Na podlagi druge alinee prvega odstavka 107. člena in prvega odstavka 91. člena Ustave Republike Slovenije izdajam

Razglašam Zakon o ratifikaciji Protokola o nadaljnjem zmanjševanju emisij žvepla h Konvenciji o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje iz leta 1979 (MZEZKPO), ki ga je sprejel državni zbor Republike Slovenije na seji 25. februarja 1998.

Ratificira se Protokol o nadaljnjem zmanjševanju emisij žvepla h Konvenciji o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje iz leta 1979, sklenjen v Oslu 14. junija 1994.

Protokol se v izvirniku v angleškem jeziku in v prevodu v slovenskem jeziku glasi:

The Parties,
Determined to implement the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution,
Concerned that emissions of sulphur and other air pollutants continue to be transported across international boundaries and, in exposed parts of Europe and North America, are causing widespread damage to natural resources of vital environmental and economic importance, such as forests, soils and waters, and to materials, including historic monuments, and, under certain circumstances, have harmful effects on human health,
Resolved to take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize emissions of air pollutants and mitigate their adverse effects,
Convinced that where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, taking into account that such precautionary measures to deal with emissions of air pollutants should be cost-effective,
Mindful that measures to control emissions of sulphur and other air pollutants would also contribute to the protection of the sensitive Arctic environment,
Considering that the predominant sources of air pollution contributing to the acidification of the environment are the combustion of fossil fuels for energy production, and the main technological processes in various industrial sectors, as well as transport, which lead to emissions of sulphur, nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants,
Conscious of the need for a cost-effective regional approach to combating air pollution that takes account of the variations in effects and abatement costs between countries,
Desiring to take further and more effective action to control and reduce sulphur emissions,
Cognizant that any sulphur control policy, however cost-effective it may be at the regional level, will result in a relatively heavy economic burden on countries with economies that are in transition to a market economy,
Bearing in mind that measures taken to reduce sulphur emissions should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international competition and trade,
Taking into consideration existing scientific and technical data on emissions, atmospheric processes and effects on the environment of sulphur oxides, as well as on abatement costs,
Aware that, in addition to emissions of sulphur, emissions of nitrogen oxides and of ammonia are also causing acidification of the environment,
Noting that under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted in New York on 9 May 1992, there is agreement to establish national policies and take corresponding measures to combat climate change, which can be expected to lead to reductions of sulphur emissions,
Affirming the need to ensure environmentally sound and sustainable development,
Recognizing the need to continue scientific and technical cooperation to elaborate further the approach based on critical loads and critical levels, including efforts to assess several air pollutants and various effects on the environment, materials and human health,
Underlining that scientific and technical knowledge is developing and that it will be necessary to take such developments into account when reviewing the adequacy of the obligations entered into under the present Protocol and deciding on further action,
Acknowledging the Protocol on the Reduction of Sulphur Emissions or Their Transboundary Fluxes by at least 30 per cent, adopted in Helsinki on 8 July 1985, and the measures already taken by many countries which have had the effect of reducing sulphur emissions,
Have agreed as follows:

For the purposes of the present Protocol,
1. “Convention” means the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, adopted in Geneva on 13 November 1979;
2. “EMEP” means the Cooperative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-range Transmission of Air Pollutants in Europe;
3. “Executive Body” means the Executive Body for the Convention constituted under article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
4. “Commission” means the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe;
5. “Parties” means, unless the context otherwise requires, the Parties to the present Protocol;
6. “Geographical scope of EMEP” means the area defined in article 1, paragraph 4, of the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Long-term Financing of the Cooperative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Long-range Transmission of Air Pollutants in Europe (EMEP), adopted in Geneva on 28 September 1984;
7. “SOMA” means a sulphur oxides management area designated in annex III under the conditions laid down in article 2, paragraph 3;
8. “Critical load” means a quantitative estimate of an exposure to one or more pollutants below which significant harmful effects on specified sensitive elements of the environment do not occur, according to present knowledge;
9. “Critical levels” means the concentration of pollutants in the atmosphere above which direct adverse effects on receptors, such as human beings, plants, ecosystems or materials, may occur, according to present knowledge;
10. “Critical sulphur deposition” means a quantitative estimate of the exposure to oxidized sulphur compounds, taking into account the effects of base cation uptake and base cation deposition, below which significant harmful effects on specified sensitive elements of the environment do not occur, according to present knowledge;
11. “Emission” means the discharge of substances into the atmosphere;
12. “Sulphur emissions” means all emissions of sulphur compounds expressed as kilotonnes of sulphur dioxide (kt SO2) to the atmosphere originating from anthropogenic sources excluding from ships in international traffic outside territorial waters;
13. “Fuel” means any solid, liquid or gaseous combustible material with the exception of domestic refuse and toxic or dangerous waste;
14. “Stationary combustion source” means any technical apparatus or group of technical apparatus that is co-located on a common site and is or could be discharging waste gases through a common stack, in which fuels are oxidized in order to use the heat generated;
15. “Major new stationary combustion source” means any stationary combustion source the construction or substantial modification of which is authorized after 31 December 1995 and the thermal input of which, when operating at rated capacity, is at least 50 MWth. It is a matter for the competent national authorities to decide whether a modification is substantial or not, taking into account such factors as the environmental benefits of the modification;
16. “Major existing stationary combustion source” means any existing stationary combustion source the thermal input of which, when operating at rated capacity, is at least 50 MWth;
17. “Gas oil” means any petroleum product within HS 2710, or any petroleum product which, by reason of its distillation limits, falls within the category of middle distillates intended for use as fuel and of which at least 85 per cent by volume, including distillation losses, distils at 350 °C;
18. “Emission limit value” means the permissible concentration of sulphur compounds expressed as sulphur dioxide in the waste gases from a stationary combustion source expressed in terms of mass per volume of the waste gases expressed in mg SO2/Nm3, assuming an oxygen content by volume in the waste gas of 3 % in the case of liquid and gaseous fuels and 6 % in the case of solid fuels;
19. “Emission limitation” means the permissible total quantity of sulphur compounds expressed as sulphur dioxide discharged from a combustion source or group of combustion sources located either on a common site or within a defined geographical area, expressed in kilotonnes per year;
20. “Desulphurization rate” means the ratio of the quantity of sulphur which is separated at the combustion source site over a given period to the quantity of sulphur contained in the fuel which is introduced into the combustion source facilities and which is used over the same period;
21. “Sulphur budget” means a matrix of calculated contributions to the deposition of oxidized sulphur compounds in receiving areas, originating from the emissions from specified areas.

1. The Parties shall control and reduce their sulphur emissions in order to protect human health and the environment from adverse effects, in particular acidifying effects, and to ensure, as far as possible, without entailing excessive costs, that depositions of oxidized sulphur compounds in the long term do not exceed critical loads for sulphur given, in annex I, as critical sulphur depositions, in accordance with present scientific knowledge.
2. As a first step, the Parties shall, as a minimum, reduce and maintain their annual sulphur emissions in accordance with the timing and levels specified in annex II.
3. In addition, any Party:
(a) Whose total land area is greater than 2 million square kilometres;
(b) Which has committed itself under paragraph 2 above to a national sulphur emission ceiling no greater than the lesser of its 1990 emissions or its obligation in the 1985 Helsinki Protocol on the Reduction of Sulphur Emissions or Their Transboundary Fluxes by at least 30%, as indicated in annex II;
(c) Whose annual sulphur emissions that contribute to acidification in areas under the jurisdiction of one or more other Parties originate only from within areas under its jurisdiction that are listed as SOMAs in annex III, and has presented documentation to this effect; and
(d) Which has specified upon signature of, or accession to, the present Protocol its intention to act in accordance with this paragraph,
shall, as a minimum, reduce and maintain its annual sulphur emissions in the area so listed in accordance with the timing and levels specified in annex II.
4. Furthermore, the Parties shall make use of the most effective measures for the reduction of sulphur emissions, appropriate in their particular circumstances, for new and existing sources, which include, inter alia:
– Measures to increase energy efficiency;
– Measures to increase the use of renewable energy;
– Measures to reduce the sulphur content of particular fuels and to encourage the use of fuel with a low sulphur content, including the combined use of high-sulphur with low-sulphur or sulphur-free fuel;
– Measures to apply best available control technologies not entailing excessive cost,
using the guidance in annex IV.
5. Each Party, except those Parties subject to the United States/Canada Air Quality Agreement of 1991, shall as a minimum:
(a) Apply emission limit values at least as stringent as those specified in annex V to all major new stationary combustion sources;
(b) No later than 1 July 2004 apply, as far as possible without entailing excessive costs, emission limit values at least as stringent as those specified in annex V to those major existing stationary combustion sources the thermal input of which is above 500 MWth taking into account the remaining lifetime of a plant, calculated from the date of entry into force of the present Protocol, or apply equivalent emission limitations or other appropriate provisions, provided that these achieve the sulphur emission ceilings specified in annex II and, subsequently, further approach the critical loads as given in annex I; and no later than 1 July 2004 apply emission limit values or emission limitations to those major existing stationary combustion sources the thermal input of which is between 50 and 500 MWth using annex V as guidance;
(c) No later than two years after the date of entry into force of the present Protocol apply national standards for the sulphur content of gas oil at least as stringent as those specified in annex V. In cases where the supply of gas oil cannot otherwise be ensured, a State may extend the time period given in this subparagraph to a period of to ten years. In this case it shall specify, in a declaration to be deposited together with the instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, its intention to extend the time period.
6. The Parties may, in addition, apply economic instruments to encourage the adoption of cost-effective approaches to the reduction of sulphur emissions.
7. The Parties to this Protocol may, at a session of the Executive Body, in accordance with rules and conditions which the Executive Body shall elaborate and adopt, decide whether two or more Parties may jointly implement the obligations set out in annex II. These rules and conditions shall ensure the fulfilment of the obligations set out in paragraph 2 above and also promote the achievement of the environmental objectives set out in paragraph 1 above.
8. The Parties shall, subject to the outcome of the first review provided for under article 8 and no later than one year after the completion of that review, commence negotiations on further obligations to reduce emissions.

1. The Parties shall, consistent with their national laws, regulations and practices, facilitate the exchange of technologies and techniques, including those that increase energy efficiency, the use of renewable energy and the processing of low-sulphur fuels, to reduce sulphur emissions, particularly through the promotion of:
(a) The commercial exchange of available technology;
(b) Direct industrial contacts and cooperation, including joint ventures;
(c) The exchange of information and experience;
(d) The provision of technical assistance.
2. In promoting the activities specified in paragraph 1 above, the Parties shall create favourable conditions by facilitating contacts and cooperation among appropriate organizations and individuals in the private and public sectors that are capable of providing technology, design and engineering services, equipment or finance.
3. The Parties shall, no later than six months after the date of entry into force of the present Protocol, commence consideration of procedures to create more favourable conditions for the exchange of technology to reduce sulphur emissions.

1. Each Party shall, in order to implement its obligations under article 2:
(a) Adopt national strategies, policies and programmes, no later than six months after the present Protocol enters into force for it; and
(b) Take and apply national measures
to control and reduce its sulphur emissions.
2. Each Party shall collect and maintain information on:
(a) Actual levels of sulphur emissions, and of ambient concentrations and depositions of oxidized sulphur and other acidifying compounds, taking into account, for those Parties within the geographical scope of EMEP, the work plan of EMEP; and
(b) The effects of depositions of oxidized sulphur and other acidifying compounds.

1. Each Party shall report, through the Executive Secretary of the Commission, to the Executive Body, on a periodic basis as determined by the Executive Body, information on:
(a) The implementation of national strategies, policies, programmes and measures referred to in article 4, paragraph 1;
(b) The levels of national annual sulphur emissions, in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Executive Body, containing emission data for all relevant source categories; and
(c) The implementation of other obligations that it has entered into under the present Protocol,
in conformity with a decision regarding format and content to be adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body. The terms of this decision shall be reviewed as necessary to identify any additional elements regarding the format and/or content of the information that are to be included in the reports.
2. Each Party within the geographical scope of EMEP shall report, through the Executive Secretary of the Commission, to EMEP, on a periodic basis to be determined by the Steering Body of EMEP and approved by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body, information on the levels of sulphur emissions with temporal and spatial resolution as specified by the Steering Body of EMEP.
3. In good time before each annual session of the Executive Body, EMEP shall provide information on:
(a) Ambient concentrations and deposition of oxidized sulphur compounds; and
(b) Calculations of sulphur budgets.
Parties in areas outside the geographical scope of EMEP shall make available similar information if requested to do so by the Executive Body.
4. The Executive Body shall, in accordance with article 10, paragraph 2 (b), of the Convention, arrange for the preparation of information on the effects of depositions of oxidized sulphur and other acidifying compounds.
5. The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, arrange for the preparation, at regular intervals, of revised information on calculated and internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions for the States within the geographical scope of EMEP, with integrated assessment models, with a view to reducing further, for the purposes of article 2, paragraph 1, of the present Protocol, the difference between actual depositions of oxidized sulphur compounds and critical load values.

