southindiashipjobs

About

IMO Conventions

Introduction
Adopting a convention
Entry into force
Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession
Signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval
Accession
Amendment
Enforcement
IMO conventions
Tacit acceptance procedure

Introduction

The industrial revolution of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and the upsurge in international commerce which followed resulted in the adoption of a number of international treaties related to shipping, including safety.  The subjects covered included tonnage measurement, the prevention of collisions, signalling and others.

By the end of the nineteenth century suggestions had even been made for the creation of a permanent international maritime body to deal with these and future measures.  The plan was not put into effect, but international co-operation continued in the twentieth century, with the adoption of still more internationally developed treaties.

By the time IMO came into existence in 1958, several important international conventions had already been developed, including the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1948, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil of 1954 and treaties dealing with load lines and the prevention of collisions at sea.

IMO was made responsible for ensuring that the majority of these conventions were kept up to date.  It was also given the task of developing new conventions as and when the need arose.

The creation of IMO coincided with a period of tremendous change in world shipping and the Organization was kept busy from the start developing new conventions and ensuring that existing instruments kept pace with changes in shipping technology.  It is now responsible for more than 40 international conventions and agreements and has adopted numerous protocols and amendments.

Adopting a convention

This is the part of the process with which IMO as an Organization is most closely involved.  IMO has six main bodies concerned with the adoption or implementation of conventions.  The Assembly and Council are the main organs, and the committees involved are the Maritime Safety Committee, Marine Environment Protection Committee, Legal Committee and the Facilitation Committee.  Developments in shipping and other related industries are discussed by Member States in these bodies, and the need for a new convention or amendments to existing conventions can be raised in any of them.

Normally the suggestion is first made in one of the committees, since these meet more frequently than the main organs.  If agreement is reached in the committee, the proposal goes to the Council and, as necessary, to the Assembly.

If the Assembly or the Council, as the case may be, gives the authorization to proceed with the work, the committee concerned considers the matter in greater detail and ultimately draws up a draft instrument. In some cases the subject may be referred to a specialized sub-committee for detailed consideration.

Work in the committees and sub-committees is undertaken by the representatives of Member States of the Organization.  The views and advice of intergovernmental and international non-governmental organizations which have a working relationship with IMO are also welcomed in these bodies.  Many of these organizations have direct experience in the various matters under consideration, and are therefore able to assist the work of IMO in practical ways.

The draft convention which is agreed upon is reported to the Council and Assembly with a recommendation that a conference be convened to consider the draft for formal adoption.

Invitations to attend such a conference are sent to all Member States of IMO and also to all States which are members of the United Nations or any of its specialized agencies.  These conferences are therefore truly global conferences open to all Governments who would normally participate in a United Nations conference.  All Governments participate on an equal footing.  In addition, organizations of the United Nations system and organizations in official relationship with IMO are invited to send observers to the conference to give the benefit of their expert advice to the representatives of Governments.

Before the conference opens, the draft convention is circulated to the invited Governments and organizations for their comments.  The draft convention, together with the comments thereon from Governments and interested organizations is then closely examined by the conference and necessary changes are made in order to produce a draft acceptable to all or the majority of the Governments present.  The convention thus agreed upon is then adopted by the conference and deposited with the Secretary-General who sends copies to Governments.  The convention is opened for signature by States, usually for a period of 12 months. Signatories may ratify or accept the convention while non-signatories may accede.

The drafting and adoption of a convention in IMO can take several years to complete although in some cases, where a quick response is required to deal with an emergency situation, Governments have been willing to accelerate this process considerably.

Entry into force

The adoption of a convention marks the conclusion of only the first stage of a long process.  Before the convention comes into force - that is, before it becomes binding upon Governments which have ratified it - it has to be accepted formally by individual Governments.

Each convention includes appropriate provisions stipulating conditions which have to be met before it enters into force.  These conditions vary but generally speaking, the more important and more complex the document, and the more stringent are the conditions for its entry into force.  For example, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, provided that entry into force requires acceptance by 25 States whose merchant fleets comprise not less than 50 per cent of the world's gross tonnage; for the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969, the requirement was acceptance by 25 States whose combined merchant fleets represent not less than 65 per cent of world tonnage.

When the appropriate conditions have been fulfilled, the convention enters into force for the States which have accepted - generally after a period of grace intended to enable all the States to take the necessary measures for implementation.

In the case of some conventions which affect a few States or deal with less complex matters, the entry into force requirements may not be so stringent.  For example, the Convention Relating to Civil Liability in the Field of Maritime Carriage of Nuclear Material, 1971, came into force 90 days after being accepted by five States; the Special Trade Passenger Ships Agreement, 1971, came into force six months after three States (including two with ships or nationals involved in special trades) had accepted it.

For the important technical conventions, it is necessary that they be accepted and applied by a large section of the shipping community.  It is therefore essential that these should, upon entry into force, be applicable to as many of the maritime states as possible.  Otherwise they would tend to confuse, rather than clarify, shipping practice since their provisions would not apply to a significant proportion of the ship they were intended to deal with.

Accepting a convention does not merely involve the deposit of a formal instrument.  A Government's acceptance of a convention necessarily places on it the obligation to take the measures required by the convention.  Often national law has to be enacted or changed to enforce the provisions of the convention; in some case, special facilities may have to be provided; an inspectorate may have to be appointed or trained to carry out functions under the convention; and adequate notice must be given to shipowners, shipbuilders and other interested parties so they make take account of the provisions of the convention in their future acts and plans.

At present IMO conventions enter into force within an average of five years after adoption.  The majority of these instruments are now in force or are on the verge of fulfilling requirements for entry into force.

Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession

The terms signature, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession refer to some of the methods by which a State can express its consent to be bound by a treaty.

Signature

Consent may be expressed by signature where:

• the treaty provides that signature shall have that effect;
• it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect;
• the intention of the State to give that effect to signature appears from the full powers of its representatives or was expressed during the negotiations (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Article 12.1).

A State may also sign a treaty "subject to ratification, acceptance or approval".  In such a situation, signature does not signify the consent of a State to be bound by the treaty, although it does oblige the State to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty until such time as it has made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 18(a))

 

 

Signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval

Most multilateral treaties contain a clause providing that a State may express its consent to be bound by the instrument by signature subject to ratification.

In such a situation, signature alone will not suffice to bind the State, but must be followed up by the deposit of an instrument of ratification with the depositary of the treaty.

This option of expressing consent to be bound by signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval originated in an era when international communications were not instantaneous, as they are today.

It was a means of ensuring that a State representative did not exceed their powers or instructions with regard to the making of a particular treaty. The words acceptance and approval basically mean the same as ratification, but they are less formal and non-technical and might be preferred by some States which might have constitutional difficulties with the term ratification.

Many States nowadays choose this option, especially in relation to multinational treaties, as it provides them with an opportunity to ensure that any necessary legislation is enacted and other constitutional requirements fulfilled before entering into treaty commitments.

The terms for consent to be expressed by signature subject to acceptance or approval are very similar to ratification in their effect.  This is borne out by Article 14.2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which provides that "the consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by acceptance or approval under conditions similar to those which apply to ratification."

 

 

Accession

Most multinational treaties are open for signature for a specified period of time. Accession is the method used by a State to become a party to a treaty which it did not sign whilst the treaty was open for signature.

Technically, accession requires the State in question to deposit an instrument of accession with the depositary. Article 15 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that consent by accession is possible where the treaty so provides, or where it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed or subsequently agreed that consent by accession could occur.


Amendment

Technology and techniques in the shipping industry change very rapidly these days. As a result, not only are new conventions required but existing ones need to be kept up to date. For example, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1960 was amended six times after it entered into force in 1965 - in 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1971 and 1973. In 1974 a completely new convention was adopted incorporating all these amendments (and other minor changes) and has itself been modified on numerous occasions.

In early conventions, amendments came into force only after a percentage of Contracting States, usually two thirds, had accepted them. This normally meant that more acceptances were required to amend a convention than were originally required to bring it into force in the first place, especially where the number of States which are Parties to a convention is very large.

This percentage requirement in practice led to long delays in bringing amendments into force. To remedy the situation a new amendment procedure was devised in IMO. This procedure has been used in the case of conventions such as the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 and SOLAS 1974, all of which incorporate a procedure involving the "tacit acceptance" of amendments by States.

Instead of requiring that an amendment shall enter into force after being accepted by, for example, two thirds of the Parties, the “tacit acceptance” procedure provides that an amendment shall enter into force at a particular time unless before that date, objections to the amendment are received from a specified number of Parties.

In the case of the 1974 SOLAS Convention, an amendment to most of the Annexes (which constitute the technical parts of the Convention) is `deemed to have been accepted at the end of two years from the date on which it is communicated to Contracting Governments...' unless the amendment is objected to by more than one third of Contracting Governments, or Contracting Governments owning not less than 50 per cent of the world's gross merchant tonnage. This period may be varied by the Maritime Safety Committee with a minimum limit of one year.

As was expected the "tacit acceptance" procedure has greatly speeded up the amendment process.  The 1981 amendments to SOLAS 1974, for example, entered into force on 1 September 1984.  Compared to this, none of the amendments adopted to the 1960 SOLAS Convention between 1966 and 1973 received sufficient acceptances to satisfy the requirements for entry into force.

 

 

Enforcement

The enforcement of IMO conventions depends upon the Governments of Member Parties

Contracting Governments enforce the provisions of IMO conventions as far as their own ships are concerned and also set the penalties for infringements, where these are applicable. 

They may also have certain limited powers in respect of the ships of other Governments.

In some conventions, certificates are required to be carried on board ship to show that they have been inspected and have met the required standards.  These certificates are normally accepted as proof by authorities from other States that the vessel concerned has reached the required standard, but in some cases further action can be taken.

The 1974 SOLAS Convention, for example, states that "the officer carrying out the control shall take such steps as will ensure that the ship shall not sail until it can proceed to sea without danger to the passengers or the crew".

This can be done if "there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship and its equipment does not correspond substantially with the particulars of that certificate".

An inspection of this nature would, of course, take place within the jurisdiction of the port State.  But when an offence occurs in international waters the responsibility for imposing a penalty rests with the flag State.

Should an offence occur within the jurisdiction of another State, however, that State can either cause proceedings to be taken in accordance with its own law or give details of the offence to the flag State so that the latter can take appropriate action.

Under the terms of the 1969 Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas, Contracting States are empowered to act against ships of other countries which have been involved in an accident or have been damaged on the high seas if there is a grave risk of oil pollution occurring as a result.

The way in which these powers may be used are very carefully defined, and in most conventions the flag State is primarily responsible for enforcing conventions as far as its own ships and their personnel are concerned.

The Organization itself has no powers to enforce conventions.

However, IMO has been given the authority to vet the training, examination and certification procedures of Contracting Parties to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978. This was one of the most important changes made in the 1995 amendments to the Convention which entered into force on 1 February 1997. Governments will have to provide relevant information to IMO's Maritime Safety Committee which will judge whether or not the country concerned meets the requirements of the Convention.

 

 

IMO conventions

The majority of conventions adopted under the auspices of IMO or for which the Organization is otherwise responsible fall into three main categories.

The first group is concerned with maritime safety; the second with the prevention of marine pollution; and the third with liability and compensation, especially in relation to damage caused by pollution.  Outside these major groupings are a number of other conventions dealing with facilitation, tonnage measurement, unlawful acts against shipping and salvage.

 

 

Tacit acceptance procedure

The amendment procedures contained in the first Conventions to be developed under the auspices of IMO were so slow that some amendments adopted have never entered into force. This changed with the introduction of the "tacit acceptance" procedure.

Tacit acceptance is now incorporated into most of IMO's technical Conventions. It facilitates the quick and simple modification of Conventions to keep pace with the rapidly evolving technology in the shipping world. Without tacit acceptance, it would have proved impossible to keep Conventions up to date and the IMO's role as the international forum for technical issues involving shipping would have been placed in jeopardy.

In the spring of 1968, IMO - then still called IMCO, the Inter-Governmental Consultative Organization - celebrated the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the IMO Convention. It should have been an occasion for some congratulations. But all was not well. Many of the Organization's Member States were not happy with the progress that had been made so far.

Many were concerned about the Organization's structure and its ability to respond to the changes taking place in shipping. In March, 1967, the oil tanker Torrey Canyon had gone aground off the coast of England, resulting in what was then the world's biggest oil spill. IMO was called upon to take action to combat oil pollution and to deal with the legal issues that arose. But would it be able to do so?

The general disquiet was summed up by Canada in a paper submitted to the 20th session of the IMO Council in May 1968. It stated that "the anticipations of twenty years ago have not been fulfilled" and went on to complain of the effort required by Member States in attending meetings and dealing with the technical problems raised by IMO. The paper was discussed by the Council which agreed to establish a working group to prepare a draft statement of the objectives of IMO and an inventory of further objectives which the Organization could usefully fulfil in the field of international maritime transport.

In November 1968 the working group reported back to the Council. It outlined a list of activities, far broader than the programmes undertaken by IMO so far. This was approved by the Council, which also agreed that IMO needed to improve its working methods.

The working group was asked to report to the Council again at its 22nd session in May 1969.This time it put forward a number of proposals for improving IMO's working methods, the most important of which concerned the procedures for amending the various Conventions that had been adopted under IMO's auspices.

The problem facing IMO was that most of its Conventions could only be updated by means of the "classical" amendment procedure. Amendments to the 1960 SOLAS Convention, for example, would enter into force "twelve months after the date on which the amendment is accepted by two-thirds of the Contracting Governments including two-thirds of the Governments represented on the Maritime Safety Committee. This did not seem to be a difficult target when the Convention was adopted, because to enter into force the Convention had to be accepted by only 15 countries, seven of which had fleets consisting of at least 1 million gross tons of merchant shipping.

But by the late 1960s the number of Parties to SOLAS had reached 80 and the total was rising all the time as new countries emerged and began to develop their shipping activities. As the number of Parties rose, so did the total required to amend the Convention. It was like trying to climb a mountain that was always growing higher and the problem was made worse by the fact that Governments took far longer to accept amendments than they did to ratify the parent Convention.

The Council approved the working group's proposal that "it would be a useful first step to undertake a comparative study of the conventions for which IMO is depositary and similar instruments for which other Members of the United Nations family are responsible." This proposal was endorsed by the 6th regular session of the IMO Assembly in October 1969 and the study itself was completed in time to be considered by the Assembly at its 7th session in 1971.

It examined the procedures of four other UN agencies: the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

It showed that all of these organizations were able to amend technical and other regulations. These amendments became binding on Member States without a further act of ratification or acceptance being required.

On the other hand, IMO had no authority to adopt let alone amend conventions. Its mandate allowed it only to "provide for the drafting of conventions, agreements or other instruments and to recommend these to Governments and to intergovernmental organizations and to convene such conferences as may be necessary." Article 2 of the IMO Convention specifically stated that IMO's functions were to be "consultative and advisory".

The Organization could arrange a conference - but it was up to the conference to decide whether the Convention under discussion should or should not be adopted and to decide how it should be amended. The study concluded that "any attempt to bring the IMO procedure and practice into line with the other organizations would, therefore, entail a change either in the constitutional and institutional structure of the Organization itself or in the procedure and practice of the diplomatic conferences which adopt the conventions of IMO.

The first might involve an amendment to the IMO Convention itself. The second might require that diplomatic conferences convened by IMO should grant greater power to the organs of IMO in regard to the review and revision of the instruments."

The study was discussed at length by the Assembly. Canada pointed out that the amendments adopted to the 1960 SOLAS Convention in 1966, 1967, 1968 and 1969 had failed to enter into force and this "sufficed to show that IMO would henceforth have to tackle serious institutional problems." A note submitted to the conference by Canada stated that "unless the international maritime community is sufficiently responsive to these changed circumstances, States will once again revert to the practice of unilaterally deciding what standards to apply to their own shipping and to foreign flag shipping visiting their ports."

The result was the adoption of resolution A.249(VII) which referred to the need for an amendment procedure "which is more in keeping with the development of technological advances and social needs and which will expedite the adoption of amendments." It called for the Legal Committee and Maritime Safety Committee to prepare draft proposals for consideration by the 8th Assembly.

A growing urgency was added by the fact that IMO was preparing a number of new conventions for adoption during the next few years. Conferences to consider a new Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea and an International Convention for Safe Containers were both scheduled for 1972, a major Convention dealing with the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships for 1973 and a conference to revise SOLAS was scheduled for 1976. All of these treaties required a new, easier amendment procedure than the traditional method.

The MSC discussed the amendment question at its 25th session in March 1972. A working group was formed to discuss the matter in detail and concluded that at current rates of acceptance the requisite "two-thirds" target needed to amend SOLAS 1960 "will not be achieved...for many years, possibly never." Moreover, any future amendments would almost certainly suffer the same fate. This would include any amendments intended to improve the amendment procedure itself.

The working group reported: "It follows that the only realistic way of bringing an improved amending procedure into effect within a reasonable period of time is to incorporate it into new or revised technical conventions.

A few weeks later, the Legal Committee held its 12th session. Among the documents prepared for the meeting was a report on discussions that had taken place at the MSC and a detailed paper prepared by the Secretariat. The paper analysed the entry into force and amendment processes of various IMO Conventions and referred to two possible methods that had been considered by the Assembly, for speeding up the amendment procedure. Alternative I was to revise each Convention so that greater authority for adopting amendments might be delegated to the appropriate IMO organs. Alternative II was to amend the IMO Convention itself and give IMO the power to amend Conventions.

The study then considered Alternative I in greater detail. The main reason why amendments took so long to enter into force was the time taken to gain acceptance by two-thirds of Contracting Governments. One way of reducing this period would be by "specifying a date ...of entry into force after adoption by the Assembly, unless that date of amendment is explicitly rejected by a certain number or percentage of Contracting Governments." The paper said that this procedure "has the advantage that all Contracting Governments would be able to advance the preparatory work for implementing the amended regulations and the industry would be in a position to plan accordingly."

The Committee established a working group to consider the subject and prepared a preliminary study based on its report, which again referred to the disadvantages of the classical amendment system. The study continued: "The remedy for this, which has proved to be workable in practice, in relation to a number of conventions, is what is known as the 'tacit' or 'passive' acceptance procedure. This means that the body which adopts the amendment at the same time fixes a time period within which contracting parties will have the opportunity to notify either their acceptance or their rejection of the amendment, or to remain silent on the subject. In case of silence, the amendment is considered to have been accepted by the party...".

The tacit acceptance idea immediately proved popular. The Council, at its meeting in May, decided that the next meeting of the Legal Committee should consist of technical as well as legal experts so that priority could be given to the amendment issue. The Committee was asked to give particular attention to tacit acceptance.

The idea was given non-governmental support by the International Chamber of Shipping, which had consultative status with IMO and submitted a paper stating that the lack of an effective amendment procedure created uncertainties and was detrimental to effective planning by the industry. The classical procedure had also encouraged some governments to introduce unilateral legislation that, however well intentioned, was "seriously disruptive to international shipping services." The paper said that if other Governments did the same " the disruption to international shipping and the world trade which it serves would become increasingly severe. Such unilateral action strikes at the purpose of IMO."

By the time the Legal Committee met for its 14th session in September 1972, there was general agreement that tacit acceptance offered the best way forward. Other ideas, such as amending the IMO Convention itself, had too many disadvantages and would take too long to introduce. There was some concern about what would happen if a large number of countries did reject an amendment and the Committee members agreed that tacit acceptance should apply only to the technical content of Conventions, which was often contained in annexes. The non-technical articles should continue to be subject to the classical (or "positive") acceptance procedure.

The Committee also generally agreed that alternative procedures for amending the technical provisions should be retained but it did not reach consensus on another issue: should amendments be prepared and adopted by an appropriate IMO body, such as the Maritime Safety Committee - or by Contracting Parties to the Convention concerned? This was an important point at the time, since many Contracting Parties to IMO Conventions were not yet Members of IMO itself and might object to treaties they had ratified being amended without them even being consulted.

This issue was still unsettled when the Conference on Revision of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea opened in October 1972. The purpose of the conference was to update the Collision Regulations and to separate them from the SOLAS Convention (the existing regulations were annexed to SOLAS 1960).

The amendment procedure is contained in Article VI. Amendments to the Collision Regulations adopted by the MSC (by a two-thirds majority) have to be communicated to Contracting Parties and IMO Member States at least six months before being considered by the Assembly. If adopted by the Assembly (again by a two-thirds majority), the amendments enter into force on a date determined by the Assembly unless more than one third of Contracting Parties notify IMO of their objection. On entry into force, any amendment shall "for all Contracting Parties which have not objected to the amendment, replace and supersede any previous provision to which the amendment refers."

