accelerated single-hull phase-out in …€¦ · accelerated single-hull phase-out in force new sua...

T H E M A G A Z I N E O F T H E INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

ACCELERATED SINGLE-HULL PHASE-OUT IN FORCE

NEW SUA CONVENTION - DRAFT COMPLETED

GLOBALLAST PROJECT ENTERS NEW PHASE

I S S U E 3 . 2 0 0 4

I S S U E 2 . 2 0 0 5

Maritime Magazine – 175, rue Saint-Paul, Québec, Québec, Canada GlK 3W2Marketing – Sophie Belina Brzozowska : [email protected]

CANADA

1 year / an : $ 32 + taxes $ 36,812 years / ans : $ 56 + taxes $ 64,413 years / ans : $ 72 + taxes $ 82,82

USA / ÉTATS-UNIS

1 year / an : US$ 362 years / ans : US$ 643 years / ans : US$ 82

FAMILY NAME / NOM __________________________________________________________________FIRST NAME / PRÉNOM____________________________________________________________

COMPANY NAME / COMPAGNIE _________________________________________________________SPHERE OF ACTIVITY / SECTEUR D’ACTIVITÉ________________________________________

ADDRESS / ADRESSE ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CITY / VILLE __________________________________________________________________________PROVINCE / STATE / PROVINCE / ÉTAT _____________________________________________

ZIP / CODE POSTAL __________________________________________________________________________COUNTRY / PAYS ______________________________________________________________________

PHONE / TÉLÉPHONE ________________________________________________________________________FAX /TÉLÉCOPIEUR____________________________________________________________________

E-MAIL / COURRIEL ____________________________________________________________________

OTHER COUNTRIES / AUTRES PAYS

1 year / an : US$ 402 years / ans : US$ 723 years / ans : US$ 94

SUBSCRIPTION FORM FORMULAIRE D’ABONNEMENT

Simply fax it back to (418) 692-5198. Will invoice you directly.Il suffit de l’envoyer part télécopieur au (418) 692-5198. Une facture suivra à votre attention.

A VALUABLE REFERENCE SOURCE

A Canadian-owned bilingual publication, Maritime Magazine isdevoted to in-depth coverage of the marine/multimodal industry in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region as well as the Atlantic andPacific coast trades.

Distributed nationally and abroad, Maritime Magazine has thedistinct advantage of being published in both French andEnglish. It allows you to reach readers in North America andaround the world.

Maritime Magazine is a prestigious quarterly publication. It currentlyreaches more than 20 000 readers.

LA RÉFÉRENCE PAR EXCELLENCE

Publication canadienne bilingue, Maritime Magazine est entière-ment dédiée à l'industrie maritime/multimodale des Grands Lacset du Saint-Laurent ainsi que des côtes atlantique et pacifique.

Distribuée tant au Canada qu'à l'étranger, MaritimeMagazine se distingue par une édition entièrementbilingue, anglais et français, qui permet de rejoindre untrès large lectorat, en Amérique du Nord et partout dans lemonde.

Ouvrage de prestige, Maritime Magazine est publié quatre fois parannée et compte plus de 20 000 lecteurs.

www.imo.org. No.2 2005 IMO NEWS 3

IMO News • Issue 2 2005

Contents

The International MaritimeOrganization (IMO)4, Albert EmbankmentLondon SE1 7SRUKTel +44 (0)20 7735 7611Fax +44 (0)20 7587 3210Email (general enquiries)[email protected] Website www.imo.org

Managing EditorLee Adamson([email protected])

Assistant EditorNatasha Brown([email protected])

Editorial productionAubrey Botsford, Brian Starkey

AdvertisingHanna Moreton([email protected], tel +44 (0)20 7735 7611)

DistributionLesley Brooks([email protected])

IMO News is the magazine ofthe International MaritimeOrganization and isdistributed free of charge toqualified readers. Theopinions expressed are notnecessarily those of IMO andthe inclusion of anadvertisement implies noendorsement of any kind byIMO of the product or serviceadvertised. The contents maybe reproduced free of chargeon condition thatacknowledgement is given toIMO News.

Please allow at least tenweeks from receipt at IMO foradditions to, deletions from orchanges in the mailing list.

Copyright © IMO 2005

Printed by Unwin Brothers Ltd

N052E

The colourful cruise ship Norwegian Dawn dwarfsthe tiny US Coast Guard patrol launch that is

shepherding her into New York. With maritimesecurity still a high priority, the completion by theLegal Committee of draft protocols to amend the

1988 Suppression of Unlawful Acts (SUA)Convention and Protocol, ahead of a diplomatic

conference to be held later this year, represents animportant breakthrough. See page 9 for details

IMO at Work

23 Workshop highlights role of flag States

25 Meeting tackles security issues for non-SOLAS vesselsSecurity fund gets boost

26 IMLI students graduate with flying colours; Captain Zenon Sdougos;Algeciras visit to IMO; Shipping organization celebrates 100 years.

Features

10 In the aftermath of the Tsunami. A period of reflection by Patricia Charlebois, IMO

18 The IMO’s work on ship recycling by Sokratis Dimakopoulos

Intelligence

6 Revised phase-out schedule for single hull tankers enters into force

8 Maritime relief fund aids tsunami reconstruction

9 Draft SUA protocols ready for October ConferenceGloBallast ballast water management project enters new phase

Opinion

5 Politics and shipping - a mutual understandingSecretary-General Efthimios E. Mitropoulos

From the meetings

12 Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE) 48th session

14 Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI) 13th session

16 Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids and Gases (BLG) 9th session

17 Legal Committee (90th session)

Message fromthe Secretary-GeneralMr. Efthimios Mitropoulos

Opinion

Politics and shipping – a mutualunderstanding

In 1948, politicians from countries with an interest in shipping did the industry, themselves and theirconstituents a great service by inaugurating the body which I currently have the honour to serve asSecretary-General. IMO was created so that effective and practicable technical standards for international

shipping could be established and their implementation could be universally agreed. In this way, not onlycould the playing field be levelled, but the wider aims of politicians - aims such as improved safety, feweraccidents, the prevention of ship-sourced pollution, better security and more efficiency – could also beachieved.

Those who participate in this process are generally not politicians themselves, but technical experts in theirparticular field. Nevertheless, from all over the world, they come to IMO and other international organizationsdealing with maritime matters, as representatives of their Governments and with a mandate to act that comesdirectly from their political masters. They have managed to combine technical expertise with politicalawareness to produce consensus solutions that enshrine both common sense and practicality. They are, inmany ways, the embodiment of "mutual understanding" between shipping and politics.

You only need to look at the statistics to see how successful this approach has been over the years.

IMO was established as a technical body, with politics and economics officially outside its scope. But, inrecent years, there has been a discernable shift in emphasis and now we are having to acknowledge that thedecisions made in IMO are becoming increasingly influenced by political factors. It is no longer always thetechnical experts whose opinions hold sway in the end; their political masters in the capital cities around theworld are becoming increasingly important players in the work of IMO as they themselves come underpressure, often from public opinion that may not be as well informed as we might like it to be.

This is an area on which we need to pay particular attention, doing whatever we can to improve the industry’spublic perception. We should perhaps start by working methodically and systematically to make people, andparticularly politicians, not only understand the strategic, economic, political, commercial and socialimportance and significance of shipping and the industry’s peculiarities and complexities when compared toother modes of transport but also its vital role in world trade and economic development.

At the same time, we should work together assiduously to put our own house in order so that we candemonstrate that shipping is the safe, secure, efficient and environmentally-friendly industry we know it to be.Only then will we be able to maintain the moral high ground and successfully defend the industry againstunjustified and unfair accusations. To succeed in this, we must be pro-active in taking all necessary measuresto prevent accidents happening in the first place; make sure that the public and politicians are made fullyaware of that work; and thereby remove any basis for them to act in a manner that might impact adversely oninternational shipping.

What is needed is a balance between the aspirations of politicians, who of course have to act and be seen toact in their constituents’ interests; between the commercial interests; and between the technical experts, whotraditionally have tried to seek the best solutions to whatever problems have arisen, without being undulydriven by the political or economic framework that surrounds them.

We must take care not to sacrifice sound technical advice, with its long-term benefits for safety and protectionof the marine environment, to the short-term horizons that dictate the changing course of politics. And wemust not deprive IMO of the valuable voice of all its Members: to make optimum decisions, we need the inputof as many as possible – in particular, those whose technical expertise and know-how can influence and beinstrumental in the formulation of the decisions of the Organization and the shaping of its policies andstrategies. It takes many opinions to make up a balanced judgement, and it is this need for a balancedapproach and a sense of proportionality that should characterize our decisions when confronted withdilemmas.


Revised phase-out schedule for singlehull tankers enters into force

Intelligence

Arevised schedule for the phasing out of singlehull oil tankers and a new regulation banning

the carriage of heavy grade oil in single hull oiltankers entered into force on 5 April 2005.

The measures were adopted in December 2003 asamendments to Annex I of the MARPOLConvention, following the November 2002 sinkingof the oil tanker Prestige off the Spanish coast.

A revised regulation 13G of MARPOL Annex Ibrings forward the phase-out schedule for existingsingle hull tankers that was first established in1992 and was subsequently revised in 2001following the Erika incident. It specifies thattankers of single hull construction should bephased out or converted to a “double hull”according to a schedule based on their year ofdelivery. The double hull requirements for oiltankers are principally designed to reduce the riskof oil spills from tankers involved in low energycollisions or groundings.

Under the phase-out schedule, “Category 1” singlehull oil tankers have been prohibited from tradingafter 5 April 2005, (for ships delivered on or before5 April 1982 or earlier) or after their anniversarydate in 2005 (for ships delivered after 5 April 1982).Category 1 oil tankers, (commonly known as Pre-MARPOL tankers) include oil tankers of 20,000tonnes deadweight and above carrying crude oil,fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo,

and tankers of 30,000 tonnes deadweight and abovecarrying other oils, which do not comply with therequirements for protectively located segregatedballast tanks.

Category 2 oil tankers, which have some level ofprotection from protectively located segregatedballast tank requirements will be phased outaccording to their age up to 2010. The year 2010 isalso a final cut off date for Category 3 oil tankerswhich are generally smaller oil tankers. Category 2oil tankers (commonly known as MARPOLtankers) include oil tankers of 20,000 tonnesdeadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil,heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and oiltankers of 30,000 tonnes deadweight and abovecarrying other oils, which comply with theprotectively located segregated ballast tankrequirements. Category 3 oil tankers are oiltankers of 5,000 tonnes deadweight and above butless than the tonnage specified for Category 1 and2 tankers.

