Annex V HME cargo residues, E-waste and hold-wash water

A cargo residue harmful to the marine environment (HME) is the residue of a solid bulk cargo that meets one or more of the seven criteria in Appendix I to MARPOL Annex V , and it may not be discharged into the sea anywhere: dry or entrained in hold washing water, it goes to a port reception facility. Appendix I was inserted by IMO resolution MEPC.277(70), adopted 28 October 2016 and in force 1 March 2018. The same amendment made the shipper’s classification and declaration of every solid bulk cargo other than grain a mandatory duty under Reg 4.3, carried into the ship’s cargo information at paragraph 4.2.2.17 of the IMSBC Code since 1 January 2025.

Non-HME residues keep a conditioned sea route: outside special areas en route and not less than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land (Reg 4.1.3), and inside special areas only as hold washing water under the six conditions of Reg 6.1.2. Both streams are logged in Garbage Record Book Part II, Category J for non-HME and Category K for HME, which every bulk carrier of 100 GT and above has kept since 1 May 2024. E-waste, Category I in Part I, is the other garbage type MEPC.277(70) added, and it has no sea route at all.

Cargo residues in Annex V: definition and scope

MARPOL Annex V Reg 1.2 defines cargo residues as “the remnants of any cargo which are not covered by other Annexes to the present Convention and which remain on the deck or in holds following loading or unloading, including loading and unloading excess or spillage, whether in wet or dry condition or entrained in wash water but does not include cargo dust remaining on the deck after sweeping or dust on the external surfaces of the ship.” Reg 1.9 then defines garbage, and cargo residues sit inside that definition.

Three features of Reg 1.2 set the boundaries used everywhere else in this article:

• Other Annexes first. A remnant covered by another Annex is not an Annex V cargo residue. Oil cargo residues belong to MARPOL Annex I , noxious liquid substances to Annex II , and packaged harmful substances to Annex III .
• Wet or dry. Sweepings, spillage and residue carried off in wash water are one regulated stream, so the HME status of the cargo follows the residue into the hold washing water.
• Dust after sweeping is out. Cargo dust left on deck after sweeping and dust on the ship’s external surfaces are not cargo residues.

The discharge regulations add a fourth limit. Reg 4.1.3 and Reg 6.1.2 cover only cargo residues “that cannot be recovered using commonly available methods for unloading”, and footnote 5 to Table 1 of the 2017 Guidelines, resolution MEPC.295(71), repeats that qualifier. A parcel that grabs, conveyors or pneumatic unloaders can still recover is cargo, not residue, and it has no Annex V discharge route.

The solid bulk cargo to which the HME duty attaches is the SOLAS definition. Reg 4.3 refers to solid bulk cargoes “as defined in regulation VI/1-1.2” of SOLAS 1974, which puts the classification inside the same cargo-information chain as SOLAS Chapter VI and the IMSBC Code. Liquid bulk, packaged goods and cargo in containers fall outside Appendix I.

MEPC.295(71) paragraph 3.1 carves one stream out. Cargo material in hold bilge water is not treated as a cargo residue where the cargo is not harmful to the marine environment and the bilge water is discharged from a loaded hold through the ship’s fixed piping bilge drainage system. The carve-out needs a non-HME cargo and a loaded hold, so water pumped out after hold washing does not qualify.

MARPOL Annex V and IMSBC HME instrument chain, 2011 to 2027

The HME regime was built in two layers, a MEPC layer for the Annex and an MSC layer for the IMSBC Code, and the dates of each matter when reading an older record book or a charter party. The table lists each instrument with its role.

The discharge bar is older than the declaration duty. Between 1 January 2013 and 28 February 2018 an HME residue already could not go over the side, but the classification rested on guidelines and the IMSBC declaration was at most a recommendation. MEPC.277(70) replaced “taking into account guidelines developed by the Organization” with classification “in accordance with the criteria set out in appendix I of this Annex”, and turned the shipper’s role into a shall-level obligation in the Annex itself.