The Parties shall encourage research, development, monitoring and cooperation related to:
(a) The international harmonization of methods for the establishment of critical loads and critical levels and the elaboration of procedures for such harmonization;
(b) The improvement of monitoring techniques and systems and of the modelling of transport, concentrations and deposition of sulphur compounds;
(c) Strategies for the further reduction of sulphur emissions based on critical loads and critical levels as well as on technical developments, and the improvement of integrated assessment modelling to calculate internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions taking into account an equitable distribution of abatement costs;
(d) The understanding of the wider effects of sulphur emissions on human health, the environment, in particular acidification, and materials, including historic and cultural monuments, taking into account the relationship between sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, ammonia, volatile organic compounds and tropospheric ozone;
(e) Emission abatement technologies, and technologies and techniques to enhance energy efficiency, energy conservation and the use of renewable energy;
(f) The economic evaluation of benefits for the environment and human health resulting from the reduction of sulphur emissions.

1. An Implementation Committee is hereby established to review the implementation of the present Protocol and compliance by the Parties with their obligations. It shall report to the Parties at sessions of the Executive Body and may make such recommendations to them as it considers appropriate.
2. Upon consideration of a report, and any recommendations, of the Implementation Committee, the Parties, taking into account the circumstances of a matter and in accordance with Convention practice, may decide upon and call for action to bring about full compliance with the present Protocol, including measures to assist a Party’s compliance with the Protocol, and to further the objectives of the Protocol.
3. The Parties shall, at the first session of the Executive Body after the entry into force of the present Protocol, adopt a decision that sets out the structure and functions of the Implementation Committee as well as procedures for its review of compliance.
4. The application of the compliance procedure shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 9 of the present Protocol.

1. The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, pursuant to article 10, paragraph 2 (a), of the Convention, review the information supplied by the Parties and EMEP, the data on the effects of depositions of sulphur and other acidifying compounds and the reports of the Implementation Committee referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the present Protocol.
2. (a)The Parties shall, at sessions of the Executive Body, keep under review the obligations set out in the present Protocol, including:
(i) Their obligations in relation to their calculated and internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions referred to in article 5, paragraph 5; and
(ii) The adequacy of the obligations and the progress made towards the achievement of the objectives of the present Protocol;
(b) Reviews shall take into account the best available scientific information on acidification, including assessments of critical loads, technological developments, changing economic conditions and the fulfilment of the obligations on emission levels;
(c) In the context of such reviews, any Party whose obligations on sulphur emission ceilings under annex II hereto do not conform to the calculated and internationally optimized allocations of emission reductions for that Party, required to reduce the difference between depositions of sulphur in 1990 and critical sulphur depositions within the geographical scope of EMEP by at least 60%, shall make every effort to undertake revised obligations;
(d) The procedures, methods and timing for such reviews shall be specified by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body. The first such review shall be completed in 1997.

1. In the event of a dispute between any two or more Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Protocol, the Parties concerned shall seek a settlement of the dispute through negotiation or any other peaceful means of their own choice. The Parties to the dispute shall inform the Executive Body of their dispute.
2. When ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the present Protocol, or at any time thereafter, a Party which is not a regional economic integration organization may declare in a written instrument submitted to the Depositary that, in respect of any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Protocol, it recognizes one or both of the following means of dispute settlement as compulsory ipso facto and without agreement, in relation to any Party accepting the same obligation:
(a) Submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice;
(b) Arbitration in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the Parties at a session of the Executive Body as soon as practicable, in an annex on arbitration.
A Party which is a regional economic integration organization may make a declaration with like effect in relation to arbitration in accordance with the procedures referred to in subparagraph (b) above.
3. A declaration made under paragraph 2 above shall remain in force until it expires in accordance with its terms or until three months after written notice of its revocation has been deposited with the Depositary.
4. A new declaration, a notice of revocation or the expiry of a declaration shall not in any way affect proceedings pending before the International Court of Justice or the arbitral tribunal, unless the Parties to the dispute agree otherwise.
5. Except in a case where the Parties to a dispute have accepted the same means of dispute settlement under paragraph 2, if after twelve months following notification by one Party to another that a dispute exists between them, the Parties concerned have not been able to settle their dispute through the means mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the dispute shall be submitted, at the request of any of the Parties to the dispute, to conciliation.
6. For the purpose of paragraph 5, a conciliation commission shall be created. The commission shall be composed of an equal number of members appointed by each Party concerned or, where Parties in conciliation share the same interest, by the group sharing that interest, and a chairman chosen jointly by the members so appointed. The commission shall render a recommendatory award, which the Parties shall consider in good faith.

The annexes to the present Protocol shall form an integral part of the Protocol. Annexes I and IV are recommendatory in character.

1. Any Party may propose amendments to the present Protocol. Any Party to the Convention may propose an adjustment to annex II to the present Protocol to add to it its name, together with emission levels, sulphur emission ceilings and percentage emission reductions.
2. Such proposed amendments and adjustments shall be submitted in writing to the Executive Secretary of the Commission, who shall communicate them to all Parties. The Parties shall discuss the proposed amendments and adjustments at the next session of the Executive Body, provided that those proposals have been circulated by the Executive Secretary to the Parties at least ninety days in advance.
3. Amendments to the present Protocol and to its annexes II, III and V shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body, and shall enter into force for the Parties which have accepted them on the ninetieth day after the date on which two thirds of the Parties have deposited with the Depositary their instruments of acceptance thereof. Amendments shall enter into force for any other Party on the ninetieth day after the date on which that Party has deposited its instrument of acceptance thereof.
4. Amendments to the annexes to the present Protocol, other than to the annexes referred to in paragraph 3 above, shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body. On the expiry of ninety days from the date of its communication by the Executive Secretary of the Commission, an amendment to any such annex shall become effective for those Parties which have not submitted to the Depositary a notification in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5 below, provided that at least sixteen Parties have not submitted such a notification.
5. Any Party that is unable to approve an amendment to an annex, other than to an annex referred to in paragraph 3 above, shall so notify the Depositary in writing within ninety days from the date of the communication of its adoption. The Depositary shall without delay notify all Parties of any such notification received. A Party may at any time substitute an acceptance for its previous notification and, upon deposit of an instrument of acceptance with the Depositary, the amendment to such an annex shall become effective for that Party.
6. Adjustments to annex II shall be adopted by consensus of the Parties present at a session of the Executive Body and shall become effective for all Parties to the present Protocol on the ninetieth day following the date on which the Executive Secretary of the Commission notifies those Parties in writing of the adoption of the adjustment.

1. The present Protocol shall be open for signature at Oslo on 14 June 1994, then at United Nations Headquarters in New York until 12 December 1994 by States members of the Commission as well as States having consultative status with the Commission, pursuant to paragraph 8 of Economic and Social Council resolution 36 (IV) of 28 March 1947, and by regional economic integration organizations, constituted by sovereign States members of the Commission, which have competence in respect of the negotiation, conclusion and application of international agreements in matters covered by the Protocol, provided that the States and organizations concerned are Parties to the Convention and are listed in annex II.
2. In matters within their competence, such regional economic integration organizations shall, on their own behalf, exercise the rights and fulfil the responsibilities which the present Protocol attributes to their member States. In such cases, the member States of these organizations shall not be entitled to exercise such rights individually.

1. The present Protocol shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by Signatories.
2. The present Protocol shall be open for accession as from 12 December 1994 by the States and organizations that meet the requirements of article 12, paragraph 1.

The instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who will perform the functions of Depositary.

1. The present Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date on which the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession has been deposited with the Depositary.
2. For each State and organization referred to in article 12, paragraph 1, which ratifies, accepts or approves the present Protocol or accedes thereto after the deposit of the sixteenth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit by such Party of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.

At any time after five years from the date on which the present Protocol has come into force with respect to a Party, that Party may withdraw from it by giving written notification to the Depositary. Any such withdrawal shall take effect on the ninetieth day following the date of its receipt by the Depositary, or on such later date as may be specified in the notification of the withdrawal.

The original of the present Protocol, of which the English, French and Russian texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed the present Protocol.
DONE at Oslo, this fourteenth day of June one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four.

The sulphur emission ceilings listed in the table below give the obligations referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 2 of the present Protocol. The 1980 and 1990 emission levels and the percentage emission reductions listed are given for information purposes only.

a/ If, in a given year before 2005, a Party finds that, due to a particularly cold winter, a particularly dry summer and an unforeseen short-term loss of capacity in the power supply system, domestically or in a neighbouring country, it cannot comply with its obligations under this annex, it may fulfil those obligations by averaging its national annual sulphur emissions for the year in question, the year preceding that year and the year following it, provided that the emission level in any single year is not more than 20 per cent above the sulphur emission ceiling.
The reason for exceedance in any given year and the method by which the three-year average figure will be achieved, shall be reported to the Implementation Committee.
b/ For Greece and Portugal percentage emission reductions given are based on the sulphur emission ceilings indicated for the year 2000.
c/ European part within the EMEP area.

The following SOMA is listed for the purposes of the present Protocol:
South-east Canada SOMA
This is an area of 1 million km2 which includes all the territory of the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, all the territory of the province of Quebec south of a straight line between Havre-St. Pierre on the north coast of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence and the point where the Quebec-Ontario boundary intersects the James Bay coastline, and all the territory of the province of Ontario south of a straight line between the point where the Ontario-Quebec boundary intersects the James Bay coastline and Nipigon River near the north shore of Lake Superior.

1. The aim of this annex is to provide guidance for identifying sulphur control options and technologies for giving effect to the obligations of the present Protocol.
2. The annex is based on information on general options for the reduction of sulphur emissions and in particular on emission control technology performance and costs contained in official documentation of the Executive Body and its subsidiary bodies.
3. Unless otherwise indicated, the reduction measures listed are considered, on the basis of operational experience of several years in most cases, to be the most well-established and economically feasible best available technologies. However, the continuously expanding experience of low-emission measures and technologies at new plants as well as of the retrofitting of existing plants will necessitate regular review of this annex.
4. Although the annex lists a number of measures and technologies spanning a wide range of costs and efficiencies, it cannot be considered as an exhaustive statement of control options. Moreover, the choice of control measures and technologies for any particular case will depend on a number of factors, including current legislation and regulatory provisions and, in particular, control technology requirements, primary energy patterns, industrial infrastructure, economic circumstances and specific in-plant conditions.
5. The annex mainly addresses the control of oxidized sulphur emissions considered as the sum of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and sulphur trioxide (SO3), expressed as SO2. The share of sulphur emitted as either sulphur oxides or other sulphur compounds from non-combustion processes and other sources is small compared to sulphur emissions from combustion.
6. When measures or technologies are planned for sulphur sources emitting other components, in particular nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulates, heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), it is worthwhile to consider them in conjunction with pollutant-specific control options in order to maximize the overall abatement effect and minimize the impact on the environment and, especially, to avoid the transfer of air pollution problems to other media (such as waste water and solid waste).

7. Fossil fuel combustion processes are the main source of anthropogenic sulphur emissions from stationary sources. In addition, some non-combustion processes may contribute considerably to the emissions. The major stationary source categories, based on EMEP/ CORINAIR 90, include:
(i) Public power, cogeneration and district heating plants:
(a) Boilers;
(b) Stationary combustion turbines and internal combustion engines;
(ii) Commercial, institutional and residential combustion plants:
(a) Commercial boilers;
(b) Domestic heaters;
(iii) Industrial combustion plants and processes with combustion:
(a) Boilers and process heaters;
(b) Processes, e.g. metallurgical operations such as roasting and sintering, coke oven plants, processing of titanium dioxide (TiO2), etc.;
(c) Pulp production;
(iv) Non-combustion processes, e.g. sulphuric acid production, specific organic synthesis processes, treatment of metallic surfaces;
(v) Extraction, processing and distribution of fossil fuels;
(vi) Waste treatment and disposal, e.g. thermal treatment of municipal and industrial waste.
8. Overall data (1990) for the ECE region indicate that about 88% of total sulphur emissions originate from all combustion processes (20% from industrial combustion), 5% from production processes and 7% from oil refineries. The power plant sector in many countries is the major single contributor to sulphur emissions. In some countries, the industrial sector (including refineries) is also an important SO2 emitter. Although emissions from refineries in the ECE region are relatively small, their impact on sulphur emissions from other sources is large due to the sulphur in the oil products. Typically 60% of the sulphur intake present in the crudes remains in the products, 30% is recovered as elemental sulphur and 10% is emitted from refinery stacks.