Regulation 13H of MARPOL Annex I on theprevention of oil pollution from oil tankers whencarrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriageof HGO in single hull tankers of 5,000 tonsdeadweight (DWT) and above from 5 April 2005,and in single hull oil tankers of 600 DWT andabove but less than 5,000 tons DWT, not later thanthe anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

Although the majority of the world’s oiltanker fleet already conforms todouble-hull standards, the new phase-out schedule hastens the day whenonly modern double-hull tonnage willbe able to trade in oil (pics: Frontline, Teekay Shipping)

6 IMO NEWS No.2 2005 www.imo.org.


Intelligence

Exemptions

The revised regulation 13G allows theAdministration (flag State) to permitcontinued operation of Category 2 or 3tankers beyond their phase-out date inaccordance with the schedule, subject tosatisfactory results from the ConditionAssessment Scheme (CAS) for oil tankers(adopted in 2001) but the continuedoperation must not go beyond theanniversary of the date of delivery of the shipin 2015 or the date on which the ship reaches25 years of age after the date of its delivery,whichever is earlier.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 oiltankers fitted with only double bottoms ordouble sides not used for the carriage of oiland which extend to the entire cargo tanklength, or tankers fitted with double hullspaces not meeting the minimum distanceprotection requirements which are not usedfor the carriage of oil and which extend tothe entire cargo tank length, theAdministration may allow a ship to continueoperation beyond its phase-out date inaccordance with the schedule, provided itwas in service on 1 July 2001, theAdministration is satisfied by verification ofthe official records that the ship compliedwith the conditions specified and that thoseconditions remain unchanged. Again, suchcontinued operation must not go beyond thedate on which the ship reaches 25 years ofage after the date of its delivery.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 may deny entryinto the ports or offshore terminals under itsjurisdiction of single hull tankers which havebeen allowed to continue operation under theexemptions mentioned above.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 tankerscarrying HGO as cargo, fitted only withdouble bottoms or double sides, not used forthe carriage of oil and extending to the entirecargo tank length, or tankers fitted withdouble hull spaces not meeting the minimumdistance protection requirements which arenot used for the carriage of oil and extend tothe entire cargo tank length, theAdministration, under certain conditions,may allow continued operation of such shipsbeyond 5 April 2005 until the date on whichthe ship reaches 25 years of age after thedate of its delivery.

Regulation 13H also allows for continuedoperation of oil tankers of 5,000 DWT andabove, carrying crude oil with a density at15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3 but lower than945 kg/m3, if satisfactory results of theCondition Assessment Scheme warrant that,in the opinion of the Administration, the shipis fit to continue such operation, havingregard to the size, age, operational area andstructural conditions of the ship andprovided that the continued operation shallnot go beyond the date on which the shipreaches 25 years of age after the date of itsdelivery.

The Administration may allow continuedoperation of a single hull oil tanker of 600DWT and above but less than 5,000 DWT,carrying HGO as cargo, if, in the opinion ofthe Administration, the ship is fit to continuesuch operation, having regard to the size,age, operational area and structuralconditions of the ship, provided that theoperation shall not go beyond the date onwhich the ship reaches 25 years of age afterthe date of its delivery.

The Administration may exempt an oil tankerof 600 DWT and above carrying HGO as cargoif the ship is either engaged in voyagesexclusively within an area under the Party'sjurisdiction, or is engaged in voyagesexclusively within an area under thejurisdiction of another Party, provided theParty within whose jurisdiction the ship will beoperating agrees. The same applies to vesselsoperating as floating storage units of HGO.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 can deny entry intothe ports or offshore terminals under itsjurisdiction of single hull tankers carrying HGOwhich have been allowed to continue operationunder the exemptions mentioned above, ordeny ship-to-ship transfer of heavy grade oil inareas under its jurisdiction except when this isnecessary for the purpose of securing the safetyof a ship or saving life at sea.

Parties to MARPOL applying the provisionsallowing for extended operation of Category2 or 3 tankers and Parties which will denyentry into the ports or offshore terminalsunder its jurisdiction to those tankers mustcommunicate this information to IMO.


Intelligence

IMO Secretary-General Efthimios E. Mitropoulos has given UN Secretary-

General Kofi Annan a cheque for £86,580,which represents the cash donations to dateto the Tsunami Maritime Relief Fund thatwas inaugurated by IMO in the wake of the2004 Boxing Day disaster. Mr Annan, whoreceived the cheque during the recentmeeting of the UN Chief Executives Board inSwitzerland on 9 April, expressed his thanksand appreciation for the gesture from themaritime community.

Mr. Mitropoulos has requested that thedonation be passed on to the Office ofPresident Clinton, who has been appointed asSpecial Envoy of the United Nations’Secretary-General for Tsunami-AffectedCountries to mobilize continued support forthe reconstruction phase. In particular, he

Maritime relief fund aids tsunamireconstruction

requested that the money fromthe Tsunami Maritime ReliefFund be used specifically forthe restoration of the maritimeinfrastructure and also tosupport the reconstruction ofthe fishing industry in theregion affected.

The Fund was established inorder to co-ordinate the maritimecommunity’s wider response tothe UN’s immediate efforts.Contributions have come in fromthe shipping industry, the IMOstaff and individuals and theFund remains open to provideassistance for the longer termtask of capacity building in theaffected maritime communities.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan receives a cheque for £86,580 from IMOSecretary-General Efthimios E. Mitropoulos, in respect of the cash donationsto the Tsunami Maritime Relief Fund that was inaugurated by IMO in thewake of the 2004 Boxing Day disaster


The IMO Legal Committee has completedits work on draft protocols to amend the

1988 Convention and Protocol for theSuppression of Unlawful Acts against theSafety of Maritime Navigation (SUATreaties). The draft protocols will beforwarded for consideration and subsequentadoption to a Diplomatic Conference on the

Revision of the SUA Treaties, scheduled tobe held at IMO Headquarters in Londonfrom 10 to 14 October 2005.

The main purpose of the 1988 SUAConvention is to provide the legal basis foraction to be taken against personscommitting unlawful acts against ships.These acts include the seizure of ships by

force, acts of violence againstpersons on board ships and theplacing of devices on boardwhich are likely to destroy ordamage the ship. Under theConvention, ContractingGovernments are obliged eitherto extradite or prosecute allegedoffenders. Similar provisions arecontained in the SUA Protocol,relating to unlawful acts againstfixed platforms located on thecontinental shelf.

The aim of the two draftProtocols is to strengthen theSUA treaties in order to providean appropriate response to theincreasing risks posed tomaritime navigation byinternational terrorism.

Proposed amendments to the treaties in thedraft Protocols include a substantialbroadening of the range of offences includedin Article 3 of the SUA Convention and theintroduction of provisions in Article 8 to allowfor the boarding of vessels suspected ofbeing involved in terrorist activities.

The Conference will consider theseamendments as well as a number of other,related, issues including the political offencesclause, the transfer of prisoners clause andthe entry into force criteria.

Work on the revision of the SUA treatiesfollows from the adoption, in 2001, ofAssembly resolution A.924(22) which calledfor a review of the then existing measuresand procedures to prevent acts of terrorismwhich threaten the security of passengersand crews an the safety of ships. The SUAamendments will complement the provisionsof SOLAS chapter XI-2 (Special measures toenhance maritime security) and theInternational Ship and Port Facility Security(ISPS) Code, which entered into force in July2004, by providing a legal basis for the arrest,detention and extradition of terrorists in theunfortunate event that a terrorist attackagainst shipping nevertheless occurs.

Intelligence

Draft SUA protocols ready forOctober Conference

GloBallast ballast water managementproject enters new phase

The GEF-UNDP-IMO Global Ballast WaterManagement Programme (GloBallast),

aimed at assisting developing countries inimplementing measures to minimize theadverse impacts of aquatic invasive speciestransferred by ships in ballast water, hasbegun a new phase, following the initial,successful, execution of the five-year US$10.2million project by IMO.

The preparatory phase of the new project, tobe known as GloBallast Partnerships, wasinitiated on 1 April 2005 with funding of aroundUS$700,000 from the Global EnvironmentalFacility (GEF). This preparatory project will beexecuted by IMO over a period of 18 monthsand is expected to provide the groundwork forthe full-scale GloBallast Partnerships project(full title: Building Partnerships to AssistDeveloping Countries to Reduce the Transfer

of Harmful Aquatic Organisms in Ships’ BallastWater), to become operational in 2006/2007.The main objective is to assist particularlyvulnerable countries and/or regions to enactlegal and policy reforms to meet the objectivesof the International Convention for the Controland Management of Ships' Ballast Water andSediments, adopted by IMO in February 2004.

The Convention requires ratification by 30States, representing 35 per cent of worldmerchant shipping tonnage, in order to enterinto force. Assisting States to implement therequirements of the convention is seen ascritical if the new instrument is to make atimely entry into force and for its aims to beachieved. The issue of aquatic invasive species,including the transfer of harmful organisms inships’ ballast water and sediments, is seen asone of the greatest threats to global marine

bio-diversity and ecosystems, and as asignificant threat to coastal economies andeven public health.

GloBallast Partnerships is intended to be afive-year project with a tentative budget ofUS$17 million, of which, US$10 million willcome from in-kind contributions from theparticipating countries and other interestedpartners. The remainder of the funding will bein the form of a GEF grant to supportincremental costs. The United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) is acting asimplementing agency for GEF.

The initial phase – known as PDF-B - willinclude the development of a plan to enactlegal reforms, identification of a plan toestablish criteria for vulnerable areas, astakeholder involvement plan and a monitoringand evaluation plan.

In the heightened emphasis on maritime security that currently prevailsthe completion of the draft revisions to the SUA Convention andprotocols is a major step forward (pic: USCG)


Features • Tsunami Response

In the aftermath of the Tsunami

On 26 December 2004, I, like the rest ofthe world, sat glued to my television

watching BBC coverage the Indian Oceantsunami feeling both shocked and saddenedby the massive scale of destruction and lossof life that I was seeing and realizing that ifthis had occurred one year earlier, I wouldundoubtedly already be on a plane to one ofthe affected countries as part of the UNhumanitarian response. But things hadchanged and although I remained on the UNDisaster Assessment and Response Teamroster linked to my previous work with theOffice for the Coordination of HumanitarianAffairs (OCHA) and the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP), I was nolonger an active member having traded myemergency response hat for a position at IMOin April 2004. However, things do not alwayshappen as one expects and UNEP, havingquickly exhausted its internal resources indeploying experts to the affected areas,requested IMO to release me from my dutiesand seconded to UNEP to assist in theresponse to the tsunami. In the spirit ofcooperation and recognizing the magnitude ofthe human impact, the Secretary General,without hesitation, released me from myregular IMO duties to participate in thisimportant mission.

