Tag: IMO

IMO Net-Zero Shipping Framework: A Crossroads for Global Shipping Regulations

Jeanne M. Grasso and Holli B. Packer ●

Introduction: A New Era for Maritime Decarbonization

The International Maritime Organization’s (“IMO”) Marine Environment Protection Committee approved a sweeping package of draft regulations known as the “IMO Net-Zero Shipping Framework” (the “Framework”) in April 2025. This Framework will be voted on in October 2025 and, if adopted, will enter into force by March 2027. It marks an ambitious and comprehensive global effort to align the maritime sector with international climate goals. However, the Framework has also sparked significant debate among IMO member states, most notably the United States, which has voiced strong opposition to the proposed measures. This article provides an overview of the proposed regulations and broader industry implications, while also highlighting the United States’ position and the Framework’s potential impact on the future of maritime decarbonization.

The IMO Net-Zero Framework: Scope and Ambition

The Framework is the centerpiece of the IMO’s mid-term greenhouse gas (“GHG”) reduction measures, intended to be formalized as a new Chapter 5 of MARPOL Annex VI. Its primary objective is to achieve net-zero GHG emissions from international shipping by 2050, in line with the 2023 IMO Strategy on GHG Emissions. The Framework applies to all vessels of 5,000 gross tons and above on international voyages, with limited exceptions for vessels operating solely within national waters, non-mechanically propelled vessels, and certain offshore platforms.

Continue reading “IMO Net-Zero Shipping Framework: A Crossroads for Global Shipping Regulations”

Regulatory Developments: Maritime Emissions

Vanessa C. DiDomenico ●

Maritime environmental regulations have become increasingly prominent internationally as concerns over climate change and air pollution intensify. The shipping industry is under mounting pressure from governments, environmental organizations, and the public to reduce its environmental footprint. This pressure is compounded by the complexity of navigating a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, making compliance a critical and challenging priority for maritime stakeholders. International cooperation has been essential in shaping these regulations, as countries and organizations work together to establish unified standards and enforcement mechanisms.

Specifically, the International Maritime Organization (“IMO”) has introduced several amendments to MARPOL Annex VI (emissions) that are entering into force within the next few months and are expected to significantly influence vessel operations and compliance strategies worldwide. These regulatory developments are expected to have far-reaching effects on global shipping practices, driving innovation and operational changes across the industry. Below is a selection of recent and upcoming maritime emissions-related regulatory developments, which demonstrate the global impact and growing importance of these regulations.

Continue reading “Regulatory Developments: Maritime Emissions”

The Arctic Shipping Frontier: Regulatory and Operational Challenges to Consider

Vanessa C. DiDomenico ●

Heavy fuel oil (“HFO”), commonly known as bunker fuel or residual fuel oil, has been widely used by vessels for decades due to its low cost and ready availability. However, due to its high sulfur and heavy metal content, the International Maritime Organization (“IMO”) has steadily enacted regulations to limit the sulfur content in fuels, and the ability to burn or carry HFO in sensitive areas, such as the Arctic.

Recently, on July 1, 2024, an international ban on the use of HFO in the Arctic went into effect. This ban, implemented by resolution MEPC.329(76), was adopted on June 17, 2021, by the IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee. The resolution amended Annex 1 of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (“MARPOL”), adding Regulation 43A, “Special requirements for the use and carriage of oils as fuel in Arctic waters.” Regulation 43A prohibits the use and carriage for use as fuel of oils having a density at 15°C higher than 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50°C higher than 180 mm2/s in Arctic waters.[1] However, there are several exemptions and waivers to the HFO ban. First, ships engaged in securing the safety of ships, or in search and rescue operations, and ships dedicated to oil spill preparedness and response are exempt. Additionally, ships that meet certain construction standards[2] for fuel oil tank protection, must comply on or after July 1, 2029. Lastly, a Party to MARPOL with a coastline bordering Arctic waters may temporarily waive the requirements for ships flying its flag while operating in waters subject to that Party’s sovereignty or jurisdiction through July 1, 2029.

