appropriate. The UN Regulations cover requirements for the construction and testing of batteries, classification and declaration of shipments, packaging and stowage.
Li-ion batteries are classified as Class 9 goods in the IMDG Code due to the hazardous properties associated with their chemical and electrical content. Pursuant to the Code, the shipper must provide the vessel with a completed Dangerous Goods (DG) cargo declaration. Furthermore, each vessel has a Document of Compliance for dangerous cargo (DOC), which indicates where the batteries can be safely stowed onboard. However, under Special Provision (SP) 188 of the UN Regulations, where Li- ion batteries meet eight specified requirements (essentially relatively small batteries), they are not considered DG and do not have to be specially declared. One concern is that SP188 may encourage shippers to mis-declare cargo.
A prevailing view within the maritime industry is that the IMDG Code needs to be amended to bring it into line with the challenges arising from the carriage of EVs and Li-ion batteries. It has been suggested that Li-ion batteries are not properly categorised as Class 9, which covers the lowest- risk DGs. Under this classification, the batteries can be stowed above and below deck, and with other dangerous goods. It has been proposed instead that they should be reclassified to Class 4.3 - flammable solids (which, when in contact with water, emit flammable gases). This
would subject them to much more stringent segregation requirements.
EVs are also categorised as Class 9 unless they come within SP 961. SP961 disapplies the Code to EVs carried in the vehicle and RoRo spaces when certain conditions are met. In such cases, the carrier will not usually know how many EVs are onboard or where they are located on the vessel. The White Paper referred to above has recommended revoking this exemption to allow carriers to plan stowage locations and the monitoring of EVs during the voyage in greater detail, with a view to developing early detection, evacuation and/or firefighting procedures.
Onboard charging of EVs on RoRo passenger ships is currently unregulated. This poses a risk of over-charging, which can trigger thermal runaway. Furthermore, there are currently no regulations dealing with the state of charge for Li-ion batteries on ships. A recommendation made to the IMO is for a 30% limit for EVs.
Used batteries may also qualify as hazardous waste under the Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. In May 2022, the UN provided a draft of practical guidance on the classification of waste batteries containing lithium. Carriers will need to ensure that shippers provide all the necessary export and clearance documentation for the batteries and/ or a written declaration that they
are not considered waste under the Convention. Otherwise, problems may be encountered at the discharge port.
In 2021, at the 103rd session of the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC 103), it was agreed that changes should be made to the SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) Regulations for better fire detection, containment, and suppression on container ships. The work on this is expected to be completed by 2025, with any amendments however coming into force at the earliest 1 January 2028.
In June 2023, MSC 107 approved draft amendments to SOLAS and related instruments to enhance the fire safety of RoRo passenger ships. The draft amendments are expected to enter into force on 1 January 2026. There have been reports that the IMO is considering a special code for EVs. However, at the time of writing, the position remained unclear.
LEGAL ISSUES
The Hague/Hague-Visby Rules are likely to apply to the contract of carriage. Pursuant to Article III Rule 1, the carrier has a due diligence obligation to make the vessel seaworthy and to properly man, equip and supply the vessel. Article III Rule 2 sets out the carrier’s obligation to take reasonable care of the cargo. This obligation is subject to certain exceptions set out in Article IV, including the fire exception in Article
THE REPORT | DEC 2024 | ISSUE 110 | 65
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
