The IMO carries out a final assessment of the products on the basis of their physical and toxicological properties as submitted by the country of production. The product is then valid for all countries without an expiry date and will be included in the Standard Certificate Compliance List (CoF). The Conditions of Carriage may be modified by the tripartite agreement. DNV GL now offers a list of fitness certificate products that contain all products that have not yet been officially evaluated by the IMO, but are still subject to a so-called tripartite agreement. This facilitates the certification process by listing all Tricolour products on a single list, as opposed to a single product supplement. Although evaluated final products for which a vessel is certified are included in the standard CoF product lists, only one product supplement is added to the CoF which only covers these three specific products. The new tripartite list will include all trilateral products in force at the time of issue for which the ship can be certified and whose flag of the ship is a signatory State. At the next opportunity, the operator should consider urgently requesting a tripartite list instead of a note to certify the vessel for all products currently available. This information is ready to provide tanker owners and stakeholders with detailed explanations of the tripartite agreements for each list in the circular, as there have been many recent requests from shipowners. The new list includes the signatory states and tripartite expiry dates for each product, in addition to standard terms such as the tanks in which the product can be transported, footnotes and the MARPOL pollution category. The advantage will be that the next tripartite product to be shipped will be more likely to be covered by the CoF, which will reduce administrative and certification costs. 2.2 In Mepc.2/Circ.18, annexes 1 to 4 contain lists of noxious liquid substances (NLS) with associated categories and minimum transport requirements established by tripartite agreements and registered with IMO.
Annexes 5 to 8 are intended to facilitate the communication of tripartite agreements and the interpretation of abbreviations used in Annexes 1 to 4. The Korean Registry has issued a technical circular on tripartite agreements for the provisional categorization of liquid substances in the IBC code ref at MEPC.2/Circ.18 wrt. 2.1 As chemical manufacturers are constantly producing new products that are not yet included in the IBC Code, the products are evaluated and classified by the government of the country for production, import or shipment for transport on board chemical tankers. If it is proposed to transport liquid substance in bulk that has not been included in the Code, the governments of the parties to the proposed transaction will conduct a preliminary assessment of the proposed transaction based on the Schedule II/Reg project. 6.2 IMO shall set out these guidelines and shall agree with them. Once the tripartite agreements have been notified to IMO, the product evaluation agreements (or trade names) are published in the form of MEPC.2/Circular. The Agreement shall apply only to the signatory States and shall not exceed three years. This means that the cargo can only be shipped on ships flying the flag of a signatory country and between the ports of the countries that are part of the agreement. New lists of three existing additions will only be published upon request. The tax on the tripartite list shall not exceed the price of two or more additives.
IMO Circular MEPC.2/Circ.18 on the provisional categorization of liquid substances, which is published in accordance with Annex II/MARPOL Regulations. 6.3 describes the requirements for tripartite agreements. 2.2 In Circular MEPC.2/Circ.18, Annexes 1 to 4 list noxious liquid substances (SNLs) as well as categories and minimum transport requirements established in tripartite agreements and registered with IMO. . . . 2.1 As chemical manufacturers are constantly producing new products that are not yet included in the IBC Code, the products are evaluated and classified by the government of the country of manufacture, import or shipment for transport on board chemical tankers. When it is proposed to transport a liquid substance in bulk that has not been included in the Code, the Governments of the Parties to the proposed project shall, on the basis of the provisions set out in Annex II/MARPOL Regulations. 6.2 prepare and agree on a preliminary assessment of the proposed project and notify IMO of the agreements. Once the tripartite agreements have been notified to IMO, the agreements on product assessments (or trade names) will be published in the form of MEPC.2/Circular.
DNV GL now offers a certificate of fitness product list that includes all products that have not yet been officially evaluated by the IMO but are still subject to a tripartite agreement. This will facilitate the certification process by placing all tripartite products on a single list, as opposed to a single product supplement. New tripartite lists, like the existing resentment, are issued only on request. The fee for the tripartite list does not exceed the price of two or more grudges. The advantage is becoming increasingly likely that the next tripartite product to be shipped will already be covered by the CoF, reducing the administrative burden and certification costs. When new chemicals or product mixtures are proposed for bulk shipping, they are usually the subject of a tripartite agreement. The objective of a tripartite agreement is that a new product can be shipped relatively quickly during a transition period before the IMO carries out the final assessment. This information is ready to provide detailed explanations of the tripartite agreements to owners of chemical tankers and stakeholders for each list contained in the circular, as many requests have recently been made by shipowners. 2.1 As chemical manufacturers are constantly producing new products that are not yet included in the IBC Code, the products are evaluated and classified by the government of the country that manufactures chemicals on board tankers. This information is intended to provide chemical tanker owners and interested parties with detailed explanations of the tripartite agreements for each list in the circular, as many issues have recently been raised by shipowners. In accordance with the provisions of No 17 and No 18.4 of this Code, the shipowner may transport the products if the On-board CoF displays the corresponding n.o.s. numbers (1 to 12) without kr`s additional certification services.
The objective of this action is to bridge the gap that may exist between the conclusion of a tripartite agreement and its appearance in the MEPC.2/Subsequent Circular (published in December of each year), since during this time, new parties who have an interest may not be aware that a particular tripartite agreement has been concluded. In addition, registration on the Site can also be used to highlight whether a significant change has recently been made to a predetermined tripartite agreement listed in the current MEPC.2/Circular. Comments are closed, but backlinks and pingbacks are open. ♦ Annex 4: List 4: mixtures of pollutants containing one or more constituents representing more than 1 % by weight of the mixture and not yet evaluated by IMO; Whether all countries have given their consent or not, all mixtures commercially named in the list cannot be included in the list of products for CoF, but can only be issued on declaration kr. 2.3 If a new product of the circular is offered for transport, the product shall be illegible in one of the following Annexes 1 to 4 of the last circular. Products agreed by “all countries” for which no expiry date applies are candidates for the next formal amendment of the code and can therefore be included in the list of products for the CoF, provided that a ship meets the requirements for the transport of the products provided. Products whose expirability date can only be transported between the ports of the countries concerned and until the expiry date. At the request of the shipowner, KR may provide an explanation for these products.
Although the mixtures proposed in List 4 have not yet been evaluated by the IMO, they can be considered in the same way as the mixtures listed in List 3. .