1. NAMEPA 2014 World Maritime Day Observance Cozumel, Mexico Canada's Experience with the North American Emission Control Area RDIMS # 10036177

2. Overview Background, What was the problem? Making the case for an Emission Control Area Stakeholder concerns Proposal to International Maritime Organization (IMO) Ratifying MARPOL Annex VI Domestic implementation Results so far Next steps 2

3. Background: What was the problem? Emissions of sulphur oxides contributed significantly to overall air pollutants and health impacts A key source of sulphur oxide emissions is sulphur in fuel Fuels used by other modes had been significantly reduced under their respective regulations. Under regulations, sulphur oxides emissions from ships would grow to be the majority of transport emissions of sulphur oxides 3 Modelled SOx Emissions 2020 2002

4. Making the case for an Emission Control Area (ECA) 2006 agreement with US at head of state level Follow criteria of Appendix III, Annex IV to MARPOL Environment Canada carried out modeling of emissions and their deposition over Canada Health Canada carried out assessment of public health impacts based on above modeling 4 An ECA requires an amendment to Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL)

5. Modelled ship traffic 2008 5

6. Modelled nitrogen oxides emissions 6

7. Impacts of sulphur oxides 7 Influence of marine emissions on summertime ozone levels (top) and sulphur deposition levels (bottom) in Canada Marine emissions contribute to smog levels (O 3 and PM 2.5 ) in all Canadian provinces where there is commercial marine activities (BC, Ontario, Quebec, Maritimes) Large portions of the Canadian population and ecosystems are affected by air pollution associated with marine transportation.

8. The North American Emission Control Area 8

9. Proposal to the International Maritime Organization Comprehensive proposal set out by Canada and the US See IMODOCS MEPC 59/6/5, supplement by MEPC 59/INF.13 Worked with the US and France joined the proposal for the islands of St Pierre and Miquelon 9 Submission to IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee in July 2009 Met in advance with European countries who had an ECA and with key flag States US led proposal as Canada was not a Party to Annex VI to MARPOL

10. Canada’s ratification of Annex VI to MARPOL TC led an initiative to ratify a framework of IMO environmental conventions in 2010 The package included MARPOL annexes IV, V, and VI Antifouling Systems Convention Ballast Water Convention Liability and compensation conventions Ratification of Annex VI in March 2010 allowed Canada to have effective options to enforce as a Port State be a voting party on further measures under Annex VI e.g. energy efficiency standards of 2012 10

11. Stakeholder views 11 International sector Accept the ECA, concern for fuel availability  TC worked with US on policies for fuel availability Domestic sector Operate in the Great Lakes System; concern for fuel costs  TC negotiated alternative regime to address concerns Ports and Port Communities Generally support ECA, concern for competition between ports for trade corridors and cruise destinations  Compliance alternatives for cruise sector available to others Cruise sector Continuously operate in ECA; concern for fuel costs  TC worked with US on alternative compliance regime

12. Domestic implementation Amendments to the Vessel pollution and dangerous chemicals regulations published May 8, 2013 Consultations with stakeholders were key and identify concerns related to fuel costs and availability Fleet averaging addressed domestic marine operators in Great Lakes and Seaway system Alternative compliance addressed ocean going vessels and cruise sector 12

13. Regulations for the Great Lakes System 13 Canadian fleet undergoing renewal The Regulations include significant flexibility based on discussions held with industry associations and individual firms operating domestic vessels in Canada Compliance is assessed based on the average sulphur content in fuel used by a firm’s fleet rather than on an individual vessel basis. Vessels built after December 31, 2008 get a 10% efficiency credit and vessels built after August 1, 2012, get a 20% credit. Additional flexibility is provided to shipowners through the Marine Technical Review Board process. Fleet targets for fuel sulphur content for domestic “laker” vessels compared to ECA Flexible timeframe

14. Alternative compliance options MARPOL Annex VI provides options to flag States under Regulations 3 and 4 for research into new technology and equivalent performance Canada, the US and France are of the view flag States need to consult with ECA states prior to approving a measure under Regulation 3 or 4 Flag States prefer to work with ECA states to ensure smooth implementation of such measures 14

15. Results so far Canadian Great Lakes bulk carrier fleet to receive 15 new builds before January 1, 2016 Other new builds planned for ferry fleet, over 25 new builds into 2020 Fuel oil non-availability reports (FONAR) for both Canada and the US Canada received to date some 30 reports on Atlantic coast and 15 on the Pacific coast. Alternative compliance Scrubbers: cruise sector 57 vessels plus 38 vessels not under Regulation 3 exemptions LNG: two vessels under permit, several planned 15

16. Timeline for IMO Air Emissions Standards 16 2011 Global sulphur standard 4.5% European Emission Control Areas at 1% New engines need to meet Tier II standards for NOx 2012 January, global sulphur standard reduced to 3.5% August, North American ECA comes into force (1%) NOx technology study begins 2013 EEDI required for new ships No EEDI reduction target SEEMP required for all ships NOx technology study due 2015 All ECAs set to 0.1% sulphur EEDI target set to 10% 2016 All new ships operating in an North American ECA must meet Tier III NOx (If confirmed by study) 2018 Study of supply of low sulphur fuels to be completed 2020 Based on fuel study, global standard for sulphur reduced to 0.5% EEDI target set to 20% 2025 Based on fuel study, global standard for sulphur reduced to 0.5% EEDI target set to 30%

17. Next steps 0.1 percent sulphur comes into effect January 1, 2015 Compliance promotion, enforcement, detection, penalties Trident alliance, informal discussions among ECA states Managing scrubbers and LNG emerging Alternative fuels still to be developed Tier III NOx standards for North American and US Caribbean Sea ECAs enter into effect January 1, 2016 New builds, re-powering, major conversions affected January 1, 2020 global sulphur content standard of 0.5%? Study under preparation, due Jan 1, 2018 17

18. Questions Paul Topping Manager, Environmental Protection Transport Canada Marine Safety and Security paul.topping@tc.gc.ca THANK YOU! GRACIAS! 18