in  enclosed  ports,
harbours and estuaries, and the results of any trials conducted under Article 4c, the
Commission shall consider which, if  any,  abatement methods  might  be  permissible
as alternatives the use of low sulphur marine fuels required under Articles 4a and 4b
and if appropriate, make a proposal.”

Amendment 39 proposes a new definition of inland waterways, in relation to Article 4b which
prescribes specific sulphur limits for “ships  on  inland  waterways”.  The  Commission  prefers
the following approach, believing it is clearer to define the vessels rather than the waterways:

(i) Introducing a new Article 2, paragraph 3.i:

3.i.  inland  waterway  vessel  shall  mean  a  vessel  intended  for  use  on  inland
waterways, including all vessels which carry

–  a Community inland navigation certificate, as defined in Directive 82/714/EEC

–  a  certificate  issued  pursuant  to  Article  22  of  the  Revised  Convention  for  the

Navigation of the Rhine

(ii) Amending Article 4b as indicated below:

1.  Member  States  shall  take  all  necessary  steps  to  ensure  that  marine  fuels  are  not
used by any ships on inland waterways inland waterway vessels or  by  any ships at
berth in Community ports as from:

(i)

[…*] if their sulphur content exceeds 0.20% by mass

(ii)

1 January 2008 if their sulphur content exceeds 0.10% by mass.

6

Amendment 41 on first phase fuel sulphur limits can be divided into the following three parts,
of which only part 2 is acceptable to the Commission.

(cid:1)  Part 1 redefines the Commission’s proposed 1.5% sulphur limit in the SOxECA as a “first
phase”.  This  is  unnecessary  as  we  do  not  accept  the  proposed  second  phase
(Amendment 42).

(cid:1)  Part  2  brings  forward  the  implementation  date  to  6  months  after  entry  into  force  of  the
directive.  This  should  be  feasible,  because  the  shipping  and  fuel  industries  have  been
aware of the proposed SOxECA limit since adoption of Annex VI in 1997.

(cid:1)  Part  3  extends  the  1.5%  sulphur  limit  to  apply  in  the  territorial  seas  and  exclusive
economic zones outside the SOxECA. The Commission believes this is premature, as the
added benefits and costs have not yet been demonstrated. If the measure were subsequently
proved  necessary,  the  Commission  would  prefer  it  to  be  agreed  internationally  by
designating an additional SOxECA under MARPOL Annex VI.

Amendment  44  on  economic  instruments  can  be  divided  into  the  following  three  parts,  of
which the Commission can only accept part 1 in principle.

(cid:1)  Part  1  requires  the  Commission  to  submit  a  report  by  2007  with  proposals  to  revise  the
directive,  which  may  include  proposals  for  economic  instruments.  The  Commission  is
investigating  the  feasibility  of  using  economic  instruments  to  reduce  ship  emissions  in
future. However, 2007 is too early to submit a report on the directive, given that some of
its provisions will not enter into force until 2008. The Commission therefore proposes the
following addition to the Reporting & Review Article 7, paragraph 2:

“On  the  basis  inter  alia  of  the  annual  reports  submitted  in  accordance  with
paragraph  1  and  the  observed  trends  in  air  quality  and  acidification,  the
Commission  shall,  by  31  December  2010,  submit  a  report  to  the  European
Parliament  and  to  the  Council.  The  Commission  may  submit  with  its  report
proposals  for  revising  this  Directive,  in  particular  as  regards  the  limit  values  laid
down  for  each  fuel  category,  and  the  Community  sea  areas  where  low-sulphur
marine fuels are  to be used, and the use  of economic instruments – including inter
alia  mechanisms  such  as  differentiated  dues  and  kilometre  charges,  tradable
emission permits and offsetting.”

(cid:1)  Part  2  already  allows  for  emissions  offsetting,  linked  to  the  use  of  exhaust  gas  cleaning
technology,  whereby  groups  of  ship  operators  could  effectively  trade  emissions  between
those  ships  which  use  exhaust  gas  cleaning  and  those  which  do  not.  The  Commission
believes that the prospect of trading ship emissions in this way is premature at this stage,
but that it should be considered in the 2010 report as set out above.

(cid:1)  Part 3 introduces further new text on exhaust gas cleaning. The Commission believes this
is unnecessary as the issue is adequately addressed in response to Amendments 33 and 43.

7

3.3.

Amendments not accepted by the Commission

Amendments 13 proposes  to change the implementation date of the 1.5% fuel sulphur limit
for passenger vessels on regular services from 1 July 2007 to 6 months after entry into force.
This is likely to be an earlier deadline, and is consequently unacceptable to the Commission.

Amendment 22 is directly related to Amendment 20, which fell during the plenary vote. It is
therefore no longer relevant.

Amendments  25  requires  fuel  monitoring  to  be  extended  to  all  seagoing  ships  in  all
Community sea areas. The Commission does not accept this proposed extension, as it relates
to  parts  of  amendments  41  and  42  which  are  also  unacceptable,  proposing  the  extension  of
fuel sulphur limits to all EU territorial waters and exclusive economic zones.

Amendment 26 requires the fuel limits under the proposed new Article 4a(a) to be monitored.
The  Commission  does  not  accept  the  amendment  introducing  the  new  Article  4a(a).  It  also
removes reference to sampling and sulphur analysis of fuels being used in other Community
sea areas. But these fuels do need to be checked, to ensure that new fuel sulphur limits in the
SOxECA do not lead to increased sulphur content in fuels used elsewhere.

Amendment 32 brings forward the proposed Commission report to the European Parliament
and the Council by 2 years from 2010. This is too early, given that some of the proposed fuel
sulphur limits do not enter into force until 2008. It also requires the report to be accompanied
by  legislative  proposals,  including  full  specifications  for  marine  fuel,  and  requires  the
Commission  to  submit  a  further  report  on  the  measures  taken  to  anchor  the  directive’s
provisions in the IMO’s MARPOL Convention. Prescribing the  content of  the  report in this
way undermines the Commission’s right of initiative.

Amendment 42 introduces a second phase 0.5% sulphur limit. The Commission believes this
is premature, as the added benefits and costs are not presented. The Commission will consider
the case for tighter fuel sulphur limits in the context of its report in 2010.

3.4.

Amended proposal

Having regard to  Article 250(2)  of the  EC  Treaty, the Commission modifies its proposal as
indicated above.

8