In the beginning there was much discussionas to what my actual role would be. Whileinitial plans were for me to join the responseand assessment teams in Aceh to conduct anenvironmental assessment in Banda Aceh, inthe end I was sent to Jakarta to work withthe Indonesian Ministry of Environment todevelop a proposal for the establishment ofan Environmental Crisis Centre in Jakartawith a sub office in Aceh, and to provideinput to the environmental dimension of thelong restoration and reconstruction task thatlie ahead.

Indonesia is a large country and it isimportant to understand the geographical andpolitical climate in order to have some insightinto the response to the tsunami. The overallmanagement of the UN intervention wasmanaged from Jakarta, the capital, in closeliaison and in full support of the efforts of theIndonesian government, while the operationalresponse was managed from Aceh, theprovince hit by the tsunami on the island ofSumatra. Banda Aceh, the main city in theprovince of Aceh, is a full three hours flightfrom Jakarta. This caused an array oflogistical difficulties in the early stages,particularly with respect to communicationsand getting the many incoming humanitarianresponders on flights to Aceh. These

problemswouldeventually beresolved, but inthe first weeksof the responserepresentedmajorobstacles tothe DisasterManagementTeam inJakarta and tothe operationsin Aceh.

The carnagewrought by thetsunami hasbeen well-documented,representingthe highestloss of human

A personal reflection by Patricia Charlebois, Emergency Focal Point, IMO

life from any disaster in modern times. Overthe course of my four weeks in Indonesia Iwould see many friends and colleagues withwhom I had worked in the past in otherdisasters come and go en route to or fromBanda Aceh. The message from all was thesame: the worst destruction and humanimpact they had ever witnessed of a scalethat was absolutely unimaginable, this fromseasoned responders who had seen a lot overthe years having been involved in some of theworld’s worst disasters. The photos I wouldsee over those weeks would confirm this,though one can never truly get the full senseof such a tragedy through a photograph.

Whenever a disaster strikes and a majorhumanitarian intervention follows, criticismis usually not far behind. The Indian Oceantsunami that impacted Indonesia which suchhorrific force, was no exception. The UN wascriticized for the slowness of its initialresponse in delivering humanitarian aid to theaffected areas, there was conjecture aroundand criticism of the response of theIndonesian military and the actions of theIndonesian Government were repeatedlycriticized in the local print media.Unfortunately, for better of worse, this is all anormal and typical part of disaster response.

Having participated in the daily UN meetingsof the Disaster Management Team and basedon my experiences in other emergencies, itnormally takes time to institute structure intochaos. Taking into account the exceptionalscale and geographical area of impact of thisparticular disaster as it affected Indonesia, itis unfortunately normal that it will take alittle longer to get the operational wheels toturn efficiently in the early stages of theresponse, notwithstanding the uniquelogistical difficulties of trying to access thewide swath of Aceh that was affected, wheremost of the roads remain impassable evennow.

Feedback from the UN staff in Aceh and wasthat the Indonesian military had done a verygood job in doing what it could to deliver aidin the early stages following tsunami prior tothe arrival of international assistance and thiscontinued throughout the emergency.Security became an issue with the resurgenceof the Acehnese rebels in the area, as theregion has been fraught with civil wars andIn some parts of Bandar Aceh, boats and fishing craft were swept into city centre areas

(© International Labour Organization/Crozet M)


Tsunami Response • Feature

civil unrest for many years. The Indonesianmilitary were able to provide effectivesecurity and because of the threat potentialthreat were required to restrict the access ofinternational response community to certainareas to protect their safety, but to a farlesser extent than was reported in the media.

It is true that decision-making at theGovernment level did take some time,particularly with respect to kick startingredevelopment efforts. Having been involvedin some of the meetings where variousredevelopment scenarios were discussed, Iwould say that this was largely due to thecomplexity and inter-related nature of theredevelopment needed - as virtuallyeverything had been wiped out in manyvillages and in a large part of Banda Aceh -and a desire to avoid the mistakes of the pastby rebuilding in a sustainable way that whatwould limit the potential impacts and loss oflife should the area ever be faced withanother tsunami. It would seem that this,unfortunately, continues to be a problemaccording to Jan Egeland, the UN emergencyrelief coordinator and head of the UN Officefor the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,commenting at a conference on post-tsunamirehabilitation held in Washington in early Maythat rebuilding following tsunami has beentoo slow and frustration is growing amongdisplaced people and urged more cooperationbetween governments, world bodies such asthe United Nations and World Bank and

nongovernmentalorganizations inpushing therebuilding ahead.

Damage to themaritime sectorwas relativelyminor ascompared withother sectors.Primary damagewas to the port ofBanda Aceh, whichwas completelydestroyed, as werevirtually all fishingvessels along thearea where thetsunami wave hit.

There was initially a strong suspicion that asa result of the earthquake, it was likely thatthere had been a change to the topography ofthe ocean floor requiring that the area behydrographically resurveyed, and that most ofthe navigational aids that were lost in thetsunami and would need to be completelyreplaced. In the end, it would turn out thatthere were significant topographical changesto the coastline and seabed, with some 27navigational aids destroyed.

Hydrographically, the Strait of Malacca wasnot affected, but parts of the west coast ofBanda Aceh wereaffected and willhave to beresurveyed beforethe lost navigationalaids can be rebuilt.A deep underwatersurvey of the seabednear the epicentre ofthe earthquake hasshown massivedisruption to theseabed, but that thisis not enough toaffect surfacenavigation in thearea. The coastlineunderwentsignificant changedin certain areas,with parts of the

coastline of Banda Aceh having moved inlandat distances varying from a few hundredmetres up to 5 kilometres at one point. Theimpacts to small fishing vessels were alsovery severe with many entire fishing villageswiped out and all fishing vessels lost.

The original 977 million dollar (USD) tsunamiappeal is the largest UN appeal everlaunched. It has since been increased by 100million, now reaching 1.1 billion USD tocover 12 months, thereby extending thecoverage of the original six month appeal.Concerns about the use, or rather the misuse,of funds have been a running themethroughout the response and in theredevelopment phase. The currentgovernment is a new one, having onlyrecently been elected, and is acutely aware ofthe attention to this issue. To date thingsappear to be running smoothly and it is thesincere hope of all involved that thiscontinues.

As for myself, even though I have long sincereturned to my regular IMO duties followingmy tsunami experience, I continue to monitorthe situation closely with great personalinterest as one who has been directlyinvolved, and feel very glad to have been ableto assist in some small way to the responseand reconstruction efforts of the largest scalenatural disaster that world has seen in recenttimes.

The destruction was such that early efforts at reparation were slow. But a more organisedresponse effort is underway and is beginning to bear fruit (© International LabourOrganization/Crozet M)

Although damage to the maritime industry in Indonesia was relatively limited, the fishingindustry was hit catastrophically (© International Labour Organization/Crozet M)


Anew draft MARPOL Annex 1 regulation on oil fueltank protection was agreed, for submission to the

Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 53) inJuly 2005 for approval. The aim is to prevent or reducespillage of oil carried as fuel for the ship followingaccidental damage.

The draft regulation on Oil Fuel Tank Protection isintended to apply to all new ships (and majorconversions) with an aggregate oil fuel capacity of 600 m3

and above. The draft regulation gives requirements forthe protective location of the fuel tanks and performancestandards for accidental oil fuel outflow. A maximumcapacity limitation of 2,500 m3 per oil fuel tank isincluded in the draft regulation.

The draft regulation requires Administrations to alsoconsider general safety aspects, including the need formaintenance and inspection of wing and double bottomtanks or spaces, when approving the design andconstruction of ships in accordance with the regulation.

Guidelines on on-board exhaust gascleaning systems

The Sub-Committee finalized draft Guidelines on on-

board exhaust gas-SOx cleaning systems as required byMARPOL Annex VI Regulations for the Prevention of Air

Pollution from Ships for adoption at MEPC 53. MARPOLAnnex VI enters into force on 19 May 2005.

Draft MARPOL regulation on oil fueltank protection agreed

Amendments to SOLAS – personalLSAs

The Sub-Committee agreed draft amendments to SOLASchapter III, for submission to the Maritime SafetyCommittee (MSC) at its 80th session in May 2005, tospecify the carriage requirements for personal life-savingappliances suitable for infants and large adults. Forpassenger ships on voyages of less than 24 hours’duration, a number of infant lifejackets equal to at least2.5% of the number of passengers on board shall beprovided; and for passenger ships on voyages of 24 hoursor greater, infant lifejackets shall be provided for eachinfant on board. The draft amendments also requiresuitable accessories to be provided if the adult lifejacketsprovided are not designed to fit persons with chest girthof up to 1750 mm.

Draft amendments to the International Life-SavingAppliance (LSA) Code and the Recommendation ontesting of LSA (resolution MSC.81(70)) regardingperformance testing and approval standards for SOLASpersonal LSA were also finalized for submission to MSC80 for approval with a view to adoption. An infant’s lifejacket symbol was also agreed.

The Sub-Committee continued work on the compatibilityof life-saving appliances and agreed that three issuesneeded further consideration: compatibility of immersionsuits and lifejackets; compatibility of immersion suits andlifeboat access and capacity; and compatibility of

lifejackets and marine evacuationsystems. The aim is to finalizerelevant amendments to the LSACode at DE 49.

Measures to preventaccidents withlifeboats

The Sub-Committee consideredmeasures to prevent accidents withlifeboats, in particular proposedamendments to LSA-relatedinstruments, provisions for on-loadrelease gear and free-fall lifeboatsand agreed to hold a workinggroup at DE 49 to discuss allrelated issues. A correspondencegroup was established to progressthe work intersessionally.

Performancestandards forprotective coatings

Work on the development of draftperformance standards for

From the meetings • Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE)

• 48th session

• 25-29 February 2005

Measures to preventaccidents withlifeboats wereconsidered, and acorrespondencegroup wasestablished toprogress the workintersessionally

48th session •25-29 February 2005 •


protective coatings commenced with a viewto finalization at DE 49. The Sub-Committeeagreed that coating performance standardsshould apply to all coatings used in ballastand void spaces on all types of ships, with atarget coating life of 15 years. Acorrespondence group was established tofurther develop the draft performancestandards for protective coatings and toreport to the next session.

Amendments to EnhancedSurvey Programme for bulkcarriers and oil tankers

The Sub-Committee reviewed proposed draftamendments to the enhanced surveyprogramme (resolution A.744) regardingsurveys of double hull bulk carriers as well asdraft amendments to the Condition AssessmentScheme (CAS) regarding change of flag duringCAS surveys. It was agreed that the workshould be finalized at the next DE session.

Passenger ship safety

The Working Group on Passenger Ship Safetyprepared draft SOLAS amendments andsupplementary guidelines on alternativedesigns and arrangements for furtherconsideration by a correspondence group onpassenger ship safety. This is part of anoverall objective to develop measures toassess alternative designs and arrangementsso as to ease the approval of new conceptsand technologies, in particular in the designof new passenger ships, provided that anequivalent level of safety is achieved.