9. General options for reduction of sulphur emissions are:
(i) Energy management measures:*
(a) Energy saving
The rational use of energy (improved energy efficiency/process operation, cogeneration and/or demand-side management) usually results in a reduction in sulphur emissions.
(b) Energy mix
In general, sulphur emissions can be reduced by increasing the proportion of non-combustion energy sources (i.e. hydro, nuclear, wind, etc.) to the energy mix. However, further environmental impacts have to be considered.
(ii) Technological options:
(a) Fuel switching
The SO2 emissions during combustion are directly related to the sulphur content of the fuel used.
Fuel switching (e.g. from high- to low-sulphur coals and/or liquid fuels, or from coal to gas) leads to lower sulphur emissions, but there may be certain restrictions, such as the availability of low-sulphur fuels and the adaptability of existing combustion systems to different fuels. In many ECE countries, some coal or oil combustion plants are being replaced by gas-fired combustion plants. Dual-fuel plants may facilitate fuel switching.
(b) Fuel cleaning
Cleaning of natural gas is state-of-the-art technology and widely applied for operational reasons.
Cleaning of process gas (acid refinery gas, coke oven gas, biogas, etc.) is also state-of-the-art technology.
Desulphurization of liquid fuels (light and middle fractions) is state-of-the-art technology.
Desulphurization of heavy fractions is technically feasible; nevertheless, the crude properties should be kept in mind. Desulphurization of atmospheric residue (bottom products from atmospheric crude distillation units) for the production of low-sulphur fuel oil is not, however, commonly practised; processing low-sulphur crude is usually preferable. Hydro-cracking and full conversion technology have matured and combine high sulphur retention with improved yield of light products. The number of full conversion refineries is as yet limited. Such refineries typically recover 80% to 90% of the sulphur intake and convert all residues into light products or other marketable products. For this type of refinery, energy consumption and investment costs are increased. Typical sulphur content for refinery products is given in table 1 below.

Current technologies to clean hard coal can remove approximately 50% of the inorganic sulphur (depending on coal properties) but none of the organic sulphur. More effective technologies are being developed which, however, involve higher specific investment and costs. Thus the efficiency of sulphur removal by coal cleaning is limited compared to flue gas desulphurization. There may be a country-specific optimization potential for the best combination of fuel cleaning and flue gas cleaning.
(c) Advanced combustion technologies
These combustion technologies with improved thermal efficiency and reduced sulphur emissions include: fluidized-bed combustion (FBC): bubbling (BFBC), circulating (CFBC) and pressurized (PFBC); integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC); and combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGT).
Stationary combustion turbines can be integrated into combustion systems in existing conventional power plants which can increase overall efficiency by 5% to 7%, leading, for example, to a significant reduction in SO2 emissions. However, major alterations to the existing furnace system become necessary.
Fluidized-bed combustion is a combustion technology for burning hard coal and brown coal, but it can also burn other solid fuels such as petroleum coke and low-grade fuels such as waste, peat and wood. Emissions can additionally be reduced by integrated combustion control in the system due to the addition of lime/limestone to the bed material. The total installed capacity of FBC has reached approximately 30,000 MWth (250 to 350 plants), including 8,000 MWth in the capacity range of greater than 50 MWth. By-products from this process may cause problems with respect to use and/or disposal, and further development is required.
The IGCC process includes coal gasification and combined-cycle power generation in a gas and steam turbine. The gasified coal is burnt in the combustion chamber of the gas turbine. Sulphur emission control is achieved by the use of state-of-the-art technology for raw gas cleaning facilities upstream of the gas turbine. The technology also exists for heavy oil residues and bitumen emulsions. The installed capacity is presently about 1,000 MWel (5 plants).
Combined-cycle gas-turbine power stations using natural gas as fuel with an energy efficiency of approximately 48% to 52% are currently being planned.
(d) Process and combustion modifications
Combustion modifications comparable to the measures used for NOx emission control do not exist, as during combustion the organically and/or inorganically bound sulphur is almost completely oxidized (a certain percentage depending on the fuel properties and combustion technology is retained in the ash).
In this annex dry additive processes for conventional boilers are considered as process modifications due to the injection of an agent into the combustion unit. However, experience has shown that, when applying these processes, thermal capacity is lowered, the Ca/S ratio is high and sulphur removal low. Problems with the further utilization of the by-product have to be considered, so that this solution should usually be applied as an intermediate measure and for smaller units (table 2).

(e) Flue gas desulphurization (FGD) processes
These processes aim at removing already formed sulphur oxides, and are also referred to as secondary measures. The state-of-the-art technologies for flue gas treatment processes are all based on the removal of sulphur by wet, dry or semi-dry and catalytic chemical processes.
To achieve the most efficient programme for sulphur emission reductions beyond the energy management measures listed in (i) above a combination of technological options identified in (ii) above should be considered.
In some cases options for reducing sulphur emissions may also result in the reduction of emissions of CO2, NOx and other pollutants.
In public power, cogeneration and district heating plants, flue gas treatment processes used include: lime/limestone wet scrubbing (LWS); spray dry absorption (SDA); Wellman Lord process (WL); ammonia scrubbing (AS); and combined NOx/SOx removal processes (activated carbon process (AC) and combined catalytic NOx/SOx removal).
In the power generation sector, LWS and SDA cover 85% and 10%, respectively, of the installed FGD capacity.
Several new flue gas desulphurization processes, such as electron beam dry scrubbing (EBDS) and Mark 13A, have not yet passed the pilot stage.
Table 2 shows the efficiency of the above-mentioned secondary measures based on the practical experience gathered from a large number of implemented plants. The implemented capacity as well as the capacity range are also mentioned. Despite comparable characteristics for several sulphur abatement technologies, local or plant-specific influences may lead to the exclusion of a given technology.
Table 2 also includes the usual investment cost ranges for the sulphur abatement technologies listed in sections (ii) (c), (d) and (e). However, when applying these technologies to individual cases it should be noted that investment costs of emission reduction measures will depend amongst other things on the particular technologies used, the required control systems, the plant size, the extent of the required reduction and the time-scale of planned maintenance cycles. The table thus gives only a broad range of investment costs. Investment costs for retrofit generally exceed those for new plants.

10. The control techniques listed in section 9 (ii) (a) to (e) are valid not only in the power plant sector but also in various other sectors of industry. Several years of operational experience have been acquired, in most cases in the power plant sector.
11. The application of sulphur abatement technologies in the industrial sector merely depends on the process’s specific limitations in the relevant sectors. Important contributors to sulphur emissions and corresponding reduction measures are presented in table 3 below.

12. In the sectors listed in table 3, process-integrated measures, including raw material changes (if necessary combined with sector-specific flue gas treatment), can be used to achieve the most effective reduction of sulphur emissions.
13. Reported examples are the following:
(a) In new kraft pulp mills, sulphur emission of less than 1 kg of sulphur per tonne of pulp AD (air dried) can be achieved;**
(b) In sulphite pulp mills, 1 to 1.5 kg of sulphur per tonne of pulp AD can be achieved;
(c) In the case of roasting of sulphides, removal efficiencies of 80 to 99% for 10,000 to 200,000 m3/h units have been reported (depending on the process);
(d) For one iron ore sintering plant, an FGD unit of 320,000 m3/h capacity achieves a clean gas value below 100 mg SOx /Nm3 at 6% O2;
(e) Coke ovens are achieving less than 400 mg SOx/Nm3 at 6% O2;
(f) Sulphuric acid plants achieve a conversion rate larger than 99%;
(g) Advanced Claus plant achieves sulphur recovery of more than 99%.

14. As efforts to reduce sulphur emissions from stationary sources are increased in the countries of the ECE region, the quantities of by-products will also increase.
15. Options which would lead to usable by-products should be selected. Furthermore, options that lead to increased thermal efficiency and minimize the waste disposal issue whenever possible should be selected. Although most by-products are usable or recyclable products such as gypsum, ammonia salts, sulphuric acid or sulphur, factors such as market conditions and quality standards need to be taken into account. Further utilization of FBC and SDA by-products have to be improved and investigated, as disposal sites and disposal criteria limit disposal in several countries.
16. The following side-effects will not prevent the implementation of any technology or method but should be considered when several sulphur abatement options are possible:
(a) Energy requirements of the gas treatment processes;
(b) Corrosion attack due to the formation of sulphuric acid by the reaction of sulphur oxides with water vapour;
(c) Increased use of water and waste water treatment;
(d) Reagent requirements;
(e) Solid waste disposal.

17. The measures taken to carry out national strategies and policies for the abatement of air pollution include: legislation and regulatory provisions, economic incentives and disincentives; as well as technological requirements (best available technology).
18. In general, standards are set, per emission source, according to plant size, operating mode, combustion technology, fuel type and whether it is a new or existing plant. An alternative approach also used is to set a target for the reduction of total sulphur emissions from a group of sources and to allow a choice of where to take action to reach this target (the bubble concept).
19. Efforts to limit the sulphur emissions to the levels set out in the national framework legislation have to be controlled by a permanent monitoring and reporting system and reported to the supervising authorities.
20. Several monitoring systems, using both continuous and discontinuous measurement methods, are available. However, quality requirements vary. Measurements are to be carried out by qualified institutes using measuring and monitoring systems. To this end, a certification system can provide the best assurance.
21. In the framework of modern automated monitoring systems and process control equipment, reporting does not create a problem. The collection of data for further use is a state-of-the-art technique; however, data to be reported to competent authorities differ from case to case. To obtain better comparability, data sets and prescribing regulations should be harmonized. Harmonization is also desirable for quality assurance of measuring and monitoring systems. This should be taken into account when comparing data.
22. To avoid discrepancies and inconsistencies, key issues and parameters, including the following, must be well defined:
(a) Definition of standards expressed as ppmv, mg/Nm3, g/GJ, kg/h or kg/tonne of product. Most of these units need to be calculated and need specification in terms of gas temperature, humidity, pressure, oxygen content or heat input value;
(b) Definition of the period over which standards are to be averaged, expressed as hours, months or a year;
(c) Definition of failure times and corresponding emergency regulations regarding bypass of monitoring systems or shut-down of the installation;
(d) Definition of methods for back-filling of data missed or lost as a result of equipment failure;
(e) Definition of the parameter set to be measured. Depending on the type of industrial process, the necessary information may differ. This also involves the location of the measurement point within the system.
23. Quality control of measurements has to be ensured.

a/ As guidance, for a plant with a multi-fuel firing unit involving the simultaneous use of two or more types of fuels, the competent authorities shall set emission limit values taking into account the emission limit values from column (ii) relevant for each individual fuel, the rate of thermal input delivered by each fuel and, for refineries, the relevant specific characteristics of the plant. For refineries, such a combined limit value shall under no circumstances exceed 1,700 mg SO2/Nm3.
In particular, the limit values shall not apply to the following plants:
– Plants in which the products of combustion are used for direct heating, drying, or any other treatment of objects or materials, e.g. reheating furnaces, furnaces for heat treatment;
– Post-combustion plants, i.e. any technical apparatus designed to purify the waste gases by combustion which is not operated as an independent combustion plant;
– Facilities for the regeneration of catalytic cracking catalysts;
– Facilities for the conversion of hydrogen sulphide into sulphur;
– Reactors used in the chemical industry;
– Coke battery furnaces;
– Cowpers;
– Waste incinerators;
– Plants powered by diesel, petrol and gas engines or by gas turbines, irrespective of the fuel used.
In a case where a Party, due to the high sulphur content of indigenous solid or liquid fuels, cannot meet the emission limit values set forth in column (ii), it may apply the desulphurization rates set forth in column (iii) or a maximum limit value of 800 mg SO2/Nm3 (although preferably not more than 650 mg SO2/Nm3). The Party shall report any such application to the Implementation Committee in the calendar year in which it is made.
Where two or more separate new plants are installed in such a way that, taking technical and economic factors into account, their waste gases could, in the judgement of the competent authorities, be discharged through a common stack, the combination formed by such plants is to be regarded as a single unit.
b/ mg SO2/Nm3 is defined at a temperature of 273 °K and a pressure of 101.3 kPa, after correction for the water vapour content.

The Executive Body,
Having agreed upon and adopted the Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution on Further Reduction of Sulphur Emissions,
Resolved to act as early as possible to ensure effective monitoring of the operation of the new Protocol,
Decides, with reference to article 7, paragraph 3, of the new Protocol, to approve the attached text on the “Structure and Functions of the Implementation Committee, as well as Procedures for its Review of Compliance”; and
Urges the Parties to the new Protocol to adopt the attached text at the first session of the Executive Body after the entry into force of the Protocol.