Less than two months later, on 2 December 1972 a conference held in Geneva adopted the International Convention for Safe Containers, article X of which contains procedures for amending any part or parts of the Convention. The procedure is the traditional "positive" acceptance system, under which amendments enter into force twelve months after being adopted by two-thirds of Contracting Parties.
However, Article XI contains a special procedure for amending the technical annexes which also incorporates tacit acceptance. The procedure is slightly different from that used in the Collision Regulations, one difference being that the amendments can be adopted by the MSC "to which all Contracting Parties shall have been invited to participate and vote." This answered the question of how to take into account the interests of Parties to Conventions that were not Member States of IMO.

The next Convention to be considered was the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), which was successfully adopted in May 1973. It, too, incorporated tacit acceptance procedures for amending the technical annexes. In the meantime, IMO was preparing for a new SOLAS convention. This was considered necessary because none of the amendments adopted to the 1960 version had entered into force and did not appear likely to do so in the near future. The 1966 Load Lines Convention also contained a classical amendment procedure and the intention was to combine the two instruments in a new Convention, which was scheduled to be considered in 1976.

The MSC discussed this proposal at its 26th session in October-November, but it was clear that this would be a daunting and time-consuming task. The combined instrument might be a good idea for the future - but the real priority was to get the amendments to SOLAS 1960 into force as quickly as possible and to make sure that future amendments would not be delayed. A working group was set up to consider the various alternatives, but opinion began to move in favour of a proposal by the United Kingdom that IMO should concentrate on an interim Convention designed to bring into force the amendments adopted since 1960. The new Convention, it was suggested, would consist of the 1960 text with the addition of a tacit acceptance amendment procedure and the addition of amendments that had already been adopted.

Another advantage, the United Kingdom pointed out, was that the conference called to adopt the revised Convention "might be held considerably earlier than 1976 since comparatively little preparation would be needed." The subject was discussed again at the MSC's 27th session in the spring of 1973 and, although some delegations wanted a more comprehensive revision, others felt that the workload would be so great that the conference would be seriously delayed. By a vote of 12 in favour and four abstentions, the Committee decided to call a conference with limited scope, as proposed by the United Kingdom.

On 21 October, 1974, the International Conference on Safety of Life at Sea opened in London and on 1 November a new SOLAS Convention was adopted, which incorporated the tacit acceptance procedure.

The tacit acceptance amendment procedure has now been incorporated into the majority of IMO's technical Conventions and has been extended to some other instruments as well. Its effectiveness can be seen most clearly in the case of SOLAS 1974, which has been amended on many occasions since then. In the process, the Convention's technical content has been almost completely re-written.

 

Complete List of Conventions

Maritime safety
Marine pollution
Liability and compensation
Other subjects

Maritime safety

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974
International Convention on Load Lines (LL), 1966
Special Trade Passenger Ships Agreement (STP), 1971
Protocol on Space Requirements for Special Trade Passenger Ships, 1973
Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG), 1972
International Convention for Safe Containers (CSC), 1972
Convention on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (INMARSAT), 1976
The Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels (SFV), 1977
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F), 1995
International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR), 1979

Marine pollution

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78)
International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties (INTERVENTION), 1969
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (LDC), 1972
International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC), 1990
Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 (HNS Protocol)
International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships (AFS), 2001
International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004

Liability and compensation

International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC), 1969
International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (FUND), 1971
Convention relating to Civil Liability in the Field of Maritime Carriage of Nuclear Material (NUCLEAR), 1971
Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea (PAL), 1974
Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC), 1976
International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS), 1996
International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001

Other subjects

Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic (FAL), 1965
International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships (TONNAGE), 1969
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA), 1988
International Convention on Salvage (SALVAGE), 1989

Action dates

IMO's conventions are regularly amended and revised while new instruments/protocols are adopted. The forthcoming dates of entry into force of amendments/instruments already adopted are shown.

Date of entry into force

Convention or Code

1 July 2004

December 2002 amendments to SOLAS - Measures to enhance maritime security

1 July 2004

December 2002 amendments to SOLAS - bulk carriers, etc

1 January 2005

June 2003 amendments to the 1988 Load Lines Protocol

1 January 2005

June 2003 amendments to the enhanced survey programme for tankers and bulk carriers

3 March 2005

2003 Protocol establishing an International Oil Pollution Compensation Supplementary Fund

5 April 2005

December 2003 amendments to MARPOL - single-hull phase-out

19 May 2005

MARPOL 1997 Protocol - Annex VI of MARPOL - air pollution regulations

1 August 2005

April 2004 amendments to MARPOL - revised sewage regulations

1 July 2006

June 2003 amendments to SOLAS/May 2004 amendments to SOLAS

1 July 2006

December 2004 amendments to SOLAS - revised bulk carrier chapter, free-fall lifeboats, S-VDRs

1 January 2007

October 2004 amendments to MARPOL - revised Annexes I and II

1 January 2007

Amendments to IBC and IGC Codes

 

Expanded Information

Date of entry into force

Convention or Code

1 January 2004

May 2002 Amendments to SOLAS - IMDG code

The amendments to SOLAS VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) make the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) mandatory. The MSC also adopted the IMDG Code in a mandatory form.

However, the provisions of the following parts of the Code will remain recommendatory:
· chapter 1.3 (Training);
· chapter 2.1 (Explosives, Introductory Notes 1 to 4 only);
· chapter 2.3, section 2.3.3 (Determination of flashpoint only);
· chapter 3.2 (columns 15 and 17 of the Dangerous Goods List only);
· chapter 3.5 (Transport schedule for Class 7 radioactive material only),
· chapter 5.4, section 5.4.5 (Multimodal dangerous goods form), insofar as layout of the form is concerned;
· chapter 7.3 (Special requirements in the event of an incident and fire precautions involving dangerous goods only).

In practice, this means that from the legal point of view, the whole of the IMDG Code is made mandatory, but provisions of recommendatory nature are editorially expressed in the Code (e.g. using the word "should" instead of "shall") to clarify their status.

The mandatory IMDG Code incorporates certain changes relating to specific products, as well as relevant elements of the amendments to the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, Model Regulations adopted by the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods at its twenty-first session in Geneva from 4 to 13 December 2000.

Also other SOLAS amendments:

Updates to Chapter IV - Radiocommunications – The amendments to this chapter relate to changes following the full implementation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) on 1 February 1999, which renders some of the provisions relating to implementation dates in the current chapter IV superfluous.

The amendments also state that a listening watch on VHF Channel 16 for distress and safety purposes should continue until 2005.

Carriage requirement for IAMSAR Manual – The amendment to Chapter V – Safety of Navigation, requires ships to carry an up-to-date copy of Volume III of the International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue (IAMSAR) Manual.

Amendments to the 1988 Protocol to SOLAS, 1974, relating to updates to the Record of Equipment for the Passenger Ship Safety Certificate (Form P); Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate (Form R); Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Certificate (Form C).

 

1 July 2004

December 2002 amendments to SOLAS - Measures to enhance maritime security

The amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention were adopted by a Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security and are aimed at enhancing maritime security on board ships and at ship/port interface areas. Among other things, these amendments create a new SOLAS chapter dealing specifically with maritime security, which in turn contains the mandatory requirement for ships to comply with the the new International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code). The Code contains detailed security-related requirements for Governments, port authorities and shipping companies in a mandatory section (Part A), together with a series of guidelines about how to meet these requirements in a second, non-mandatory section (Part B). The Conference also adopted a series of resolutions designed to add weight to the amendments, encourage the application of the measures to ships and port facilities not covered by the Code and pave the way for future work on the subject..

Modifications to Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) contain a new timetable for the fitting of Automatic Information Systems (AIS). Ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 300 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 50,000 gross tonnage, will be required to fit AIS not later than the first safety equipment survey after 1 July 2004 or by 31 December 2004, whichever occurs earlier. Ships fitted with AIS shall maintain AIS in operation at all times except where international agreements, rules or standards provide for the protection of navigational information."

The existing SOLAS Chapter XI (Special measures to enhance maritime safety) has been re-numbered as Chapter XI-1. Regulation XI-1/3 is modified to require ships' identification numbers to be permanently marked in a visible place either on the ship's hull or superstructure. Passenger ships should carry the marking on a horizontal surface visible from the air. Ships should also be marked with their ID numbers internally.

And a new regulation XI-1/5 requires ships to be issued with a Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) which is intended to provide an on-board record of the history of the ship. The CSR shall be issued by the Administration and shall contain information such as the name of the ship and of the State whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that State, the ship's identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address. Any changes shall be recorded in the CSR so as to provide updated and current information together with the history of the changes.

New Chapter XI-2 (Special measures to enhance maritime security)
A brand-new Chapter XI-2 (Special measures to enhance maritime security) is added after the renumbered Chapter XI-1.

This chapter applies to passenger ships and cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards, including high speed craft, mobile offshore drilling units and port facilities serving such ships engaged on international voyages.

Regulation XI-2/3 of the new chapter enshrines the International Ship and Port Facilities Security Code (ISPS Code). Part A of this Code will become mandatory and part B contains guidance as to how best to comply with the mandatory requirements.

The regulation requires Administrations to set security levels and ensure the provision of security level information to ships entitled to fly their flag. Prior to entering a port, or whilst in a port, within the territory of a Contracting Government, a ship shall comply with the requirements for the security level set by that Contracting Government, if that security level is higher than the security level set by the Administration for that ship.

Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.

Regulation XI-2/5 requires all ships to be provided with a ship security alert system, according to a strict timetable that will see most vessels fitted by 2004 and the remainder by 2006. When activated the ship security alert system shall initiate and transmit a ship-to-shore security alert to a competent authority designated by the Administration, identifying the ship, its location and indicating that the security of the ship is under threat or it has been compromised. The system will not raise any alarm on-board the ship. The ship security alert system shall be capable of being activated from the navigation bridge and in at least one other location.

Regulation XI-2/6 covers requirements for port facilities, providing among other things for Contracting Governments to ensure that port facility security assessments are carried out and that port facility security plans are developed, implemented and reviewed in accordance with the ISPS Code.

Other regulations in this chapter cover the provision of information to IMO, the control of ships in port, (including measures such as the delay, detention, restriction of operations including movement within the port, or expulsion of a ship from port), and the specific responsibility of Companies.

1 July 2004

The December 2002 amendments to SOLAS (adopted by the expanded MSC)

Chapter XII (Additional Safety Measures for Bulk Carriers) -

• New regulation XII/12 on Hold, ballast and dry space water level detectors require the fitting of high level alarms and level monitoring systems on all bulk carriers, in order to detect water ingress. The regulation requires the fitting of such alarms on all bulk carriers regardless of their date of construction.
• New regulation XII/13 on Availability of pumping systems would require the means for draining and pumping dry space bilges and ballast tanks any part of which is located forward of the collision bulkhead to be capable of being brought into operation from a readily accessible enclosed space.

SOLAS chapter II-1 (Construction - structure, subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations)-

• In Part B (Subdivision and stability), new regulation II-1/3-6 Access to spaces in cargo areas of oil tankers and bulk carriers is intended to ensure that vessels can be properly inspected throughout their lifespan, by designing and building the ship to provide suitable means for access. Associated Technical provisions for means of access for inspections are mandatory under the regulation. Without adequate access, the structural condition of the vessel can deteriorate undetected and major structural failure can arise. The regulation requires each space within the cargo area to be provided with an appropriate means of access to enable, throughout the life of a ship, overall and close-up inspections and thickness measurements of the ship's structures to be carried out by the Administration, the Company, and the ship's personnel and others as necessary.
• In Part C (Machinery Installation), new paragraph added to regulation 31 - Machinery control, to require automation systems to be designed in a manner which ensures that threshold warning of impending or imminent slowdown or shutdown of the propulsion system is given to the officer in charge of the navigational watch in time to assess navigational circumstances in an emergency.

Chapter II-2 (Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction) -

• The amendments concern references to the IMDG Code and reflect amendments to SOLAS chapter VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) adopted in May 2002 which make the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) mandatory.

Chapter III - Life-saving appliances and arrangements -

• The amendments to Regulation 26 - Additional requirements for ro-ro passenger ships, requires liferafts carried on ro-ro passenger ships to be fitted with a radar transponder in the ratio of one transponder for every four liferafts. The regulation is made applicable to existing ships as well as new ships.

Also adopted, amendments to the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on board Ships (INF Code) - The amendments in the sections on definitions and application reflect amendments to SOLAS chapter VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) adopted in May 2002 which make the IMDG Code mandatory.

1 January 2005

June 2003 amendments to the 1988 Load Lines Protocol

The amendments to Annex B to the 1988 Load Lines Protocol (i.e. the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966, as modified by the Protocol of 1988 relating thereto) include a number of important revisions, in particular to regulations concerning: strength and intact stability of ships; definitions; superstructure and bulkheads; doors; position of hatchways, doorways and ventilators; hatchway coamings; hatch covers; machinery space openings; miscellaneous openings in freeboard and superstructure decks; cargo ports and other similar openings; spurling pipes and cable lockers; side scuttles; windows and skylights; calculation of freeing ports; protection of the crew and means of safe passage for crew; calculation of freeboard; sheer; minimum bow height and reserve buoyancy; and others.

The amendments, which amount to a comprehensive revision of the technical regulations of the original Load Lines Convention, will not affect the 1966 LL Convention and will only apply to approximately two-thirds of the world's fleet, i.e., to those ships flying the flags of States Party to the 1988 LL Protocol. (See Status of Conventions - Summary)

1 January 2005

June 2003 amendments to the enhanced survey programme for tankers and bulk carriers

The amendments to the Guidelines on the enhanced programme of inspections during surveys of bulk carriers and oil tankers (resolution A.744(18)), to include a new appendix 3 to Annex 12 of Annex B of the Guidelines relating to the sampling method of thickness measurements for longitudinal strength evaluation and repair methods.

3 March 2005

2003 Protocol establishing an International Oil Pollution Compensation Supplementary Fund

The 2003 Protocol establishing an International Oil Pollution Compensation Supplementary Fund will supplement the compensation available under the 1992 Civil Liability Convention (CLC) and Fund Convention with an additional, third tier of compensation. Participation is optional, although open to all States Parties to the 1992 Fund Convention.

The total amount of compensation payable for any one incident will be limited to a combined total of 750 million Special Drawing Rights (SDR) (just over US$1,152 million) including the amount of compensation paid under the existing 1992 CLC/Fund Convention.

With the entry into force of this Protocol, IMO has substantially enhanced the compensation available under the 1992 Convention. The supplementary scheme introduced by the 2003 Protocol should therefore ensure, for the foreseeable future, that victims of oil pollution damage will be fully compensated for their losses.

It is expected that the increased compensation should put an end to the practice of pro-rating of payment of claims, which, although it has been unavoidable, has led to criticisms of the 1992 Convention.

The supplementary Fund will apply to damage in the territory, including the territorial sea, of a Contracting State and in the Exclusive Economic Zone of a Contracting State.

Annual contributions to the Fund will be made in respect of each Contracting State by any person who, in any calendar year, has received total quantities of oil exceeding 150,000 tons. However, for the purposes of the 2003 Protocol, there is a minimum aggregate receipt of 1,000,000 tons of contributing oil in each Contracting State.

The Assembly of the Supplementary Fund will assess the level of contributions based on estimates of expenditure (including administrative costs and payments to be made under the Fund as a result of claims) and income (including surplus funds from previous years, annual contributions and any other income).

Amendments to the compensation limits established under the Protocol can be adopted by a tacit acceptance procedure, so that an amendment adopted in the Legal Committee of IMO by a two-thirds majority of Contracting States present and voting, can enter into force 24 months after its adoption.

5 April 2005

December 2003 amendments to MARPOL 73/78

Under a revised regulation 13G of Annex I of MARPOL, the final phasing-out date for Category 1 tankers (pre-MARPOL tankers) is brought forward to 2005, from 2007. The final phasing-out date for category 2 and 3 tankers (MARPOL tankers and smaller tankers) is brought forward to 2010, from 2015.

The full timetable for the phasing out of single-hull tankers is as follows:

Category of oil tanker

Date or year

Category 1

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1982 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1982

Category 2 and
Category 3

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1977 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1977 but before 1 January 1978
2006 for ships delivered in 1978 and 1979
2007 for ships delivered in 1980 and 1981
2008 for ships delivered in 1982
2009 for ships delivered in 1983
2010 for ships delivered in 1984 or later

Under the revised regulation, the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) is to be made applicable to all single-hull tankers of 15 years, or older. Previously it was applicable to all Category 1 vessels continuing to trade after 2005 and all Category 2 vessels after 2010. Consequential enhancements to the CAS scheme were also adopted.

The revised regulation allows the Administration (flag State) to permit continued operation of category 2 or 3 tankers beyond 2010 subject to satisfactory results from the CAS, but the continued operation must not go beyond the anniversary of the date of delivery of the ship in 2015 or the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery, whichever is earlier.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 oil tankers fitted with only double bottoms or double sides not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length or double hull spaces, not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements, which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation beyond 2010, provided that the ship was in service on 1 July 2001, the Administration is satisfied by verification of the official records that the ship complied with the conditions specified and that those conditions remain unchanged. Again, such continued operation must not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

Carriage of heavy grade oil
A new MARPOL regulation 13H on the prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers when carrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriage of HGO in single-hull tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above after the date of entry into force of the regulation (5 April 2005), and in single-hull oil tankers of 600 tons dwt and above but less than 5,000 tons dwt, not later than the anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

Under the new regulation, HGO means any of the following:
a) crude oils having a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3;
b) fuel oils having either a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50ºC higher than 180 mm2/s;
c) bitumen, tar and their emulsions.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 tankers carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, fitted only with double bottoms or double sides, not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length, or double hull spaces not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation of such ships beyond 5 April 2005 until the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

Regulation 13(H) also allows for continued operation of oil tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above, carrying crude oil with a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 but lower than 945 kg/ m3, if satisfactory results of the Condition Assessment Scheme warrant that, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship and provided that the continued operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration may allow continued operation of a single hull oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above but less than 5,000 tons deadweight, carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, if, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship, provided that the operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration of a Party to the present Convention may exempt an oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above carrying heavy grade oil as cargo if the ship is either engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the Party's jurisdiction, or is engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the jurisdiction of another Party, provided the Party within whose jurisdiction the ship will be operating agrees. The same applies to vessels operating as floating storage units of heavy grade oil.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 shall be entitled to deny entry of single hull tankers carrying heavy grade oil which have been allowed to continue operation under the exemptions mentioned above, into the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction, or deny ship-to-ship transfer of heavy grade oil in areas under its jurisdiction except when this is necessary for the purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea.

19 May 2005

MARPOL 1997 Protocol - Annex VI of MARPOL - air pollution regulations

Annex VI set limits on sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ship exhausts and prohibit deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances.

The annex includes a global cap of 4.5% m/m on the sulphur content of fuel oil and calls on IMO to monitor the worldwide average sulphur content of fuel once the Protocol comes into force.

Annex VI contains provisions allowing for special “SOx Emission Control Areas” to be established with more stringent controls on sulphur emissions. In these areas, the sulphur content of fuel oil used onboard ships must not exceed 1.5% m/m. Alternatively, ships must fit an exhaust gas cleaning system or use any other technological method to limit SOx emissions. The Baltic Sea Area is designated as a SOx Emission Control area in the Protocol.

In March 2000, the MEPC approved a proposed amendment to Annex VI to also include the North Sea as a SOx Emission Control Area. The aim is to adopt the amendment once MARPOL Annex VI enters into force.

Annex VI prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances, which include halons and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). New installations containing ozone-depleting substances are prohibited on all ships. But new installations containing hydro-chlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are permitted until 1 January 2020.

Annex VI also sets limits on emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from diesel engines. A mandatory NOx Technical Code, which defines how this shall be done, was adopted by the Conference under the cover of Resolution 2.

The Annex also prohibits the incineration onboard ship of certain products, such as contaminated packaging materials and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

 

1 August 2005

April 2004 amendments to MARPOL

Revised Annex IV Regulations for the prevention of pollution by sewage

Annex IV contains a set of regulations regarding the discharge of sewage into the sea, ships' equipment and systems for the control of sewage discharge, the provision of facilities at ports and terminals for the reception of sewage, and requirements for survey and certification. It also includes a model International Sewage Pollution Prevention Certificate to be issued by national shipping administrations to ships under their jurisdiction.

The revised Annex will apply to new ships engaged in international voyages, of 400 gross tonnage and above or which are certified to carry more than 15 persons. Existing ships will be required to comply with the provisions of the revised Annex IV five years after the date of its entry into force. The Annex requires ships to be equipped with either a sewage treatment plant or a sewage comminuting and disinfecting system or a sewage holding tank.