Two consequences follow for anyone reading older material. A reference to “section 3.2 of the 2012 Guidelines” as the source of the HME test describes the position before 1 March 2018. A reference to “4.2.2.16” of the IMSBC Code describes 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2024, and the IMSBC Code amendment cycle explains why the paragraph number moves every two years while the content stays put.

The seven HME criteria of MARPOL Annex V Appendix I

Appendix I classifies as HME the “residues of solid bulk cargoes which are classified according to the criteria of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) meeting the following parameters”. The seven parameters are joined by “and/or”, so a single one is enough:

1. Acute Aquatic Toxicity Category 1.
2. Chronic Aquatic Toxicity Category 1 or 2.
3. Carcinogenicity Category 1A or 1B combined with not being rapidly degradable and having high bioaccumulation.
4. Mutagenicity Category 1A or 1B combined with not being rapidly degradable and having high bioaccumulation.
5. Reproductive Toxicity Category 1A or 1B combined with not being rapidly degradable and having high bioaccumulation.
6. Specific Target Organ Toxicity Repeated Exposure Category 1 combined with not being rapidly degradable and having high bioaccumulation.
7. Solid bulk cargoes containing or consisting of synthetic polymers, rubber, plastics, or plastic feedstock pellets, “(this includes materials that are shredded, milled, chopped or macerated or similar materials)”.

Criteria 1 and 2 are the aquatic hazard classes of the Globally Harmonized System and stand alone. Criteria 3 to 6 are human-health classes, and each is compound: a Category 1B carcinogen that degrades rapidly, or one that does not bioaccumulate, does not meet criterion 3.

Criterion 7 has no toxicity gate at all. A cargo that contains or consists of polymer, rubber or plastic is HME on its composition, and the bracketed words bring shredded tyre rubber, plastic flake and similar processed material inside it. The criterion dates from section 3.2.7 of the 2012 Guidelines, so it predates the 2021 loss of the X-Press Pearl off Sri Lanka, and that casualty involved pellets carried in containers, which is Annex III and IMDG Code territory rather than Annex V solid bulk. The wider regulatory work on plastic pellets in maritime transport is a separate strand.

Which GHS edition applies

Appendix I names no GHS revision and carries no footnotes. The 2012 Guidelines did both: footnote 1 to MEPC.219(63) section 3.2 based the criteria on the “UN GHS, fourth revised edition (2011)” and pointed to GHS annexes 9 and 10 for metals and inorganic metal compounds, and footnote 2 limited criteria 3 to 6 to products classified “for oral and dermal hazards or without specification of the exposure route in the hazard statement”. Neither footnote appears in MEPC.277(70) or in MEPC.295(71).

The practical reading is that the shipper classifies on the GHS basis it applies to the product, and the Annex text fixes no edition. An inhalation-only classification was screened out under the 2012 footnote and is not expressly screened out by the current text. A shipper relying on that screen is relying on superseded guidance.

The provisional classification period, 2013 to 2014

IMO circular MEPC.1/Circ.791, dated 18 October 2012 and issued before the revised Annex V entered into force, dealt with the data gap. It asked Administrations to accept provisional classifications made on the acute aquatic toxicity, chronic aquatic toxicity and polymer-content criteria (3.2.1, 3.2.2 and 3.2.7 of the 2012 Guidelines) between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2014, while shippers gathered data for the carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, reproductive toxicity and repeated-exposure criteria. From 1 January 2015 the circular expected classification against all seven criteria. It also asked Parties to ensure reception facilities for solid bulk cargo residues, “including those entrained in the wash water”.

No provisional route survives today. A cargo whose data cannot support a non-HME classification has no Annex V basis for a non-HME declaration.

Grain and the Annex V HME classification duty

Reg 4.3, inserted by MEPC.277(70), reads: “Solid bulk cargoes as defined in regulation VI/1-1.2 of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, as amended, other than grain, shall be classified in accordance with appendix I of this Annex, and declared by the shipper as to whether or not they are harmful to the marine environment.” Reg 6.1.2.2 repeats the declaration condition for special areas with the same grain exception.