Draft standards for essential systems and

equipment on passenger ships for safe

return to port after a casualty and for three

hour time to remain habitable after a

casualty were developed, for furtherconsideration at DE 49, subject to input fromother relevant technical Sub-Committees.The correspondence will be expected toprepare performance requirements forsurvival craft used on future passenger shipsand to further consider the draft definitionfor the damage control concept, which statesthat shipboard damage control includes anymeasure necessary to control or mitigate theeffects of shipboard flooding or fire in orderto achieve the established “time to remainhabitable” to allow the ship to return to a portor to allow safe and orderly abandonment.

Shipboard mooring andtowing equipment

The Sub-Committee agreed a draft MSCcircular on Guidance on shipboard mooring

and towing equipment, for approval by MSC80. The circular is intended to providestandards for the design and construction ofshipboard fittings and supporting hullstructures associated with towing andmooring. The Guidance supports regulationII-1/3-8 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention,which is expected to be adopted in 2005 andrequires that new displacement type ships(except high speed craft and offshore units)shall be provided with arrangements,equipment and fittings of sufficient safeworking load to enable the safe conduct ofall towing and mooring operationsassociated with the normal operations of theship.

The Sub-Committee also established acorrespondence group to develop a revisedproposal for draft SOLAS amendments andrelated guidelines for the assessment of deckequipment to be used in emergency towing,in relation to mandatory emergency towingsystems in ships other than tankers of notless than 20,000 dwt.

Amendments to the HSC andDSC Codes

Work on the preparation of draftamendments to the 1994 and 2000 High-Speed Craft (HSC) Codes and the Code ofSafety for Dynamically Supported Craft(DSC Code) continued with a view tofinalization at DE 49. A correspondencegroup was established to progress the workintersessionally.

OSV Guidelines

The Sub-Committee agreed draftamendments to the Guidelines for the design

and construction of offshore supply vessels

(resolution A.469(XII)), for submission tothe Sub-Committee on Stability and LoadLines and on Fishing Vessels’ Safety (SLF).

Interpretations of SOLAS,2000 HSC Code and MARPOL

The Sub-Committee agreed draft MSCcirculars on Interpretations to SOLAS

chapters II-1 and XII and to the 2000

HSC Code as well as a draft MEPC circularon Interpretations to MARPOL Annex

VI, for submission to MSC 80 and MEPC 53respectively.

Proposed draft amendments to the enhanced survey programme regarding surveys of bulk carriers were reviewed.The work is due to be finalized at the next DE session

Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE) • From the meetings


From the meetings • Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI)

• 13th session

• 7-11 March 2005

Implementation of mandatory IMO instruments– draft Code finalized by Sub-Committee

The draft Code for the implementation of

mandatory IMO instruments, which is akey element of the proposed Voluntary IMOMember State Audit Scheme, was finalizedby the Sub-Committee. It will be submittedto the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) inMay and the Marine Environment ProtectionCommittee (MEPC) in July for approval andthen to the IMO Assembly in November foradoption.

The draft Code is aimed at ensuring theproper and effective implementation ofstandards and it is intended that it will playan important role in achieving complete anduniform application of IMO standards on allships to which the IMO Conventions apply. Itincludes transparent criteria for properimplementation of IMO instruments by flagStates, port States and coastal States.

The draft Code includes four parts.

Part 1 - Common Areas includes sectionson the objective, strategy, scope, initialactions, communication of information,records and improvement of the Scheme.The Code states that a strategy to meet itsobjective should be developed, to coverimplementation and enforcement of relevantinternational mandatory instruments,adherence to internationalrecommendations, continuous review andverification of the effectiveness of the Statein respect of meeting its internationalobligations and the achievement,maintenance and improvement of overallorganizational performance and capability.States should continually improve theadequacy of the measures which are takento give effect to those conventions andprotocols which they have accepted.

Part 2 – Flag States includes sections onimplementation, delegation of authority,enforcement, flag State surveyors, flag Stateinvestigations and evaluation and review.The Code states that in order to effectivelydischarge their responsibilities andobligations, flag States should implementpolicies through the issuance of nationallegislation and guidance which will assist inthe implementation and enforcement of therequirements of all conventions andprotocols they are Party to and assignresponsibilities within their Administrationto update and revise any relevant policies

adopted. The flag States should, on a periodicbasis, evaluate their performance withrespect to the implementation ofadministrative processes, procedures andresources necessary to meet their obligationsas required by the conventions to which theyare Party.

Part 3 – Coastal States includes sectionson implementation, enforcement, evaluationand review. The Code states that CoastalStates have certain rights and obligationsunder various mandatory IMO instrumentsand that, in order to meet their obligationseffectively, coastal States should implementpolicies and guidance which will assist in theimplementation and enforcement of theirobligations and assign responsibilities withintheir Administration to update and revise anyrelevant policies adopted, as necessary.Coastal States should take all necessarymeasures to ensure their observance ofinternational rules when exercising theirrights and fulfilling their obligations. Acoastal State should consider developing andimplementing a control and monitoringprogramme.

Part 4 – Port States also includes sectionson implementation, enforcement andevaluation and review. The draft Code statesthat port States have certain rights andobligations under various mandatory IMO

instruments and that when exercising theirrights, port States incur additionalobligations. Port States should take allnecessary measures to ensure theirobservance of international rules whenexercising their rights and fulfilling theirobligations and should periodically evaluatetheir performance.

The draft Code also includes five Annexes:Annexes 1 to 4 cover the obligations ofContracting Governments/Parties and Annex5 includes tables on the instruments mademandatory under IMO Conventions.

The Sub-Committee also agreed a draftAssembly resolution on the Code.

Casualty investigation code -support for mandatory application

The issue of whether to make the Code for

the investigation of marine casualties and

incidents (resolution A.849(20), as amended)mandatory was discussed and the Sub-Committee expressed overwhelming supportfor the idea of making the Code mandatory,either in full or in part.

A Correspondence Group on the review ofthe Code for the investigation of marine

casualties and incidents was established toreview initially all issues relating to makingthe Code mandatory and to prepare aproposed revised draft format for the Code.

While there were various options for makinga revised Code mandatory, in full or in part,including the adoption of a new Convention,the general preference was to include a newregulation in SOLAS chapter XI-1.

The Sub-Committee also approved anamended casualty analysis procedure whichis aimed at ensuring a more rapiddistribution of information andrecommendations from the correspondencegroup on casualty analysis that may berelevant to other Sub-Committees.

Harmonization and co-ordinationof port State control activities

The Sub-Committee reviewed informationrelating to port State control (PSC) activities,including the outcome of the 3rd IMOWorkshop for PSC MoU/AgreementSecretaries and Directors of InformationCentres and the 2nd Joint Ministerial

In its consideration of the draft Code for the implementationof mandatory IMO instruments, the committee consideredthe relationship between Administrations and RecognizedOrganizations, such as classification societies (pic: ABS)


13th session •7-11 March 2005 •

Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI) • From the meetings

Date ofcompletionof survey

The Sub-Committeeagreed a draftMSC/MEPC circularon Interpretations

of the date of

completion of the

survey and

verification on

which the

certificate is based,for submission toMSC 80 and MEPC53 for approval, tosupersedeMSC/Circ.1012 -MEPC/Circ.384. Thecircular has beenprepared followingthe adoption by the MSC of the addition ofthe words “Completion date of the survey onwhich this certificate is based” to certificatesissued following surveys in respect of bothmandatory and non-mandatory instruments.The aim is to clarify, for control purposes,the date of the last survey.

Transfer of class

The Sub-Committee agreed a draftMSC/MEPC circular giving Guidelines for

the Administration to apply to ensure the

adequacy of transfer of class-related

matters between Recognized Organizations,for submission to the MSC and MEPC. Thecircular gives procedural requirements,including obligations of the gaining andlosing Recognized Organizations, when thereis transfer of class-related matters from oneRecognized Organization to another.

The Sub-Committee also agreed to a draftMSC/MEPC circular on Recommended

conditions for extending the period of

validity of a certificate, for submission toMSC 80 and MEPC 53 for approval.

Carriage of publications onboard ships

A draft MSC/MEPC circular on IMO

requirements and recommendations on

carriage of publications on board ships wasagreed, for submission to the MSC and

Conference of the Paris and Tokyo MoUs onPSC; the in-depth analysis of annual reportsof PSC regimes; the world fleet database andthe findings of a programme of checks onship security conducted by the Paris andTokyo MoUs. The Sub-Committeeconsidered several options for the conductof its future reviews of PSC-related mattersand provisionally agreed to theestablishment of a working group on PSC atits next session.

Guidelines for port Statecontrol officers on ConditionAssessment Scheme (CAS)

A draft MEPC circular on Guidelines for

port State control officers (PSCOs) whilstchecking compliance with CAS was agreed,for submission to MEPC 53. From 5 April2005, certain oil tankers will be required tocomply with the CAS survey requirements.The first CAS survey should be carried outconcurrent with the first intermediate orrenewal survey after 5 April 2005, or afterthe date when the ship reaches 15 years ofage, whichever occurs later. The Sub-Committee also invited Administrations toprovide the information required by CAS forinclusion in the relevant IMO CAS electronicdatabase. The draft Guidelines recommendthat PSCOs make an informed decision onwhether an oil tanker should comply withCAS by checking the International OilPollution Prevention Certificate (IOPPC) andother relevant statutory certificates and byconsulting the IMO CAS database.

The Sub-Committee also agreed draftGuidelines for port State control for

MARPOL Annex VI, for submission toMEPC 53. Annex VI, which includesregulations for the prevention of airpollution from ships, enters into force on 19May 2005.

HSSC - draft amendmentsagreed for MARPOL Annex VIsurveys

Survey guidelines for MARPOL Annex VIRegulations for the prevention of air

pollution by ships were agreed, in the formof draft amendments to resolution A.948(23)Revised Survey Guidelines under the

Harmonized System of Survey and

Certification.

MEPC for approval. The draft circular listspublications explicitly required by IMOinstruments to be carried on board ships aswell as those recommended to be carried onboard in order to improve the crew’sknowledge and to enhance theimplementation of IMO instruments.

Reports on inadequacy ofreception facilities

The Sub-Committee agreed a draft MEPCcircular on the Revised consolidated format

for reporting alleged inadequacy of port

reception facilities, which is intended to bemore user-friendly and take less time tocomplete. The intention is to encouragereports to be submitted so that appropriateaction can be taken. The Sub-Committee alsoagreed a draft MEPC circular on Waste

reception facility reporting requirements.

Reporting requirements underMARPOL

The Sub-Committee noted the low rate ofreporting on infringements of the MARPOLConvention and agreed a draft MEPCcircular on Compliance with the reporting

requirements under MARPOL which urgesall Parties to MARPOL 73/78 to fulfil theirtreaty obligations and comply fully with thereporting requirements under the MARPOLConvention, submitting on a yearly basistheir annual reports, including nil returns.