The discharge of sewage into the sea will be prohibited, except when the ship has in operation an approved sewage treatment plant and is discharging comminuted and disinfected sewage using an approved system at a distance of more than three nautical miles from the nearest land; or is discharging sewage which is not comminuted or disinfected at a distance of more than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land.

Also, amendments to the Appendix to MARPOL Annex V on Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships which relate to the recording of the disposal of cargo residues in the Garbage Record Book.

1 July 2006

June 2003 amendments to SOLAS

Chapter V - Safety of Navigation

Amendments to SOLAS regulations V/2 Definitions and V/22 Navigation Bridge Visibility add the definition of "length" to regulation V/2 and a consequential editorial change is made to regulation V/22. The definition states that "length of a ship means its length overall".

Amendments to SOLAS regulation V/28 on Records of navigational activities add a new paragraph on daily reporting. The amendment will require all ships of 500 gross tonnage and above, engaged on international voyages exceeding 48 hours, to submit a daily report to their company, to include ship's position; ship's course and speed; and details of any external or internal conditions that are affecting the ship's voyage or the normal safe operation of the ship. The aim of the amendments is to address the responsibilities of ship operators to provide information of benefit to those responsible for mounting rescue operations.

1 July 2006

May 2004 amendments to SOLAS

Persons in distress at sea
Amendments to chapter V (Safety of Navigation) - to add a definition of search and rescue services; to set an obligation to provide assistance, regardless of nationality or status of persons in distress, and mandate co-ordination and co-operation between States to assist the ship's master in delivering persons rescued at sea to a place of safety; and to add a new regulation on master's discretion.

Accidents with lifeboats
Amendments to SOLAS chapter III (Life-saving appliances and arrangements) which are intended to help prevent accidents with lifeboats during drills. The amendments, which are expected to enter into force on 1 July 2006, stem from work by the Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE) intended to address the unacceptably high number of accidents with lifeboats that have been occurring over recent years. Crew have been injured, sometimes fatally, while participating in lifeboat drills and/or inspections.

The amendments to Regulation 19 (Emergency training and drills) and Regulation 20 (Operational readiness, maintenance and inspections) concern the conditions in which lifeboat emergency training and drills should be conducted and introduce changes to the operational tests to be conducted during the weekly and monthly inspections, so as not to require the assigned crew to be on board in all cases.

Carriage of immersion suits
Amendments to SOLAS chapter III Regulation 32 - Personal life-saving appliances to make changes to the number of immersion suits to be carried on all cargo ships. The amendments introduce carriage requirements for one immersion suit per person on board all cargo ships, including bulk carriers. At present, the regulation requires carriage of at least three immersion suits for each lifeboat on a cargo ship, as well as thermal protective aids for persons not provided with immersion suits.

With the adoption of the proposed amendments, immersion suits will become, as lifejackets, a personal life-saving appliance for each person on board thus offering better thermal protection and improved chance of survival and rescue. The MSC also adopted consequential amendments to the 1988 SOLAS Protocol relating to the records of equipment.

1 July 2006

December 2004 amendments to SOLAS

Bulk carrier safety
A new text for SOLAS chapter XII (Additional safety measures for bulk carriers) incorporates revisions to some regulations and new requirements relating to double-side skin bulk carriers.

The amendments include the addition of a new regulation 14 on restrictions from sailing with any hold empty and requirements for double-side skin construction as an optional alternative to single-side skin construction. The option of double-side skin construction will apply to new bulk carriers of 150m in length and over, carrying solid bulk cargoes having a density of 1,000 kg/m3 and above.

Free-fall lifeboats on bulk carriers
an amendment to regulation 31 in SOLAS chapter III (Life-saving appliances and arrangements) makes mandatory the carriage of free-fall lifeboats on bulk carriers.

Simplified Voyage Data Recorders
Amendments to regulation 20 of SOLAS chapter V (Safety of Navigation) give a phased-in carriage requirement for a shipborne simplified voyage data recorder (S-VDR).

The regulation requires a VDR, which may be an S-VDR, to be fitted on existing cargo ships of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards, phasing in the requirement for cargo ships of 20,000 gross tonnage and upwards first, to be followed by cargo ships of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards.

The S-VDR is not required to store the same level of detailed data as a standard VDR, but nonetheless should maintain a store, in a secure and retrievable form, of information concerning the position, movement, physical status, command and control of a vessel over the period leading up to and following an incident.

Other amendments:

- SOLAS chapter II-1 regulation 18 Construction and initial tests of watertight doors, sidescuttles, etc., in passenger ships and cargo ships to allow testing of watertight doors with a prototype pressure test in certain circumstances. Also regulation 45 - Precautions against shock, fire and other hazards of electrical origin to replace the existing paragraph 10 and the addition of a new paragraph 11 in order to control the installation of electrical equipment in spaces where flammable mixtures are likely to collect and in hazardous locations on tankers.

- SOLAS chapter V regulation 19 Carriage requirements for shipborne navigational systems and equipment to add the words "being clearly readable by the helmsman at the main steering position" in paragraph 2.5 relating to carriage of a gyro compass, or other means to determine and display heading by shipborne non-magnetic means.

- SOLAS chapter VII regulation 10 to delete the superfluous words "For the purpose of this regulation, the requirements of the Code shall be treated as mandatory."

- SOLAS chapter V - addition of Simplified Voyage Data Recorder (S-VDR) to the Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate (Form E).

- International Code for Application of Fire Test Procedures (FTP Code) in Part 2 - Smoke and toxicity test - the addition of "(200 ppm for floor coverings)" in the table of limits in 2.6 Classification criteria, 2.6.2 Toxicity.

- International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft, 2000 (2000 HSC Code) relating to buoyant spaces in Chapter 2 - Buoyancy, stability and subdivision.

- International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) - to reflect the draft amendments to SOLAS chapter II-1 Regulation 45 - Precautions against shock, fire and other hazards of electrical origin. (entry into force date of 1 January 2007).

- STCW Code - amendments to Table A-VI/2-1 - Specifications of minimum standards of competence in survival crafts and rescue boats other than fast rescue boats.

 

1 January 2007

October 2004 amendments to MARPOL - revised Annexes I and II

Revised MARPOL Annex I (oil)
The revised MARPOL Annex I Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil incorporates the various amendments adopted since MARPOL entered into force in 1983, including the amended regulation 13G (regulation 20 in the revised annex) and regulation 13H (regulation 21 in the revised annex) on the phasing-in of double hull requirements for oil tankers. It also separates, in different chapters, the construction and equipment provisions from the operational requirements and makes clear the distinctions between the requirements for new ships and those for existing ships. The revision provides a more user-friendly, simplified Annex I.

New requirements in the revised Annex I include the following:

• Regulation 22 Pump-room bottom protection: on oil tankers of 5,000 tonnes deadweight and above constructed on or after 1 January 2007, the pump-room shall be provided with a double bottom.
• Regulation 23 Accidental oil outflow performance - applicable to oil tankers delivered on or after [date of entry into force of revised Annex I plus 36 months] 1 January 2010; construction requirements to provide adequate protection against oil pollution in the event of stranding or collision.

Oman Sea - new special area under MARPOL Annex I
The Oman Sea area of the Arabian Seas is designated a special area in the revised Annex I.

The other special areas in Annex I are: Mediterranean Sea area; Baltic Sea area; Black Sea area; Red Sea area; "Gulfs" area; Gulf of Aden area; Antarctic area; and North West European Waters. In the special areas, there are stricter controls on discharge of oily wastes.

Revised MARPOL Annex II (noxious liquid substances carried in bulk)
The revised Annex II Regulations for the control of pollution by noxious liquid substances in bulk includes a new four-category categorization system for noxious and liquid substances. The revised annex is expected to enter into force on 1 January 2007.

The new categories are:

• Category X: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a major hazard to either marine resources or human health and, therefore, justify the prohibition of the discharge into the marine environment;
• Category Y: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a hazard to either marine resources or human health or cause harm to amenities or other legitimate uses of the sea and therefore justify a limitation on the quality and quantity of the discharge into the marine environment;
• Category Z: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a minor hazard to either marine resources or human health and therefore justify less stringent restrictions on the quality and quantity of the discharge into the marine environment; and
• Other Substances: substances which have been evaluated and found to fall outside Category X, Y or Z because they are considered to present no harm to marine resources, human health, amenities or other legitimate uses of the sea when discharged into the sea from tank cleaning of deballasting operations. The discharge of bilge or ballast water or other residues or mixtures containing these substances are not subject to any requirements of MARPOL Annex II.

The revised annex includes a number of other significant changes. Improvements in ship technology, such as efficient stripping techniques, has made possible significantly lower permitted discharge levels of certain products which have been incorporated into Annex II. For ships constructed on or after 1 January 2007 the maximum permitted residue in the tank and its associated piping left after discharge will be set at a maximum of 75 litres for products in categories X, Y and Z - compared with previous limits which set a maximum of 100 or 300 litres, depending on the product category.

Alongside the revision of Annex II, the marine pollution hazards of thousands of chemicals have been evaluated by the Evaluation of Hazardous Substances Working Group, giving a resultant GESAMP2 Hazard Profile which indexes the substance according to its bio-accumulation; bio-degradation; acute toxicity; chronic toxicity; long-term health effects; and effects on marine wildlife and on benthic habitats.

As a result of the hazard evaluation process and the new categorization system, vegetable oils which were previously categorized as being unrestricted will now be required to be carried in chemical tankers. The revised Annex includes, under regulation 4 Exemptions, provision for the Administration to exempt ships certified to carry individually identified vegetable oils, subject to certain provisions relating to the location of the cargo tanks carrying the identified vegetable oil.

Transport of vegetable oils
An MEPC resolution on Guidelines for the transport of vegetable oils in deep tanks or in independent tanks specially designed for the carriage of such vegetable oils on board dry cargo ships allows general dry cargo ships that are currently certified to carry vegetable oil in bulk to continue to carry these vegetable oils on specific trades. The guidelines also take effect on 1 January 2007.

Consequential amendments to the IBC Code
Consequential amendments to the International Bulk Chemical Code (IBC Code) were also adopted in October 2004, reflecting the changes to MARPOL Annex II. The amendments incorporate revisions to the categorization of certain products relating to their properties as potential marine pollutants as well as revisions to ship type and carriage requirements following their evaluation by the Evaluation of Hazardous Substances Working Group.

Ships constructed after 1986 carrying substances identified in chapter 17 of the IBC Code must follow the requirements for design, construction, equipment and operation of ships contained in the Code.

1 January 2007

December 2004 - adoption of amendments to Codes by the MSC

International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) - revised Code adopted. (See above)

International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) - amendments to reflect the amendments to SOLAS chapter II-1 Regulation 45 - Precautions against shock, fire and other hazards of electrical origin.

 

 

IMO Meetings

The table below represents the programme of IMO meetings for 2005. Please use the navigation bar to select the summary meeting reports (and forthcoming provisional agendas) of a particular Committee or Sub-Committee and for the Council and Assembly.

PROGRAMME OF MEETINGS FOR 2005

NAME OF MEETING

SESSION NO.

DATE HELD

Sub-Committee on Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW)

36

10-14 Jan

Sub-Committee on Fire Protection (FP)

49

24-28 Jan

Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue (COMSAR)

9

7-11 Feb

Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE)

48

21-25 Feb

Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI)

13

7-11 Mar

Sub-Committee on Bulk Liquids and Gases

9

4-8 Apr

Legal Committee

90

18-29 Apr

Maritime Safety Committee

80

11-20 May

Sub-Committee on Safety of Navigation (NAV)

51

6-10 Jun

Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC)

55

14-16 Jun

Council

94

20-24 Jun

Facilitation Committee (FAL)

32

4-8 Jul

Marine Environment Protection Committee

53

18-22 Jul

Stability and Load Lines and Fishing Vessel Safety (SLF)

48

12-16 Sep

Sub-Committee on Dangerous Goods, Solid Cargoes and Containers (DSC)

10

26-30 Sep

Diplomatic Conference on the Revision of the SUA Treaties

.

10-14 Oct

Council

23

17-18 Nov

ASSEMBLY

24

21 Nov -2 Dec

COUNCIL

95

2-2 Dec

 

 

_____________
*      Tentative
**    Financed by the United States of America
***  Meeting held without interpretation and with documentation in original language only

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974

Adoption: 1 November 1974
Entry into force: 25 May 1980

Introduction and history
Amendment procedure
Technical provisions
Chapter I - General Provisions
Chapter II-1 - Construction - Subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations
Chapter II-2 - Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction
Chapter III - Life-saving appliances and arrangements
Chapter IV - Radiocommunications
Chapter V - Safety of navigation
Chapter VI - Carriage of Cargoes
Chapter VII - Carriage of dangerous goods
Chapter VIII - Nuclear ships
Chapter IX - Management for the Safe Operation of Ships
Chapter X - Safety measures for high-speed craft
Chapter XI-1 - Special measures to enhance maritime safety
Chapter XI-2 - Special measures to enhance maritime security
Chapter XII - Additional safety measures for bulk carriersAmendments:
The Protocol of 1978 - Tanker safety and pollution prevention
The 1981 amendments -chapter II-1 and II-2 updated
The 1983 amendments -revised chapter III
The 1988 (April) amendments - post Herald of Free Enterprise
The 1988 (October) amendments - stability of passenger ships
The 1988 Protocol - HSSC
The 1988 amendments - GMDSS
The 1989 amendments - chapters II-1 and II-2
The 1990 amendments - subdivision and stability: probabilistic approach
The 1991 amendments - revised chapter VI
The April 1992 amendments - measures for existing ro-ro passenger ships
The December 1992 amendments -fire safety of new passenger ships
The May 1994 amendments (Conference) - Accelerated amendmentprocedure
NewChapter IX - Management for the Safe Operation of Ships
New Chapter X - Safety measures for high-speed craft
New Chapter XI - Special measures to enhance maritime safety
The May 1994 amendments (MSC) - emergency towing, ship reporting systems
The December 1994 amendments - cargo code made mandatory
The May 1995 amendments - ships routeing systems made mandatory
The November 1995 amendments (Conference) - ro-ro safety post-Estonia
The June 1996 amendments - revised chapter III
The December 1996 amendments -new Fire Test Procedures Code
The June 1997 amendments - Vessel Traffic Services regulation
The November 1997 amendments (Conference) - New chapter XII bulk carrier safety
The May 1998 amendments - amendments to chapters II-1, IV, VI
The May 1999 amendments - INF Code made mandatory
The May 2000 amendment - helicopter landing area
The December 2000 amendments - VDRs, AIS made mandatory in revised chapter V, revised chapter II-1
The June 2001 amendments - ch VII, ch IX
The May 2002 amendments - IMDG Code made mandatory
The December 2002 amendments (Conference) - measures to enhance maritime security
The December 2002 amendments - bulk carrier new regulations
The June 2003 amendments - ch V
May 2004 amendments - persons in distress at sea, accidents with lifeboats
December 2004 amendments - bulk carriers, free-fall lifeboats, S-VDRs

Introduction and history
The SOLAS Convention in its successive forms is generally regarded as the most important of all international treaties concerning the safety of merchant ships. The first version was adopted in 1914, in response to the Titanic disaster, the second in 1929, the third in 1948 and the fourth in 1960.

The 1960 Convention - which was adopted on 17 June 1960 and entered into force on 26 May 1965 - was the first major task for IMO after the Organization's creation and it represented a considerable step forward in modernizing regulations and in keeping pace with technical developments in the shipping industry.

The intention was to keep the Convention up to date by periodic amendments but in practice the amendments procedure incorporated proved to be very slow. It became clear that it would be impossible to secure the entry into force of amendments within a reasonable period of time.

As a result, a completely new Convention was adopted in 1974 which included not only the amendments agreed up until that date but a new amendment procedure - the tacit acceptance procedure - designed to ensure that changes could be made within a specified (and acceptably short) period of time.

Instead of requiring that an amendment shall enter into force after being accepted by, for example, two thirds of the Parties, the tacit acceptance procedure provides that an amendment shall enter into force on a specified date unless, before that date, objections to the amendment are received from an agreed number of Parties.

As a result the 1974 Convention has been updated and amended on numerous occasions. The Convention in force today is sometimes referred to as SOLAS, 1974, as amended.

Amendment procedure
Article VIII of the SOLAS 1974 Convention states that amendments can be made either:

After consideration within IMO
Amendments proposed by a Contracting Government are circulated at least six months before consideration by the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) - which may refer discussions to one or more IMO Sub-Committees - and amendments are adopted by a two-thirds majority of Contracting Governments present and voting in the MSC. Contracting Governments of SOLAS, whether or not Members of IMO are entitled to participate in the consideration of amendments in the so-called "expanded MSC".

Amendments by a Conference
A Conference of Contracting Governments is called when a Contracting Government requests the holding of a Conference and at least one-third of Contracting Governments agree to hold the Conference. Amendments are adopted by a two-thirds majority of Contracting Governments present and voting.

In the case of both a Conference and the expanded MSC, amendments (other than to Chapter I) are deemed to have been accepted at the end of a set period of time following communication of the adopted amendments to Contracting Governments, unless a specified number of Contracting Governments object. The length of time from communication of amendments to deemed acceptance is set at two years unless another period of time - which must not be less than one year - is determined by two-thirds of Contracting Governments at the time of adoption.
Amendments to Chapter I are deemed accepted after positive acceptance by two-thirds of Contracting Governments.

Amendments enter into force six months after their deemed acceptance.

The minimum length of time from circulation of proposed amendments through entry into force is 24 months - circulation: six months, adoption to deemed acceptance date: 12 months minimum; deemed acceptance to entry into force: six months.

However, a resolution adopted in 1994 makes provision for an accelerated amendment procedure to be used in exceptional circumstances - allowing for the length of time from communication of amendments to deemed acceptance to be cut to six months in exceptional circumstances and when this is decided by a Conference. In practice to date, the expanded MSC has adopted most amendments to SOLAS, while Conferences have been held on several occasions - notably to adopt whole new Chapters to SOLAS or to adopt amendments proposed in response to a specific incident.

Technical provisions
The main objective of the SOLAS Convention is to specify minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of ships, compatible with their safety. Flag States are responsible for ensuring that ships under their flag comply with its requirements, and a number of certificates are prescribed in the Convention as proof that this has been done. Control provisions also allow Contracting Governments to inspect ships of other Contracting States if there are clear grounds for believing that the ship and its equipment do not substantially comply with the requirements of the Convention - this procedure is known as port State control.The current SOLAS Convention includes Articles setting out general obligations, amendment procedure and so on, followed by an Annex divided into 12 Chapters.

Chapter I - General Provisions
Includes regulations concerning the survey of the various types of ships and the issuing of documents signifying that the ship meets the requirements of the Convention. The Chapter also includes provisions for the control of ships in ports of other Contracting Governments.

Chapter II-1 - Construction - Subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations
The subdivision of passenger ships into watertight compartments must be such that after assumed damage to the ship's hull the vessel will remain afloat and stable. Requirements for watertight integrity and bilge pumping arrangements for passenger ships are also laid down as well as stability requirements for both passenger and cargo ships.

The degree of subdivision - measured by the maximum permissible distance between two adjacent bulkheads - varies with ship's length and the service in which it is engaged. The highest degree of subdivision applies to passenger ships.

Requirements covering machinery and electrical installations are designed to ensure that services which are essential for the safety of the ship, passengers and crew are maintained under various emergency conditions. The steering gear requirements of this Chapter are particularly important.

Chapter II-2 - Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction
Includes detailed fire safety provisions for all ships and specific measures for passenger ships, cargo ships and tankers.

They include the following principles: division of the ship into main and vertical zones by thermal and structural boundaries; separation of accommodation spaces from the remainder of the ship by thermal and structural boundaries; restricted use of combustible materials; detection of any fire in the zone of origin; containment and extinction of any fire in the space of origin; protection of the means of escape or of access for fire-fighting purposes; ready availability of fire-extinguishing appliances; minimization of the possibility of ignition of flammable cargo vapour.

A new revised chapter II-2 was adopted in December 2000, entering into force on 1 July 2002.

Chapter III - Life-saving appliances and arrangements
A revised Chapter was adopted in 1996 and entered into force on 1 July 1998. The revisions took into account changes in technology since the Chapter was last revised in 1983. Under the 1996 revision, specific technical requirements were moved to a new International Life-Saving Appliance (LSA) Code, made mandatory under Regulation 34, which states that all life-saving appliances and arrangements shall comply with the applicable requirements of the LSA Code.

The Chapter entered into force on 1 July 1998 and applies to all ships built on or after 1 July 1998, with some new amendments to the previous Chapter also applying to ships built before that date.