Grain shippers therefore make no HME declaration, and MEPC.295(71) paragraph 3.2 applies the HME test to residues of solid bulk cargoes “(other than grain)”. Grain carried under the International Grain Code still leaves cargo residues in the sense of Reg 1.2, and those residues use the non-HME discharge conditions of Reg 4.1.3 and Reg 6.1.2.

Appendix I itself contains no grain exception. Treating grain residue as non-HME for discharge is the reading the Annex and the 2017 Guidelines support, since no classification of grain exists to make it HME.

The shipper’s declaration under the IMSBC Code

The shipper classifies and declares; the master receives the declaration as part of the IMSBC cargo information before loading. Since 1 January 2025 the item sits at IMSBC Code paragraph 4.2.2.17, inserted in its present place by amendment 07-23, resolution MSC.539(107), which reads “whether or not the cargo is classified as harmful to the marine environment in accordance with appendix I of Annex V” to MARPOL. The form of cargo information at 4.2.3 carries tick boxes for harmful and not harmful to the marine environment.

The item reached that paragraph in three steps:

• 1 January 2017. Amendment 03-15, MSC.393(95), added 4.2.2.2, under which the cargo information “should include whether or not the cargo is harmful to the marine environment”, and a Section 14 on cargo residues that put classification and declaration on the shipper by reference to section 3.4 of the 2012 Guidelines.
• 1 January 2019. Amendment 04-17, MSC.426(98), deleted 4.2.2.2 and Section 14 and inserted the HME item into the mandatory 4.2.2 list as 4.2.2.16. Amendments 05-19 and 06-21 (MSC.462(101) and MSC.500(105)) left it at .16.
• 1 January 2025. Amendment 07-23 inserted bulk density as 4.2.2.7, which pushed the HME item to .17 and the national-requirements item to .18.

Amendment 08-25, MSC.575(110), enters into force on 1 January 2027 and does not amend section 4.2, so 4.2.2.17 stays put for at least that cycle.

The shipper’s cargo declaration carries the HME statement alongside the bulk cargo shipping name , the group (Group A , Group B or Group C ), and the moisture data where they apply. An IMSBC schedule does not fix HME status: the schedule describes the cargo’s properties for safe carriage, and the HME call is a per-shipment classification of that shipper’s product. An iron ore or copper concentrate schedule therefore says nothing about whether a given parcel is HME.

The master’s position

No IMO instrument tells the master what to do when the HME item is missing or looks wrong. The Annex puts the classification on the shipper and makes non-HME status a precondition of every sea discharge, so a residue with no declaration has no documented basis for discharge. Retaining it for a reception facility is the only course that cannot breach Reg 4.1.3 or Reg 6.1.2.

The IMSBC side gives the master a lever before loading, because the HME item is one of the mandatory 4.2.2 items and the information is due to the master before loading. Requesting the missing item from the shipper, through the charterers where the ship is on time charter, and recording the request, keeps the record straight for the Part II entry that follows.

Discharge rules for cargo residues and hold washing water

HME residues have no sea route; non-HME residues have a conditioned one that narrows sharply inside special areas and in Arctic waters. The table follows Table 1 of MEPC.295(71) and the regulations it summarizes.

Reg 4.4, renumbered from 4.3 by MEPC.277(70), applies the more stringent requirement when garbage is mixed with other discharges that have different requirements. Wash water that carries both non-HME residue and a cleaning agent that fails the not-harmful test is therefore wash water that cannot be discharged.

HME residues: retention and reception

Reg 4.1.3, as amended, allows cargo residues to be discharged outside special areas only where they do not contain substances classified as harmful to the marine environment under Appendix I. Reg 6.1.2.1, as replaced by MEPC.277(70), makes “Cargo residues contained in hold washing water do not include any substances classified as harmful to the marine environment according to the criteria set out in appendix I of this Annex” the first of the special-area conditions. Between them, no distance, no speed and no area opens a sea route for HME residue.