With increasing geopolitical tensions affecting shipping lanes in the Middle East, the possibility exists more ships may consider using the Northern Sea Route through Arctic waters to avoid risks near areas in conflict. In fact, according to the Arctic Council Working Group on the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (“PAME”), “[t]he number of unique ships entering the Arctic Polar Code area from 2013 to 2023 increased by 37%, [to] around 500 ships.”[3]

The Northern Sea Route, most commonly used in September between the western part of Eurasia and the Asia-Pacific region, is shorter than the journey through the Suez Canal, or detour around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope. Yet that route presents its own regulatory and operational considerations. In particular, as discussed above, ship owners and operators must ensure their vessels meet the construction standard requirements of Regulation 43A to use HFO or use alternative fuel to remain compliant. Additionally, the sensitive Arctic environment imposes more stringent requirements in other MARPOL Annexes, such as Annex II, control of pollution by noxious liquid substances in bulk; Annex IV, sewage; and Annex V, garbage. Vessel owners and operators should also ensure compliance with the operational and structural requirements of the Polar Code when operating in this region.

Notably, due to the harsh weather conditions, and limited aid in the region, operating in the Arctic requires specific compulsory vessel documentation and certificates, training and manning, and life-saving appliances, among other prerequisites. As political forces shift maritime trading patterns, vessel owners and operators should exercise added due diligence in evaluating their vessels’ ability to meet the regulatory and operational requirements for transiting the Northern Sea Route, which, while now open, at times remains an unforgiving realm.

[1] Arctic waters are defined in MARPOL Annex 1 Regulation 46.2.

[2] MARPOL Annex I, Regulation 12A; or Polar Code Chapter 1, part II-A, Regulation 1.2.1.

[3] PAME, Arctic Shipping Update: 37% Increase in Ships in the Arctic Over 10 Years, (Jan. 31, 2024), available at: https://arctic-council.org/news/increase-in-arctic-shipping/.

Maritime Decarbonization

Stefanos N. Roulakis and Vanessa C. DiDomenico

As the international shipping industry prepares to reduce emissions, there are many recent developments that present both obstacles and opportunities that must be explored while preparing to set sail on the challenge.

IMO Timeline and Introduction to Initial Strategy

Shipping is already the most carbon-friendly form of transportation. Despite carrying approximately 90 percent of the world’s goods, shipping only accounts for about 2.9 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. While the maritime industry and its regulatory body, the International Maritime Organization (“IMO”), rightly are trying to reduce this number, the outsized role of shipping in the world economy and its relative impact on global emissions should be the starting point of any analysis.

A key aspect in the debate on how to decarbonize centers is between the difference in gross output as opposed to efficiency. The IMO’s strategy contains targets for both types of metrics. The current goal seeks to cut overall greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions by at least half by 2050 (using 2008 as a baseline). On the efficiency side, the shipping industry seeks to reduce GHG emissions per transport work by 40 percent in 2030 and 70 percent by 2050.

Continue reading “Maritime Decarbonization”

Maritime Cybersecurity: Prepare, Detect, and Respond

Vanessa C. DiDomenico

At a time when the world has become more aware than ever before about the vital importance of the world’s ocean shipping fleet, which carried supplies, merchandise, and much-needed personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic, an increased risk from a different threat, cyberattacks, presents a set of new challenges.