The text of the 1996 Chapter takes into account technological changes, such as the development of marine evacuation systems: these systems involve the use of slides, similar to those installed on aircraft. The 1996 revision of Chapter III also reflects public concern over safety issues, raised by a series of major accidents in the 1980s and 1990s. Many of the passenger ship regulations have been made applicable to existing ships, and extra regulations were introduced specifically for ro-ro passenger ships.

Chapter IV - Radiocommunications
The Chapter was completely revised in 1988 to incorporate amendments to introduce the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS).

The amendments entered into force on 1 February 1992 with a phase-in period to 1 February 1999. By that date the Morse Code was phased out and all passenger ships and all cargo ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards on international voyages are now required to carry equipment designed to improve the chances of rescue following an accident, including satellite emergency position indicating radio beacons (EPIRBs) and search and rescue transponders (SARTs) for the location of the ship or survival craft. Chapter IV of SOLAS was previously titled Radiotelegraphy and radiotelephony, reflecting the forms of radio communication available prior to the introduction of satellites.

Regulations in Chapter IV cover undertakings by contracting governments to provide radiocommunciation services as well as ship requirements for carriage of radiocommunications equipment. The Chapter is closely linked to the Radio Regulations of the International Telecommunication Union.

Chapter V - Safety of navigation
Chapter V identifies certain navigation safety services which should be provided by Contracting Governments and sets forth provisions of an operational nature applicable in general to all ships on all voyages. This is in contrast to the Convention as a whole, which only applies to certain classes of ship engaged on international voyages.

The subjects covered include the maintenance of meteorological services for ships; the ice patrol service; routeing of ships; and the maintenance of search and rescue services.

This Chapter also includes a general obligation for masters to proceed to the assistance of those in distress and for Contracting Governments to ensure that all ships shall be sufficiently and efficiently manned from a safety point of view.

A new revised chapter V was adopted in December 2000, entering into force on 1 July 2002. The new chapter makes mandatory the carriage of voyage data recorders (VDRs) and automatic ship identification systems (AIS) for certain ships.

Chapter VI - Carriage of Cargoes
The Chapter covers all types of cargo (except liquids and gases in bulk) "which, owing to their particular hazards to ships or persons on board, may require special precautions".

The regulations include requirements for stowage and securing of cargo or cargo units (such as containers).

Before 1991, this Chapter only covered the carriage of grain - which due to its inherent capability to shift can have disastrous effects on a ship's stability if not stowed, trimmed and secured properly. The current Chapter requires cargo ships carrying grain to comply with the IMO International Grain Code.

Chapter VII - Carriage of dangerous goods
The regulations are contained in three parts:

Part A - Carriage of dangerous goods in packaged form or in solid form or in bulk - includes provisions for the classification, packing, marking, labelling and placarding, documentation and stowage of dangerous goods. Contracting Governments are required to issue instructions at the national level and the Chapter refers to International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, developed by IMO, which is constantly updated to accommodate new dangerous goods and to supplement or revise existing provisions.

Part B covers Construction and equipment of ships carrying dangerous liquid chemicals in bulk and requires chemical tankers built after 1 July 1986 to comply with the International Bulk Chemical Code (IBC Code).

Part C covers Construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk and gas carriers constructed after 1 July 1986 to comply with the requirements of the International Gas Carrier Code (IGC Code).

Part D includes special requirements for the carriage of packaged irradiated nuclear fuel, plutonium and high-level radioactive wastes on board ships and requires ships carrying such products to comply with the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on Board Ships (INF Code).

From 1 January 2004, the chapter will require carriage of dangerous goods to be in compliance with the relevant provisions of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code). This is due to amendments adopted by IMO in 2002, which are expected to enter into force on 1 January 2004.

The IMDG Code was first adopted by IMO in 1965 and has been kept up to date by regular amendments, including those needed to keep it in line with United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods which sets the basic requirements for all the transport modes

Chapter VIII - Nuclear ships
Gives basic requirements for nuclear-powered ships and is particularly concerned with radiation hazards. It refers to detailed and comprehensive Code of Safety for Nuclear Merchant Ships which was adopted by the IMO Assembly in 1981.

Chapter IX - Management for the Safe Operation of Ships
The Chapter makes mandatory the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, which requires a safety management system to be established by the shipowner or any person who has assumed responsibility for the ship (the "Company").

The Chapter was adopted in May 1994 and entered into force on 1 July 1998.

Chapter X - Safety measures for high-speed craft
The Chapter makes mandatory the International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft (HSC Code), which applies to high-speed craft built on or after 1 January 1996. The Chapter was adopted in May 1994 and entered into force on 1 January 1996.

A new HSC Code was adopted in December 2000 and it applies to ships built on or after 1 July 2002.

Chapter XI-1 - Special measures to enhance maritime safety
The Chapter was adopted in May 1994 and entered into force on 1 January 1996. The Chapter clarifies requirements relating to authorization of recognized organizations (responsible for carrying out surveys and inspections on Administrations' behalves); enhanced surveys; ship identification number scheme; and port State control on operational requirements.

 

Chapter XI-2 - Special measures to enhance maritime security
The Chapter was adopted in December 2002 and entered into force on 1 July 2004. Regulation XI-2/3 of the new chapter enshrines the International Ship and Port Facilities Security Code (ISPS Code). Part A of the Code is mandatory and part B contains guidance as to how best to comply with the mandatory requirements. The regulation requires Administrations to set security levels and ensure the provision of security level information to ships entitled to fly their flag. Prior to entering a port, or whilst in a port, within the territory of a Contracting Government, a ship shall comply with the requirements for the security level set by that Contracting Government, if that security level is higher than the security level set by the Administration for that ship.

Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.

Regulation XI-2/5 requires all ships to be provided with a ship security alert system, according to a strict timetable that will see most vessels fitted by 2004 and the remainder by 2006. When activated the ship security alert system shall initiate and transmit a ship-to-shore security alert to a competent authority designated by the Administration, identifying the ship, its location and indicating that the security of the ship is under threat or it has been compromised. The system will not raise any alarm on-board the ship. The ship security alert system shall be capable of being activated from the navigation bridge and in at least one other location.

Regulation XI-2/6 covers requirements for port facilities, providing among other things for Contracting Governments to ensure that port facility security assessments are carried out and that port facility security plans are developed, implemented and reviewed in accordance with the ISPS Code.

Other regulations in this chapter cover the provision of information to IMO, the control of ships in port, (including measures such as the delay, detention, restriction of operations including movement within the port, or expulsion of a ship from port), and the specific responsibility of Companies.

 

Chapter XII - Additional safety measures for bulk carriers
The Chapter was adopted in November 1997 and entered into force on 1 July 1999. It includes structural requirements for new bulk carriers over 150 metres in length built after 1 July 1999 carrying cargoes with a density of 1,000 kg/m3 and above and also includes specific structural requirements for existing bulk carriers carrying cargoes with a density of 1,780 kg/m3 and above - these include cargoes such as iron ore, pig iron, steel, bauxite and cement. Cargoes with a density above 1,000 kg/m3 but below 1,780 kg/m3 include grains, such as wheat and rice, and timber.

The Protocol of 1978
Adoption: 17 February 1978
Entry into force: 1 May 1981

The 1978 Protocol was adopted at the International Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention, which was convened in response to a spate of tanker accidents in 1976-1977.

The conference adopted measures affecting tanker design and operation, which were incorporated into both the SOLAS Protocol of 1978 as well as the Protocol of 1978 relating to the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1978 MARPOL Protocol).

The 1978 SOLAS Protocol made a number of important changes to Chapter I, including the introduction of unscheduled inspections and/or mandatory annual surveys and the strengthening of port State control requirements. Chapter II-1, Chapter II-2 and Chapter V were also improved.
The main amendments included the following:

New crude oil carriers and product carriers of 20,000 dwt and above are required to be fitted with an inert gas system.

An inert gas system became mandatory for existing crude oil carriers of 70,000 dwt and above by 1 May 1983, and by 1 May 1985 for ships of 20,000-70,000 dwt.

In the case of crude oil carriers of 20-40,000 dwt there is provision for exemption by flag States where it is considered unreasonable or impracticable to fit an inert gas system and high-capacity fixed washing machines are not used. But an inert gas system is always required when crude oil washing is operated.

An inert gas system was required on existing product carriers from 1 May 1983 and by 1 May 1985 for ships of 40-70,000 dwt and down to 20,000 dwt which are fitted with high capacity washing machines.

In addition to requiring that all ships of 1,600 grt and above shall be fitted with radar, the Protocol requires that all ships of 10,000 grt and above have two radars, each capable of being operated independently.

All tankers of 10,000 grt and above shall have two remote steering gear control systems, each operable separately from the navigating bridge.

The main steering gear of new tankers of 10,000 grt and above shall comprise two or more identical power units, and shall be capable of operating the rudder with one or more power units.

The 1981 amendments
Adoption: 20 November 1981
Entry into force: 1 September 1984

Chapters II-1 and II-2 were re-written and updated.

In Chapter II-1, the provisions of resolution A.325(IX) Recommendation concerning regulations for machinery and electrical installations in passenger and cargo ships (adopted in November 1975) were incorporated and made mandatory. Changes to regulations 29 and 30 on steering gear introduced the concept of duplication of steering gear control systems in tankers. These measures were agreed taking into account concerns following the 1978 Amoco Cadiz disaster and relevant provisions in the 1978 SOLAS Protocol.

Chapter II-2 was re-arranged to take into account strengthened fire safety requirements for cargo ships and passenger ships.

The revised Chapter II-2 incorporated the requirements of resolution A.327(IX) Recommendation concerning fire safety requirements for cargo ships, which includes 21 regulations based on the principles of: separation of accommodation spaces from the remainder of the ship by thermal and structural boundaries; protection of means of escape; early detection, containment or extinction of any fire; and restricted use of combustible materials. Other amendments to Chapter II-2 related to provisions for halogenated hydrocarbon extinguishing systems, special requirements for ships carrying dangerous goods, and a new regulation 62 on inert gas systems.

Some important changes were also made to Chapter V, including the addition of new requirements concerning the carriage of shipborne navigational equipment, covering such matters as gyro and magnetic compasses; the mandatory carriage of two radars and of automatic radar plotting aids in ships of 10,000 grt and above; echo-sounders; devices to indicate speed and distance; rudder angle indicators; propeller revolution indicators; rate of turn indicators; radio-direction finding apparatus; and equipment for homing on the radiotelephone distress frequency.

In addition, a few minor changes were made to Chapter III; seven regulations in Chapter IV were replaced, amended or added and a number of small changes were made to Chapter VII.

The 1983 amendments
Adoption: 17 June 1983
Entry into force: 1 July 1986

The most extensive changes involved Chapter III, which was completely rewritten. The Chapter in the 1974 Convention differed little from the texts which appeared in the 1960 and 1948 SOLAS Conventions and the amendments were designed not only to take into account the many technical advances which had taken place since then but also to expedite the evaluation and introduction of further improvements.

There were also a few minor changes to Chapter II-1 and some further changes to Chapter II-2 (including improvements to the 1981 amendments) designed particularly to increase the safety of bulk carriers and passenger ships. Some small changes were made to Chapter IV.

Amendments to Chapter VII extended its application to chemical tankers and liquefied gas carriers by making reference to two new Codes, the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code). Both apply to ships built on or after 1 July 1986.

The 1988 (April) amendments
Adoption: 21 April 1988
Entry into force: 22 October 1989

In March 1987 the car ferry Herald of Free Enterprise capsized shortly after leaving Zeebrugge in Belgium and sank with the loss of 193 lives. The United Kingdom proposed a series of measures designed to prevent a recurrence, the first package of which was adopted in April 1988.

They included new regulations 23-2 and 42-1 of Chapter II-1 intended to improve monitoring of doors and cargo areas and to improve emergency lighting. Because of the urgency, the Maritime Safety Committee agreed the amendments should come into force only 18 months after their adoption, using the "tacit acceptance" procedure.

The 1988 (October) amendments
Adoption: 28 October 1988
Entry into force: 29 April 1990

Some of these amendments also resulted from the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster and included details of how stability of passenger ships in a damaged condition should be determined and a requirement for all cargo loading doors to be locked before a ship leaves the berth.

The amendments also made it compulsory for passenger ships to have a lightweight survey at least every five years to ensure their stability has not been adversely affected by the accumulation of extra weight or any alterations to the superstructure.

Other amendments concerning the stability of passenger ships in the damaged condition were also adopted. These regulations had been in preparation before the Herald of Free Enterprise incident and their adoption was brought forward.

The 1988 Protocol (HSSC)
Adoption: 11 November 1988
Entry into force: 3 February 2000

The Protocol introduces a new harmonized system of surveys and certification (HSSC) to harmonize with two other Conventions, Load Lines and MARPOL 73/78. The aim is to alleviate problems caused by the fact that as requirements in the three instruments vary, ships may be obliged to go into dry-dock for a survey required by one convention shortly after being surveyed in connection with another.

By enabling the required surveys to be carried out at the same time, the system is intended to reduce costs for shipowners and administrations alike.

The 1988 (GMDSS) amendments
Adoption: 11 November 1988
Entry into force: 1 February 1992

IMO had begun work on the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) in the 1970s and its introduction marked the biggest change to maritime communications since the invention of radio.

The amendments which replaced the existing Chapter IV phased in the introduction of the GMDSS in stages between 1993 and 1 February 1999. The basic concept of the system is that search and rescue authorities ashore, as well as ships in the vicinity, will be rapidly alerted in the event of an emergency.

The GMDSS makes great use of the satellite communications provided by Inmarsat but also uses terrestrial radio.

The equipment required by ships varies according to the sea area in which they operate - ships travelling to the high seas must carry more communications equipment than those which remain within reach of specified shore-based radio facilities. In addition to distress communications, the GMDSS also provides for the dissemination of general maritime safety information (such as navigational and meteorological warnings and urgent information to ships).

The 1989 amendments
Adoption: 11 April 1989
Entry into force: 1 February 1992

The main changes concern Chapter II-1 and II-2 of the Convention and deal with ships' construction and with fire protection, detection and extinction.

In Chapter II-1, one of the most important amendments is designed to reduce the number and size of openings in watertight bulkheads in passenger ships and to ensure that they are closed in the event of an emergency.

In Chapter II-2, improvements were made to regulations concerning fixed gas fire-extinguishing systems, smoke detection systems, arrangements for fuel and other oils, the location and separation of spaces and several other regulations.

The International Gas Carrier Code - which is mandatory under SOLAS - was also amended.

The 1990 amendments
Adoption: May 1990
Entry into force: 1 February 1992

Important changes were made to the way in which the subdivision and stability of dry cargo ships is determined. They apply to ships of 100 metres or more in length built on or after 1 February 1992.

The amendments introduced a new part B-1 of Chapter II-1 containing subdivision and damage stability requirements for cargo ships based upon the so-called "probabilistic" concept of survival, which was originally developed through study of data relating to collisions collected by IMO.

This showed a pattern in accidents which could be used in improving the design of ships: most damage, for example, is sustained in the forward part of ships and it seemed logical, therefore, to improve the standard of subdivision there rather than towards the stern. Because it is based on statistical evidence as to what actually happens when ships collide, the probabilistic concept provides a far more realistic scenario than the earlier "deterministic" method, whose principles regarding the subdivision of passenger ships are theoretical rather than practical in concept.

Amendments were also made to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code).

The 1991 amendments
Adoption: 24 May 1991
Entry into force: 1 January 1994

Chapter VI (Carriage of grain) was completely revised to extend it to include other cargoes and it was retitled Carriage of cargoes. The text is shorter, but the Chapter is backed up by two new Codes. The International Grain Code is mandatory while the Code of Safe Practice for Cargo Stowage and Securing is recommended. The Chapter also refers to the Code of Safe Practice for Ships Carrying Timber Deck Cargoes and the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes.In Chapter II-2, fire safety requirements for passenger ships were improved and other changes were made to Chapter III and Chapter V.

The April 1992 amendments
Adoption: 10 April 1992
Entry into force: 1 October 1994

New standards concerning the stability of existing ro-ro passenger ships after damage were included in amendments to Chapter II-1. They were based on measures to improve the damage stability of new ro-ro passenger ships which came into force on 29 April 1990 but were slightly modified. The measures are phased in over an 11-year period beginning 1 October 1994.

A number of other amendments to SOLAS were adopted, including improved fire safety measures for existing passenger ships carrying more than 36 passengers, including mandatory requirements for smoke detection and alarm and sprinkler systems in accommodation and service spaces, stairway enclosures and corridors. Other improvements involved the provision of emergency lighting, general emergency alarm systems and other means of communication.

Some of these measures became applicable for existing ships on 1 October 1994. Those dealing with smoke detection and alarm systems and sprinklers applied from 1 October 1997. Requirements concerning stairways of steel-frame construction, for fire-extinguishing systems in machinery spaces and for fire doors are mandatory from 1 October 2000.

The April 1992 amendments are particularly important because they apply to existing ships. In the past, major changes to SOLAS had been restricted to new ships by so-called "grandfather clauses". The reason for this is that major changes involve expensive modifications to most ships, and there had previously been a reluctance to make such measures retroactive.

The December 1992 amendments
Adoption: 11 December 1992
Entry into force: 1 October 1994

The most important amendments were concerned with the fire safety of new passenger ships. They made it mandatory for new ships (i.e. those built after 1 October 1994) carrying more than 36 passengers to be fitted with automatic sprinklers and a fire detection and alarm system centralized in a continuously-manned remote control station. Controls for the remote closing of fire doors and shutting down of ventilation fans must be located at the same place.

New standards for the fire integrity of bulkheads and decks were introduced and improvements made to standards for corridors and stairways used as a means of escape in case of fire. Emergency lighting which can be used by passengers to identify escape routes is required.

Other amendments affect the fire safety of ships carrying 36 passengers or less and also oil tanker fire safety.

Three Codes were also amended. Amendments to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) entered into force on 1 July 1994 and affect ships built after that date.

Amendments to the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (BCH Code) entered into force on 1 July 1994. The Code is voluntary and applies to existing ships.

The May 1994 amendments (Conference)
Adoption: 24 May 1994
Entry into force: 1 January 1996 (Chapters X, XI) 1 July 1998 (Chapter IX)

The Conference adopted three new SOLAS Chapters as well as a resolution on an accelerated amendment procedure.

Accelerated amendment procedure
The Conference adopted a resolution on an accelerated amendment procedure to be used in exceptional circumstances. It states that a Conference of Contracting Governments can reduce the period after which an amendment to the technical Chapters of the Convention (which excludes the articles and Chapter I) is deemed to have been accepted from 12 months to six months, in exceptional circumstances.

Article VIII of SOLAS deals with the procedures for amending the Convention. The existing text says that proposed amendments have to be circulated to Governments at least six months prior to adoption and cannot enter into force until at least 18 months after adoption. This makes a total of 24 months, from circulation (six months), through adoption, to deemed acceptance date (12 months after adoption), to entry into force (six months after deemed acceptance date).

The resolution adopted by the conference states that the circulation period will remain at six months as will the period between the date on which the amendment is deemed to have been accepted and the date of entry into force. But the period between adoption and deemed acceptance date can be reduced to six months from 12. The total period between circulation of an amendment and its entry into force could thus be reduced from 24 months to 18 - in exceptional circumstances.

Chapter IX: Management for the Safe Operation of Ships
This new Chapter to the Convention was designed to make mandatory the International Safety Management Code, which was adopted by IMO in November 1993 (Assembly resolution A.741(18)).

The amendments introducing the new Chapter IX entered into force under tacit acceptance on 1 July 1998. The Chapter applies to passenger ships and tankers from that date and to cargo ships and mobile drilling units of 500 gross tonnage and above from 1 July 2002.

The Code establishes safety management objectives which are:

- to provide for safe practices in ship operation and a safe working environment;

- to establish safeguards against all identified risks;

- to continuously improve safety management skills of personnel, including preparing for emergencies.

The Code requires a safety management system (SMS) to be established by "the Company", which is defined as the shipowner or any person, such as the manager or bareboat charterer, who has assumed responsibility for operating the ship.

The company is then required to establish and implement a policy for achieving these objectives. This includes providing the necessary resources and shore-based support. Every company is expected "to designate a person or persons ashore having direct access to the highest level of management".

The procedures required by the ISM Code should be documented and compiled in a Safety Management Manual, a copy of which should be kept on board.

Chapter X: Safety Measures for High Speed Craft
The new Chapter makes mandatory the International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft, which was adopted by the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) held concurrently with the Conference.

The Chapter entered into force under tacit acceptance on 1 January 1996 and applies to high-speed craft built on or after that date.

Chapter XI: Special Measures to Enhance Safety:
The new Chapter entered into force under tacit acceptance on 1 January 1996.

Regulation 1 states that organizations entrusted by an Administration with the responsibility for carrying out surveys and inspections shall comply with the guidelines adopted by IMO in resolution A.739(18) in November 1993.