Maritime casualties - a Correspondence Group on the review of the Code for the investigationof marine casualties and incidents was established to review initially all issues relating tomaking the Code mandatory and to prepare a proposed revised draft format for the Code


From the meetings • Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids and Gases (BLG)

• 9th session

• 4-8 April 2005

The Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids andGases agreed draft Guidelines for the

application of the revised MARPOL Annex I

requirements to Floating Production

Storage and Offloading Facilities (FPSOs)

and Floating Storage Units (FSUs) to besubmitted to the 53rd session of the MarineEnvironment protection Committee (MEPC)in July 2005 for adoption. The revisedMARPOL Annex I Regulations for the

prevention of pollution by oil was adoptedin October 2004 and is expected to enter intoforce for ships on 1 January 2007.

Evaluation of safety andpollution hazards of chemicals

Sixteen cleaning additives were approved forinclusion in the next publication of the MEPCcircular which provides lists of noxious liquidsubstances (NLS) with associated categoriesand minimum carriage requirements whichhave been established through TripartiteAgreements and registered with the IMOSecretariat (MEPC.2/Circ. series).

The Sub-Committee also agreed draft revisedGuidelines for the completion of the BLG

Product Data Reporting Form and resolvedthe practical problems related to the relevantcertificates including the problemsassociated with determining equivalencywith respect to gas carriers that may arise inconnection with the implementation of therevised MARPOL Annex II, which wasadopted in October 2004 and is expected toenter into force on 1 January 2007.

Revision of fire protectionrequirements of the IBC, IGC,BCH and GC Codes

The Sub-Committee agreed proposed draftamendments to the International Code forthe Construction and Equipment of Shipscarrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBCCode), the International Code for theConstruction and Equipment of ShipsCarrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code),the Code for the Construction andEquipment of Ships Carrying DangerousChemicals in Bulk (BCH Code) and the Codefor the Construction and Equipment of ShipsCarrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (GC Code)aimed at ensuring consistency between theCodes and the revised SOLAS chapter II-2.The Sub-Committee also agreed the additionof Dimethyl Ether and Carbon Dioxide to

chapter 19 of the IGC Code and chapter XIXof the GC Code, for approval by the MSC.

Sewage regulations -amendments to standards

MARPOL Annex IV Prevention of pollution

by sewage from ships entered into force on27 September 2003. A revised Annex wasadopted on 1 April 2004, with an entry intoforce date of 1 August 2005.

The Sub-Committee established acorrespondence group to review resolutionMEPC.2(VI) Recommendation on

international effluent standards and

guidelines for performance tests for sewage

treatment plants. The revision is expected tofocus on a number of areas, including theneed to reflect current trends for theprotection of the marine environment anddevelopments in the design and effectivenessof commercially available sewage treatmentplants with a view to avoiding theproliferation of differing standardsworldwide. The review will aim to identifyand offer solutions for any problems relatedto the implementation of the resolution andwill take into account, as necessary, anyrelevant standards or guidelines developedby the World Health Organization (WHO).

The correspondence group will also developdraft standards for the establishment of therate of discharge for sewage that has beenstored in holding tanks aboard ships.

The Sub-Committee alsotasked thecorrespondence groupwith developing arecommendationregarding the dischargein a practical, efficientand environmentally-friendly manner, at adistance of more than 12nautical miles from thenearest land, of untreatedanimal effluent, notstored in holding tanks,from livestock carriers.

Review of theOSV Guidelines

The Sub-Committeefinalised its work on thereview of the Guidelines

Application of MARPOL to FPSOs and FSUs– draft guidelines agreed

Draft Guidelines for the application of the revised MARPOL Annex I requirementsto FPSOs and FSUs were agreed. They will be submitted to the 53rd session ofthe MEPC in July 2005 for adoption (pic: APL)

for the transport and handling of limited

amounts of hazardous and noxious liquid

substances in bulk on offshore support

vessels (resolution A.673(16)) and theGuidelines for the design and construction

of offshore supply vessels (OSV) (resolutionA.469(XII) and forwarded itsrecommendations to the Sub-Committee onStability and Load Lines and on FishingVessels Safety (SLF), which is co-ordinatingwork on the revision of the guidelines.

Guidelines for implementationof the 2004 Ballast WaterManagement Convention

Draft guidelines aiming at ensuring uniformimplementation of the InternationalConvention for the Control and Managementof Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004(BWM Convention) were finalized by theSub-Committee.

The following guidelines were finalized witha view to their adoption by MEPC 53: draftGuidelines for ballast water managementequivalent compliance; draft Guidelines forballast water management and thedevelopment of ballast water managementplans and draft Guidelines for ballast waterexchange. The following guidelines werealso finalized for review by the Flag StateImplementation (FSI) and Ship Design andEquipment (DE) Sub-Committees before finaladoption: draft Guidelines for sediment

Continued on next page


90th session •18-29 April 2005 •

Legal Committee (LEG) • From the meetings

The consideration of draft protocols toamend the 1988 Suppression of Unlawful

Acts (SUA) Convention and Protocol wascompleted by the Legal Committee ahead ofa diplomatic conference to be held later thisyear. For full story, see page 6.

The Committee also continued itsconsideration of the draft Wreck Removal

Convention (WRC) with a view to finalizing

as many outstanding issues as possible inorder to present as final as possible a draftfor consideration by a diplomatic conferencetentatively scheduled to be held in theforthcoming biennium. The WRC is intendedto provide international rules on the rightsand obligations of States and shipownerswith respect to wrecks and drifting orsunken cargo which may pose a hazard to

navigation and/or pose a threatto the marine environment.

The aim of the Convention is toclarify the rights andobligations regarding theidentification, reporting,locating and removal ofhazardous wrecks, in particularthose found beyond territorialwaters. The proposedConvention will also cover theissue of compensation in theevent that the coastal Stateitself needs to take relevantaction.

Fair treatment ofseafarers

The Committee reviewed thereport of the first session of theJoint IMO/ILO Ad Hoc ExpertWorking Group on the Fair

Treatment of Seafarers in theEvent of a Maritime Accident,

which met in January 2005. The Committeeapproved a draft resolution for adoption bythe twenty-fourth IMO Assembly (whichmeets in November-December 2005) and bythe ILO Governing Body. The resolution callsfor the adoption of guidelines on fairtreatment of seafarers in the event of amaritime accident as a matter of priority.

Claims for death, personalinjury and abandonment ofseafarers

The Committee received a progress report onthe work of the Joint IMO/ILO Ad HocExpert Working Group on Liability andCompensation regarding Claims for Death,Personal Injury and Abandonment ofSeafarers. In particular, the Committee notedthat ILO has created a database to recordinformation on incidents of abandonment ofseafarers. The database is intended tofacilitate monitoring of the size and scope ofthe issues involved.

Implementation of the HNSConvention

The Committee was updated on the status ofimplementation of the InternationalConvention on Liability and Compensationfor Damage in Connection with the Carriageof Hazardous and Noxious Substances (HNS)by Sea, 1996.

The HNS Convention is intended to add avital component to the international regimefor compensation for pollution damage atsea. At the end of April 2005, it had beenratified by eight States, representing 5.38 percent of world merchant shipping tonnage.For entry into force, the HNS Conventionrequires ratification by 12 States, four ofwhich have not less than two million units ofgross tonnage, provided that persons in theseStates who would be responsible for payingcontributions to the general account havereceived a total quantity of at least 40 milliontonnes of contributing cargo in the precedingcalendar year. It was noted that thecontracting States, as well as the Stateswhich in future will accede to the HNSConvention, are legally obliged to submitinformation on contributing cargo receivedwhen depositing their instruments with theSecretary-General of IMO and annuallythereafter.

Amendments to suppression of unlawfulacts (SUA) treaties finalized

A draft IMO/ILO resolution calling for the adoption of guidelines on fairtreatment of seafarers in the event of a maritime accident as a matter ofpriority was approved

reception facilities; draft Guidelines forballast water reception facilities and draftGuidelines on design and construction tofacilitate sediment control on ships.

Clarification of the definitionof fuel oil in MARPOL Annex I

The Sub-Committee agreed to a UnifiedInterpretation to regulation 13H(2) of thecurrent MARPOL Annex I and the text ofproposed amendments to regulation 21.2.2 ofthe revised MARPOL Annex I, which clarifythe definition of fuel oil. The intention is tofill the perceived gap in the definition ofHeavy Grade Oil (HGO) that presently wouldallow for HGOs other than crude oil, fuel oil,or bitumen, tar and their emulsions, to becarried on board single hulled ships.

The proposed Unified Interpretation anddraft amendments will be submitted toMEPC 53 in July 2005 for consideration.

Shipboard occupational health

Guidelines on the basic elements for a

shipboard occupational health and safety

programme were finalized for submission tothe Joint MSC/MEPC Working Group on theHuman Element, which meets during MEPCin July 2005, for consideration.

The voluntary guidelines describe the basicelements of a shipboard occupational health andsafety programme, applicable to all vessel types,which may be used by company managers,health and safety personnel or consultants whoare implementing, improving or auditing theeffectiveness of such a programme.

BLG 9 - continued from previous page

Features • Ship Recycling

The IMO’s work on ship recycling


Ship recycling contributes to sustainabledevelopment and is the most

environmentally friendly way of disposing ofships, with virtually every part of the hull andmachinery capable of being re-used.However, while the principle of shiprecycling is a sound one, the reported statusof working practices and environmentalstandards in recycling facilities in certainparts of the world often leaves much to bedesired.

Noting the growing concerns aboutenvironmental safety, health and welfarematters in the ship recycling industry, andthe need to reduce the environmental,occupational health and safety risks relatedto ship recycling, as well as the need tosecure the smooth withdrawal of ships thathave reached the end of their operating lives,IMO has taken swift action to develop arealistic and effective solution to some of theproblems associated with of ship recycling,which will take into account the particularcharacteristics of the world of maritimetransport.

The issue of ship recycling was first broughtto the attention of the IMO MarineEnvironment Protection Committee (MEPC)at its forty-second session in 1998 and at thefollowing sessions of the Committee it wasgenerally agreed that IMO has an importantrole to play in ship recycling, includingpreparation of a ship before recyclingcommences, and a co-ordinating roletowards the ILO and the Basel Convention inrecycling matters. At MEPC 47 (March 2002),the Committee agreed that, for the timebeing, IMO should develop recommendatoryguidelines to be adopted by an Assemblyresolution.