The consequence falls on hold washing. After discharging an HME parcel, every litre of wash water that carries residue has to be retained until it can be landed, and the Annex sets no volume allowance. Where the ship has no dedicated tank, retention means designating a space for it before the washing starts, and the voyage plan then needs a port that has declared HME reception.

Non-HME residues outside special areas

Outside MARPOL special areas , non-HME cargo residues that cannot be recovered by commonly available unloading methods may be discharged with the ship en route, as far as practicable from the nearest land and not less than 12 nautical miles from it. MEPC.295(71) Table 1 applies the same conditions whether the residue is dry or contained in wash water. The detailed conditions, including the en route requirement, are in the article on Reg 4, discharge outside special areas .

Cleaning agents and additives in cargo hold washing water are a separate item in Table 1 and may be discharged outside special areas where they are not harmful to the marine environment (Reg 4.2).

Non-HME residues within special areas

Inside a special area, cargo residues not contained in wash water may not be discharged at all. Hold washing water containing residues may be discharged only when every condition of Reg 6.1.2, as amended by MEPC.277(70), is met:

1. The cargo residues contained in the hold washing water include no substance classified HME under Appendix I (6.1.2.1).
2. The solid bulk cargo, other than grain, has been classified under Appendix I and declared by the shipper (6.1.2.2).
3. Cleaning agents and additives are not harmful to the marine environment (6.1.2.3).
4. The port of departure and the next port of destination are both within the special area and the ship does not transit outside it between them (6.1.2.4).
5. No adequate reception facilities are available at those ports (6.1.2.5).
6. The discharge is made as far as practicable from the nearest land or ice shelf and not less than 12 nautical miles from either (6.1.2.6), with the ship en route as the Reg 6.1 chapeau requires.

MEPC.295(71) paragraph 3.6 accepts the master’s determination, on information available from the port, that neither port has adequate reception facilities as meeting condition 5. Paragraph 3.7 applies the route when the port of departure and the next destination are the same port. The Reg 6 article sets out the special-area regime in full.

A common misreading treats “6.1.2.1” as the name of the special-area route. It is the first of six conditions, and a discharge that satisfies it alone is unlawful.

Arctic and Antarctic waters

The Polar Code Part II-A, made mandatory under MARPOL by resolution MEPC.265(68), sets the Arctic regime. Paragraph 5.2.1.5 allows cargo hold washing water containing residues to be discharged, with the ship en route, only where four conditions are met: the cargo residues, cleaning agents or additives in the washing water are not harmful to the marine environment, taking into account IMO guidelines; the ports of departure and destination are both within Arctic waters and the ship does not transit outside them; no adequate reception facilities are available at those ports; and the discharge is made “as far as practicable from areas of ice concentration exceeding 1/10, but in any case not less than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land, nearest ice shelf, or nearest fast ice”. Condition 1 still uses the pre-2018 “taking into account guidelines” formulation rather than a reference to Appendix I.

The Antarctic area is an Annex V special area, so Reg 6 applies, and Polar Code paragraph 5.2.2 adds a 12-nautical-mile distance from the nearest fast ice. Reg 6.3.2 requires a ship entering the Antarctic area to have enough capacity to retain all garbage on board. The Antarctic special area and Polar Code article covers the combined regime.

Cleaning agents and additives in hold washing water

MEPC.295(71) paragraph 1.7.4 treats cleaning agents and additives contained in wash water as operational waste, which makes them garbage, and allows their discharge only where they are not harmful to the marine environment. Paragraph 1.7.5 sets two tests: the agent must not be a harmful substance under the criteria of MARPOL Annex III , and it must not contain any component known to be carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic.

Paragraph 1.7.6 asks for evidence on board from the producer that the product meets those tests, and states that a dated and signed statement from the product supplier would be adequate. Paragraph 1.7.6 asks only for it in the ship’s record; filing it alongside the Part II entries puts both halves of the test in one place, since a wash-water discharge is lawful only if both the residue and the agent pass.