Regulation 2 extends to bulk carriers aged five years and above, the enhanced programme of surveys applicable to tankers under MARPOL 73/78. The enhanced surveys should be carried out during the periodical, annual and intermediate surveys prescribed by the MARPOL and SOLAS Conventions.

The related guidelines on enhanced surveys pay special attention to corrosion. Coatings and tank corrosion prevention systems must be thoroughly checked and measurements must also be carried out to check the thickness of plates.

Regulation 3 provides that all passenger ships of 100 gross tonnage and above and all cargo ships of 300 gross tonnage and above shall be provided with an identification number conforming to the IMO ship identification number scheme, as adopted by resolution A.600(15) in 1987.

Regulation 4 makes it possible for port State control officers inspecting foreign ships to check operational requirements "when there are clear grounds for believing that the master or crew are not familiar with essential shipboard procedures relating to the safety of ships"

.Reference is made to resolution A.742(18), adopted in November 1993. The resolution acknowledges the need for port States to be able to monitor not only the way in which foreign ships comply with IMO standards but also to be able to assess "the ability of ships' crews in respect of operational requirements relevant to their duties, especially with regard to passenger ships and ships which may present a special hazard"

.The "clear grounds" referred to are defined in the annex to the resolution. They include such factors as operational shortcomings, cargo operations not being conducted properly, the involvement of the ship in incidents caused by operational mistakes, absence of an up-to-date muster list and indications that crew members may not be able to communicate with each other.

Port State control inspections are normally limited to checking certificates and documents. But if certificates are not valid or if there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship or of its equipment, or its crew, does not substantially meet the requirements of a relevant instrument, a more detailed inspection may be carried out.

The operations and procedures selected for special attention include ascertaining that crew members are aware of their duties as indicated in the muster list; communications; fire and abandon ship drills; familiarity with the ship's damage control and fire control plans; bridge, cargo and machinery operations; and ability to understand manuals and other instructions.

The May 1994 amendments (MSC)
Adoption: 25 May 1994
Entry into force: 1 January 1996

Three new regulations were added to Chapter V

.Regulation 15.1 requires all tankers of 20,000 dwt and above built after 1 January 1996 to be fitted with an emergency towing arrangement to be fitted at both ends of the ship. Tankers built before that date had to be fitted with a similar arrangement not later than 1 January 1999.

Regulation 22 is aimed at improving navigation bridge visibility.

Regulation 8.1 makes mandatory the use of ship reporting systems approved by IMO. General principles for ship reporting systems were previously adopted by IMO in 1989 as a recommendation. The systems are used to provide, gather or exchange information through radio reports.

The regulation makes it mandatory for ships entering areas covered by ship reporting systems to report in to the coastal authorities giving details of sailing plans.

In Chapter II-2 improvements were made to regulation 15, which deals with fire protection arrangements for fuel oil, lubrication oil and other flammable oils.

Amendments to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) and the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases (Gas Carrier Code) relate to the filling limits for cargo tanks.

The December 1994 amendments
Adoption: 9 December 1994
Entry into force: 1 July 1996

In Chapter VI (Carriage of Cargoes), the Code of Safe Practice for Cargo Stowage and Securing is made mandatory. The Code was adopted as a recommendation in 1991. The amendments make it mandatory to provide the cargo information required by the Code and for cargo units, including containers, to be loaded, stowed and secured in accordance with a manual that must be at least equivalent to the Code.

The Code is also made mandatory under Chapter VII (Carriage of dangerous goods).

The May 1995 amendments
Adoption: 16 May 1995
Entry into force: 1 January 1997

Regulation 8 of Chapter V was amended to make ships' routeing systems compulsory. Governments are responsible for submitting proposals for ships' routeing systems to IMO in accordance with amendments to the General Provisions on Ships' Routeing, which were adopted at the same time.

The November 1995 amendments (Conference)
Adopted: 29 November 1995
Entry into force: 1 July 1997

The conference adopted a series of amendments to SOLAS, based on proposals put forward by the Panel of Experts on the safety of roll on-roll off passenger ships which was established in December 1994 following the sinking of the ferry Estonia.

The most important changes relate to the stability of ro-ro passenger ships in Chapter II-1.

The SOLAS 90 damage stability standard, which had applied to all ro-ro passenger ships built since 1990, was extended to existing ships in accordance with an agreed phase-in programme. Ships that only meet 85% of the standard had to comply fully by 1 October 1998 and those meeting 97.5% or above, by 1 October 2005. (The SOLAS 90 standard refers to the damage stability standard in the 1988 (October) amendments to SOLAS adopted 28 October 1988 and entering into force on 29 April 1990.)

The conference also adopted a new regulation 8-2, containing special requirements for ro-ro passenger ships carrying 400 passengers or more. This is intended to phase out ships built to a one-compartment standard and ensure that they can survive without capsizing with two main compartments flooded following damage.

Amendments to other Chapters in the SOLAS Convention included changes to Chapter III, which deals with life saving appliances and arrangements, including the addition of a section requiring ro-ro passenger ships to be fitted with public address systems, a regulation providing improved requirements for life-saving appliances and arrangements and a requirement for all passenger ships to have full information on the details of passengers on board and requirements for the provision of a helicopter pick-up or landing area.

Other amendments were made to Chapter IV (radiocommunications); Chapter V (safety of navigation) - including a requirement that all ro-ro passenger ships should have an established working language - and Chapter VI (carriage of cargoes).

The conference also adopted a resolution which permits regional arrangements to be made on special safety requirements for ro-ro passenger ships.

The June 1996 amendments
Adoption: 4 June 1996
Entry into force: 1 July 1998

A completely revised Chapter III on life-saving appliances and arrangements was adopted. The amendments take into account changes in technology since the Chapter was last re-written in 1983.

Many of the technical requirements were transferred to a new International Life-Saving Appliance (LSA) Code, applicable to all ships built on or after 1 July 1998. Some of the amendments apply to existing ships as well as new ones.

Other SOLAS Chapters were also amended.

In Chapter II-1, a new part A-1 dealing with the structure of ships was added. Regulation 3-1 requires ships to be designed, constructed and maintained in compliance with structural requirements of a recognized classification society or with applicable requirements by the Administration. Regulation 3-2 deals with corrosion prevention of seawater ballast tanks and other amendments to Chapter II-1 concern the stability of passenger and cargo ships in the damaged condition.

In Chapter VI, Regulation 7 was replaced by a new text dealing with the loading, unloading and stowage of bulk cargoes. It is intended to ensure that no excessive stress is placed on the ship's structure during such operations. The ship must be provided with a booklet giving advice on cargo handling operations and the master and terminal representative must agree on a plan to ensure that loading and unloading is carried out safely.

In Chapter XI, an amendment was made regarding authorization of recognized organizations.

The International Bulk Chemicals (IBC) and Bulk Chemicals (BCH) Codes were also amended. The IBC Code is mandatory under SOLAS and applies to ships carrying dangerous chemicals in bulk that were built after 1 July 1986. The BCH is recommended and applies to ships built before that date.

The December 1996 amendments
Adoption: 6 December 1996
Entry into force: 1 July 1998

Chapter II-2 was considerably modified, with changes to the general introduction, Part B (fire safety measures for passenger ships), Part C (fire safety measures for cargo ships) and Part D (fire safety measures for tankers). The changes made mandatory a new International Code for Application of Fire Test Procedures intended to be used by Administrations when approving products for installation in ships flying their flag.

Amendments to Chapter II-1 included a requirement for ships to be fitted with a system to ensure that the equipment necessary for propulsion and steering are maintained or immediately restored in the case of loss of any one of the generators in service.

An amendment to Chapter V aims to ensure that the crew can gain safe access to the ship's bow, even in severe weather conditions. Amendments were also made to two regulations in Chapter VII relating to carriage of dangerous goods and the IBC Code was also amended.

The June 1997 amendments
Adoption: 4 June 1997
Entry into force: 1 July 1999 (Under tacit acceptance)

The amendments included a new Regulation 8.2 on Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) in Chapter V. VTS are traffic management systems, for example those used in busy straits. This Regulation sets out when VTS can be implemented. It says Vessel Traffic Services should be designed to contribute to the safety of life at sea, safety and efficiency of navigation and the protection of the marine environment, adjacent shore areas, worksites and offshore installations from possible adverse effects of maritime traffic.

Governments may establish VTS when, in their opinion, the volume of traffic or the degree of risk justifies such services. But no VTS should prejudice the "rights and duties of governments under international law" and a VTS may only be made mandatory in sea areas within a State's territorial waters.

In Chapter II-1, a new regulation 8.3 on "Special requirements for passenger ships, other than ro-ro passenger ships, carrying 400 persons or more" effectively makes these ships comply with the special requirements for ro-ro passenger ships in Regulation 8.2 which were adopted in November 1995. The special requirements are aimed at ensuring the ships can survive without capsizing with two main compartments flooded following damage.

The November 1997 amendments (Conference)
Adoption: 27 November 1997
Entry into force: 1 July 1999

The Conference adopted a Protocol adding a new Chapter XII to the Convention entitled Additional Safety Measures for Bulk Carriers.

The regulations state that all new bulk carriers 150 metres or more in length (built after 1 July 1999) carrying cargoes with a density of 1,000 kg/m3 and above should have sufficient strength to withstand flooding of any one cargo hold, taking into account dynamic effects resulting from presence of water in the hold and taking into account the recommendations adopted by IMO.

For existing ships (built before 1 July 1999) carrying bulk cargoes with a density of 1,780 kg/m3 and above, the transverse watertight bulkhead between the two foremost cargo holds and the double bottom of the foremost cargo hold should have sufficient strength to withstand flooding and the related dynamic effects in the foremost cargo hold.

Cargoes with a density of 1,780 kg/m3 and above (heavy cargoes) include iron ore, pig iron, steel, bauxite and cement. Lighter cargoes, but with a density of more than 1,000 kg/m3, include grains such as wheat and rice, and timber.

The amendments take into account a study into bulk carrier survivability carried out by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) at the request of IMO. IACS found that if a ship is flooded in the forward hold, the bulkhead between the two foremost holds may not be able to withstand the pressure that results from the sloshing mixture of cargo and water, especially if the ship is loaded in alternate holds with high density cargoes (such as iron ore). If the bulkhead between one hold and the next collapses, progressive flooding could rapidly occur throughout the length of the ship and the vessel would sink in a matter of minutes.

IACS concluded that the most vulnerable areas are the bulkhead between numbers one and two holds at the forward end of the vessel and the double bottom of the ship at this location. During special surveys of ships, particular attention should be paid to these areas and, where necessary, reinforcements should be carried out.

The criteria and formulae used to assess whether a ship currently meets the new requirements, for example in terms of the thickness of the steel used for bulkhead structures, or whether reinforcement is necessary, are laid out in IMO standards adopted by the 1997 Conference.

Under Chapter XII, surveyors can take into account restrictions on the cargo carried in considering the need for, and the extent of, strengthening of the transverse watertight bulkhead or double bottom. When restrictions on cargoes are imposed, the bulk carrier should be permanently marked with a solid triangle on its side shell. The date of application of the new Chapter to existing bulk carriers depends on their age. Bulk carriers which are 20 years old and over on 1 July 1999 have to comply by the date of the first intermediate or periodic survey after that date, whichever is sooner. Bulk carriers aged 15-20 years must comply by the first periodical survey after 1 July 1999, but not later than 1 July 2002. Bulk carriers less than 15 years old must comply by the date of the first periodical survey after the ship reaches 15 years of age, but not later than the date on which the ship reaches 17 years of age.

The May 1998 amendments
Adoption: 18 May 1998
Entry into force: 1 July 2002 (Under tacit acceptance)

Amendments were made to regulation 14 on Construction and initial testing of watertight bulkheads, etc., in passenger ships and cargo ships in Chapter II-1. Paragraph 3 is replaced to allow visual examination of welded connections, where filling with water or a hose test are not practicable.

In Chapter IV, the amendments included:

a new regulation 5-1 requiring Contracting Governments to ensure suitable arrangements are in place for registering Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) identities (including ship's call sign, Inmarsat identities) and making the information available 24 hours a day to Rescue Co-ordination Centres;

a new paragraph 9 to regulation 15 Maintenance requirements covering testing intervals for satellite emergency position indicating radio beacons (EPIRBs);

a new regulation 18 on Position updating requiring automatic provision of information regarding the ship's position where two-way communication equipment is capable of providing automatically the ship's position in the distress alert.

Amendments in Chapter VI to paragraph 6 of regulation 5 Stowage and securing make it clear that "all cargoes, other than solid and liquid bulk cargoes" should be loaded, stowed and secured in accordance with the Cargo Securing Manual. A similar amendment was adopted for Regulation 6 of Chapter VII, also covering Stowage and securing.

The May 1999 amendments
Adoption: 27 May 1999
Entry into force: 1 January 2001 (Under tacit acceptance)

Amendments to Chapter VII make the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on Board Ships (INF Code) mandatory.

The INF Code sets out how the material covered by the Code should be carried, including specifications for ships. The material covered by the code includes:

- Irradiated nuclear fuel - material containing uranium, thorium and/or plutonium isotopes which has been used to maintain a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction.

- Plutonium - the resultant mixture of isotopes of that material extracted from irradiated nuclear fuel from reprocessing

- High-level radioactive wastes - liquid wastes resulting from the operation of the first stage extraction system or the concentrated wastes from subsequent extraction stages, in a facility for reprocessing irradiated fuel, or solids into which such liquid wastes have been converted.

The INF Code applies to all ships regardless of the date of construction and size, including cargo ships of less than 500 gross tonnage, engaged in the carriage of INF cargo. The INF Code does not apply to warships, naval auxiliary or other ships used only on government non-commercial service, although Administrations are expected to ensure such ships are in compliance with the Code.

Specific regulations in the Code cover a number of issues, including: damage stability, fire protection, temperature control of cargo spaces, structural consideration, cargo securing arrangements, electrical supplies, radiological protection equipment and management, training and shipboard emergency plans.

Ships carrying INF cargo are assigned to one of three classes, depending on the total radioactivity of INF cargo which is carried on board, and regulations vary slightly according to the Class:

Class INF 1 ship - Ships which are certified to carry INF cargo with an aggregate activity less than 4,000 TBq (TeraBecquerel - measurement of radioactivity).

Class INF 2 ship - Ships which are certified to carry irradiated nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive wastes with an aggregate activity less than 2 x 106 TBq and ships which are certified to carry plutonium with an aggregate activity less than 2 x 105 TBq.

Class INF 3 ship - Ships which are certified to carry irradiated nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive wastes and ships which are certified to carry plutonium with no restriction of the maximum aggregate activity of the materials.

The INF Code was first adopted as a recommendatory Code by the eighteenth session of the Assembly on 4 November 1993 (resolution A.748(18)). The twentieth session of the Assembly adopted amendments to the INF Code to include specific requirements for shipboard emergency plans and notification in the event of an incident (resolution A.853(20), adopted on 27 November 1997).

The Maritime Safety Committee also adopted a redrafted text of the INF Code incorporating amendments reflecting its mandatory nature.

The May 2000 amendment
Adoption: 26 May 2000
Entry into force: 1 January 2002 (Under tacit acceptance)

SOLAS Chapter III, regulation 28.2 for helicopter landing areas is amended to require a helicopter landing area only for ro-ro passenger ships. Regulation 28.1 of SOLAS Chapter III requires all ro-ro passenger ships to be provided with a helicopter pick-up area and existing ro-ro passenger ships were required to comply with this regulation not later than the first periodical survey after 1 July 1997.

The requirement for a helicopter landing area for all passenger ships of 130 metres in length and upwards was deferred to 1 July 1999 but it was decided to amend the regulation to make this requirement applicable to ro-ro passenger ships only.

The December 2000 amendments
Adoption: 6 December 2000
Entry into force: 1 July 2002 (Under tacit acceptance)

A number of amendments were adopted.

A revised SOLAS Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) brings in a new mandatory requirement for voyage data recorders voyage data recorders (VDRs) to assist in accident investigations. Regulation 20 requires the following ships to fit VDRs:

- passenger ships constructed on or after 1 July 2002;

- ro-ro passenger ships constructed before 1 July 2002 not later than the first survey on or after 1 July 2002

- passenger ships other than ro-ro passenger ships constructed before 1 July 2002 not later than 1 January 2004; and·

- ships, other than passenger ships, of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards constructed on or after 1 July 2002.

The new chapter also requires automatic identification systems (AIS), capable of providing information about the ship to other ships and to coastal authorities automatically, to be fitted aboard all ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards engaged on international voyages, cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards not engaged on international voyages and passenger ships irrespective of size built on or after 1 July 2002.

It also applies to ships engaged on international voyages constructed before 1 July 2002, according to the following timetable:

- passenger ships, not later than 1 July 2003;

- tankers, not later than the first survey for safety equipment on or after 1 July 2003;

- ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 50,000 gross tonnage and upwards, not later than 1 July 2004;

- ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 10,000 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 50,000 gross tonnage, not later than 1 July 2005;

- ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 10,000 gross tonnage, not later than 1 July 2006.

- ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 300 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 3,000 gross tonnage, not later than 1 July 2007.

Note: the phase-in schedule for AIS on ships 300 gross tonnage and upwards was amended by the 2002 amendments to a final date of 2004 (see below).

Amendments to SOLAS chapter X (Safety measures for high-speed craft) make mandatory for new ships the High-Speed Craft Code 2000. The 2000 HSC Code updates the mandatory High-Speed Craft Code adopted in 1994. The 2000 HSC will apply to all HSC built after the date of entry into force, 1 July 2002. The original HSC Code was adopted by IMO in May 1994, but the rapid pace of development in this sector of shipping has meant an early revision of the Code. The original Code will continue to apply to existing high-speed craft. The changes incorporated in the new Code are intended to bring it into line with amendments to SOLAS and new recommendations that have been adopted in the past four years - for example, requirements covering public address systems and helicopter pick-up areas

A revised SOLAS chapter II-2 (Construction, - Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction) as well as a new International Code for Fire Safety Systems (FSS Code) were adopted. The revised chapter is intended to be clear, concise and user-friendly, incorporating the substantial changes introduced in recent years following a number of serious fire casualties. The revised chapter includes seven parts, each including requirements applicable to all or specified ship types, while the Fire Safety Systems (FSS) Code, which is made mandatory under the new chapter, includes detailed specifications for fire safety systems in 15 Chapters.

A new regulation in SOLAS Chapter II-1 (Construction - Structure, subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations) prohibits the new installation of materials which contain asbestos on all ships. The new regulation 3-5 is included in SOLAS Chapter II-1 (Construction - Structure, Subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations.

Amendments to the 1988 SOLAS Protocol include amendments to reflect the changes to SOLAS chapter V, such as the details of navigational systems and equipment referred to in the records of equipment attached to certificates.

Amendments to the International Code for the Application of Fire Test Procedures (FTP Code) add new parts 10 and 11 to annex 1 on Test for fire-restricting material for high-speed craft and test for fire-resisting divisions of high-speed craft.

Amendments to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (BCH Code) relate to cargo hose requirements, protection of personnel and carriage of carbon disulphide. Entry into force 1 July 2002 under tacit acceptance.

Amendments to the International Safety Management Code (ISM Code) include the replacement of Chapter 13 Certification, verification and control with chapters 13 Certification; and adding of chapters 14 Interim Certification; 15 Forms of Certificate; and 16 Verification; as well as a new appendix giving forms of documents and certificates.

Amendments to the Code for the Construction and equipment of ships carrying dangerous chemicals in bulk (BCH Code) relate to ship's cargo hoses, tank vent systems, safety equipment, operational requirements; and amendments to the Code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk (GC Code) relate to ship's cargo hoses, personnel protection and operating requirements.

 

The June 2001 Amendments
Adoption: June 2001
Entry into force: 1 January 2003 (Under tacit acceptance)

Amendments to Chapter VII - Carriage of Dangerous Goods - and to the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on Board Ships (INF Code) to align them with Amendment 30 to the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code.

Also amendments to the International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft (1994 HSC Code) to bring the provisions for navigational equipment of the 1994 HSC Code in line with the relevant provisions of the 2000 HSC Code (which enters into force on 1 July 2002 for ships built after that date). In particular the amendments relate to carriage of voyage data recorders and carriage of automatic identification systems (AIS).

 

The May 2002 amendments
Adoption: 24 May 2002
Entry into force: 1 January 2004

The amendments to chapter SOLAS VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) make the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) mandatory. The MSC also adopted the IMDG Code in a mandatory form.