1. The Committee shall consist of eight Parties. The Parties shall, at the first session of the Executive Body after the entry into force of this Protocol, elect four Parties to the Committee for a term of two years and four Parties for a term of one year. At each session thereafter they shall elect four new Parties for a term of two years. Outgoing Parties may be re-elected for one immediately consecutive term. The Committee shall elect its own chairman and vice-chairman.
2. The Committee shall, unless it decides otherwise, meet twice a year. The secretariat shall arrange for and service its meetings.
3. If one or more Parties have reservations about another Party’s implementation of its obligations under the present Protocol, these concerns may be addressed in writing to the secretariat. Such a submission shall be supported by corroborating information. The secretariat shall, within two weeks of its receiving a submission, send a copy of that submission to the Party whose implementation of a particular provision of the Protocol is at issue. Any reply and information in support thereof are to be submitted to the secretariat and to the Parties involved within three months of the date of the dispatch or such longer period as the circumstances of any particular case may require. The secretariat shall transmit the submission, the reply and the information provided by the Parties to the Committee, which shall consider the matter as soon as practicable.
4. Where the secretariat, in particular upon reviewing the reports submitted in accordance with article 5, becomes aware of possible non-compliance by any Party with its obligations under the Protocol, it may request the Party concerned to furnish necessary information about the matter. If there is no response from the Party concerned within three months or such longer period as the circumstances of the matter may require or the matter is not resolved through administrative action or through diplomatic contacts, the secretariat shall inform the Committee accordingly.
5. Where a Party concludes that, despite having made its best bona fide efforts, it is or will be unable to comply fully with its obligations under the present Protocol, it may address to the secretariat a submission in writing, explaining, in particular, the specific circumstances that it considers to be the cause of its non-compliance. The secretariat shall transmit such a submission to the Committee, which shall consider it as soon as practicable.
6. The Committee shall:
(a) Subject to policy guidance by the Parties at sessions of the Executive Body, synthesize and evaluate the information reported by Parties in accordance with article 5 of the Protocol;
(b) Subject to policy guidance by the Parties at sessions of the Executive Body, analyse and evaluate on a periodic basis, the progress that has been made in the implementation of the Protocol;
(c) Consider any matter brought before it in accordance with paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 above with a view to securing a constructive solution of the matter; and
(d) Ensure that the quality of data reported by a Party in accordance with article 5 (Reporting) is evaluated by the EMEP technical centres, and/or by an independent expert nominated by the Implementation Committee. In areas outside the geographic scope of EMEP, evaluation procedures appropriate to the particular circumstances of the Parties concerned shall be used.
7. The Committee may:
(a) Request, through the secretariat, further information on matters under its consideration;
(b) Undertake, upon the invitation of the Party concerned, information gathering in the territory of that Party; and
(c) Consider any information forwarded by the secretariat concerning compliance with the provisions of the present Protocol.
8. The Committee shall report annually to the Parties at sessions of the Executive Body on its activities and in particular any recommendations it considers appropriate regarding compliance with the Protocol. Each such report shall be finalized by the Committee no later than ten weeks in advance of the session of the Executive Body at which it is to be considered.
9. Where a Party that is not a member of the Committee is identified in a submission under paragraph 3, or makes itself a submission under paragraph 5, it shall be entitled to participate in the consideration of that submission by the Committee.
10. No Party, whether or not a member of the Committee, involved in a matter under consideration by the Committee, shall take part in the elaboration and adoption of recommendations on that matter to be included in the report of the Committee.

* Options (i) and (a) and (b) are integrated in the energy structure and policy of a Party. Implementation status, efficiency and costs per sector are not considered here.
** Control of sulphur-to-sodium ratio is required, i.e. removal of sulphur in the form of neutral salts and use of sulphur-free sodium make-up.

Pogodbenice, ki:
so odločene izvajati določila Konvencije o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje,
so zaskrbljene, ker se emisije žvepla in druge snovi, ki onesnažujejo zrak, še naprej prenašajo čez mednarodne meje in povzročajo v izpostavljenih krajih Evrope in Severne Amerike obsežno škodo na naravnih virih, kot so gozdovi, prst in voda, ki so življenjskega pomena za okolje in gospodarstvo, ter materialu, vključno z zgodovinskimi spomeniki, v določenih okoliščinah pa tudi škodljivo vplivajo na zdravje ljudi,
so odločene izvajati preventivne ukrepe napovedovanja, preprečevanja ali zmanjševanja emisij snovi, ki onesnažujejo zrak ter zmanjševanja njihovih škodljivih učinkov,
so prepričane, da v primerih, kjer lahko pride do resne ali nepopravljive škode, pomanjkanja popolne znanstvene gotovosti ne bi smeli uporabiti kot vzroka za odlašanje s preventivnimi ukrepi, ki pa morajo biti finančno učinkoviti,
se zavedajo, da bi ukrepi za nadzor nad emisijami žvepla in drugimi škodljivimi snovmi v ozračju prispevali tudi k varstvu občutljivega arktičnega okolja,
upoštevajo, da k povečevanju kislosti okolja največ prispevajo zgorevanje fosilnih goriv pri pridobivanju energije, glavni tehnološki postopki v različnih sektorjih industrije ter prometa, ki onesnažujejo zrak z emisijami žvepla, dušikovih oksidov in drugih snovi, ki onesnažujejo okolje,
se zavedajo potrebe po finančno učinkovitem regionalnem pristopu v boju proti onesnaževanju zraka, ki upošteva razlike med državami v uspešnosti in stroških zmanjševanja onesnaževanja,
želijo nadaljnje in učinkovitejše delovanje pri nadzoru in zmanjševanju emisij žvepla,
se zavedajo, da je kakršna koli politika za nadzor nad emisijami žvepla ne glede na svojo finančno učinkovitost na regionalni ravni sorazmerno težko gospodarsko breme za države, ki prehajajo na tržno gospodarstvo,
upoštevajo, da ukrepi za zmanjšanje emisij žvepla ne smejo biti izrabljeni za samovoljno ali nedopustno diskriminacijo ali prikrito omejevanje mednarodne konkurence in trgovine,
upoštevajo obstoječe znanstvene in tehnične podatke o emisijah, procesih v ozračju in vplivu žveplovih oksidov na okolje kakor tudi podatke o stroških zmanjševanja onesnaževanja,
se zavedajo, da poleg emisij žvepla tudi emisije dušikovih oksidov in amoniaka povečujejo kislost okolja,
upoštevajo, da Okvirna Konvencija Združenih narodov o spremembi podnebja, sprejeta v New Yorku 9. maja 1992, vsebuje sporazum o oblikovanju nacionalnih politik in sprejetju ustreznih ukrepov za preprečevanje spremembe podnebja, ki bo verjetno privedel do zmanjšanja emisij žvepla,
potrjujejo potrebo po zagotavljanju okolju prijaznega in trajnostnega razvoja,
se zavedajo potrebe po nadaljnjem znanstvenem in tehničnem sodelovanju, ki naj bi privedlo do izpopolnitve pristopa, ki temelji na kritičnih obremenitvah in ravneh, vključno s prizadevanji za proučitev nekaterih snovi, ki onesnažujejo zrak v ozračju in njihovih vplivov na okolje, material in zdravje ljudi,
poudarjajo, da se znanstveno in tehnično znanje razvija in da bo potrebno takšen razvoj upoštevati pri odločanju o prihodnjem delovanju ter pri ocenjevanju, ali so obveznosti, ki jih sprejemajo države pogodbenice tega protokola, ustrezne,
upoštevajo Protokol o zmanjšanju emisij žvepla ali njihovega prekomejnega prenosa za najmanj 30%, sprejet v Helsinkih 8. julija 1985, ter ukrepe, ki jih že izvajajo mnoge države in se kažejo v zmanjšanih emisijah žvepla,
so se sporazumele o naslednjem:

Za namene tega protokola
1. “Konvencija” pomeni Konvencijo o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje, sprejeta v Ženevi 13. novembra 1979;
2. “EMEP” pomeni Program sodelovanja za monitoring in vrednotenje prenosa emisij snovi, ki onesnažujejo zrak na velike razdalje v Evropi;
3. “Izvršilni organ” pomeni izvršilni organ Konvencije, ustanovljeno v skladu s prvim odstavkom 10. člena konvencije;
4. “Komisija” pomeni Ekonomsko komisijo Združenih narodov za Evropo;
5. “Pogodbenice” pomeni pogodbenice tega protokola, če pomen v besedilu ne zahteva drugače;
6. “Geografsko območje EMEP” pomeni območje, določeno v četrtem odstavku 1. člena Protokola o dolgoročnem financiranju Programa sodelovanja za monitoring in vrednotenje prenosa emisij škodljivih snovi na velike razdalje v Evropi (EMEP) h Konvenciji o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje iz leta 1979. Ta protokol je bil sprejet v Ženevi 28. septembra 1984;
7. “SOMA” pomeni območje nadzora nad žveplovimi oksidi, določeno v Prilogi III, pod pogoji, določenimi v tretjem odstavku 2. člena;
8. “Kritična obremenitev” pomeni kvantitativno oceno izpostavljenosti eni ali več snovem, katere znatni škodljivi vplivi, kolikor je znano, ne učinkujejo na določene občutljive dele okolja;
9. “Kritična raven” pomeni koncentracijo škodljivih snovi v ozračju, ki lahko, kolikor je znano, neposredno škodljivo vpliva na sprejemnike, kot so ljudje, rastline, ekosistemi ali material;
10. “Kritično usedanje žvepla” pomeni kvantitativno oceno izpostavljenosti oksidiranim žveplovim spojinam ob upoštevanju učinkov vsrkavanja in usedanja bazičnih kationov, ko ni, kolikor je znano, znatnih škodljivih učinkov na določene občutljive elemente okolja;
11. “Emisija” pomeni oddajanje snovi v ozračje;
12. “Emisije žvepla” pomeni vse emisije žveplovih spojin, izražene v kilotonah žveplovega dioksida (kt SO2), v ozračje, ki izhajajo iz antropogenih virov, razen ladij v mednarodnem prometu zunaj teritorialnih voda;
13. “Gorivo” pomeni katero koli gorljivo snov v trdnem, tekočem ali plinastem stanju, razen gospodinjskih, strupenih ali nevarnih odpadkov;
14. “Nepremična zgorevalna naprava” pomeni vsako tehnično napravo ali skupino tehničnih naprav, ki so nameščene na skupni lokaciji in oddajajo ali pa bi lahko izpuščale odpadne pline skozi skupen dimnik, v katerem oksidacijo goriva izrabljajo za proizvodnjo toplote;
15. “Večja nova zgorevalna naprava” pomeni vsako nepremično zgorevalno napravo, katere izgradnja ali bistvena sprememba je bila odobrena po 31. decembru 1995 in katere toplotna moč je vsaj 50 MW pri obratovanju z nazivno močjo. Odločitev ustreznih državnih organov je, ali je sprememba bistvenega pomena ali ne, ob upoštevanju dejavnikov kot npr. koristnost takšne spremembe za okolje;
16. “Večja obstoječa zgorevalna naprava” pomeni vsako že obstoječo nepremično zgorevalno napravo, katere toplotna moč je vsaj 50 MW pri obratovanju z nazivno močjo;
17. “Plinsko olje” pomeni kateri koli naftni derivat v okviru HS 2710 ali kateri koli naftni derivat, ki zaradi destilacijskih omejitev sodi v razred srednjih destilatov, ki se uporablja kot gorivo, in od katerega se vsaj 85 volumskih %, vključno z izgubami pri destilaciji, destilira pri 350 °C;
18. “Mejna emisijska vrednost” pomeni dopustno koncentracijo žveplovih spojin, izraženih v obliki žveplovega dioksida, v odpadnih plinih iz nepremične zgorevalne naprave. Mejna emisijska vrednost je izražena v masi na prostornino odpadnih plinov (mg SO2/Nm3) ob domnevi, da je volumska vsebnost kisika v odpadnih plinih 3% pri tekočih in plinastih gorivih in 6% pri trdnih gorivih;
19. “Omejevanje emisij” – pomeni dopustno skupno količino žveplovih spojin, izraženih v obliki žveplovega dioksida, ki prihajajo iz zgorevalne naprave ali skupine zgorevalnih naprav, nameščenih na skupni lokaciji ali na določenem geografskem območju. Ta količina je izražena v kilotonah na leto;
20. “Stopnja razžveplanja” – pomeni razmerje med količino žvepla, ki se v določenem časovnem obdobju izloči na lokaciji zgorevalne naprave, in količino žvepla, vsebovanega v gorivu, ki ga v enakem časovnem obdobju uporabijo v zgorevalni napravi;
21. “Bilanca žvepla” – pomeni matriko izračunanih novih količin oksidiranih žveplovih spojin, ki se odložijo na vplivnih območjih in so posledica emisij na določenih območjih.