The two tests run on different classification systems. The residue is tested against Appendix I, the agent against Annex III, so a non-HME residue can still produce wash water that must be retained when the crew used a product that fails 1.7.5. Hold cleaning materials and chemicals are chosen with that in mind as much as for their cleaning performance.

Wash water from decks and external surfaces is a different stream. Reg 6.2 covers cleaning agents in deck and external-surface wash water within special areas, and MEPC.277(70) moved cargo-hold agents out of that paragraph and into the Reg 6.1.2 conditions.

Hold cleaning between cargoes

Hold cleaning is where the HME classification becomes a voyage plan. The next cargo’s cleanliness standard usually decides how much washing is needed, and the residue’s HME status decides where the resulting water can go. The deck sequence of sweeping, washing, rinsing and drying is in cargo hold preparation standards and cargo hold ventilation , and hold cleanliness inspection is the test the washing has to pass.

Removing as much dry residue as possible at the discharge berth reduces the quantity that later becomes wash water. Dry residue swept up after discharge is still a cargo residue, and a non-HME sweeping that the berth’s unloading equipment could have recovered is cargo that should have been discharged, not residue for the sea.

For an HME cargo the wash-water plan has to name the retention space, the port that will receive the water, and the date. A ship leaving an HME discharge port in ballast for a loading port with no declared HME reception capacity carries the wash water, or the unwashed holds, the whole way.

Charter party allocation

Who pays for cleaning and disposal is a contract question, and the standard forms answer it differently. Under Clause 10(b) of the NYPE 2015 time charter form , intermediate hold cleaning is paid at a rate per hold, with cleaning agents supplied by the charterers, accompanied by a statement under resolution MEPC.219(63) on MARPOL Annex V, and with residue disposal at the charterers’ time and cost. The clause still names the 2012 Guidelines, which MEPC.295(71) replaced on 7 July 2017, so a rider that updates the reference to MEPC.295(71) paragraph 1.7.6 matches the current guidance.

Under a voyage charter party the allocation is whatever the rider says, and the time spent retaining, landing or waiting for reception facilities runs against laytime only where the charter makes it do so. The time charter party article covers the off-hire and cleaning provisions on the wider set of forms.

E-waste: Category I

E-waste is Category I in Garbage Record Book Part I, a category created by MEPC.277(70) with effect from 1 March 2018. The definition is not in the resolution. It is in paragraph 1.6.2 of MEPC.295(71): “electrical and electronic equipment used for the normal operation of the ship or in the accommodation spaces, including all components, subassemblies and consumables, which are part of the equipment at the time of discarding, with the presence of material potentially hazardous to human health and/or the environment.”

Annex V gives E-waste no discharge route, so it falls under the general prohibition in Reg 3 and goes to a reception facility. Two words in the definition decide what goes in the category. “Normal operation” and “accommodation spaces” cover bridge electronics, engine-room controllers and crew-cabin equipment alike, and “consumables, which are part of the equipment at the time of discarding” would on that wording include, for example, toner cartridges and batteries still fitted when the equipment is thrown away.

E-waste needs its own store in the Garbage Management Plan , separate from Category F operational wastes and from the incinerator stream, whose permitted feed is governed by MARPOL Annex VI Reg 16 . Once landed it becomes a shore waste, and whether the Basel Convention applies to a later shipment of it is a question for the port State’s waste law rather than for MARPOL.

Garbage Record Book categories A to K

MEPC.277(70) split the Garbage Record Book into Part I for Categories A to I and Part II for Categories J and K, the latter headed “For all cargo residues as defined in regulation 1.2 … (Ships that carry solid bulk cargoes)”. The sea-discharge column below follows MEPC.295(71) Table 1.

Incinerator ashes, clinkers, floating dunnage, lining and packing materials are prohibited in every column of Table 1, which corrects a reading still found in older summaries that gave ash a 12-nautical-mile route. The per-category detail for food waste, animal carcasses and the platform rules is in the Annex V garbage discharge rules , Reg 5 on fixed and floating platforms and Reg 7 on exceptions .