However, the provisions of the following parts of the Code will remain recommendatory:
· chapter 1.3 (Training);
· chapter 2.1 (Explosives, Introductory Notes 1 to 4 only);
· chapter 2.3, section 2.3.3 (Determination of flashpoint only);
· chapter 3.2 (columns 15 and 17 of the Dangerous Goods List only);
· chapter 3.5 (Transport schedule for Class 7 radioactive material only),
· chapter 5.4, section 5.4.5 (Multimodal dangerous goods form), insofar as layout of the form is concerned;
· chapter 7.3 (Special requirements in the event of an incident and fire precautions involving dangerous goods only).

In practice, this means that from the legal point of view, the whole of the IMDG Code is made mandatory, but provisions of recommendatory nature are editorially expressed in the Code (e.g. using the word "should" instead of "shall") to clarify their status.

The mandatory IMDG Code incorporates certain changes relating to specific products, as well as relevant elements of the amendments to the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, Model Regulations adopted by the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods at its twenty-first session in Geneva from 4 to 13 December 2000.

Also, amendments to the 1978 SOLAS Protocol, make changes to the Record of Equipment for the Passenger Ship Safety Certificate (Form P); Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate (Form R); and Record of Equipment for the Cargo Ship Safety Certificate (Form C).

 

The December 2002 amendments (Conference) - Measures to enhance maritime security
Adoption: 13 December 2002
Entry into force: 1 July 2004

The amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention were adopted by a Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security and are aimed at enhancing maritime security on board ships and at ship/port interface areas. Among other things, these amendments create a new SOLAS chapter dealing specifically with maritime security, which in turn contains the mandatory requirement for ships to comply with the the new International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code). The Code contains detailed security-related requirements for Governments, port authorities and shipping companies in a mandatory section (Part A), together with a series of guidelines about how to meet these requirements in a second, non-mandatory section (Part B). The Conference also adopted a series of resolutions designed to add weight to the amendments, encourage the application of the measures to ships and port facilities not covered by the Code and pave the way for future work on the subject..

Modifications to Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) contain a new timetable for the fitting of Automatic Information Systems (AIS). Ships, other than passenger ships and tankers, of 300 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 50,000 gross tonnage, will be required to fit AIS not later than the first safety equipment survey after 1 July 2004 or by 31 December 2004, whichever occurs earlier. Ships fitted with AIS shall maintain AIS in operation at all times except where international agreements, rules or standards provide for the protection of navigational information."

The existing SOLAS Chapter XI (Special measures to enhance maritime safety) has been re-numbered as Chapter XI-1. Regulation XI-1/3 is modified to require ships' identification numbers to be permanently marked in a visible place either on the ship's hull or superstructure. Passenger ships should carry the marking on a horizontal surface visible from the air. Ships should also be marked with their ID numbers internally.

And a new regulation XI-1/5 requires ships to be issued with a Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) which is intended to provide an on-board record of the history of the ship. The CSR shall be issued by the Administration and shall contain information such as the name of the ship and of the State whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that State, the ship's identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address. Any changes shall be recorded in the CSR so as to provide updated and current information together with the history of the changes.

 

New Chapter XI-2 (Special measures to enhance maritime security)
A brand-new Chapter XI-2 (Special measures to enhance maritime security) is added after the renumbered Chapter XI-1.

This chapter applies to passenger ships and cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards, including high speed craft, mobile offshore drilling units and port facilities serving such ships engaged on international voyages.

Regulation XI-2/3 of the new chapter enshrines the International Ship and Port Facilities Security Code (ISPS Code). Part A of this Code is mandatory and part B contains guidance as to how best to comply with the mandatory requirements.

The regulation requires Administrations to set security levels and ensure the provision of security level information to ships entitled to fly their flag. Prior to entering a port, or whilst in a port, within the territory of a Contracting Government, a ship shall comply with the requirements for the security level set by that Contracting Government, if that security level is higher than the security level set by the Administration for that ship.

Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.Regulation XI-2/4 confirms the role of the Master in exercising his professional judgement over decisions necessary to maintain the security of the ship. It says he shall not be constrained by the Company, the charterer or any other person in this respect.

Regulation XI-2/5 requires all ships to be provided with a ship security alert system, according to a strict timetable that will see most vessels fitted by 2004 and the remainder by 2006. When activated the ship security alert system shall initiate and transmit a ship-to-shore security alert to a competent authority designated by the Administration, identifying the ship, its location and indicating that the security of the ship is under threat or it has been compromised. The system will not raise any alarm on-board the ship. The ship security alert system shall be capable of being activated from the navigation bridge and in at least one other location.

Regulation XI-2/6 covers requirements for port facilities, providing among other things for Contracting Governments to ensure that port facility security assessments are carried out and that port facility security plans are developed, implemented and reviewed in accordance with the ISPS Code.

Other regulations in this chapter cover the provision of information to IMO, the control of ships in port, (including measures such as the delay, detention, restriction of operations including movement within the port, or expulsion of a ship from port), and the specific responsibility of Companies.

 

The December 2002 amendments (by the expanded MSC)
Adoption: 12 December 2002
Entry into force: 1 July 2004

Chapter XII (Additional Safety Measures for Bulk Carriers) -

• New regulation XII/12 on Hold, ballast and dry space water level detectors require the fitting of high level alarms and level monitoring systems on all bulk carriers, in order to detect water ingress. The regulation requires the fitting of such alarms on all bulk carriers regardless of their date of construction.
• New regulation XII/13 on Availability of pumping systems would require the means for draining and pumping dry space bilges and ballast tanks any part of which is located forward of the collision bulkhead to be capable of being brought into operation from a readily accessible enclosed space.

 

SOLAS chapter II-1 (Construction - structure, subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations)-

• In Part B (Subdivision and stability), new regulation II-1/3-6 Access to spaces in cargo areas of oil tankers and bulk carriers is intended to ensure that vessels can be properly inspected throughout their lifespan, by designing and building the ship to provide suitable means for access. Associated Technical provisions for means of access for inspections are mandatory under the regulation. Without adequate access, the structural condition of the vessel can deteriorate undetected and major structural failure can arise. The regulation requires each space within the cargo area to be provided with an appropriate means of access to enable, throughout the life of a ship, overall and close-up inspections and thickness measurements of the ship's structures to be carried out by the Administration, the Company, and the ship's personnel and others as necessary.
• In Part C (Machinery Installation), new paragraph added to regulation 31 - Machinery control, to require automation systems to be designed in a manner which ensures that threshold warning of impending or imminent slowdown or shutdown of the propulsion system is given to the officer in charge of the navigational watch in time to assess navigational circumstances in an emergency.

 

Chapter II-2 (Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction) -

• The amendments concern references to the IMDG Code and reflect amendments to SOLAS chapter VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) adopted in May 2002 which make the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) mandatory.

 

Chapter III - Life-saving appliances and arrangements -

• The amendments to Regulation 26 - Additional requirements for ro-ro passenger ships, requires liferafts carried on ro-ro passenger ships to be fitted with a radar transponder in the ratio of one transponder for every four liferafts. The regulation is made applicable to existing ships as well as new ships.

Also adopted, amendments to the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on board Ships (INF Code) - The amendments in the sections on definitions and application reflect amendments to SOLAS chapter VII (Carriage of Dangerous Goods) adopted in May 2002 which make the IMDG Code mandatory.

 

 

 

 

The June 2003 amendments
Adoption: June 2003
Entry into force: 1 July 2006

 

Chapter V - Safety of Navigation

Amendments to SOLAS regulations V/2 Definitions and V/22 Navigation Bridge Visibility add the definition of "length" to regulation V/2 and a consequential editorial change is made to regulation V/22. The definition states that "length of a ship means its length overall".

Amendments to SOLAS regulation V/28 on Records of navigational activities add a new paragraph on daily reporting. The amendment will require all ships of 500 gross tonnage and above, engaged on international voyages exceeding 48 hours, to submit a daily report to their company, to include ship's position; ship's course and speed; and details of any external or internal conditions that are affecting the ship's voyage or the normal safe operation of the ship. The aim of the amendments is to address the responsibilities of ship operators to provide information of benefit to those responsible for mounting rescue operations.

 

 

 

 

The May 2004 amendments
Adoption: May 2004
Entry into force: 1 July 2006

 

Persons in distress at sea
Amendments to chapter V (Safety of Navigation) - to add a definition of search and rescue services; to set an obligation to provide assistance, regardless of nationality or status of persons in distress, and mandate co-ordination and co-operation between States to assist the ship's master in delivering persons rescued at sea to a place of safety; and to add a new regulation on master's discretion.

 

Accidents with lifeboats
Amendments to SOLAS chapter III (Life-saving appliances and arrangements) which are intended to help prevent accidents with lifeboats during drills. The amendments, which are expected to enter into force on 1 July 2006, stem from work by the Sub-Committee on Ship Design and Equipment (DE) intended to address the unacceptably high number of accidents with lifeboats that have been occurring over recent years. Crew have been injured, sometimes fatally, while participating in lifeboat drills and/or inspections.

The amendments to Regulation 19 (Emergency training and drills) and Regulation 20 (Operational readiness, maintenance and inspections) concern the conditions in which lifeboat emergency training and drills should be conducted and introduce changes to the operational tests to be conducted during the weekly and monthly inspections, so as not to require the assigned crew to be on board in all cases.

 

Carriage of immersion suits
Amendments to SOLAS chapter III Regulation 32 - Personal life-saving appliances to make changes to the number of immersion suits to be carried on all cargo ships. The amendments introduce carriage requirements for one immersion suit per person on board all cargo ships, including bulk carriers. At present, the regulation requires carriage of at least three immersion suits for each lifeboat on a cargo ship, as well as thermal protective aids for persons not provided with immersion suits.

With the adoption of the amendments, immersion suits become, as lifejackets, a personal life-saving appliance for each person on board thus offering better thermal protection and improved chance of survival and rescue. The MSC also adopted consequential amendments to the 1988 SOLAS Protocol relating to the records of equipment.

 

IMDG Code amendments
Amendments to the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code update several sections of the Code relating to the carriage of dangerous goods and also include a new chapter 1.4 on Security Provisions intended to address the security of dangerous goods being transported by sea. The amendments are expected to enter into force on 1 January 2006, but may be applied on a voluntary basis from 1 January 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

December 2004 amendments to SOLAS

Adoption: December 2004
Entry into fore: 1 July 2006

 

Bulk carrier safety
A new text for SOLAS chapter XII (Additional safety measures for bulk carriers) incorporates revisions to some regulations and new requirements relating to double-side skin bulk carriers.

The amendments include the addition of a new regulation 14 on restrictions from sailing with any hold empty and requirements for double-side skin construction as an optional alternative to single-side skin construction. The option of double-side skin construction will apply to new bulk carriers of 150m in length and over, carrying solid bulk cargoes having a density of 1,000 kg/m3 and above.

 

Free-fall lifeboats on bulk carriers
an amendment to regulation 31 in SOLAS chapter III (Life-saving appliances and arrangements) makes mandatory the carriage of free-fall lifeboats on bulk carriers.

 

Simplified Voyage Data Recorders
Amendments to regulation 20 of SOLAS chapter V (Safety of Navigation) give a phased-in carriage requirement for a shipborne simplified voyage data recorder (S-VDR).

The regulation requires a VDR, which may be an S-VDR, to be fitted on existing cargo ships of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards, phasing in the requirement for cargo ships of 20,000 gross tonnage and upwards first, to be followed by cargo ships of 3,000 gross tonnage and upwards.

The S-VDR is not required to store the same level of detailed data as a standard VDR, but nonetheless should maintain a store, in a secure and retrievable form, of information concerning the position, movement, physical status, command and control of a vessel over the period leading up to and following an incident.

 

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78)

Introduction
History of MARPOL 73/78
OILPOL Convention
Torrey Canyon
1973 Convention
1978 Conference
Annex I: Prevention of pollution by oil
Annex II: Control of pollution by noxious liquid substances
Annex III: Prevention of pollution by harmful substances in packaged form
Annex IV: Prevention of pollution by sewage from ships
Annex V: Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships
Annex VI: Prevention of  Air Pollution from Ships
Enforcement
Amendment Procedure
The 1984 amendments
The 1985 (Annex II) amendments
The 1985 (Protocol I) amendments – incident reporting
The 1987 amendments  - special area extension
The 1989 (March) amendments – Annex II
The October 1989 amendments – North Sea special area
The 1990 (HSSC) amendments
The 1990 (IBC Code) amendments
The 1990 (BCH) amendments
The 1990 (Annexes I and V) amendments – Antarctic as special area
The 1991 amendments – Wider Caribbean as special area
The 1992 amendments – Double hulls made mandatory
The 1994 amendments - Implementation
The 1995 amendments – Garbage records
The 1996 amendments
The 1997 amendments – North West European waters as special area
The Protocol of 1997  adoption of Annex VI - Regulations for the Prevention of Air
Pollution from Ships
The 1999 amendments – Persistent oil
The 2000 amendments – Deletion of tainting
The 2001 amendments - revised 13 G (double hulls)
The 2003 amendments - Double hulls
The 2004 (April) amendments - revised Annex IV (sewage)
The 2004 (October) amendments - revised Annexes I and II

Introduction

The MARPOL Convention is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. It is a combination of two treaties adopted in 1973 and 1978 respectively and updated by amendments through the years.

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) was adopted on 2 November 1973 at IMO and covered pollution by oil, chemicals, harmful substances in packaged form, sewage and garbage. The Protocol of 1978 relating to the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1978 MARPOL Protocol) was adopted at a Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention in February 1978 held in response to a spate of tanker accidents in 1976-1977. (Measures relating to tanker design and operation were also incorporated into a Protocol of 1978 relating to the 1974 Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974).

As the 1973 MARPOL Convention had not yet entered into force, the 1978 MARPOL Protocol absorbed the parent Convention. The combined instrument is referred to as the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78), and it entered into force on 2 October 1983 (Annexes I and II).

The Convention includes regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships - both accidental pollution and that from routine operations - and currently includes six technical Annexes:

Annex I

Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil

Annex II

Regulations for the Control of  Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk

Annex III

Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form

Annex IV

Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships

Annex V

Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships

Annex VI

Prevention of  Air Pollution from Ships (entry into force 19 May 2005)

States Parties must accept Annexes I and II, but the other Annexes are voluntary.

History of MARPOL 73/78
Oil pollution of the seas was recognized as a problem in the first half of the 20th century and various countries introduced national regulations to control discharges of oil within their territorial waters. In 1954, the United Kingdom organized a conference on oil pollution which resulted in the adoption of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil (OILPOL), 1954. Following entry into force of the IMO Convention in 1958, the depository and Secretariat functions in relation to the Convention were transferred from the United Kingdom Government to IMO.       

OILPOL Convention
The 1954 Convention, which was amended in 1962, 1969 and 1971, primarily addressed pollution resulting from routine tanker operations and from the discharge of oily wastes from machinery spaces -  regarded as the major causes of oil pollution from ships.

The 1954 OILPOL Convention, which entered into force on 26 July 1958, attempted to tackle the problem of pollution of the seas by oil - defined as crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil and lubricating oil - in two main ways:

it established "prohibited zones" extending at least 50 miles from the nearest land in which the discharge of oil or of mixtures containing more than 100 parts of oil per million was forbidden;

it required Contracting Parties to take all appropriate steps to promote the provision of facilities for the reception of oily water and residues.

In 1962, IMO adopted amendments to the Convention which extended its application to ships of a lower tonnage and also extended the "prohibited zones". Amendments adopted in 1969 contained regulations to further restrict operational discharge of oil from oil tankers and from machinery spaces of all ships.

Although the 1954 OILPOL Convention went some way in dealing with oil pollution, growth in oil trade and developments in industrial practices were beginning to make it clear that further action, was required. Nonetheless, pollution control was at the time still a minor concern for IMO, and indeed the world was only beginning to wake up to the environmental consequences of an increasingly industrialised society.

Torrey Canyon

In 1967, the tanker Torrey Canyon ran aground while entering the English Channel and spilled her entire cargo of 120,000 tons of crude oil into the sea.  This resulted in the biggest oil pollution incident ever recorded up to that time.  The incident raised questions about measures then in place to prevent oil pollution from ships and also exposed deficiencies in the existing system for providing compensation following accidents at sea.

First, IMO called an Extraordinary session of its Council, which drew up a plan of action on technical and legal aspects of the Torrey Canyon incident. Then, the IMO Assembly decided in 1969 to convene an international conference in 1973 to prepare a suitable international agreement for placing restraints on the contamination of the sea, land and air by ships.

In the meantime, in 1971, IMO adopted further amendments to OILPOL 1954 to afford additional protection to the Great Barrier Reef of Australia and also to limit the size of tanks on oil tankers, thereby minimizing the amount of oil which could escape in the event of a collision or stranding.

1973 Convention

Finally, an international Conference in 1973 adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships. While it was recognized that accidental pollution was spectacular, the Conference considered that operational pollution was still the bigger threat. As a result, the 1973 Convention incorporated much of OILPOL 1954 and its amendments into Annex I, covering oil.

But the Convention was also intended to address other forms of pollution from ships and therefore other annexes covered chemicals, harmful substances carried in packaged form, sewage and garbage. The 1973 Convention also included two Protocols dealing with Reports on Incidents involving Harmful Substances and Arbitration.   

The 1973 Convention required ratification by 15 States, with a combined merchant fleet of not less than 50 percent of world shipping by gross tonnage, to enter into force. By 1976, it had only received three ratifications - Jordan, Kenya and Tunisia - representing less than one percent of the world's merchant shipping fleet. This was despite the fact that States could become Party to the Convention by only ratifying Annexes I (oil) and II (chemicals). Annexes III to V, covering harmful goods in packaged form, sewage and garbage, were optional.     

It began to look as though the 1973 Convention might never enter into force, despite its importance.

1978 Conference
In 1978, in response to a spate of tanker accidents in 1976-1977, IMO held a Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention in February 1978. The conference adopted measures affecting tanker design and operation, which were incorporated into both the Protocol of 1978 relating to the 1974 Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea (1978 SOLAS Protocol) and the Protocol of 1978 relating to the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1978 MARPOL Protocol) - adopted on 17 February 1978.

More importantly in terms of achieving the entry into force of MARPOL, the 1978 MARPOL Protocol allowed States to become Party to the Convention by first implementing Annex I (oil), as it was decided that Annex II (chemicals) would not become binding until three years after the Protocol entered into force.

This gave States time to overcome technical problems in Annex II, which for some had been a major obstacle in ratifying the Convention.

As the 1973 Convention had not yet entered into force, the 1978 MARPOL Protocol absorbed the parent Convention. The combined instrument  - the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78) - finally entered into force on 2 October 1983 (for Annexes I and II).

Annex V, covering garbage, achieved sufficient ratifications to enter into force on 31 December 1988, while Annex III, covering harmful substances carried in packaged form, entered into force on 1 July 1992. Annex IV, covering sewage, enters into force on 27 September 2003. Annex VI, covering air pollution, was adopted in September 1997 and enters into force on 19 May 2005.

Annex I: Prevention of pollution by oil

Entry into force: 2 October 1983

(Revised Annex I enters into force 1 January 2007)

The 1973 Convention maintained the oil discharge criteria prescribed in the 1969 amendments to the 1954 Oil Pollution Convention, without substantial changes, namely:

Operational discharges of oil from tankers are allowed only when all of the following conditions are met:

1.    the total quantity of oil which a tanker may discharge in any ballast voyage whilst under way must not exceed 1/15,000 of the total cargo carrying capacity of the vessel;

2.    the rate at which oil may be discharged must not exceed 60 litres per mile travelled by the ship; and

3.    no discharge of any oil whatsoever must be made from the cargo spaces of a tanker within 50 miles of the nearest land.

An oil record book is required, in which is recorded the movement of cargo oil and its residues from loading to discharging on a tank-to-tank basis.

In addition, in the 1973 Convention, the maximum quantity of oil permitted to be discharged on a ballast voyage of new oil tankers was reduced from 1/15,000 of the cargo capacity to 1/30,000 of the amount of cargo carried.  These criteria applied equally both to persistent (black) and non‑persistent (white) oils.

As with the 1969 OILPOL amendments, the 1973 Convention recognized the "load on top" (LOT) system which had been developed by the oil industry in the 1960s. On a ballast voyage the tanker takes on ballast water (departure ballast) in dirty cargo tanks. Other tanks are washed to take on clean ballast. The tank washings are pumped into a special slop tank. After a few days, the departure ballast settles and oil flows to the top. Clean water beneath is then decanted while new arrival ballast water is taken on. The upper layer of the departure ballast is transferred to the slop tanks. After further settling and decanting, the next cargo is loaded on top of the remaining oil in the slop tank, hence the term load on top.