1. Pogodbenice v skladu s sedanjimi znanstvenimi dognanji nadzorujejo in zmanjšujejo emisije žvepla z namenom varovanja zdravja ljudi in okolja pred škodljivimi učinki, še zlasti učinki povečevanja kislosti, ter zagotavljajo, kolikor je mogoče, brez povzročanja čezmernih stroškov, da dolgoročno usedanje oksidiranih žveplovih spojin ne presega kritičnih obremenitev, ki veljajo za žveplo in so dane v Prilogi I kot kritično usedanje žvepla.
2. Najmanj kar pogodbenice v prvem koraku storijo, zmanjšajo in vzdržujejo svoje letne emisije žvepla v skladu s časovnim načrtom in stopnjami, določenimi v Prilogi II.
3. Poleg tega vsaka pogodbenica:
(a) ki ima površino večjo kot 2 milijona kvadratnih kilometrov;
(b) ki se je v skladu z drugim odstavkom zgoraj obvezala, da njene najvišje dovoljene emisije žvepla ne bodo presegle nižjih ravni njenih emisij iz leta 1990 ali se je obvezala s Helsinškim protokolom o zmanjšanju emisij žvepla ali njihovega prenosa preko državnih meja za najmanj 30%, iz leta 1985, kot je navedeno v Prilogi II,
(c) katere letne emisije žvepla, ki prispevajo k povečani kislosti na območjih, ki spadajo pod jurisdikcijo ene ali več pogodbenic, prihajajo le z območij pod njeno jurisdikcijo, ki so navedena kot območja SOMA v Prilogi III in za katera je priložila dokumentacijo in
(d) ki je s podpisom ali pristopom k temu protokolu izrazila namen delovati v skladu s tem odstavkom,
vsaj zmanjša in vzdržuje svojo letno količino emisij žvepla na navedenih območjih v skladu s časovnim načrtom in ravnmi, določenimi v Prilogi II.
4. Pogodbenice poleg tega izvajajo ukrepe za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla, ki so v danih razmerah najučinkovitejši in veljajo za nove in že obstoječe zgorevalne naprave. Ti ukrepi med drugim vključujejo:
– ukrepe učinkovitejše rabe energije,
– ukrepe povečanja uporabe obnovljive energije,
– ukrepe zmanjševanja vsebnosti žvepla v določenih gorivih in pospeševanja uporabe goriv z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla, vključno s kombinirano uporabo goriv z visoko in nizko vsebnostjo žvepla ter goriv, ki ne vsebujejo žvepla,
– ukrepe za uporabo najboljše razpoložljive tehnologije za nadzor, ne da bi povzročili čezmerne stroške,
ob uporabi smernic iz Priloge IV.
5. Vsaka pogodbenica, razen pogodbenic, ki jih zavezuje Sporazum med Združenimi državami Amerike in Kanado o kakovosti zraka iz leta 1991, bo najmanj:
(a) uporabila mejne emisijske vrednosti, ki bodo vsaj tako stroge kot tiste, ki so določene v Prilogi V za vse večje nove stacionarne zgorevalne naprave;
(b) uporabila, če je le mogoče brez povzročanja čezmernih stroškov, najkasneje do 1. julija 2004 mejne emisijske vrednosti, ki bodo vsaj tako stroge kot tiste, določene v Prilogi V, ki bodo veljale za večje obstoječe stacionarne zgorevalne naprave, katerih toplotna moč je večja od 500 MW ob upoštevanju preostale življenjske dobe naprav, ki se izračuna od datuma začetka veljavnosti tega protokola; ali uvedla ustrezne omejitve emisij oziroma sprejela druge ustrezne ukrepe pod pogojem, da ne bodo presežene najvišje dovoljene vrednosti emisij žvepla, določene v Prilogi II, in se tako postopoma približala kritičnim obremenitvam, kot je določeno v Prilogi I; najkasneje do 1. julija 2004 uvedla mejne emisijske vrednosti ali omejevanje emisij za tiste večje obstoječe stacionarne zgorevalne naprave, katerih toplotna moč je med 50 in 500 MW, pri tem pa bo Prilogo V upoštevala kot smernice;
(c) najkasneje v dveh letih po datumu začetka veljavnosti tega protokola uvedla državne standarde za vsebnost žvepla v plinskih oljih, ki bodo vsaj tako strogi kot tisti, določeni v Prilogi V. V primerih, ko dobave plinskega olja ne more zagotoviti iz drugih virov, lahko država podaljša časovno obdobje, določeno v tej točki, na obdobje do deset let. V tem primeru obrazloži svojo namero o podaljšanju časovnega obdobja v deklaraciji, ki mora biti predložena skupaj z listino o ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu.
6. Pogodbenice lahko poleg tega s pomočjo gospodarskih ukrepov spodbudijo uvajanje finančno učinkovitih načinov za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla.
7. Pogodbenice tega protokola lahko na zasedanju izvršilnega organa v skladu s pravili in pogoji, ki jih izdela in sprejme izvršilni organ, odločijo, ali lahko dve ali več pogodbenic skupaj izpolnjujejo obveznosti iz Priloge II. Ta pravila in pogoji bodo zagotovili izpolnjevanje obveznosti, določenih v drugem odstavku zgoraj, pa tudi spodbudili doseganje okoljskih ciljev, določenih v prvem odstavku zgoraj.
8. Pogodbenice v skladu z izidi prve revizije, predvidene v 8. členu, in ne pozneje kot leto dni po opravljeni reviziji začnejo s pogajanji o nadaljnjih obveznostih za zmanjševanje emisij.

1. Pogodbenice v skladu s svojimi zakoni, predpisi in prakso olajšajo izmenjavo tehnologij in tehnik, vključno s tistimi, ki povečujejo energetsko učinkovitost, spodbujajo uporabo obnovljive energije in predelavo goriv z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla, z namenom zmanjšati emisije žvepla, predvsem s spodbujanjem:
(a) komercialne izmenjave razpoložljive tehnologije;
(b) neposrednih stikov in sodelovanja v industriji, vključno s skupnimi vlaganji;
(c) izmenjave informacij in izkušenj;
(d) zagotavljanja tehnične pomoči.
2. Pri spodbujanju dejavnosti, navedenih v prvem odstavku zgoraj, pogodbenice ustvarijo ugodne pogoje z omogočanjem lažjega navezovanja stikov in sodelovanja med ustreznimi organizacijami in posamezniki v zasebnem in javnem sektorju, ki so sposobni zagotavljati storitve, opremo ali finančna sredstva tehnologiji, projektiranju in inženiringu.
3. Pogodbenice najkasneje v šestih mesecih po datumu začetka veljavnosti tega protokola začnejo razmišljati o postopkih, ki bi ustvarili ugodnejše razmere za izmenjavo tehnologije za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla.

1. Da bi izpolnila svoje obveznosti iz 2. člena, vsaka pogodbenica:
(a) sprejme nacionalno strategijo, politiko in programe najkasneje v šestih mesecih od začetka veljavnosti tega protokola in
(b) sprejme in izvaja nacionalne ukrepe
za nadzor in zmanjšanje svojih emisij žvepla.
2. Vsaka pogodbenica zbira in dopolnjuje podatke o:
(a) dejanskih ravneh emisij žvepla ter o koncentracijah v okolju in usedlinah oksidiranega žvepla in drugih spojin, ki povzročajo kislost, ob upoštevanju delovnega načrta EMEP za tiste pogodbenice, ki so znotraj geografskega območja EMEP in
(b) učinkih usedanja oksidiranega žvepla in drugih spojin, ki povzročajo kislost.

1. Vsaka pogodbenica preko izvršilnega sekretarja Komisije poroča izvršilnemu organu občasno, kot to določi izvršilni organ o:
(a) izvajanju nacionalnih strategij, politike, programov in ukrepov, navedenih v prvem odstavku 4. člena;
(b) ravni letnih emisij žvepla v državi v skladu s smernicami, ki jih je sprejel izvršilni organ, s podatki o emisijah iz vseh pomembnejših kategorij virov in
(c) izvajanju drugih obveznosti, ki jih je prevzela v skladu s tem protokolom,
ob upoštevanju odločitve o obliki in vsebini, ki jo bodo sprejele pogodbenice na zasedanju izvršilnega organa. Pogoji te odločitve, bodo ponovno proučeni, če se bo pokazala potreba po dodatnih elementih v zvezi z obliko in/ali vsebino informacij, ki bi jih bilo še treba vključiti v poročila.
2. Vsaka pogodbenica znotraj geografskega območja EMEP, preko izvršilnega sekretarja Komisije v rednih časovnih presledkih poroča EMEP kot to določi vodilno telo EMEP in ob potrditvi pogodbenic na zasedanju izvršilnega organa, o ravneh emisij žvepla s časovno in prostorsko specifikacijo, kot to določi usmerjevalno telo EMEP.
3. V ustreznem času pred vsakoletnim zasedanjem izvršilnega organa EMEP pošlje podatke o:
(a) koncentracijah v okolju in usedanju oksidiranih žveplovih spojin in
(b) izračunih bilanc žvepla.
Pogodbenice, ki so zunaj geografskega območja EMEP, zagotovijo podobne podatke, če to zahteva izvršilni organ.
4. Izvršilni organ v skladu s pododstavkom (b) drugega odstavka 10. člena Konvencije poskrbi za pripravo informacij o učinkih usedanja oksidiranega žvepla in drugih spojin, ki povzročajo kislost.
5. Za namene prvega odstavka 2. člena, pogodbenice tega protokola poskrbijo, da se na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa v rednih časovnih presledkih pripravijo revidirane informacije o izračunanih in mednarodno doseženih optimalnih razporeditvah zmanjšanja emisij za države znotraj geografskega območja EMEP, s pomočjo modelov za vrednotenje posledic emisij, z namenom nadaljnjega zmanjševanja razlike med dejanskim usedanjem oksidiranih žveplovih spojin in vrednostmi kritičnih obremenitev.

Pogodbenice spodbujajo raziskovanje, razvoj, monitoring in sodelovanje, ki se nanašajo na:
(a) mednarodno usklajevanje metod za določitev kritičnih obremenitev in kritičnih ravni ter za izdelavo postopkov za takšno usklajevanje;
(b) izboljševanje tehnik in sistemov monitoringa in modeliranja prenosa, koncentracij in usedanja žveplovih spojin;
(c) strategije za nadaljnje zmanjševanje emisij žvepla, ki temeljijo na kritičnih obremenitvah in kritičnih ravneh kakor tudi na tehničnem razvoju, in za izboljšanje modelov vrednotenja posledic emisij za izračunavanje mednarodno doseženih optimalnih razporeditev zmanjšanja emisij ob upoštevanju pravične razporeditve stroškov zmanjševanja onesnaževanja;
(d) razumevanje širših učinkov emisij žvepla na zdravje ljudi, okolje, zlasti povečana kislost, in material, vključno z zgodovinskimi in kulturnimi spomeniki, ob upoštevanju odnosa med žveplovimi oksidi, dušikovimi oksidi, amoniakom, hlapnimi organskimi spojinami in troposferskim ozonom;
(e) tehnologije za zmanjševanje emisij ter tehnologije in tehnike za učinkovitejšo rabo energije, varčevanje z energijo in uporabo obnovljive energije;
(f) gospodarsko oceno koristi zmanjšanja emisij žvepla za okolje in zdravje ljudi.

1. Ustanovljen je Odbor za izvajanje z namenom, da pregleda izvajanje tega protokola in izpolnjevanje obveznosti pogodbenic. Odbor pogodbenicam poroča na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa in jim lahko da ustrezna priporočila, če se mu to zdi primerno.
2. Ko pogodbenice proučijo poročilo in morebitna priporočila Odbora za izvajanje, se lahko ob upoštevanju okoliščin in v skladu z določili konvencije odločijo za poziv pogodbenicam, naj v celoti izpolnjujejo obveznosti iz tega protokola, vključno z ukrepi za pomoč pogodbenicam pri izpolnjevanju obveznosti iz protokola in za spodbujanje doseganja ciljev protokola.
3. Pogodbenice na prvem zasedanju izvršilnega organa po začetku veljavnosti tega protokola sprejmejo sklep, ki določa sestavo in naloge Odbora za izvajanje ter postopke za ugotavljanje izpolnjevanja obveznosti.
4. Izvajanje postopka za ugotavljanje izpolnjevanja ne vpliva na določbe 9. člena tega protokola.

1. Pogodbenice na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa v skladu s pododstavkom (a) drugega odstavka 10. člena konvencije proučijo informacije, ki jih predložijo pogodbenice in EMEP, podatke o učinkih usedanja žvepla in drugih spojin, ki povečujejo kislost, ter poročila Odbora za izvajanje navedena v prvem odstavku 7. člena tega protokola.
2. (a) Pogodbenice na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa pregledujejo obveznosti, določene v tem protokolu, vključno:
(i) s svojimi obveznostmi do izračunanih in mednarodno doseženih optimalnih razporeditev zmanjšanja emisij, navedenih v petem odstavku 5. člena in
(ii) z ustreznostjo obveznosti in doseženim napredkom pri doseganju ciljev tega protokola.
(b) Revizije upoštevajo najnovejše znanstvene informacije o povečevanju kislosti, vključno z ocenami kritičnih obremenitev, tehnološkega razvoja, sprememb gospodarskih razmer in izpolnjevanja obveznosti glede ravni emisij.
(c) V skladu s temi revizijami vsaka pogodbenica, katere obveznosti glede najvišjih dovoljenih vrednosti emisij žvepla iz Priloge II niso v skladu z izračunanimi in mednarodno doseženih optimalnih razporeditvah emisij za to pogodbenico, ki zahtevajo zmanjšanje razlik med usedanjem žvepla v letu 1990 in kritičnim usedanjem žvepla na območju EMEP za vsaj 60%, stori, kar je v njeni moči, da bi prevzela revidirane obveznosti.
(d) Postopke, metode in časovni potek teh revizij pogodbenice določijo na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa. Prva takšna revizija bo končana leta 1997.