MEPC 49 (July 2003) finalized the IMOGuidelines on Ship Recycling (“Guidelines”),which were subsequently adopted in 2003 bythe IMO Assembly by resolution A.962(23).IMO invited Governments to take urgentaction to apply these Guidelines, includingtheir dissemination to the shipping and shiprecycling industries, and to report to theMEPC on any experience gained in theirimplementation.

MEPC 50 (December 2003), realized that theamendments to MARPOL Annex I toaccelerate the phase-out of single hull oil

tankers would increase the number of vesselsto be recycled within a specific period oftime, which implied an increased need forship recycling facilities and capabilities. TheCommittee adopted resolution MEPC.113(50),recommending that initiatives should betaken to maintain adequate ship recyclingfacilities at world-wide level and to promoteresearch and development programmes toimprove environment and safety levels in shiprecycling operations.

Ship recycling remains a high priority item onthe work programme of the MEPC andintensive work is currently under way withthe objective of promoting theimplementation of the Guidelines, assessingtheir effectiveness, reviewing them ifnecessary, and, finally, determining any otherrequired solutions, including the identificationof those parts of the Guidelines which may bemade mandatory.

Ship recycling remains one of the highpriority items in the agenda of the MEPC,which held its fifty-second session from 11 to15 October 2004. Having considered the needfor developing mandatory measures for shiprecycling, MEPC agreed that certain parts ofthe Guidelines might be given mandatoryeffect and the Working Group on ShipRecycling (WG), established at that session,developed an initial list of the elements of theGuidelines for which a mandatory schememight be regarded as the most suitable optionfor theirimplementation. Itwas agreed thatfuture work thatwas neededintersessionally inorder to develop thislist and to considerissues associatedwith the possiblemandatoryapplication of theidentified measures.

Whilst it wassuggested thatexisting IMOinstruments, such asMARPOL 73/78,could provide anappropriate vehicle

for the implementation of some of theidentified measures, the Group agreed that anew IMO instrument could be developed witha view to providing legally binding andglobally applicable ship recycling regulationsand that further work was needed before aconcrete proposal could be made on thisissue.

With regard to the development of a reportingsystem for ships destined for recycling, theWG agreed that this system should betransparent, effective, ensure uniformapplication and respect commerciallysensitive information; developed in such away as to facilitate the control andenforcement of any mandatory provisions onship recycling that may be developed by IMO;implemented by the shipowner, the recyclingfacility, the flag State and the recycling Stateswith the latter two stakeholders having theprimary role for ensuring its properapplication; should be a stand-alone reportingmechanism and, although existing notificationand reporting procedures under otherexisting legal instruments could be taken intoaccount, should be a workable and effectivesystem, with the minimum requiredadministrative burden and catering for theparticular characteristics of world maritimetransport.

MEPC 52 developed a draft outline of areporting system for ships destined forrecycling in order to identify, in a schematic

As the most environmentally friendly way of disposing of ships, recycling contributes tosustainable development. However, while the principle of ship recycling is a sound one,working practices and environmental standards in recycling facilities in certain parts ofthe world often leave much to be desired (pic: bhavnagar.com)

By Sokratis DimakopoulosViews expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of IMO or its Secretariat.

way, what should be reported, to where andby whom. Additional work will be needed,for example on the appropriate time-frames, aharmonized reporting format and the possibleneed for additional flow of informationbetween stakeholders.

MEPC 52 agreed that a “single list” of thepotentially hazardous materials on boardshould be developed. The “single list” wouldprovide guidance on the identification ofpotentially hazardous materials aboard shipsand the preparation of the relevantinventories. The WG agreed that the “singlelist” should be user friendly, workable andpracticable, specific for shipboardapplications, exclude any generic terms andprovide information on all hazards anddeveloped an initial layout of the “single list”for further consideration in the intersessionalperiod.

The Committee also considered a number ofproposals for amendments to the Guidelines,submitted by the Industry Working Party onShip Recycling[1], which was invited toprepare a revised text of the proposedamendments to the Guidelines for furtherconsideration in the intersessional period.

Following a proposal by Bangladesh, theneed, in principle, for the establishment of anInternational Ship Recycling Fund to promotethe safe and environmentally-soundmanagement of ship recycling through theIMO’s technical co-operation activities was


agreed. The IMO’sTechnical Co-operationCommittee wasinvited to considerfurther thearrangements toestablish such adedicated fund.

MEPC 52established acorrespondencegroup to furtherprogress the workin the intersessionalperiod, approved athree-dayintersessionalmeeting of theWorking Group on

Ship Recycling during the week before MEPC53 (to be held from 18 to 22 July 2005) toconsider the issues related to the terms ofreference of the Correspondence Group andagreed to re-establish the Working Group onShip Recycling at the next session of theCommittee.

IMO maintains close co-operation with ILOand the Basel Convention on the issue of shiprecycling and the establishment by the threeOrganizations of the Joint ILO/IMO/BaselConvention Working Group on ShipScrapping (JWG) isa good example andevidence of thisenhanced co-operation at theinternational level.

The overall task setby the threeOrganizations forthe JWG is to act asa platform forconsultation, co-ordination and co-operation inrelation to theirwork programmesand activities withregard to issuesrelated to shiprecycling. The JWGaims to promote a

Ship Recycling • Feature

Virtually every part of a ship’s hull and machinery is capable of being re-used (pic: bhavnagar.com)

co-ordinated approach to the relevant aspectsof ship recycling with the aim of avoidingduplication of work and overlapping of roles,responsibilities and competencies betweenthe three Organizations, and identifyingfurther needs.

The first session of the JWG was held at theIMO headquarters in London from 15 to 17February 2005. It analysed the respectivework programmes of the pertinent bodies ofILO, IMO and the Conference of Parties to theBasel Convention on the issue of shiprecycling and developed a list of the mainitems that are being considered by the threeOrganizations concurrently.

With a view to identifying any possible gaps,overlaps, or ambiguities, the JWG began acomprehensive initial examination of therelevant IMO, ILO and BC guidelines on shiprecycling, based on a comparison of theissues presented in each of the guidelines inthe form of a matrix, and a draft overviewpaper outlining the purpose of each of theguidelines, their respective field ofapplication and main contents. This is a largeundertaking and intersessional work andfurther work at the second session will beneeded.

The JWG agreed that each Organizationshould consider the translation of itsguidelines into the working languages of the

Amendments to MARPOL Annex I to accelerate the phase-out of single hull oil tankersimply an increased need for ship recycling facilities and capabilities. IMO adoptedresolution MEPC.113(50), recommending that initiatives should be taken to maintainadequate ship recycling facilities at world-wide level and to promote research anddevelopment programmes to improve environment and safety levels in ship recyclingoperations (pic: Edwards ship photos)

[1] The Industry Working Party on Ship Recycling was established in February 1999comprising representatives from BIMCO, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO, ICS, ITOPF, ITF,and OCIMF with active participation, as observers, also from ECSA and IACS.


Ship recycling plan

In accordance with the IMO Guidelines on Ship Recycling, the development andimplementation of a recycling plan can help ensure that a ship has been prepared to the

maximum extent possible prior to its recycling and that the safety of the ship, prior todelivery, has been taken into account. The ship recycling plan should be developed by therecycling facility in consultation with the shipowner, taking into account the potentialhazards which may arise during the recycling operation, the relevant national andinternational requirements and the facilities available at the recycling facility in terms ofmaterials, handling and the disposal of any wastes generated during the recycling process.

MEPC 52 approved Guidelines for the development of the ship recycling plan, aimed atproviding technical information and guidance for its preparation.

main ship recycling States, and that eachshould also ensure that a user-friendly webpage is established, providing information onship recycling matters and a link to the othertwo Organizations’ relevant web-pages andguidelines. It also agreed to invite the shiprecycling States to make point-of-contactdetails for the competent authoritiesresponsible for issues related to shipscrapping publicly available, and to inviteGovernments and all involved stakeholders toprovide information to the threeOrganizations on any experience gained inthe implementation of the guidelines.

It was agreed that the implementation of theguidelines should be also promoted throughjoint technical co-operation activities, and theJWG has invited Governments and otherstakeholders to provide information to thethree Organizations on any technical co-operation activities or other relevantinitiatives already launched or planned sothat these activities can be taken into accountin the future technical co-operationprogrammes of the Organizations. EachOrganization will invite the other two toparticipate in any workshops or seminarsthey organize, and a section providinginformation on the guidelines of the othertwo is to be included in the programme ofany such activities. It was agreed that the

Features • Ship Recycling

threeOrganizationsshould be askedto consider aglobal technicalco-operationprogramme onship scrapping.

The secondsession of theJWG will behosted by theBasel Conventionin Geneva,Switzerland,either inDecember 2005 orJanuary 2006.

In conclusion,recycling is one ofthe basicprinciples of

sustainable development and ship recyclingis, generally, the best option for all time-expired tonnage. IMO, therefore, encouragesand promotes ship recycling in compliancewith the international standards on safety,health and environment.

IMO’s work on ship recycling aims at thedevelopment of a realistic, pragmatic, well-balanced, workable and effective solution tothe problem of ship recycling, which shouldtake into account the particularcharacteristics of world maritime transportand the need for securing the smoothwithdrawal of ships from trade at the end oftheir operating lives.

Areas where IMO has focused its attentioninclude, but are not limited to theminimization of the use of hazardousmaterials in the design, construction andmaintenance of ships, without compromisingtheir safety and operational efficiency; theidentification of potentially hazardousmaterials on board ships and the preparationof the relevant inventories (e.g. GreenPassport) and the preparation of ships forrecycling in such a manner as to reduceenvironmental and safety risks and healthand welfare concerns as far as practicable.

The issue of ship recycling has been givenhigh priority at the MEPC in order that thepromotion of the implementation of the IMOGuidelines on Ship Recycling and theconsideration of a possible new legallybinding IMO instrument on ship recycling areprogressed as efficiently and expeditiously aspossible.

IMO maintains close co-operation with ILOand the appropriate bodies of the BaselConvention, with the aim of avoidingduplication of work and overlapping ofresponsibilities and competencies betweenthe three Organizations.

Sokratis Dimakopoulos is the responsible

officer in the IMO Secretariat for issues

related to ship recycling. He is the

Secretary of the MEPC’s Working group on

Ship Recycling and Co-Secretary of the

IMO/ILO/Basel Convention Joint Working

Group on Ship Scrapping.

Growing concerns about environmental safety, health and welfare matters in the shiprecycling industry, and the need to reduce the environmental, occupational health andsafety risks related to ship recycling, as well as the need to secure the smooth withdrawalof ships that have reached the end of their operating lives, have prompted IMO to take swiftaction to develop a realistic and effective solution to some of the problems associated withship recycling (pic: bhavnagar.com)


Ship recycling – IMO Guidelines

They were developed to provideguidance to flag, port and recycling

States, shipowners, ship recycling facilities,ship builders and marine equipmentsuppliers as to “best practice”, which takesinto account the ship recycling processthroughout the life cycle of the ship. TheGuidelines seek to encourage recycling asthe best means to dispose of ships at theend of their operating lives; provideguidance in respect of the preparation ofships for recycling and minimizing the useof potentially hazardous materials andwaste generation during a ship’s operatinglife; foster inter-agency co-operation andencourage all stakeholders to address theissue of ship recycling.