The letters changed on 1 March 2018. In the form issued with MEPC.201(62) and used from 1 January 2013, cargo residues were Category G and animal carcasses Category H, with fishing gear listed after them. A record book or an audit finding from 2013 to early 2018 that logs “Category G” for hold sweepings is correct for its date.

Garbage Record Book Part II

Part II is the cargo-residue record, and its columns are fewer than many summaries suggest. Each entry carries the date and time; the position of the ship, or the port or receiving ship; the category, J or K; the estimated amount discharged into the sea or delivered to a reception facility or another ship, in cubic metres; the start and stop positions for a discharge into the sea; and the certification and signature of the officer in charge. The master signs each completed page. The form has no column for cargo name, hold number or the shipper’s declaration.

That gap is what the category letter fills. Choosing J or K records the HME status, and the declaration that supports the choice sits in the IMSBC cargo documents rather than in the book. A superintendent auditing a Part II entry reads it against the cargo information for the parcel that left the residue.

Reg 10.3.2, as amended by MEPC.277(70), requires the start and stop positions for cargo-residue discharges into the sea, because a discharge at 12 nautical miles is lawful only if the whole of it happened beyond that distance. Reg 10.3.1 requires entries at least in English, French or Spanish.

Reg 10.3.5 requires the book to be kept on board for at least two years from the last entry, with the receipts from reception facilities retained with it. Under Reg 10.5, certified copies of entries are admissible in judicial proceedings, which makes Part II an evidence document as much as a log. Electronic record books under MARPOL are treated in their own article.

Which ships keep it

Since 1 May 2024, under MEPC.360(79), the Garbage Record Book is required on every ship of 100 GT and above, every ship certified to carry 15 or more persons engaged in international voyages, and every fixed or floating platform. The threshold before that date was 400 GT. Ships below 100 GT record Reg 7 discharges and losses in the official log-book (Reg 10.3.6). Part II applies to those ships that carry solid bulk cargoes, which now includes bulk-carrying coasters of 100 to 399 GT that had no record book before May 2024.

The Garbage Management Plan and the cargo-residue routine

Reg 10.2 requires a written Garbage Management Plan on every ship of 100 GT and above, every ship certified to carry 15 or more persons, and every fixed or floating platform, “written in the working language of the crew”. The 2012 Guidelines for the Development of Garbage Management Plans, resolution MEPC.220(63), are the IMO guidance on its content, and the full Reg 10 treatment is in the placards, plan and record book article .

The language rule for the plan differs from the rule for placards and the record book. Placards under Reg 10.1.2 need English, French or Spanish on ships engaged in voyages to ports or offshore terminals under the jurisdiction of other Parties, and record book entries under Reg 10.3.1 are made at least in English, French or Spanish on every ship; the plan itself needs only the working language of the crew.

The Annex does not prescribe a cargo-residue section in the plan. A bulk carrier’s plan that has none leaves the chief officer to improvise at the point where the HME declaration, the retention space and the reception port have to line up, A cargo-residue section, integrated with the ship’s ISM Code procedures, closes that gap by naming, for each cargo type:

• the document from which HME status is taken (the IMSBC 4.2.2.17 item),
• the planned route for dry residue and for hold washing water,
• the retention space if the cargo is HME,
• the cleaning agents on board and where their supplier statements are kept,
• the officer who makes the Part II entry.

A plan that describes a tank the ship no longer has, or cites the pre-2018 single-part record book, no longer matches the ship. A port State control officer comparing plan and practice will see the mismatch.

Port reception facilities for HME residues and wash water

Reg 8 requires each Party to ensure adequate reception facilities at ports and terminals “without causing undue delay to ships, and according to the needs of the ships using them”. Section 3.3 of MEPC.295(71) applies that to HME cargoes, whose residues and wash water need facilities at the ports and terminals that receive them. The Reg 8 article covers adequacy and the reporting of inadequate facilities.