1. Ob sporu med dvema ali več pogodbenicami glede razlage ali uporabe tega protokola skušajo pogodbenice spor rešiti s pogajanji ali drugimi miroljubnimi sredstvi po lastni izbiri. Pogodbenice v sporu o svojem sporu obvestijo izvršilni organ.
2. Ob ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu k temu protokolu ali kadar koli pozneje lahko pogodbenica, ki ni regionalna organizacija za gospodarsko povezovanje, v pisnem dokumentu, ki ga predloži depozitarju, izjavi, da ob kakršnem koli sporu, glede razlage ali uporabe tega protokola, priznava enega ali oba od naslednjih načinov reševanja spora za obveznega ipso facto in brez sporazuma v odnosu do katere koli pogodbenice, ki je sprejela isto obveznost:
(a) predložitev spora Meddržavnemu sodišču;
(b) arbitraža v skladu s postopki, ki jih pogodbenice takoj, ko je to mogoče, sprejmejo na zasedanju izvršilnega organa in vključijo v Prilogo o arbitraži.
Pogodbenica, ki je regionalna organizacija za gospodarsko povezovanje, lahko predloži izjavo, ki ima enak učinek kot arbitraža v skladu s postopki iz pododstavka (b) zgoraj.
3. Izjava, omenjena v drugem odstavku zgoraj, ostane veljavna, dokler ne poteče v skladu s pogoji, navedenimi v izjavi, oziroma tri mesece po tem, ko je bilo njeno pisno obvestilo o preklicu deponirano pri depozitarju.
4. Nova izjava, obvestilo o preklicu ali prenehanje veljavnosti izjave na noben način ne vplivajo na potek postopka, ki teče pred Meddržavnim ali arbitražnim sodiščem, razen če se stranke v sporu ne sporazumejo drugače.
5. Če po dvanajstih mesecih po obvestilu ene pogodbenice drugi, da med njima obstaja spor, stranki v sporu ne uspeta poravnati spora na način, omenjen v prvem odstavku zgoraj, se spor, razen če nista stranki v sporu sprejeli načina poravnave iz drugega odstavka, na zahtevo katere koli stranke v sporu predloži v spravni postopek.
6. Za namen petega odstavka se ustanovi spravna komisija. Komisijo sestavlja enako število članov, ki jih imenuje vsaka udeležena pogodbenica, ali kadar imajo pogodbenice v spravi enak interes, jih imenuje skupina, ki ima tak interes. Predsednika komisije izberejo člani, ki so tako imenovani. Komisija da priporočilo, ki ga pogodbenice proučijo v dobri veri.

Priloge k temu protokolu so sestavni del protokola. Prilogi I in IV imata naravo priporočila.

1. Katera koli pogodbenica lahko predlaga spremembe k temu protokolu. Katera koli pogodbenica Konvencije lahko predlaga prilagoditve k Prilogi II tega protokola, tako da doda svoje ime skupaj z ravnmi emisij, najvišjimi dovoljenimi vrednostmi emisij žvepla in zmanjšanjem emisij, izraženim v odstotkih.
2. Takšne predlagane spremembe se v pisni obliki predložijo izvršilnemu sekretarju komisije, ki jih pošlje vsem pogodbenicam. Pogodbenice razpravljajo o predlaganih spremembah in prilagoditvah na naslednjem zasedanju izvršilnega organa pod pogojem, da je izvršilni sekretar poslal te predloge pogodbenicam najmanj devetdeset dni vnaprej.
3. Pogodbenice prisotne na zasedanju izvršilnega organa, sprejmejo spremembe tega protokola in njegovih Prilog II, III in V, s konsenzom in začnejo za te pogodbenice veljati devetdeseti dan po datumu, ko dve tretjini pogodbenic depozitarju deponira listine o njihovem sprejetju. Za vsako drugo pogodbenico začnejo spremembe veljati devetdeseti dan od datuma, ko ta pogodbenica deponira svojo listino o njihovem sprejetju.
4. Spremembe prilog tega protokola, razen prilog navedenih v tretjem odstavku zgoraj, pogodbenice, prisotne na zasedanju izvršilnega organa, sprejmejo s konsenzom. Po preteku devetdeset dni od datuma, ko izvršilni sekretar komisije pogodbenicam pošlje spremembo, začne sprememba katere koli priloge veljati za pogodbenice, ki depozitarju ne pošljejo uradnega obvestila v skladu z določbami petega odstavka spodaj, pod pogojem, da najmanj šestnajst pogodbenic ni poslalo takega uradnega obvestila.
5. Katera koli pogodbenica, ki ne more odobriti spremembe priloge razen priloge tretjega odstavka zgoraj, o tem pisno obvesti depozitarja v devetdesetih dneh po datumu, ko je prejela obvestilo o sprejetju spremembe. Depozitar nemudoma obvesti vse pogodbenice o prejemu takšnega uradnega obvestila. Pogodbenica lahko kadar koli nadomesti svoje prejšnje obvestilo s sprejetjem in po deponiranju listine o sprejetju pri depozitarju, začne tudi za to pogodbenico veljati sprememba ustrezne pri- loge.
6. Prilagoditve Priloge II pogodbenice, prisotne na zasedanju izvršilnega organa sprejmejo s konsenzom, za vse pogodbenice tega protokola pa začnejo veljati devetdeseti dan po datumu, ko izvršilni sekretar komisije pisno obvesti vse pogodbenice o sprejetju prilagoditve.

1. Ta protokol je na voljo za podpis v Oslu 14. junija 1994, nato pa na sedežu Združenih narodov v New Yorku do 12. decembra 1994 za države članice komisije in za države, ki imajo posvetovalni status pri komisiji v skladu z osmim odstavkom resolucije št. 36 (IV) Ekonomsko socialnega sveta z dne 28. marca 1947. Protokol je na voljo za podpis tudi za regionalne organizacije za gospodarsko povezovanje, ki so jih ustanovile neodvisne države članice komisije, pristojne za pogajanja mednarodnih sporazumov v njihovem sklepanju in uporabi v zadevah, ki jih obravnava ta protokol pod pogojem, da so te države in organizacije pogodbenice konvencije in so navedene v Prilogi II.
2. Take regionalne organizacije za gospodarsko povezovanje v okviru svojih pristojnosti v svojem imenu uresničujejo pravice in izpolnjujejo obveznosti, ki jih ta protokol nalaga njihovim državam članicam. V takšnih primerih države članice teh organizacij ne morejo posamično uresničevati teh pravic.

1. Podpisnice ta protokol ratificirajo, sprejmejo ali odobrijo.
2. K temu protokolu lahko od 12. decembra 1994 pristopijo države in organizacije, ki izpolnjujejo zahteve iz prvega odstavka 12. člena.

Listine o ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu se deponirajo pri generalnem sekretarju Združenih narodov, ki bo opravljal funkcijo depozitarja.

1. Protokol začne veljati devetdeseti dan po datumu deponiranja šestnajste listine o ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu pri depozitarju.
2. Za vsako državo in organizacijo, navedeno v prvem odstavku 12. člena, ki ratificira, sprejme ali odobri ta protokol ali k njemu pristopi potem, ko je bila deponirana šestnajsta listina o ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu, začne protokol veljati devetdeseti dan po datumu, ko ta država ali organizacija deponira svojo listino o ratifikaciji, sprejetju, odobritvi ali pristopu.

Kadar koli po petih letih od datuma, ko ta protokol začne veljati za določeno pogodbenico, ga lahko ta pogodbenica odpove s pisnim uradnim obvestilom depozitarju. Odpoved začne veljati devetdeseti dan po datumu, ko depozitar prejme uradno obvestilo o odpovedi, ali pozneje, če je tako določeno v uradnem obvestilu o odpovedi.

Izvirnik tega protokola z enako verodostojnimi besedili v angleškem, francoskem in ruskem jeziku je deponiran pri generalnem sekretarju Združenih narodov.
V POTRDITEV TEGA so podpisani, ki so bili za to pravilno pooblaščeni, podpisali ta protokol.
Sestavljeno v Oslu, 14. junija tisoč devetstoštiriindevetdeset.

Najvišje dovoljene emisije žvepla, ki so navedene v tabeli spodaj, izhajajo iz obveznosti iz drugega in tretjega odstavka 2. člena tega protokola. Ravni emisij in zmanjšanje emisij v odstotkih so za l. 1980 in 1990 dane zgolj informativno.

Opombe
a/ Če v danem letu pred l. 2005 katera od pogodbenic ugotovi, da zaradi izjemno mrzle zime, izjemno suhega poletja in nepredvidene kratkoročne izgube zmogljivosti v sistemu za preskrbo z električno energijo doma ali v sosednji državi ne more izpolniti svojih obveznosti iz te Priloge, lahko izpolni te obveznosti tako, da upošteva povprečje svojih letnih emisij žvepla za tekoče, prejšnje in prihodnje leto, pod pogojem, da stopnja emisij v katerem koli od teh let ne presega najvišje dovoljene emisije žvepla za več kot 20%.
Odboru za izvajanje je treba poročati o vzroku za prekoračitev v posameznem letu in načinu, kako bo doseženo triletno povprečje.
b/ Za Grčijo in Portugalsko odstotek zmanjšanja emisij temelji na najvišjih dovoljenih emisijah žvepla za leto 2000.
c/ Evropski del znotraj območja EMEP.

Za namene tega protokola je navedeno naslednje območje nadzora nad žveplovimi oksidi:
SOMA jugovzhodna Kanada
To je območje, ki zajema milijon km2, ki v celoti vključuje province Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia in New Brunswick, provinco Quebec južno od črte, ki povezuje Havre-St. Pierre na severni obali Zaliva Svetega Lovrenca in točko, kjer meja med Quebecom in Ontariom seka obalo Jamesovega zaliva, ter provinco Ontario južno od črte, ki povezuje točko, kjer meja med Ontariom in Quebecom seka obalo Jamesovega zaliva in reko Nipogon v bližini severne obale Gornjega jezera.

1. Cilj te Priloge je oblikovati smernice za ugotavljanje možnosti za nadzor nad žveplom in tehnologij, ki bi omogočile izpolnjevanje obveznosti iz tega protokola.
2. Priloga temelji na informacijah o splošnih možnostih za zmanjšanje emisij žvepla, zlasti o uspešnosti tehnološkega nadzora nad emisijami, in stroških, navedenih v uradni dokumentaciji izvršilnega organa in njegovih pomožnih organov.
3. Razen če je drugače določeno, se navedeni ukrepi za zmanjševanje štejejo – v večini primerov na podlagi operativnih izkušenj iz prejšnjih let – za najbolj uveljavljene in gospodarsko izvedljive tehnologije, ki so na voljo. Vendar pa bodo zaradi vedno bogatejših izkušenj pri ukrepih za zmanjševanje emisij in tehnologijah v novih napravah, pa tudi prilagajanja že obstoječih naprav, potrebne redne revizije te Priloge.
4. Čeprav Priloga navaja številne ukrepe in tehnologije, ki se po stroških in učinkovitosti med seboj močno razlikujejo, to ne more biti dokončen seznam možnosti nadzora. Poleg tega bo izbor ukrepov za nadzorovanje in tehnologij, pri vsakem posameznem primeru odvisen od številnih dejavnikov, tudi od trenutne zakonodaje in določb, predvsem pa od zahtev tehnologije za nadzorovanje, primarne energetske strukture, industrijske infrastrukture, gospodarskih okoliščin in stanja posameznih naprav.
5. Priloga predvsem obravnava nadzor nad emisijami oksidiranega žvepla, ki ga obravnavamo kot vsoto žveplovega dioksida (SO2) in žveplovega trioksida (SO3), izražena kot SO2. Delež žvepla, ki pride v ozračje kot žveplov oksid ali druge žveplove spojine pri drugih procesih in iz drugih virov, je v primerjavi z emisijami žvepla pri zgorevanju majhen.
6. Pri načrtovanju ukrepov ali tehnologij za vire žvepla, ki oddajajo v ozračje tudi druge snovi, zlasti dušikove okside (NOx), trdne delce, težke kovine in hlapne organske spojine, bi jih bilo koristno proučiti skupaj z možnostmi za nadzor nad drugimi snovmi, ki onesnažujejo okolje, da bi jih kar najbolj zmanjšali in s tem tudi njihov učinek na okolje ter se še zlasti izognili prenosu problemov onesnaževanja zraka v druga okolja (kot so odpadne vode in trdni odpadki).

7. Procesi zgorevanja fosilnih goriv so glavni vir antropogenih emisij žvepla iz nepremičnih zgorevalnih naprav. Poleg tega lahko k emisijam znatno prispevajo tudi nekateri procesi, pri katerih ne prihaja do zgorevanja. Glavne kategorije nepremičnih zgorevalnih naprav, povzete po EMEP/CORINAIR 90, so:
(i) Javne termoelektrarne, toplarne – termoelektrarne in toplarne:
(a) kotli;
(b) nepremične plinske turbine in motorji z notranjim zgorevanjem.
(ii) Kurilne naprave v poslovnih stavbah, ustanovah in stanovanjskih objektih:
(a) kotlarne v poslovnih stavbah;
(b) ogrevalne naprave v gospodinjstvih.
(iii) Zgorevalne naprave in postopki z zgorevanjem v industriji:
(a) kotli in tehnološki grelniki;
(b) tehnološki postopki, npr. metalurški postopki, kot so žganje in sintranje, peči na koks, predelava titanovega dioksida (TiO2) itd.;
(c) proizvodnja papirja.
(iv) Postopki, pri katerih ne pride do zgorevanja, npr. proizvodnja žveplove kisline, specifični postopki organske sinteze, obdelovanje kovinskih površin.
(v) Pridobivanje, predelovanje in distribucija fosilnih goriv.
(vi) Obdelava in odlaganje odpadkov, npr. toplotna obdelava komunalnih in industrijskih odpadkov.
8. Skupni podatki (1990) za območje Ekonomske komisije za Evropo kažejo, da približno 88% vseh emisij žvepla izvira iz procesov zgorevanja (20% iz zgorevanja v industriji), 5% iz proizvodnih postopkov in 7% iz rafinerij nafte. Elektrarne so v mnogih državah glavni vir emisij žvepla. V nekaterih državah je industrija (vključno z rafinerijami) prav tako pomemben vir emisij SO2. Čeprav so emisije iz rafinerij na območju Ekonomske komisije za Evropo sorazmerno majhne, je njihov učinek na emisije žvepla iz drugih virov velik zaradi žvepla v naftnih derivatih. Običajno 60% žvepla, ki je prisotno v surovi nafti, ostane v derivatih, 30% se ga izloči v elementarni obliki, 10% pa ga pride v ozračje skozi dimnike rafinerij.