The Guidelines take into account the“Industry Code of Practice on ShipRecycling”[1] and complement otherinternational guidelines addressing thisissue; notably those produced under theBasel Convention on the Control ofTransboundary Movements of HazardousWastes and their Disposal focusing onissues related to ship recycling facilities[2],and those of the International LabourOrganization addressing working conditionsat the recycling facilities.[3]

They place a significant emphasis on theidentification of potentially hazardousmaterials on board ships prior to recyclingand introduce the concept of the Green

Passport. The Green Passport for ships isa document providing information withregard to materials known to be potentiallyhazardous utilised in the construction of theship, its equipment and systems. Thisdocument should accompany the shipthroughout its operating life and successiveowners of the ship should maintain theaccuracy of the Green Passport andincorporate into it all relevant design andequipment changes, with the final ownerdelivering the document, with the ship, tothe recycling facility.

Acknowledging that a number of theproblems associated with ship recycling

might be addressed at the design andconstruction stage, the Guidelines encourageship designers and shipbuilders to take dueaccount of the ship’s ultimate disposal whendesigning and constructing a ship.

The use of materials which can be recycled ina safe and environmentally sound manner, theminimization of the use of materials knownto be potentially hazardous to health and theenvironment, the consideration of structuraldesigns that could facilitate ship recyclingand the promotion of the use of techniquesand designs which, without compromisingsafety or operational efficiency, contributetowards the facilitation of the recyclingoperation are some of the recommendationsprovided by the Guidelines with regard to thedesign and construction of ships.

Manufacturers of marine equipment thatcontains hazardous substances are alsoencouraged to design the equipment so as tofacilitate the safe removal of thosesubstances, or give advice as to how suchsubstances can be safely removed at the endof the working life of the equipment.

Minimization of the use of potentiallyhazardous substances and of wastegeneration is also recommended for thelifetime of ships and shipowners areencouraged to make every effort to minimizethe amount of potentially hazardous materialson board the ship, including those carried asstores, during routine or major maintenanceoperations or major conversions andcontinuously seek to minimize hazardouswaste generation and retention during theoperating life of a ship and at the end of aship’s life.

The Guidelines also provide a number ofrecommendations with regard to thepreparation of a ship for recycling, whichshould begin before the ship arrives at therecycling facility. These preparations include,amongst others: the selection of a recyclingfacility which has the capability to recycle theships it purchases in a manner consistentwith national legislation and relevant

international conventions; the developmentof a recycling plan by the recycling facilityin consultation with the shipowner,ensuring that a ship has been prepared tothe maximum extent possible prior to itsrecycling and that the safety of the ship,prior to delivery, has been taken intoaccount; preparations to protectoccupational health and safety, such asissue of gas-free/hot work certificates,marking of any oxygen-deficientcompartments onboard and identification ofany area of the ship where there may bestructural integrity problems or criticalsupport structures, and preparations toprevent pollution, such as minimization ofthe quantities of fuel, diesel, lubricating,hydraulic and other oils and chemicals onboard at delivery to the facility, removal ofwastes at appropriate port receptionfacilities, and controlled drainage, by therecycling facility, of potentially harmfulliquids from the ship.

The Guidelines provide guidance to allstakeholders in the ship recycling process.This includes flag, port and recycling States,authorities of shipbuilding and maritimeequipment supplying countries, as well asrelevant intergovernmental organizationsand commercial bodies such as shipowners,ship builders, marine equipmentmanufacturers, repairers and recyclingfacilities. Additional stakeholders includeworkers, local communities, andenvironmental and labour bodies.

The Guidelines also refer to the role of theILO, the Basel Convention and the LondonConvention 1972/1996 Protocol, makingreference to their relevant provisions andguidelines applicable to ship recycling.

Finally, the Guidelines suggest that nationalor regional organizations should co-operatewith Governments in ship recycling Statesand other interested parties on projectsinvolving the transfer of technology or aidfunding to improve facilities and workingpractices in the recycling facilities.

The IMO Guidelines on Ship Recycling were adopted on 5 December 2003 by resolution A.962(23).

[1] In co-operation with other industry organizations, ICShas produced the “Industry Code of Practice on ShipRecycling”, outlining the measures that shipownersshould be prepared to take prior to recycling (seewww.marisec.org/recycling).

[2] Technical Guidelines for the Environmentally SoundManagement of the Full and Partial Dismantling of Shipsadopted by the Sixth Meeting of the Conference of Partiesto the Basel Convention on 13 December 2002 (seehttp://www.basel.int/ships/techguid.html).

[3] Safety and Health in Shipbreaking: Guidelines forAsian countries and Turkey, developed by ILO (seewww.ilo.org/public/english/protection/safework/sectors/shipbrk/index.htm).

Ship Recycling • Feature


Workshop highlights role of flag States

IMO at work

An International Workshop on Flag StateImplementation, organized by IMO through

its Integrated Technical Co-operationProgramme (ITCP) was held in March at IMOHeadquarters.

Its objective was to promote a clearunderstanding of the duties and responsibilitiesof flag States regarding merchant, fishing andother vessels flying their flags. It also sought toaddress the difficulties faced by States in theeffective implementation and enforcement ofrelated provisions contained in IMO’sconventions and other international instruments.

A further objective was to inform participants ofinitiatives and developments at IMO concerningthe assessment of compliance by States with theglobal maritime standards adopted by theOrganization through its Conventions, Codesand other instruments.

The procedure for the adoption and ratificationof IMO instruments was also detailed, as werethe different aspects of flag, port and coastalState jurisdiction. In respect of flag States, it wasemphasized that Governments, in accepting,implementing and enforcing IMO instruments,had to make significant investments andembrace fully their commitments.

The efficacy of a flag State may be assessed by,among other things, the extent of its acceptanceand implementation of international maritime lawinstruments, the scope of its national legislation,particularly in relation to the effectiveimplementation of international maritimeinstruments and the extent of the MaritimeAdministration’s infrastructure in relation toregistration, safety oversight, enforcement andinvestigation, control and monitoring, andmeeting obligations under international maritimelaw instruments.

However, the meeting concluded that there is nomodel for an “ideal” Maritime Administrationinfrastructure and this will depend on severalfactors, including the number and type of shipsregistered the international conventions thathave been accepted and enacted into national lawand the availability of administrative andtechnical expertise. Nevertheless, States shouldensure that adequate resources are provided totheir Maritime Administrations to enable them toperform their functions effectively in theexercise of flag, port and coastal Statejurisdiction in accordance with relevantinternational standards.

The meeting agreed that the conduct ofinvestigations into marine casualties and

The delegation by flag States of statutory survey andcertification functions to recognized organizations (ROs)does not equal the delegation of responsibility, theworkshop agreed. Flag States must retain the ability tofulfil their obligation to monitor the work carried out byROs on their behalf (pic: ABS)

incidents, requiring the appointment and trainingof accident investigators, is a crucial obligationof flag States that is of global benefit sincelessons learned from such investigations canenhance maritime safety and marineenvironment protection. Training materials onmarine accident and incident investigationshould be provided with increased frequency todeveloping countries through IMO’s ITCP.

Presentations on flag State responsibilitiesrelated to maritime security, marine environmentprotection, marine insurance and seafarersunderlined the complexity of the relatedobligations of flag States. Issues highlightedincluded the need for IMO to considerdeveloping guidance on the extension ofmaritime security procedures to non-Conventionvessels and fishing vessels, the application byflag States of safe manning requirements andways to ensure that seafarers’ rights aresafeguarded in the context of the implementationof the ISPS Code.

It was also agreed that, in fulfilling theirobligations under the IMO Conventions to whichthey are Parties, States should respect theirobligation to fulfil the related reportingrequirements. The low level of response oncertain topics leads to inaccurate statistics andinformation and frustrates the work of IMO’sgoverning bodies in assessing how effectivelythe Conventions are being implemented andenforced.

Several presentations were made on howGovernments and industry (classificationsocieties and shipowners’ associations) monitorand assess compliance by flag States with globalmaritime standards. In this respect, it wasconcluded that it may not always be possible foradministrations of developing flag States toundertake the same level of compliancemonitoring as more developed flag States.

While recognizing that the structures andresources available to each flag State will dependon several factors, it was neverthelessacknowledged that the delegation by flag Statesof statutory survey and certification functions torecognized organizations (ROs) does not equalthe delegation of responsibility. Flag States mustretain the ability to fulfil their obligation tomonitor the work carried out by ROs on theirbehalf.

The potential for improved flag Stateperformance, resulting from close co-operationbetween flag and port States through theactivities of regional port State control regimes,was highlighted in a presentation by arepresentative of a major flag State. It was notedthat similar experience had been gained in theCaribbean, where flag State performance hadalso improved as a result of the compliancemonitoring carried out by the regional port Statecontrol regime.

With a view to improving their performance asflag States, it was agreed that countries shouldaccess all available forms of technical assistanceand development aid, including through: IMO’sITCP; regional organizations and developmentbanks; the World Bank and the GlobalEnvironment Facility; technical co-operationamong developing countries (TCDC); and relatedindustry programmes (e.g. IACS, ITF, etc.).

A strong view was also expressed that IMOshould seek to facilitate access by developingStates to development aid, specifically in relationto capital investment requirements, and also tothe technical assistance that may be providedbilaterally by the Maritime Administrations ofdeveloped countries.

A presentation on “Making a case forperformance assessment” provided informationon the development of compliance monitoringand performance assessment and detailed theresponsibilities of the various actors in theimplementation and enforcement of globalmaritime standards. In this respect, advances inthis area included the flag State Self-AssessmentForm and the on-going development of the

IMO at work


PORT STATE CONTROLLONDON, 3 –13 April 2006

This widely recognised and practical intensive course is now in its 18th successive year. The course is designed especially for officials in national marine departments,

port or terminal operators, ship managers and shipowners.

The course covers in detail the major IMO conventions and codes along with other relevant internationalregulations and conventions, inspection systems and documentation.

Special sections of the course concentrate on the ISPS code.

The Course is taught by an experienced team of academics and practitioners from the UK, USA and Europe.