A new and important feature of the 1973 Convention was the concept of "special areas" which are considered to be so vulnerable to pollution by oil that oil discharges within them have been completely prohibited, with minor and well‑defined exceptions.  The 1973 Convention identified the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, and the Baltic Sea, the Red Sea and the Gulfs area as special areas. All oil‑carrying ships are required to be capable of operating the method of retaining oily wastes on board through the "load on top" system or for discharge to shore reception facilities.

This involves the fitting of appropriate equipment, including an oil‑discharge monitoring and control system, oily‑water separating equipment and a filtering system, slop tanks, sludge tanks, piping and pumping arrangements.

New oil tankers (i.e. those for which the building contract was placed after 31 December 1975) of 70,000 tons deadweight and above, must be fitted with segregated ballast tanks large enough to provide adequate operating draught without the need to carry ballast water in cargo oil tanks. 

Secondly, new oil tankers are required to meet certain subdivision and damage stability requirements so that, in any loading conditions, they can survive after damage by collision or stranding.

The Protocol of 1978 made a number of changes to Annex I of the parent convention.  Segregated ballast tanks (SBT) are required on all new tankers of 20,000 dwt and above (in the parent convention SBTs were only required on new tankers of 70,000 dwt and above).  The Protocol also required SBTs to be protectively located ‑ that is, they must be positioned in such a way that they will help protect the cargo tanks in the event of a collision or grounding.    

Another important innovation concerned crude oil washing (COW), which had been developed by the oil industry in the 1970s and offered major benefits.  Under COW, tanks are washed not with water but with crude oil ‑ the cargo itself.  COW was accepted as an alternative to SBTs on existing tankers and is an additional requirement on new tankers.

For existing crude oil tankers (built before entry into force of the Protocol) a third alternative was permissible for a period of two to four years after entry into force of MARPOL 73/78. The dedicated clean ballast tanks (CBT) system meant that certain tanks are dedicated solely to the carriage of ballast water.  This was cheaper than a full SBT system since it utilized existing pumping and piping, but when the period of grace has expired other systems must be used.

Drainage and discharge arrangements were also altered in the Protocol, regulations for improved stripping systems were introduced.

Some oil tankers operate solely in specific trades between ports which are provided with adequate reception facilities.  Some others do not use water as ballast.  The TSPP Conference recognized that such ships should not be subject to all MARPOL requirements and they were consequently exempted from the SBT, COW and CBT requirements. It is generally recognized that the effectiveness of international conventions depends upon the degree to which they are obeyed and this in turn depends largely upon the extent to which they are enforced.  The 1978 Protocol to MARPOL therefore introduced stricter regulations for the survey and certification of ships.

The 1992 amendments to Annex I made it mandatory for new oil tankers to have double hulls – and it brought in a phase-in schedule for existing tankers to fit double hulls, which was subsequently revised in 2001 and 2003.

(Revised Annex I enters into force 1 January 2007)

See also Oil Pollution

Annex II: Control of pollution by noxious liquid substances

Entry into force: 6 April 1987

(Revised Annex II enters into force 1 January 2007)

Annex II details the discharge criteria and measures for the control of pollution by noxious liquid substances carried in bulk.

Some 250 substances were evaluated and included in the list appended to the Convention.  The discharge of their residues is allowed only to reception facilities until certain concentrations and conditions (which vary with the category of substances) are complied with. 

In any case, no discharge of residues containing noxious substances is permitted within 12 miles of the nearest land.  More stringent restrictions applied to the Baltic and Black Sea areas.      

(Revised Annex II enters into force 1 January 2007)

See also Chemical Pollution

Annex III: Prevention of pollution by harmful substances in packaged form

Entry into force: 1 July 1992

The first of the convention's optional annexes.  States ratifying the Convention must accept Annexes I and II but can choose not to accept the other three - hence they have taken much longer to enter into force.

Annex III contains general requirements for the issuing of detailed standards on packing, marking, labelling, documentation, stowage, quantity limitations, exceptions and notifications for preventing pollution by harmful substances.

The International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code has, since 1991, included marine pollutants. 

See also Harmful Substances in Packaged Form

  
Annex IV: Prevention of pollution by sewage from ships

Entry into force: 27 September 2003

The second of the optional Annexes, Annex IV contains requirements to control pollution of the sea by sewage.   A revised Annex was adopted in 2004.

See also Sewage

Annex V: Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships

Entry into force: 31 December 1988

This deals with different types of garbage and specifies the distances from land and the manner in which they may be disposed of.  The requirements are much stricter in a number of "special areas" but perhaps the most important feature of the Annex is the complete ban imposed on the dumping into the sea of all forms of plastic.     

See also Garbage 

Annex VI: Prevention of  Air Pollution from Ships

Adopted September 1997

Entry into force: 19 May 2005

The regulations in this annex, when they come into force, will set limits on sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ship exhausts and prohibit deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances. 

See 1997 amendments

See also Air Pollution

Enforcement

Any violation of the MARPOL 73/78 Convention within the jurisdiction of any Party to the Convention is punishable either under the law of that Party or under the law of the flag State.  In this respect, the term "jurisdiction" in the Convention should be construed in the light of international law in force at the time the Convention is applied or interpreted.

With the exception of very small vessels, ships engaged on international voyages must carry on board valid international certificates which may be accepted at foreign ports as prima facie evidence that the ship complies with the requirements of the Convention.

If, however, there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship or its equipment does not correspond substantially with the particulars of the certificate, or if the ship does not carry a valid certificate, the authority carrying out the inspection may detain the ship until it is satisfied that the ship can proceed to sea without presenting unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment.

Under Article 17, the Parties to the Convention accept the obligation to promote, in consultation with other international bodies and with the assistance of UNEP, support for those Parties which request technical assistance for various purposes, such as training, the supply of equipment, research, and combating pollution.

Amendment Procedure

Amendments to the technical Annexes of MARPOL 73/78 can be adopted using the "tacit acceptance" procedure, whereby the amendments enter into force on a specified date unless an agreed number of States Parties object by an agreed date.

In practice, amendments are usually adopted either by IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) or by a Conference of Parties to MARPOL.

The 1984 amendments
Adoption: 7 September 1984
Entry into force: 7 January 1986

The amendments to Annex I were designed to make implementation easier and more effective.  New requirements were designed to prevent oily water being discharged in special areas, and other requirements were strengthened.  But in some cases they were eased, provided that various conditions were met: some discharges were now permitted below the waterline, for example, which helps to cut costs by reducing the need for extra piping.

The 1985 (Annex II) amendments
Adoption: 5 December 1985
Entry into force: 6 April 1987

The amendments to Annex II, which deals with liquid noxious substances (such as chemicals), were intended to take into account technological developments since the Annex was drafted in 1973 and to simplify its implementation.  In particular, the aim was to reduce the need for reception facilities for chemical wastes and to improve cargo tank stripping efficiencies.

The amendments also made the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) mandatory for ships built on or after 1 July 1986.  This is important because the Annex itself is concerned only with discharge procedures: the Code contains carriage requirements.  The Code itself was revised to take into account anti‑pollution requirements and therefore make the amended Annex more effective in reducing accidental pollution

The 1985 (Protocol I) amendments
Adoption: 5 December 1985
Entry into force: 6 April 1987

The amendments made it an explicit requirement to report incidents involving discharge into the sea of harmful substances in packaged form.

The 1987 Amendments
Adoption:  December 1987
Entry into force: 1 April 1989

The amendments extended Annex I Special Area status to the Gulf of Aden

The 1989 (March) amendments
Adoption: March 1989
Entry into force: 13 October 1990

The amendments affected the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code), mandatory under both MARPOL 73/78 and SOLAS and applies to ships built on or after 1 July 1986 and the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (BCH).  In both cases, the amendments included a revised list of chemicals.  The BCH Code is mandatory under MARPOL 73/78 but voluntary under SOLAS 1974.

Further amendments affected Annex II of MARPOL  - updating and replacing the lists of chemicals in appendices II and III.    

The October 1989 amendments
Adoption: 17 October 1989
Entry into force: 18 February 1991

The amendments make the North Sea a "special area" under Annex V of the convention.  This greatly increases the protection of the sea against the dumping of garbage from ships

The 1990 (HSSC) amendments

Adoption: March 1990

Entry into force: 3 February 2000 (Coinciding with the entry into force of the 1988 SOLAS and Load Lines Protocols. 

The amendments are designed to introduce the harmonized system of survey and certificates (HSSC) into MARPOL 73/78 at the same time as it enters into force for the SOLAS and Load Lines Conventions. 

All three instruments require the issuing of certificates to show that requirements have been met and this has to be done by means of a survey which can involve the ship being out of service for several days.

The harmonized system alleviates the problems caused by survey dates and intervals between surveys which do not coincide, so that a ship should no longer have to go into port or repair yard for a survey required by one convention shortly after doing the same thing in connection with another instrument.       

The 1990 (IBC Code) amendments

Adoption: March 1990

Entry into force: On the same date as the March 1990 HSSC amendments i.e. 3 February 2000.

The amendments introduced the HSSC into the IBC Code

The 1990 (BCH) amendments

Adoption: March 1990

Entry into force: On the same date as the March 1990 HSSC amendments i.e. 3 February 2000.

The amendments introduced the HSSC into the BCH Code.

The 1990 (Annexes I and V) amendments

Adoption: November 1990

Entry into force: 17 March 1992

The amendments extended Special Area Status under Annexes I and V to the Antarctic.

The 1991 amendments

Adoption: 4 July 1991

Entry into force: 4 April 1993

The amendments made the Wider Caribbean a Special Area under Annex V.

Other amendments added a new chapter IV to Annex I, requiring ships to carry an oil pollution emergency plan. 

The 1992 amendments
Adoption: 6 March 1992
Entry into force: 6 July 1993

The amendments to Annex I of the convention which deals with pollution by oil brought in the "double hull" requirements for tankers, applicable to new ships (tankers ordered after 6 July 1993, whose keels were laid on or after 6 January 1994 or which are delivered on or after 6 July 1996) as well as existing ships built before that date, with a phase-in period. 

New-build tankers are covered by Regulation 13F, while regulation 13G applies to existing crude oil tankers of 20,000 dwt and product carriers of 30,000 dwt and above. Regulation 13G came into effect on 6 July 1995.

Regulation 13F requires all new tankers of 5,000 dwt and above to be fitted with double hulls separated by a space of up to 2 metres (on tankers below 5,000 dwt the space must be at least 0.76m).

As an alternative, tankers may incorporate the "mid‑deck" concept under which the pressure within the cargo tank does not exceed the external hydrostatic water pressure. Tankers built to this design have double sides but not a double bottom. Instead, another deck is installed inside the cargo tank with the venting arranged in such a way that there is an upward pressure on the bottom of the hull.

Other methods of design and construction may be accepted as alternatives "provided that such methods ensure at least the same level of protection against oil pollution in the event of a collision or stranding and are approved in principle by the Marine Environment Protection Committee based on guidelines developed by the Organization.

For oil tankers of 20,000 dwt and above new requirements were introduced concerning subdivision and stability.

The amendments also considerably reduced the amount of oil which can be discharged into the sea from ships (for example, following the cleaning of cargo tanks or from engine room bilges).  Originally oil tankers were permitted to discharge oil or oily mixtures at the rate of 60 litres per nautical mile.  The amendments reduced this to 30 litres. For non‑tankers of 400 grt and above the permitted oil content of the effluent which may be discharged into the sea is cut from 100 parts per million to 15 parts per million.

Regulation 24(4), which deals with the limitation of size and arrangement of cargo tanks, was also modified.

Regulation 13G applies to existing crude oil tankers of 20,000 dwt and product carriers of 30,000 dwt and above.

Tankers that are 25 years old and which were not constructed according to the requirements of the 1978 Protocol to MARPOL 73/78 have to be fitted with double sides and double bottoms. The Protocol applies to tankers ordered after 1 June 1979, which were begun after 1 January 1980 or completed after 1 June 1982.  Tankers built according to the standards of the Protocol are exempt until they reach the age of 30.

Existing tankers are subject to an enhanced programme of inspections during their periodical, intermediate and annual surveys. Tankers that are five years old or more must carry on board a completed file of survey reports together with a conditional evaluation report endorsed by the flag Administration.

Tankers built in the 1970s which are at or past their 25th must comply with Regulation 13F. If not, their owners must decide whether to convert them to the standards set out in regulation 13F, or to scrap them.

Another set of tankers built according to the standards of the 1978 protocol will soon be approaching their 30th birthday - and the same decisions must be taken.       

The 1994 amendments
Adoption: 13 November 1994
Entry into force: 3 March 1996

The amendments affect four of the Convention's five technical annexes (II III, V, and I) and are all designed to improve the way it is implemented. They make it possible for ships to be inspected when in the ports of other Parties to the Convention to ensure that crews are able to carry out essential shipboard procedures relating to marine pollution prevention. These are contained in resolution A.742 (18), which was adopted by the IMO Assembly in November 1993.

The amendments are similar to those made to SOLAS in May 1994. Extending port State control to operational requirements is seen as an important way of improving the efficiency with which international safety and anti-pollution treaties are implemented.   

The 1995 amendments
Adoption: 14 September 1995
Entry into force: 1 July 1997

The amendments concern Annex V. They are designed to improve the way the Convention is implemented. Regulation 2 was clarified and a new regulation 9 added dealing with placards, garbage management plans and garbage record keeping.

The 1996 amendments
Adoption: 10 July 1996
Entry into force: 1 January 1998

One set of amendments concerned Protocol I to the Convention which contains provisions for reporting incidents involving harmful substances. The amendments included more precise requirements for the sending of such reports.

Other amendments brought requirements in MARPOL concerning the IBC and BCH Codes into line with amendments adopted to SOLAS.       

The 1997 amendments
Adoption: 23 September 1997
Entry into force: 1 February 1999

Regulation 25A to Annex 1 specifies intact stability criteria for double hull tankers.

Another amendment made the North West European waters a "special area" under Regulation 10 of Annex 1.  The waters cover the North Sea and its approaches, the Irish Sea and its approaches, the Celtic Sea, the English Channel and its approaches and part of the North East Atlantic immediately to the West of Ireland.

In special areas, discharge into the sea of oil or oily mixture from any oil tanker and ship over 400 gt is prohibited.  Other special areas already designated under Annex I of MARPOL include: the Mediterranean Sea area, the Baltic Sea area, the Red Sea area, the Gulf of Aden area and the Antarctic area.    

The Protocol of 1997 (Annex VI - Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships)

Adoption: 26 September 1997
Entry into force: 19 May 2005

The Protocol was adopted at a Conference held from 15 to 26 September 1997 and adds a new Annex VI on Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships to the Convention.

The rules, when they come into force, will set limits on sulphur oxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from ship exhausts and prohibit deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances.

The new Annex VI includes a global cap of 4.5% m/m on the sulphur content of fuel oil and calls on IMO to monitor the worldwide average sulphur content of fuel once the Protocol comes into force.

Annex VI contains provisions allowing for special  "SOx Emission Control Areas" to be established with more stringent control on sulphur emissions. In these areas, the sulphur content of fuel oil used on board ships must not exceed 1.5% m/m. Alternatively, ships must fit an exhaust gas cleaning system or use any other technological method to limit SOx emissions.

The Baltic Sea is designated as a SOx Emission Control area in the Protocol.

Annex VI prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances, which include halons and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). New installations containing ozone-depleting substances are prohibited on all ships. But new installations containing hydro-chlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are permitted until 1 January 2020.

The requirements of the IMO Protocol are in accordance with the Montreal Protocol of 1987, as amended in London in 1990. The Montreal Protocol is an international environmental treaty, drawn up under the auspices of the United Nations, under which nations agreed to cut CFC consumption and production in order to protect the ozone layer.

Annex VI sets limits on emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from diesel engines. A mandatory NOx Technical Code, developed by IMO, defines how this is to be done.

The Annex also prohibits the incineration on board ship of certain products, such as contaminated packaging materials and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

Format of Annex VI

Annex VI consists of three Chapters and a number of Appendices:

• Chapter 1 - General
• Chapter II - Survey, Certification and Means of Control
• Chapter III - Requirements for Control of Emissions from Ships
• Appendices including the form of the International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate; criteria and procedures for designation of SOx emission control areas; information for inclusion in the bunker delivery note; approval and operating limits for shipboard incinerators; test cycles and weighting factors for verification of compliance of marine diesel engines with the NOx limits; and details of surveys and inspections to be carried out.       

The 1999 amendments
Adoption: 1 July 1999
Entry into force: 1 January 2001 (under tacit acceptance)

Amendments to Regulation 13G of Annex I (Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil) make existing oil tankers between 20,000 and 30,000 tons deadweight carrying persistent product oil, including heavy diesel oil and fuel oil, subject to the same construction requirements as crude oil tankers.

Regulation 13G requires, in principle, existing tankers to comply with requirements for new tankers in Regulation 13F, including double hull requirements for new tankers or alternative arrangements, not later than 25 years after date of delivery.

The amendments extend the application from applying to crude oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above and product carriers of 30,000 tons deadweight and above, to also apply to tankers between 20,000 and 30,000 tons deadweight which carry heavy diesel oil or fuel oil.

The aim of the amendments is to address concerns that oil pollution incidents involving persistent oils are as severe as those involving crude oil, so regulations applicable to crude oil tankers should also apply to tankers carrying persistent oils.

Related amendments to the Supplement of the IOPP (International Oil Pollution Prevention) Certificate, covering in particular oil separating/filtering equipment andretention and disposal of oil residues were also adopted.

A third MARPOL 73/78 amendment adopted relates to Annex II of MARPOL Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk. The amendment adds a new regulation 16 requiring a Shipboard marine pollution emergency plan for noxious liquid substances.

Amendments were also made to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (BCH Code). The amendments address the maintenance of venting systems,

The 2000 amendments
Adoption: 13 March 2000
Entry into force: 1 January 2002 (under tacit acceptance)

The amendment to Annex III (Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form) deletes tainting as a criterion for marine pollutants from the Guidelines for the identification of harmful substances in packaged form. Tainting refers to the ability of a product to be taken up by an organism and thereby affect the taste or smell of seafood making it unpalatable. A substance is defined as tainting when it has been found to taint seafood.

The amendment means that products identified as being marine pollutants solely on the basis of their tainting properties will no longer be classified as marine pollutants.

The 2001 amendments
Adoption: 27 April 2001
Entry into force: 1 September 2002

The amendment to Annex I brings in a new global timetable for accelerating the phase-out of single-hull oil tankers. The timetable will see most single-hull oil tankers eliminated by 2015 or earlier. Double-hull tankers offer greater protection of the environment from pollution in certain types of accident. All new oil tankers built since 1996 are required to have double hulls.

The revised regulation identifies three categories of tankers, as follows:

"Category 1 oil tanker" means oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do not comply with the requirements for protectively located segregated ballast tanks (commonly known as Pre-MARPOL tankers).

"Category 2 oil tanker" means oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do comply with the protectively located segregated ballast tank requirements (MARPOL tankers), while

"Category 3 oil tanker" means an oil tanker of 5,000 tons deadweight and above but less than the tonnage specified for Category 1 and 2 tankers.

Although the new phase-out timetable sets 2015 as the principal cut-off date for all single-hull tankers, the flag state administration may allow for some newer single hull ships registered in its country that conform to certain technical specifications to continue trading until the 25th anniversary of their delivery.

However, under the provisions of paragraph 8(b), any Port State can deny entry of those single hull tankers which are allowed to operate until their 25th anniversary to ports or offshore terminals. They must communicate their intention to do this to IMO.

As an additional precautionary measure, a Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) will have to be applied to all Category 1 vessels continuing to trade after 2005 and all Category 2 vessels after 2010.

Although the CAS does not specify structural standards in excess of the provisions of other IMO conventions, codes and recommendations, its requirements stipulate more stringent and transparent verification of the reported structural condition of the ship and that documentary and survey procedures have been properly carried out and completed.

The requirements of the CAS include enhanced and transparent verification of the reported structural condition and of the ship and verification that the documentary and survey procedures have been properly carried out and completed. The Scheme requires that compliance with the CAS is assessed during the Enhanced Survey Programme of Inspections concurrent with intermediate or renewal surveys currently required by resolution A.744(18), as amended.

The 2003 Amenedments
Adoption: 4 December 2003
Entry into force: April 2005

Under a revised regulation 13G of Annex I of MARPOL, the final phasing-out date for Category 1 tankers (pre-MARPOL tankers) is brought forward to 2005, from 2007. The final phasing-out date for category 2 and 3 tankers (MARPOL tankers and smaller tankers) is brought forward to 2010, from 2015.