9. Splošne možnosti za zmanjšanje emisij žvepla so:
(i) Ukrepi gospodarjenja z energijo: *
(a) varčevanje z energijo
Smotrna raba energije (izboljšanje energetske učinkovitosti / vodenje postopkov, sočasna proizvodnja elektrike in toplote in/ali gospodarjenje pri porabnikih) ima navadno za posledico zmanjšanje emisij žvepla.
(b) različni energetski viri
Na splošno lahko zmanjšamo emisije žvepla pri skupni proizvodnji, tako da pri različnih energetskih virih povečamo delež tistih, pri katerih ne prihaja do zgorevanja (npr. vodna, jedrska, energija vetra itd.). Vendar je treba upoštevati učinke na okolje.
(ii) Tehnološke možnosti:
(a) Prehod na druge vrste goriva
Emisije SO2 pri zgorevanju so neposredno odvisne od vsebnosti žvepla v uporabljenem gorivu.
Prehod na uporabo drugih vrst goriva (npr. s premoga z visoko na premog z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla in/ali prehod s premoga na tekoča goriva ali plin) vodi k nižjim emisijam žvepla, lahko pa pride do določenih omejitev, kot sta razpoložljivost goriv z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla in prilagodljivost že obstoječih sistemov zgorevanja za druga goriva. V mnogih državah Ekonomske komisije za Evropo se naprave na premog ali olje zamenjujejo z napravami na plin. Naprave na dve vrsti goriva lahko olajšajo prehod na druge vrste goriva.
(b) Čiščenje goriva
Čiščenje zemeljskega plina je sodobna tehnologija, ki je v široki uporabi iz praktičnih razlogov.
Tudi čiščenje plinastih goriv (plin iz rafinerij kislin, koksni plin, bioplin, itd.) je sodobna tehnologija.
Razžveplanje tekočih goriv (lahkih in srednjih frakcij) je sodobna tehnologija.
Razžveplanje težkih frakcij je tehnično izvedljivo, vendar je treba upoštevati lastnosti surovine. Razžveplanje ostankov destilacij (ostanki v napravah za atmosfersko destilacijo surovin) za pridobivanje kurilnega olja z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla se običajno ne izvaja; navadno je bolj zaželeno predelovanje surovin z nizko vsebnostjo žvepla. Hidriranje in tehnologija popolne pretvorbe sta že izpopolnjeni tehnologiji – združujeta visoke stopnje izločanja žvepla iz goriv in izboljšan donos lahkih pogonskih frakcij. Število rafinerij za popolno pretvorbo je za zdaj omejeno. Takšne rafinerije so običajno sposobne izločiti 80% do 90% vsebovanega žvepla, vse ostanke pa predelajo v lahke pogonske frakcije ali druge tržne izdelke. Pri takšni rafineriji se poraba energije in investicijski stroški povečajo. Običajna vsebnost žvepla v naftnih derivatih je prikazana v tabeli 1 spodaj.

Sedanje tehnologije za čiščenje premoga lahko odstranijo približno 50% anorganskega žvepla (odvisno od lastnosti premoga), vendar ne morejo odstraniti organskega žvepla. Razvijajo že tudi učinkovitejše tehnologije, ki pa so vezane na višja specifična vlaganja in stroške. Učinkovitost odstranjevanja žvepla pri čiščenju premoga je torej v primerjavi z razžveplanjem dimnih plinov omejena. Možnosti za doseganje najboljše kombinacije med čiščenjem goriv in čiščenjem dimnih plinov se med posameznimi državami močno razlikujejo.
(c) Sodobnejše tehnologije zgorevanja
Poznamo naslednje tehnologije zgorevanja z izboljšanim toplotnim izkoristkom in zmanjšanimi emisijami žvepla: zgorevanje v vrtinčnem sloju (FBC): “bubbling” (BFBC), krožeč (CFBC) in tlačen (PFBC); kombinirani postopek z uplinjanjem (IGCC); in turbine s kombiniranim plinsko – parnim postopkom (CCGT).
Nepremične plinske turbine lahko vgradimo v sisteme zgorevanja v že obstoječih klasičnih termoelektrarnah, kar lahko skupni izkoristek poveča za 5–7% in pomembno zmanjša emisije SO2. Vendar pa so nujne večje spremembe na sistemu kurišč.
Zgorevanje v vrtinčnem sloju je tehnologija zgorevanja, pri katerem kot gorivo uporabljamo črni in rjavi premog ter lignit, lahko pa tudi druga trdna goriva, npr. petrolejski koks in nizkokalorična goriva, npr. odpadke, šoto in les. Emisije lahko dodatno zmanjšamo tudi s celovitim nadzorom zgorevanja v sistemu s pomočjo dodajanja apna/apnenca gorivu. Skupna instalirana toplotna moč FBC je dosegla približno 30.000 MW (250–350 elektrarn), od tega je bilo 8.000 MW energije proizvedene v elektrarnah z močjo več kot 50 MW. Stranski proizvodi teh procesov lahko povzročajo težave glede njihove nadaljnje uporabe in/ali odlaganja, zato je potreben nadaljnji razvoj na tem področju.
Pri postopku IGCC gre za uplinjanje premoga in proizvodnjo energije v kombiniranem postopku v plinskih in parnih turbinah. Uplinjeni premog uporabljajo kot energetski vir v zgorevalnih komorah v plinskih turbinah. Nadzor emisij žvepla dosežemo z uporabo sodobne tehnologije naprav za čiščenje neočiščenih dimnih plinov, ki so nameščene nad plinskimi turbinami. Obstaja tudi tehnologija za ostanke težkih olj in bitumenske emulzije. Skupna inštalirana električna moč je trenutno približno 1.000 MW (5 elektrarn).
Trenutno načrtujejo gradnjo elektrarn s kombiniranimi plinsko – parnimi postopki, ki za gorivo uporabljajo zemeljski plin z energetskim izkoristkom približno 48–52%.
(d) Spremembe postopkov in izgorevanja
Spremembe izgorevanja, ki bi bile primerljive z ukrepi za nadzor emisij NOx, ne obstajajo, saj organsko oziroma anorgansko vezano žveplo pri zgorevanju popolnoma oksidira (določen odstotek žvepla – odvisno od lastnosti goriva in tehnologije zgorevanja – ostane v pepelu).
V tej Prilogi uvrščamo suhi aditivi postopek za klasične kotle med spremembe postopkov zaradi vpihavanja sredstva v zgorevalno komoro. Vendar so izkušnje pokazale, da se ob uporabi teh postopkov zmanjša toplotna moč, razmerje Ca/S dosega visoke vrednosti, količine odstranjenega žvepla pa so majhne. Upoštevati je treba tudi težave z nadaljnjo uporabo stranskih proizvodov, zato se ta rešitev po navadi uporablja kot začasni ukrep in pa pri manjših zgorevalnih napravah (Tabela 2).

a/ Pri visoki vsebnosti žvepla v gorivu moramo prilagoditi stopnjo izločanja. Vendar pa so načini, da to dosežemo, specifični za določene postopke. Razpoložljivost teh postopkov je navadno 95 odstotna.
b/ Omejena uporabnost pri gorivih z visoko vsebnostjo žvepla.
c/ Koncentracija škodljivih snovi v suhem dimnem plinu v mg/m3 pri 6% kisika za trda goriva, 3% kisika za tekoča goriva.
d/ Faktor pretvorbe je odvisen od lastnosti goriva, specifični volumen dimnih plinov in toplotnega izkoristka kotlov (faktorji pretvorbe (m3/kWh, toplotni izkoristek: 36%) uporabljeno gorivo: črni premog: 3,50; rjavi premog: 4.20; težka olja: 2.80).
e/ Specifični stroški vlaganja veljajo za majhno število kurilnih naprav.
f/ Specifični stroški vlaganja vključujejo postopek denitrifikacije.
Tabela je bila sestavljena v glavnem za velike kurilne naprave v javnem sektorju. Vendar so ti načini nadzora uporabni tudi v drugih sektorjih s podobnimi odpadnimi plini.
(e) Postopki razžveplanja dimnih plinov (FGD)
Ti postopki so namenjeni odstranjevanju že nastalih žveplovih oksidov in jih imenujemo tudi sekundarni ukrepi. Vse sodobne tehnologije za postopke obdelave dimnih plinov temeljijo na odstranjevanju žvepla z mokrimi, suhimi ali polsuhimi in katalitičnimi kemičnimi procesi.
Oblikovanje čim učinkovitejšega programa zmanjševanja emisij žvepla, ki bo presegel ukrepe gospodarjenja z energijo, navedene v pododstavku (i) zgoraj, je mogoče doseči s kombinacijo tehnoloških možnosti, opisanih v pododstavku (ii) zgoraj.
V nekaterih primerih lahko z zmanjševanjem emisij žvepla dosežemo tudi zmanjševanje emisij CO2, NOx in drugih snovi, ki onesnažujejo okolje.
V javnih termoelektrarnah, termoelektrarnah – toplarnah in toplarnah postopki obdelave dimnih plinov vključujejo: mokri kalcitni postopek z apnom ali apnencem (LWS); suhi razpršilni postopek (SDA); Wellman – Lordov postopek (WL); mokri neregenerativni postopek z uporabo amoniaka (AS), in kombinirani postopek za izločanje NOx/SOx (postopek z aktivnim ogljem (AC) in kombinirani katalitični postopek za izločanje NOx/SOx).
V energetiki pokrivajo z LWS in SDA 85 odstotni oziroma 10 odstotni delež instalirane moči FGD.
Nekateri novi postopki razžveplanja dimnih plinov, kot sta suhi postopek z elektronskimi žarki (EBDS) in postopek “Mark 13A”, so še v fazi poskusnih projektov.
V tabeli 2 so prikazani podatki o učinkovitosti zgoraj omenjenih sekundarnih ukrepov, ki temeljijo na praktičnih izkušnjah, pridobljenih v številnih napravah, ki obratujejo. Omenjena sta tudi instalirana moč in razpon moči. Kljub temu da je več tehnologij za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla med seboj primerljivih, zaradi lokalnih razmer ali značilnosti posameznih zgorevalnih naprav nekatere tehnologije ne pridejo v poštev.
V tabeli 2 je prikazan tudi razpon običajnih stroškov vlaganja tehnologij za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla, navedenih v točkah (c), (d) in (e) pododstavka (ii). Vendar se moramo pri uporabi teh tehnologij v posameznih primerih zavedati, da bodo investicijski stroški ukrepov za zmanjševanje emisij med drugim odvisni od uporabljenih tehnologij, potrebnih nadzornih sistemov, velikosti elektrarne, obsega potrebnega zmanjšanja in časovnega poteka načrtovanih vzdrževalnih ciklusov. V tabeli so torej prikazane le grobe ocene stroškov vlaganja. Stroški vlaganj za zmanjšanje onesnaževanja na splošno presegajo stroške pri novih napravah.

10. Tehnike nadzora, navedene v točkah od (a) do (e), pododstavka (ii) devetega odstavka ne veljajo le za energetiko, temveč tudi za različne druge sektorje v industriji. V nekaj letih je bilo pridobljenih precej operativnih izkušenj, večinoma na področju energetike.
11. Uporaba tehnologij za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla v industriji je v glavnem odvisna od specifičnih omejitev pri postopkih v ustreznih sektorjih. V tabeli 3 spodaj so prikazane dejavnosti, ki pomembno prispevajo k emisijam žvepla, in ustrezni ukrepi za zmanjšanje emisij.

12. V dejavnostih, ki so navedene v tabeli 3, lahko ukrepe, vključene v postopek, tudi z zamenjavo surovin (po potrebi v kombinaciji z ustrezno obdelavo dimnih plinov), uporabimo za najučinkovitejše zmanjšanje emisij žvepla.
13. Navajamo nekatere primere:
(a) v novih tovarnah sulfatne celuloze je možno doseči emisije, manjše od 1 kg žvepla na tono celuloze sušene z zrakom celuloze, **
(b) v tovarnah sulfitne celuloze je možno doseči 1–1.5 kg žvepla na tono celuloze sušene z zrakom;
(c) pri žganju sulfidov so poročali o 80–99% učinkovitosti odstranjevanja za enote od 10.000 do 200.000 m3/h (odvisno od postopka);
(d) v neki tovarni, kjer sintrajo železovo rudo, enota FGD z zmogljivostjo 320.000 m3/h dosega koncentracije v očiščenih dimnih plinih pod 100 mg SOx/Nm3 pri 6% O2;
(e) peči na koks dosegajo manj kot 400 mg SOx/Nm3 pri 6% O2;
(f) naprave za proizvodnjo žveplove kisline dosegajo več kot 99% stopnjo pretvorbe;
(g) izboljšana Clausova naprava dosega več kot 99% stopnjo izločanja žvepla.