Venue: Senate House, University of London

Fees: Sterling £2,650

The course is conducted by the Centre for Maritime Co-operation of the International Chamber of Commerce.Further details can be obtained from:

Miss Angeles Aguado, Course Co-ordinatorICC Centre for Maritime Co-operation

Maritime House, 1 Linton Road, Barking, Essex IG11 8HG, United Kingdom

Tel: + 44 20 8591 3000 Fax: + 44 20 8594 2833E-mail [email protected] Web www.icc-ccs.org

Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme,which was approved in IMO Assemblyresolution A.946(23) and is applicable to flag,port and coastal States. It was suggested thatboth schemes provided States with theopportunity to carry out objective self-evaluations leading to the identification of areasrequiring improvements and consequentassistance needs.

Presentations on the work of the twocorrespondence groups dealing with the draftCode for the implementation of [mandatory]IMO instruments and the Voluntary IMOMember State Audit Schemes gave a clearbackground to the development of bothinitiatives and highlighted their obvious inter-relations. A schedule for the adoption of bothinitiatives by the Assembly at its twenty-thirdsession in November 2005 was outlined and theworkshop was advised that a global programmeof regional training courses for auditors wouldbe initiated in the last quarter of 2005 with partfunding from the IMO Technical Co-operationFund. Further courses would follow during the2006-2007 biennium.

The Workshop recommended that, following theadoption of the Code on implementation of[mandatory] IMO instruments, the IMOSecretariat should develop a webpage on itspublic website itemizing the obligations of flag,port and coastal States under existingConventions and mandatory Codes, withappropriate linkages to the guidance alreadydeveloped by the Organization for the fulfilmentof these obligations. Additionally, a similarapproach should be considered for any futureConventions and mandatory Codes that may bedeveloped and adopted by IMO.

The issue of application of IMO rules andregulations to non-Convention ships and fishing

vessels came up regularly under many of the topicscovered by the Workshop. Among the main issueshighlighted was a concern that there are currentlyno mandatory international requirements on thesurvey and certification of non-Convention ships,although in 2005 IMO adopted VoluntaryGuidelines for the Design, Construction andEquipment of Small Fishing Vessels.

The Organization has also helped severaldeveloping regions to prepare and adoptrelevant codes and regulations (for example theCaribbean Cargo Ship Safety Code (vesselsunder 500 GT) and Small Commercial VesselCode (vessels under 24 metres), the East andSouth East Asia Guidelines for Fishing Vesselsand the draft national regulations for non-Convention ships that are to made a regionalstandard by the Mediterranean countries),which were being used as the vessel safety

standards in those regions and, in some cases,as the port State control standards also. It wassuggested that the countries participating inthe Workshop, many of which have only non-Convention ships or small fishing vessels undertheir flag, should access these instrumentsthrough the IMO public website and considerusing them as safety standards for theirvessels.

The Workshop concluded that the mainobstacle to ensuring the safety of non-Convention ships was not simply one of lack ofregulations, but one of lack of financialresources and of a comprehensive safetyculture, versus the need to secure livelihoods.It was suggested that IMO consider enhancingits focus on building up safety awarenessamong the seafarers, fishermen andpassengers operating and using such ships.

The need for IMO to consider developing guidance on the extension of maritime security procedures to non-Convention vessels and fishing vessels was highlighted (pic: Olav Moen)

Meeting tackles security issues for non-SOLAS vessels

ASeminar on maritime security measuresfor non-SOLAS vessels was convened at

IMO Headquarters on 10 May 2005 by theJapan International Transport Institute. Thepurpose of the seminar was to help placeissues in sharper focus and enable movestowards a common approach to them.

As comprehensive and far reaching as theyare, the maritime security measures adoptedby IMO in 2002 apply formally to only onesector, albeit an extremely broad one, of thewider maritime community. Because theywere adopted as amendments to the Safety ofLife at Sea Convention, by definition theyapply only to ships that come under theauspices of that Convention – essentiallypassenger ships, cargo ships of 500 gross tonsand above that are engaged in internationaltrade, and mobile offshore drilling units.

Although this means that nearly 100 per centof the world’s international merchant fleet iscovered, Governments attending the 2002

Conference were very wellaware, at the time ofadopting the newmeasures, that thehundreds of thousands ofvessels all over the worldthat are not covered by theSOLAS Conventionnonetheless had thepotential to pose asignificant security threat.At the same, therefore, theConference adopted aresolution encouragingGovernments to tackle theproblem, and it was in thatcontext that this meetingwas held.

In his opening address to the meeting, IMOSecretary-General Efthimios E. Mitropoulosreferred to the host of different factors thatcombine to make establishing effective

security measures for non-SOLAS shipping a difficultand complex challenge. Theimmense diversity of thesector in terms of vesselownership, different vesseltypes with a multitude ofspecific or general purposes,in terms of trading patternsand port facilities used, oftencompounded by the absenceof a formal structure ofregistration and inspection,suggests that a solution thatworks in one part of the worldmay not necessarily meet therequirements of another.

IMO at work

OhOn behalf of the North East MaritimeInstitute of Fairhaven, USA, Mr Eric

Dawicki President of the institute, hasdonated US$50,000 to the IMO’sInternational Maritime Security Trust Fund.

The fund was established as a multi-donortrust fund to be maintained separately fromall other funds established by theOrganization with the main purpose ofproviding support for national initiatives withrespect to legal, administrative and operationmatters aimed at strengthening maritimesecurity in developing countries andensuring that the interests of all developingregions are adequately recognized.

Although IMO maritime security measures address the concerns of the international shippingand port industries, nevertheless shipping activity that falls outside of the SOLAS Conventioncan also pose a major threat


He said, “The threat of terrorism is notreceding. Moreover, we, in the world ofshipping, have to consider issues that reachfar beyond the immediate consequences ofany terrorist attack, however horrific theymay be. We have already taken great steps,under the auspices of the SOLAS Convention,towards addressing the question of securityfor international shipping and are expandingour work to also cover shipping lanes ofstrategic significance and importance, such asthe Malacca Strait. But even a small ship,used strategically and in the right location, atthe right time, could have a major disruptiveeffect on human life, the environment andlocal, regional and even international trade –so, finding ways to tackle successfully thesecurity question for non-SOLAS shipping isnot just a desirable addition to the workalready undertaken, it is a vital and necessarycomponent of it”.

Security fund gets boostAll funds available in the IMST Fund havebeen transferred to the Global Programme onMaritime Security to address relevant activitiesand projects that are identified as priorities bythe developing countries, as well as by donors.There has been great demand for assistance inthe implementation of the maritime securityregime and the Secretariat, in closecollaboration with IMO technical co-operationpartners, has made every possible effort tomeet the demand. In 2004 alone, five regionaland 34 national seminars/workshops orcourses on maritime security were deliveredand 21 country needs assessment/advisorymissions were fielded.

The International Maritime Law Institute(IMLI) held its 16th Graduation

Ceremony on, May 14th 2005 at theMaritime Museum in Vittoriosa, Malta. Theceremony was attended by, among others,Mr. Efthimios Mitropoulos and the Hon.Censu Galea, Malta’s Minister forCompetitiveness and Communications.

During the ceremony 27 lawyers from 20States were awarded the Master Degree inInternational Maritime Law.

A welcoming Address was delivered by theDirector of the Institute, Professor David J.Attard, who also presented the degrees tothe 16th generation of IMLI lawyers.Secretary-General Mitropoulos, also

Obituary: Captain Zenon Sdougos

IMO at work

Captain Zenon Sdougos, a long-servingand highly esteemed contributor to the

work of the International MaritimeOrganization, has died at his home inLondon. He was 89.

Captain Sdougos began his long maritimecareer as a deck officer in the Greekmerchant navy, before joining the HellenicCoast Guard, where he achieved the rank ofCaptain. In 1961, he joined the IMOSecretariat to work in the Maritime SafetyDivision. In 1976 he retired from IMO, havingrisen to the post of Director of the division.

He then began a new career, as an advisor tothe Union of Greek Shipowners, in whichcapacity he continued to make an

IMLI students graduate with flying colours

Shipping organization celebrates 100 years

More than 800 Maritime industry peoplefrom 60 centres around the world met in

Copenhagen in May to celebrate the centenaryof the shipping organisation BIMCO.

Founded in 1905 by a small group ofNorthern European shipowners, BIMCOhas grown into a global organisation of 2500members in 123 countries. The owner-members of BIMCO control a fleet of about525 million DWT thereby representing 65%of the world’s merchant fleet. BIMCO isaccredited as an official observer at IMO.Among its many activities, BIMCO provides

practical information and assistance to themaritime community.

“Global Outlook” was been the theme of theCentenary conference. This was reflected inthe address of the Danish Foreign Minister,Per Stig Møller, who paid tribute to theshipping industry as “the single mostimportant vehicle for globalisation.”

Outgoing President of BIMCO, C.C. Tungsaid that the global influence of BIMCO wasnot merely geographical, but “wasdemonstrated in the wide spread of interest ofour members, who today represented all parts

During therecent visit ofofficials from theBahia Port ofAlgeciras, Spainto IMO, PortPresident Mr.Manuel MoronLedro presents aplaque to IMO’sHead of ExternalRelations, OlgaBosquez.

Algeciras visit to IMO

of the maritime industry.” The ability to tapinto the experience of shipping experts fromaround the globe and from every industrialsector, said Mr. Tung, enables BIMCO tobring real value to the negotiating table in itsdiscussion with governments and regulatorsat the highest level.

Speaking at the opening of the relatedBIMCO/Sohmen lecture, IMO Secretary-GeneralEfthimios Mitropoulos took the opportunity toexpress his thanks to BIMCO for also markingits centenary by making a contribution to IMO’sInternational Search and Rescue Fund.

Chairman of the IMLI Govering Board,delivered a Graduation Address, in which hequoted United Nations Secretary-GeneralKofi Annan emphasizing to the UN GeneralAssembly the importance of the rule of lawand the need for common solutions to thecommon problems that we all face today.

Established under the auspices of the IMO,IMLI is an international centre for trainingspecialists in maritime law. Since itsestablishment in 1989 IMLI has successfullytrained 332 lawyers from 103 countriesaround the world who are now serving therule of international maritime law and aregreatly contributing to IMO’s aim of safershipping and cleaner oceans.

outstanding contribution to the work of theOrganization. Among many achievements,his important work in the area ofnavigational safety and the development ofthe GMDSS will be particularlyremembered.

IMO Secretary-General Efthimios E.Mitropoulos said “It was with great sadnessthat we learned of the death of CaptainSdougos. He was a man of integrity, who hada profound knowledge and understanding ofshipping. He was fully committed to thecauses of maritime safety and environmentalprotection and made a major contribution overmany years of committed service. His passingwill be mourned by all those who knew him.”


International Maritime Organization4 Albert EmbankmentLondon SE1 7SRUnited Kingdomwww.imo.org

Designed by Flipside www.flipsideweb.co.uk

INTERNATIONALMARITIME

ORGANIZATION

accelerated single-hull phase-out in …€¦ · accelerated single-hull phase-out in force new sua...

Documents