The Port Reception Facilities Database in IMO GISIS is the lookup for a voyage plan. MEPC.1/Circ.834/Rev.1 of 1 March 2018 confirms the database and lists, among the Annex V facility types, “E-waste, cargo residues not harmful to the marine environment (non-HME) and cargo residues harmful to the marine environment (HME)”. A port declaring general garbage reception has not thereby declared HME wash-water reception.

Reg 8.3 lets some States meet the duty regionally. MEPC.216(63), in force 1 August 2013, allowed Small Island Developing States to satisfy Reg 8 through a regional arrangement with a Regional Reception Facilities Plan , and MEPC.360(79), in force 1 May 2024, extended the same route to States whose coastline borders Arctic waters. In those regions the nearest HME reception point may be in another State.

Regional law adds its own layer. In the European Union, the Port Reception Facilities Directive (EU) 2019/883 governs delivery and fees at EU ports, and the Baltic States work under the Helsinki Convention . Those overlays govern cost and notification; they do not change the Appendix I classification.

Port State control and the cargo-residue record

A port State control inspection tests the cargo-residue regime through documents. The officer can compare the IMSBC cargo information for recent parcels with the J or K letters in Part II, the sea-discharge positions with the 12-nautical-mile line and any special-area boundary, and wash-water entries with reception receipts. The IMO framework for that examination is resolution A.1206(34), the Procedures for Port State Control, 2025 , applied in the Paris MoU and Tokyo MoU regions and elsewhere.

Three inconsistencies are visible from the documents alone:

• a Category J sea discharge after a parcel whose cargo information declared the cargo harmful,
• a sea discharge inside a special area with no record that the Reg 6.1.2 conditions were met,
• retained HME wash water that disappears from the book with no reception receipt.

The deficiency recorded, and whether it grounds a detention, is decided by the inspecting officer under the port State’s procedures and is coded under the regional PSC deficiency codes .

Where Annex V meets Annex I, II, III and the IMDG Code

The HME regime covers solid bulk cargo residues only, and the neighbouring regimes pick up everything else. The first test in Reg 1.2 is whether another Annex covers the remnant.

The GHS aquatic-toxicity classes do double duty. They decide HME status for solid bulk under Appendix I and marine pollutant status for packaged goods, where they lead into IMDG Class 9 and the marine pollutant mark. A product can therefore be HME when shipped in bulk and a marine pollutant when shipped in bags, with its residues going into different books under different Annexes.

Limitations

This article covers the Annex V provisions on solid bulk cargo residues, hold washing water and E-waste as they stand on 30 September 2026. The operative texts are the revised Annex V to the MARPOL Convention in MEPC.201(62) as amended by, among others, MEPC.216(63), MEPC.277(70) and MEPC.360(79), read with the IMSBC Code as amended by MSC.539(107). The 2017 Guidelines in MEPC.295(71) are guidance, and their paragraph references here are to that resolution as adopted.

HME status is a per-parcel classification by the shipper against Appendix I. Nothing in this article classifies a named cargo, and no IMSBC schedule does so either. The GHS thresholds behind the aquatic-toxicity and bioaccumulation tests are set in the GHS itself, and the edition a shipper applies is the shipper’s choice, since Appendix I names none.

The master’s handling of a missing or doubtful declaration, the content of a cargo-residue section in the Garbage Management Plan and the charter-party points are site analysis of practice built on the instruments, not requirements of them. Reception capacity, charges and notification rules vary by port and region, and the GISIS database records what each port has declared, which is not a guarantee of availability on the day.

Related Articles

• MARPOL Annex V: garbage from ships
• MARPOL Annex V: garbage discharge rules
• Annex V Regulation 4: discharge outside special areas
• Annex V Regulation 6: discharge within special areas
• Annex V Regulation 10: placards, GMP and record book
• IMSBC Code
• IMSBC Group B cargoes
• Cargo hold preparation standards
• NYPE 2015 time charter form
• Polar Code
• Port State control