14. S povečanim prizadevanjem za zmanjšanje emisij žvepla iz nepremičnih zgorevalnih naprav v državah na območju Ekonomske komisije za Evropo se bo povečala tudi količina stranskih proizvodov.
15. Izbrati bi morali možnosti, s katerimi bi dobili uporabne stranske proizvode. Poleg tega bi morali tudi izbrati (kadar je to mogoče) možnosti za doseganje večjega toplotnega izkoristka in zmanjšanje problematike odlaganja odpadkov. Čeprav je večino stranskih proizvodov – npr. sadro, amoniakove soli, žveplovo kislino ali žveplo – možno ponovno uporabiti ali reciklirati, moramo upoštevati dejavnike, kot so tržne razmere in standardi za kakovost. Izboljšati in proučiti je treba nadaljnjo uporabo stranskih proizvodov, ki nastajajo pri postopkih FBC in SDA, ker odlagališča in merila za odlaganje omejujejo odlaganje v nekaterih državah.
16. Naslednji stranski učinki ne onemogočajo uporabe nobene tehnologije ali metode, upoštevati pa jih moramo, ko izbiramo med več možnostmi za zmanjševanje emisij žvepla:
(a) energetske potrebe pri postopkih obdelave plina;
(b) korozija, ki jo povzroča žveplova kislina, ki nastaja pri reakciji žveplovih oksidov z vodnimi hlapi;
(c) povečana uporaba vode in čiščenje odpadne vode;
(d) potrebe po reagentih;
(e) odlaganje trdnih odpadkov.

17. Med ukrepe za izvajanje nacionalnih strategij in politike pri zmanjševanju onesnaževanja zraka spadajo: zakonodaja in predpisi, gospodarske spodbude in ovire ter tehnološke zahteve (najboljša razpoložljiva tehnologija).
18. Na splošno so standardi postavljeni glede na vir emisije, velikost zgorevalne naprave, načina delovanja, tehnologijo zgorevanja, vrste goriva in glede na to, ali gre za novo ali že obstoječo zgorevalno napravo. Drug pristop, ki se tudi uporablja, je določiti cilj za zmanjšanje skupnih emisij žvepla iz skupine virov, kar nam omogoči večjo izbiro pri ukrepanju za dosego cilja (bubble concept).
19. Prizadevanja za omejitev emisij žvepla na ravni, ki so določene v nacionalni okvirni zakonodaji, morajo nadzorovati stalni sistemi za monitoring in poročanje ter o tem poročati nadzornim organom.
20. Različni sistemi monitoringa uporabljajo kontinuirane in diskontinuirane metode meritev. Vendar pa so potrebe po kakovosti različne. Meritve morajo opravljati usposobljene ustanove, ki uporabljajo sisteme za merjenje in monitoring. V ta namen je sistem potrdil najboljše jamstvo.
21. Pri sodobnih avtomatiziranih sistemih monitoringa in opremi za nadzor postopkov poročanje ne povzroča težav. Zbiranje podatkov za nadaljnjo uporabo je sodobna tehnika, vendar pa se podatki, poslani ustreznim organom, razlikujejo od primera do primera. Zaradi lažje primerljivosti je treba uskladiti nize podatkov in predpise za njihovo zbiranje. Usklajenost je zaželena tudi pri zagotavljanju kakovosti sistemov merjenja in monitoringa. To bi morali upoštevati pri primerjanju podatkov.
22. Da bi se izognili neskladju in nedoslednostim, morajo biti dobro določena naslednja ključna vprašanja in parametri:
(a) definicijo standardov, izraženih v ppmv, mg/Nm3, g/GJ, kg/h ali kg/tono proizvoda. Večino teh enot je treba izračunati, za kar so potrebni podatki o temperaturi plina, vlažnosti, pritisku, vsebnosti kisika ali kurilni vrednosti;
(b) definicija obdobja, za katero mora biti izračunana srednja vrednost standardov, izražena v urah, mesecih ali letu;
(c) definicija obdobij okvar in ustrezni nujni ukrepi za premostitev sistemov monitoringa ali ustavitve obratovanja;
(d) definicija dopolnjevanja manjkajočih ali izgubljenih podatkov zaradi okvar na opremi;
(e) definicija niza parametrov, ki jih je treba izmeriti. Potrebne informacije se lahko razlikujejo glede na vrsto industrijskega postopka. To velja tudi za lokacijo točke merjenja v okviru sistema.
23. Zagotoviti je treba nadzor nad kakovostjo meritev.

a/ Kot smernica za naprave, ki uporabljajo različna goriva pri hkratnem obratovanju z dvema ali več gorivi, pristojni organi določijo mejne emisijske vrednosti, tako da upoštevajo mejne emisijske vrednosti iz stolpca ii), ki veljajo za vsako gorivo, stopnjo toplotne vrednosti vsakega goriva in za rafinerije ustrezno značilnostim naprave. Pri rafinerijah takšna kombinirana mejna vrednost v nobenem primeru ne sme preseči 1.700 mg SO2/Nm3.
Mejne vrednosti se še zlasti ne uporabljajo za naslednje naprave:
– naprave, v katerih se proizvodi zgorevanja uporabljajo za neposredno ogrevanje, sušenje ali kakršno koli drugo obdelavo predmetov ali materiala, npr. peči za dogrevanje, peči za toplotno obdelavo;
– naprave za naknadno zgorevanje, npr. kakršnekoli tehnične naprave za čiščenje odpadnih plinov z zgorevanjem, ki ne delujejo kot samostojne zgorevalne naprave;
– naprave za regeneracijo katalizatorjev za katalitično krekiranje;
– naprave za pretvarjanje vodikovega sulfida v žveplo;
– reaktorje, ki jih uporabljajo v kemični industriji;
– peči na koks;
– Kauperje;
– sežigalnice odpadkov;
– naprave, ki jih poganjajo dieselski, bencinski ali plinski motorji ali plinske turbine ne glede na gorivo, ki ga uporabljajo.
Če pogodbenica zaradi visoke vsebnosti žvepla v trdih ali tekočih gorivih, ki jih pridobiva na lastnem ozemlju, ne more izpolniti zahtev po mejnih emisijskih vrednostih, določenih v stolpcu ii), lahko uporabi stopnje razžveplanja, določene v stolpcu iii) ali najvišjo mejno vrednost 800 mg SO2/Nm3 (čeprav raje ne več kot 650 mg SO2/Nm3). Pogodbenica o takšni uporabi poroča Odboru za izvajanje v koledarskem letu, v katerem pride do takšne uporabe.
Če sta dve ali več novih naprav nameščeni tako, da se lahko ob upoštevanju tehničnih in gospodarskih dejavnikov njuni odpadni plini odvajajo – po presoji ustreznih organov – skozi skupen dimnik, takšno kombinacijo štejemo za posamezno enoto.
b/ mg SO2/Nm3 so določeni pri temperaturi 273 °K in pod pritiskom 101.3 kPa po popravkih za vsebnost vodnih hlapov.

Izvršilni organ
je odobril in sprejel Protokol o nadaljnjem zmanjševanju emisij žvepla h Konvenciji o prekomejnem onesnaževanju zraka na velike razdalje iz leta 1979,
je odločen, da čim prej zagotovi učinkovit monitoring za uresničevanje novega protokola,
se je odločil, da v skladu s tretjim odstavkom 7. člena novega protokola odobri priloženo besedilo o “Sestavi in nalogah Odbora za izvajanje ter postopkih, po katerih se mora Odbor ravnati pri ugotavljanju izpolnjevanja obveznosti iz tega protokola” in
poziva pogodbenice novega protokola, da sprejmejo priloženo besedilo na prvem zasedanju, ki ga bo imel izvršilni organ po začetku veljavnosti tega protokola.

1. Odbor sestavlja osem pogodbenic. Na prvem zasedanju izvršilnega organa po začetku veljavnosti tega protokola izvolijo v Odbor štiri pogodbenice za dve leti in štiri pogodbenice za eno leto. Na vsakem nadaljnjem zasedanju izvolijo štiri nove pogodbenice za dve leti. Pogodbenice, katerim članstvo v Odboru poteče, so lahko ponovno izvoljene za naslednje obdobje. Odbor izvoli svojega predsednika in podpredsednika.
2. Odbor zaseda dvakrat letn, razen če se odloči drugače. Zasedanja Odbora organizira sekretariat.
3. Če ena ali več pogodbenic meni, da druga pogodbenica ne izpolnjuje obveznosti iz tega protokola, lahko svoje sporočilo, ki mora biti podprto z dodatnimi informacijami, pisno naslovi na sekretariat. Sekretariat v dveh tednih po prejemu sporočila pošlje njegovo kopijo pogodbenici, katere izpolnjevanje določene določbe protokola je sporno. Odgovor, podprt z ustreznimi informacijami, mora biti predložen sekretariatu in pogodbenicam, na katere se to nanaša, v treh mesecih od datuma odposlanega sporočila ali v daljšem roku, če tako zahtevajo okoliščine. Sekretariat predloži sporočilo, odgovor in informacije pogodbenic Odboru, ki prouči zadevo takoj, ko je to izvedljivo.
4. Če sekretariat, zlasti po pregledu poročil, predloženih v skladu s 5. členom, ugotovi, da obstaja možnost, da katera pogodbenica ne izpolnjuje obveznosti iz tega protokola, lahko od te pogodbenice zahteva, da o zadevi priskrbi potrebne informacije. Če pogodbenica v treh mesecih ali v daljšem obdobju, če tako zahtevajo okoliščine, ne odgovori, ali če zadeva ni rešena po upravni ali diplomatski poti, sekretariat o tem obvesti Odbor.
5. Če pogodbenica ugotovi, da kljub prizadevanjem v dobri veri ni ali ne bo mogla v celoti izpolniti svojih obveznosti iz tega protokola, lahko na sekretariat naslovi pisno sporočilo, v katerem predvsem razloži posebne okoliščine, ki so po njenem mnenju vzrok za neizpolnjevanje obveznosti. Sekretariat pojasnilo pošlje Odboru, ki ga prouči takoj, ko je mogoče.
6. Odbor mora:
(a) v skladu s političnimi smernicami, ki jih oblikujejo pogodbenice na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa, strniti in oceniti informacije, ki jih pošljejo pogodbenice v skladu s 5. členom tega protokola;
(b) v skladu s političnimi smernicami, ki jih oblikujejo pogodbenice na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa, redno razčlenjevati in ocenjevati napredek, ki je bil dosežen pri izvajanju protokola;
(c) v skladu s tretjim, četrtim in petim odstavkom zgoraj prouči vsa predložena vprašanja z namenom zagotoviti konstruktivno rešitev;
(d) zagotoviti, da bodo tehnični centri EMEP in/ali samostojen strokovnjak, ki ga imenuje Odbor za izvajanje, ocenili kakovost podatkov, ki jih pošljejo pogodbenice v skladu s 5. členom (Poročanje). Zunaj območja EMEP se uporabljajo postopki ocenjevanja, ki ustrezajo razmeram v državi pogodbenici.
7. Odbor lahko:
(a) preko sekretariata zahteva dodatne informacije o vprašanjih, ki jih preučuje;
(b) na poziv pogodbenica, ki jo to zadeva, organizira zbiranje informacij na njenem ozemlju;
(c) prouči kakršno koli informacijo, ki mu jo pošlje sekretariat v zvezi z izpolnjevanjem določb iz tega protokola.
8. Odbor enkrat letno na zasedanjih izvršilnega organa poroča pogodbenicam o svojem delu, še posebej pa daje priporočila v zvezi z izpolnjevanjem obveznosti iz tega protokola. Vsako takšno poročilo bo Odbor dokončno izoblikoval najkasneje deset tednov pred zasedanjem izvršilnega organa, na katerem naj bi ga proučili.
9. Če je pogodbenica, ki ni članica Odbora, omenjena v sporočilu iz tretjega odstavka ali pošlje sporočilo iz petega odstavka, je upravičena do sodelovanja pri obravnavi sporočila v Odboru.
10. Nobena pogodbenica, na katero se nanaša zadeva, ki jo proučuje Odbor, ne glede na to, ali je članica Odbora ali ne, ne more sodelovati pri oblikovanju in sprejemanju priporočil v zvezi s to zadevo, ki bo vključena v poročilo Odbora.

* Možnosti (i) in (a) ter (b) so vključene v energetsko strukturo in politiko pogodbenice. Uspešnost izvajanja, učinkovitost in stroški za posamezne sektorje niso upoštevani.
** Potreben je nadzor nad razmerjem žvepla in natrija, npr. odstranjevanje žvepla v obliki nevtralnih soli in uporaba natrijevih zmesi, ki ne vsebujejo žvepla

Za izvajanje protokola skrbi Ministrstvo za okolje in prostor.

Ta zakon začne veljati naslednji dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Republike Slovenije – Mednarodne pogodbe.