Increase in Maritime- and Energy-Related Cyber Attacks

According to Israeli cybersecurity specialist Naval Dome, since February 2020, there has been a 400-percent increase in attempted hacks on the maritime realm, coinciding with a period when the maritime industry turned to greater use of technology and working from home due to the coronavirus pandemic. Increased phishing attempts, malware, and ransomware attacks can be attributed to the changes in operations and procedures during the travel restrictions and operational hurdles encountered during the pandemic. These global challenges resulted in a move by the United States to bolster the federal government’s cybersecurity practices and contractually obligate private sector to align with such enhanced security practices. For instance, the ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline, which controls nearly half the gasoline, jet fuel, and diesel flowing along the East Coast, prompted President Biden to sign an Executive Order (“EO”) on “Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity (14028)” on May 12, 2021. A comprehensive overview of President Biden’s EO can be found here. On August 25, 2021, the president also held a cybersecurity summit with leading tech company and Wall Street banking executives to discuss cybersecurity concerns.

Continue reading “Maritime Cybersecurity: Prepare, Detect, and Respond”

Mainbrace Live: U.S. Maritime Regulatory Update

Blank Rome’s internationally recognized Maritime & International Trade practice group presents a new series of informative webinars covering hot topics in the shipping industry and key insights into 2021 and beyond. Sessions will cover:

    • Sanctions and international trade
    • Offshore wind developments
    • Shipping litigation
    • Maritime regulation
    • Ship finance
    • And more!

For the fourth webinar in our Mainbrace Live series, Blank Rome LLP attorneys Jeanne M. Grasso, Dana S. Merkel, and Stefanos N. Roulakis presented “U.S. Maritime Regulatory Update” on Tuesday, June 22, 2021.

Jeanne, Dana, and Stefanos discussed:

    • The conundrum in ballast water management: VIDA, VGP, and the IMO
    • Ongoing industry challenges as COVID-19 continues
    • Emerging greenhouse gas regulation and shipping

MODERATOR

    • Jeanne M. Grasso, Partner and Co-Chair, Maritime & International Trade Practice Group

PRESENTERS

    • Dana S. Merkel, Associate, Maritime Practice Group
    • Stefanos N. Roulakis, Associate, Maritime Practice Group

To watch a recording of this webinar, please go to the webinar on-demand registration page here.

New Developments in MARPOL Annex VI Compliance and Implementation

Jeanne M. Grasso, Jonathan K. Waldron, and Dana S. Merkel

 

The International Maritime Organization (“IMO”), in preparing for the global 0.5 percent fuel oil sulfur limit, recently adopted an amendment to MARPOL Annex VI to support consistent implementation and enforcement of the new requirement. At the same time, the IMO rejected a proposal for an “experience building phase” during the first months of implementation. This put to rest any rumors of a delay in implementation. Meanwhile, the U.S. Coast Guard published procedures by which owners may seek authorization to operate engines that do not meet MARPOL Annex VI NOx Tier III requirements for qualified vessels.

New Developments

The IMO adopted an amendment to support consistent implementation of the forthcoming 0.5 percent limit on sulfur in ships fuel oil on October 26, 2018, during the recent session of its Marine Environment Protection Committee (“MEPC 73”). This amendment, effective on March 1, 2020, prohibits the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil for use on the vessel unless the vessel is outfitted with an exhaust gas cleaning system, often referred to as a scrubber. The amendment does not alter the January 1, 2020 implementation date for the 0.5 percent sulfur limit.

Also related to MARPOL Annex VI, the U.S. Coast Guard published an enforcement Work Instruction formally addressing how the U.S. Coast Guard will enforce the Annex VI nitrogen oxides (“NOx”) Tier III standards within the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea Emission Control Areas (“ECAs”). See Exercise of Enforcement Discretion with Regard to MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 13.5.1.2; CVC-WI-014(1) (October 17, 2018). Because engines meeting the NOx Tier III standards were largely unavailable after the Tier III standards took effect in 2016, the U.S. Coast Guard is allowing impacted vessels to instead be certified as meeting U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Clean Air Act Tier 3 requirements pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 1042. Once individually recognized by the U.S. Coast Guard, such engines may be used indefinitely, even after NOx Tier III compliant engines become available.

Please click here for the full client alert. 

Exit mobile version
%%footer%%