 

The full timetable for the phasing out of single-hull tankers is as follows:

Category of oil tanker

Date or year

Category 1

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1982 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1982

Category 2 and
Category 3

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1977 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1977 but before 1 January 1978
2006 for ships delivered in 1978 and 1979
2007 for ships delivered in 1980 and 1981
2008 for ships delivered in 1982
2009 for ships delivered in 1983
2010 for ships delivered in 1984 or later

 

Under the revised regulation, the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) is to be made applicable to all single-hull tankers of 15 years, or older. Previously it was applicable to all Category 1 vessels continuing to trade after 2005 and all Category 2 vessels after 2010. Consequential enhancements to the CAS scheme were also adopted.

The revised regulation allows the Administration (flag State) to permit continued operation of category 2 or 3 tankers beyond 2010 subject to satisfactory results from the CAS, but the continued operation must not go beyond the anniversary of the date of delivery of the ship in 2015 or the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery, whichever is earlier.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 oil tankers fitted with only double bottoms or double sides not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length or double hull spaces, not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements, which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation beyond 2010, provided that the ship was in service on 1 July 2001, the Administration is satisfied by verification of the official records that the ship complied with the conditions specified and that those conditions remain unchanged. Again, such continued operation must not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

 

Carriage of heavy grade oil
A new MARPOL regulation 13H on the prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers when carrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriage of HGO in single-hull tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above after the date of entry into force of the regulation (5 April 2005), and in single-hull oil tankers of 600 tons dwt and above but less than 5,000 tons dwt, not later than the anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

Under the new regulation, HGO means any of the following:
a) crude oils having a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3;
b) fuel oils having either a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50ºC higher than 180 mm2/s;
c) bitumen, tar and their emulsions.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 tankers carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, fitted only with double bottoms or double sides, not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length, or double hull spaces not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation of such ships beyond 5 April 2005 until the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

Regulation 13(H) also allows for continued operation of oil tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above, carrying crude oil with a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 but lower than 945 kg/ m3, if satisfactory results of the Condition Assessment Scheme warrant that, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship and provided that the continued operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration may allow continued operation of a single hull oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above but less than 5,000 tons deadweight, carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, if, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship, provided that the operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration of a Party to the present Convention may exempt an oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above carrying heavy grade oil as cargo if the ship is either engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the Party's jurisdiction, or is engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the jurisdiction of another Party, provided the Party within whose jurisdiction the ship will be operating agrees. The same applies to vessels operating as floating storage units of heavy grade oil.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 shall be entitled to deny entry of single hull tankers carrying heavy grade oil which have been allowed to continue operation under the exemptions mentioned above, into the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction, or deny ship-to-ship transfer of heavy grade oil in areas under its jurisdiction except when this is necessary for the purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea.

 

Resolutions adopted
The amendments to MARPOL regulation 13G, the addition of a new regulation 13H, consequential amendments to the IOPP Certificate and the amendments to the Condition Assessment Scheme were adopted by the Committee as MEPC Resolutions

Among other resolutions adopted by the Committee, another on early implementation urged Parties to MARPOL 73/78 seriously to consider the application of the amendments as soon as possible to ships entitled to fly their flag, without waiting for the amendments to enter into force and to communicate this action to the Organization. It also invited the maritime industry to implement the aforesaid amendments to Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 effectively as soon as possible.

The 2004 (April) Amendments
Adoption: 1 April 2004
Entry into force: 1 August 2005

The revised Annex will apply to new ships engaged in international voyages, of 400 gross tonnage and above or which are certified to carry more than 15 persons. Existing ships will be required to comply with the provisions of the revised Annex IV five years after the date of its entry into force. The Annex requires ships to be equipped with either a sewage treatment plant or a sewage comminuting and disinfecting system or a sewage holding tank.

The discharge of sewage into the sea will be prohibited, except when the ship has in operation an approved sewage treatment plant or is discharging comminuted and disinfected sewage using an approved system at a distance of more than three nautical miles from the nearest land; or is discharging sewage which is not comminuted or disinfected at a distance of more than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land.

Also, amendments to the Appendix to MARPOL Annex V on Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships which relate to the recording of the disposal of cargo residues in the Garbage Record Book.

The 2004 (October) Amendments
Adoption: 15 October 2004
Entry into force: 1 January 2007

Revised MARPOL Annex I (oil)
The revised MARPOL Annex I Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil incorporates the various amendments adopted since MARPOL entered into force in 1983, including the amended regulation 13G (regulation 20 in the revised annex) and regulation 13H (regulation 21 in the revised annex) on the phasing-in of double hull requirements for oil tankers. It also separates, in different chapters, the construction and equipment provisions from the operational requirements and makes clear the distinctions between the requirements for new ships and those for existing ships. The revision provides a more user-friendly, simplified Annex I.

New requirements in the revised Annex I include the following:

• Regulation 22 Pump-room bottom protection: on oil tankers of 5,000 tonnes deadweight and above constructed on or after 1 January 2007, the pump-room shall be provided with a double bottom.
• Regulation 23 Accidental oil outflow performance - applicable to oil tankers delivered on or after [date of entry into force of revised Annex I plus 36 months] 1 January 2010; construction requirements to provide adequate protection against oil pollution in the event of stranding or collision.

Oman Sea - new special area under MARPOL Annex I
The Oman Sea area of the Arabian Seas is designated as a special area in the revised Annex I.

The other special areas in Annex I are: Mediterranean Sea area; Baltic Sea area; Black Sea area; Red Sea area; "Gulfs" area; Gulf of Aden area; Antarctic area; and North West European Waters. In the special areas, there are stricter controls on discharge of oily wastes.

Revised MARPOL Annex II (noxious liquid substances carried in bulk)
The revised Annex II Regulations for the control of pollution by noxious liquid substances in bulk includes a new four-category categorization system for noxious and liquid substances. The revised annex is expected to enter into force on 1 January 2007.

The new categories are:

• Category X: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a major hazard to either marine resources or human health and, therefore, justify the prohibition of the discharge into the marine environment;
• Category Y: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a hazard to either marine resources or human health or cause harm to amenities or other legitimate uses of the sea and therefore justify a limitation on the quality and quantity of the discharge into the marine environment;
• Category Z: Noxious Liquid Substances which, if discharged into the sea from tank cleaning or deballasting operations, are deemed to present a minor hazard to either marine resources or human health and therefore justify less stringent restrictions on the quality and quantity of the discharge into the marine environment; and
• Other Substances: substances which have been evaluated and found to fall outside Category X, Y or Z because they are considered to present no harm to marine resources, human health, amenities or other legitimate uses of the sea when discharged into the sea from tank cleaning of deballasting operations. The discharge of bilge or ballast water or other residues or mixtures containing these substances are not subject to any requirements of MARPOL Annex II.

The revised annex includes a number of other significant changes. Improvements in ship technology, such as efficient stripping techniques, has made possible significantly lower permitted discharge levels of certain products which have been incorporated into Annex II. For ships constructed on or after 1 January 2007 the maximum permitted residue in the tank and its associated piping left after discharge will be set at a maximum of 75 litres for products in categories X, Y and Z - compared with previous limits which set a maximum of 100 or 300 litres, depending on the product category.

Alongside the revision of Annex II, the marine pollution hazards of thousands of chemicals have been evaluated by the Evaluation of Hazardous Substances Working Group, giving a resultant GESAMP2 Hazard Profile which indexes the substance according to its bio-accumulation; bio-degradation; acute toxicity; chronic toxicity; long-term health effects; and effects on marine wildlife and on benthic habitats.

As a result of the hazard evaluation process and the new categorization system, vegetable oils which were previously categorized as being unrestricted will now be required to be carried in chemical tankers. The revised Annex includes, under regulation 4 Exemptions, provision for the Administration to exempt ships certified to carry individually identified vegetable oils, subject to certain provisions relating to the location of the cargo tanks carrying the identified vegetable oil.

Transport of vegetable oils
An MEPC resolution on Guidelines for the transport of vegetable oils in deep tanks or in independent tanks specially designed for the carriage of such vegetable oils on board dry cargo ships allows general dry cargo ships that are currently certified to carry vegetable oil in bulk to continue to carry these vegetable oils on specific trades. The guidelines also take effect on 1 January 2007.

Consequential amendments to the IBC Code
Consequential amendments to the International Bulk Chemical Code (IBC Code) were also adopted at the session, reflecting the changes to MARPOL Annex II. The amendments incorporate revisions to the categorization of certain products relating to their properties as potential marine pollutants as well as revisions to ship type and carriage requirements following their evaluation by the Evaluation of Hazardous Substances Working Group.

Ships constructed after 1986 carrying substances identified in chapter 17 of the IBC Code must follow the requirements for design, construction, equipment and operation of ships contained in the Code.

 

International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978

Adoption: 7 July 1978
Entry into force: 28 April 1984

The 1995 amendments, which completely revised the Convention, entered into force on 1 February 1997. However, until 1 February 2002, Parties may continue to issue, recognize and endorse certificates which applied before 1 February 1997 in respect of seafarers who began training or seagoing service before 1 August 1998. This means that the original 1978 text will continue to apply to many of the world's ships and seafarers until the year 2002.

The 1978 STCW Convention – Introduction
The 1978 Convention – Chapter I: General provisions
The 1978 Convention – Chapter II: Master-deck department
The 1978 Convention – Chapter III: Engine department
The 1978 Convention – Chapter IV: Radio department
The 1978 Convention – Chapter V: Special requirements for tankers
The 1978 Convention – Chapter VI: Proficiency in survival craftResolutions adopted by the 1978 ConferenceAmendment Procedure
The 1991 amendments – GMDSS
The 1994 amendments – tanker crews
The 1995 amendments – major revision
Ensuring compliance with the Convention
Port State control
1995 amendments – chapters II, III, IV
1995 amendments - Chapter V: Special training requirements for personnel on certain types of ships
1995 amendments - Chapter VI: Emergency, occupational safety, medical care and survival functions
1995 amendments - Chapter VII: Alternative certification
1995 amendments - Chapter VIII: Watchkeeping
The STCW Code
The 1997 Amendments – training for crew on passenger ships
The 1998 Amendments – training for crew on bulk carriers
The White List

The 1978 STCW Convention – Introduction
The 1978 STCW Convention was the first to establish basic requirements on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers on an international level. Previously the standards of training, certification and watchkeeping of officers and ratings were established by individual governments, usually without reference to practices in other countries. As a result standards and procedures varied widely, even though shipping is the most international of all industries.

The Convention prescribes minimum standards relating to training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers which countries are obliged to meet or exceed.

The Convention did not deal with manning levels: IMO provisions in this area are covered by regulation 13 of Chapter V of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, whose requirements are backed up by resolution A.890(21) Principles of safe manning, adopted by the IMO Assembly in 1999, which replaced an earlier resolution A.481(XII) adopted in 1981.

The Articles of the Convention include requirements relating to issues surrounding certification and port State control.

One especially important feature of the Convention is that it applies to ships of non-party States when visiting ports of States which are Parties to the Convention. Article X requires Parties to apply the control measures to ships of all flags to the extent necessary to ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to ships entitled to fly the flag of a State which is not a Party than is given to ships entitled to fly the flag of a State that is a Party.

The difficulties which could arise for ships of States which are not Parties to the Convention is one reason why the Convention has received such wide acceptance. By December 2000, the STCW Convention had 135 Parties, representing 97.53 percent of world shipping tonnage.

The 1978 Convention – Chapter I
The technical provisions of the 1978 Convention are contained in an Annex, divided into six Chapters:

The 1978 Convention - Chapter I:General provisions
Includes a list of definitions of terms used in the annex. Regulation I/2 deals with the content of the certificate and endorsement form. All certificates must include a translation into English, if that is not the official language of the issuing country.

The 1978 Convention - Chapter II: Master-deck department
The Chapter establishes basic principles to be observed in keeping a navigational watch, covering such matters as watch arrangements, fitness for duty, navigation, navigational equipment, navigational duties and responsibilities, the duties of the look-out, navigation with a pilot on board and protection of the marine environment.

The regulations include mandatory minimum requirements for certificating masters and chief mates; for certification of officers in charge of a navigational watch; and for certification of deck ratings forming part of a navigational watch. The regulations also include basic principles to be observed in keeping watch in port and mandatory minimum requirements for a watch in port on ships carrying hazardous cargo.

The 1978 Convention - Chapter III: Engine department
Includes basic principles to be observed in keeping an engineering watch; mandatory minimum requirements for certification of chief engineer officers and second engineer officers; mandatory minimum requirements for certification of engineer officers in charge of a watch in a traditionally manned engine room or designated duty officers in a periodically unmanned engine room; requirements to ensure the continued proficiency and updating of knowledge for engineer officers; mandatory minimum requirements for ratings forming part of an engine room watch.

The 1978 Convention - Chapter IV: Radio department
Notes that mandatory provisions relating to radio watchkeeping are set forth in the ITU Radio Regulations and safety radio watchkeeping and maintenance provisions are included in the same regulations and in SOLAS. The Chapter in STCW includes mandatory minimum requirements for certification of radio officers; provisions designed to ensure the continued proficiency and updating of knowledge of radio officers; and minimum requirements for certification of radiotelephone operators.

The 1978 Convention - Chapter V: Special requirements for tankers
The Chapter was designed to ensure that officers and ratings who are to have specific duties related to the cargo and cargo equipment of tankers shall have completed an appropriate shore-based fire-fighting course; and have completed either an appropriate period of shipboard service or an approved familiarization course. Requirements are more stringent for masters and senior officers. Attention is paid not only to safety aspects but also to pollution prevention. The Chapter contains three regulations dealing with oil tankers, chemical tankers and liquefied gas tankers, respectively.

The 1978 Convention - Chapter VI: Proficiency in survival craft
The Chapter establishes requirements governing the issuing of certificates of proficiency in survival craft. An appendix lists the minimum knowledge required for the issue of certificates of proficiency.

Resolutions adopted by the 1978 Conference
The 1978 Conference which adopted the STCW Convention also adopted a number of resolutions designed to back up the Convention itself. The resolutions, which are recommendatory rather than mandatory, incorporate more details than some of the Convention regulations.

Resolution 1 - Basic principles to be observed in keeping a navigational watch. An annex contains a recommendation on operational guidance for officers in charge of a navigational watch.

Resolution 2 - Operational guidance for engineer officers in charge of an engineering watch. An annex to the resolution deals with engineering watch underway and at an unsheltered anchorage.

Resolution 3 - Principles and operational guidance for deck officers in charge of a watch in port. Detailed recommendations are contained in an annex.

Resolution 4 - Principles and operational guidance for engineer officers in charge of an engineering watch in port. Recommendations are in an annex.

Resolution 5 - Basic guidelines and operational guidance relating to safety radio watchkeeping and maintenance for radio officers. A comprehensive annex is divided into basic guidelines and safety radio watchkeeping and maintenance.

Resolution 6 - Basic guidelines and operational guidance relating to safety radio watchkeeping for radio telephone operators.

Resolution 7 - Radio operators. Four recommendations are annexed to this resolution dealing with (i) minimum requirements for certification of radio officers; (ii) minimum requirements to ensure the continued proficiency and updating of knowledge for radio operators; (iii) basic guidelines and operational guidance relating to safety radio watchkeeping and maintenance for radio operators; and (iv) training for radio operators.

Resolution 8 - Additional training for ratings forming part of a navigational watch. Recommends that such ratings be trained in use and operation of appropriate bridge equipment and basic requirements for the prevention of pollution.

Resolution 9 - Minimum requirements for a rating nominated as the assistant to the engineer officer in charge of the watch. Recognizes that suitable training arrangements are not widely available. Detailed requirements are contained in an annex.

Resolution 10 - Training and qualifications of officers and ratings of oil tankers. Refers to resolution 8 adopted by the International Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1978 (TSPP), which deals with the improvement of standards of crews on tankers. Recommendation in annex.

Resolution 11 - Training and qualifications of officers and ratings of chemical tankers.

Resolution 12 - Training and qualifications of masters, officers and ratings of liquefied gas tankers.

Resolution 13 - Training and qualifications of officers and ratings of ships carrying dangerous and hazardous cargo other than in bulk.

Resolution 14 - Training for radio officers. Detailed recommendations in annex.

Resolution 15 - Training for radiotelephone operators

Resolution 16 - Technical assistance for the training and qualifications of masters and other responsible personnel of oil, chemical and liquefied gas tankers. Refers to requirements in several Convention regulations and recognizes that training facilities may be limited in some countries. Urges Governments which can provide assistance to do so.· Back to top

Resolution 17 - Additional training for masters and chief mates of large ships and of ships with unusual manoeuvring characteristics. Is designed to assist those moving to ships of this type from smaller vessels, where characteristics may be quite different.

Resolution 18 - Radar simulator training. Recommends that such training be given to all masters and deck officers.

Resolution 19 - Training of seafarers in personal survival techniques. A recommendation is annexed.

Resolution 20 - Training in the use of collision avoidance aids.

Resolution 21 - International Certificate of Competency. Invites IMO to develop a standard form and title for this certificate.

Resolution 22 - Human relationships. Emphasizes the importance to safety of good human relationships between seafarers on board.

Resolution 23 - Promotion of technical co-operation. Records appreciation of IMO's work in assisting developing countries to establish maritime training facilities in conformity with global standards of training and invites the organization to intensify its efforts with a view to promoting universal acceptance and implementation of the STCW Convention.

Amendment Procedure
Amendments to the 1978 STCW Convention's technical Annex may be adopted by a Conference of STCW Parties or by IMO's Maritime Safety Committee, expanded to include all Contracting Parties, some of whom may not be members of the Organization.

Amendments to the STCW Annex will normally enter into force one and a half years after being communicated to all Parties unless, in the meantime, they are rejected by one-third of the Parties or by Parties whose combined fleets represent 50 per cent of world tonnage.

The 1991 amendments
Adoption: 22 May 1991
Entry into force: 1 December 1992

The amendments were mostly concerned with additional requirements made necessary by the implementation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS).

The 1994 amendments
Adoption: 25 May 1994
Entry into force: 1 January 1996

The amendments replaced Chapter V on special training for crews on tankers.

The 1995 amendments
Adoption: 7 July 1995
Entry into force: 1 February 1997

The 1995 amendments, adopted by a Conference, represented a major revision of the Convention, in response to a recognized need to bring the Convention up to date and to respond to critics who pointed out the many vague phrases, such as "to the satisfaction of the Administration", which resulted in different interpretations being made.

Others complained that the Convention was never uniformly applied and did not impose any strict obligations on Parties regarding implementation. The 1995 amendments entered into force on 1 February 1997. However, until 1 February 2002, Parties may continue to issue, recognize and endorse certificates which applied before that date in respect of seafarers who began training or seagoing service before 1 August 1998.

One of the major features of the revision was the division of the technical annex into regulations, divided into Chapters as before, and a new STCW Code, to which many technical regulations have been transferred. Part A of the Code is mandatory while Part B is recommended.

Dividing the regulations up in this way makes administration easier and it also makes the task of revising and updating them more simple: for procedural and legal reasons there is no need to call a full conference to make changes to Codes.

Some of the most important amendments adopted by the Conference concern Chapter I - General Provisions. They include the following:

Ensuring compliance with the Convention
Parties to the Convention are required to provide detailed information to IMO concerning administrative measures taken to ensure compliance with the Convention. This represented the first time that IMO had been called upon to act in relation to compliance and implementation - generally, implementation is down to the flag States, while port State control also acts to ensure compliance. Under Chapter I, regulation I/7 of the revised Convention, Parties are required to provide detailed information to IMO concerning administrative measures taken to ensure compliance with the Convention, education and training courses, certification procedures and other factors relevant to implementation.

By 1 August 1998 - the deadline for submission of information established in section A-I/7 of the STCW Code - 82 out of the 133 STCW Parties had communicated information on compliance with the requirements of the revised Convention. The 82 Parties which met the deadline represent well over 90% of the world's ships and seafarers.

The information is reviewed by panels of competent persons, nominated by Parties to the STCW Convention, who report on their findings to the IMO Secretary-General, who, in turn, reports to the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) on the Parties which fully comply. The MSC then produces a list of Parties in compliance with the 1995 amendments.

The first list of countries was approved by the MSC at its 73rd session held from 27 November to 6 December 2000 – it included 71 countries and one Associate Member of IMO.


Port State control
The revised Chapter I includes enhanced procedures concerning the exercise of port State to allow intervention in the case of deficiencies deemed to pose a danger to persons, property or the environment (regulation I/4). This can take place if certificates are not in order or if the ship is involved in a collision or grounding, if there is an illegal discharge of substances (causing pollution) or if the ship is manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner, etc.

Other regulations in chapter I include:

Measures are introduced for watchkeeping personnel to prevent fatigue.

Parties are required to establish procedures for investigating acts by persons to whom they have issued certificates that endanger safety or the environment. Penalties and other disciplinary measures must be prescribed and enforced where the Convention is not complied with.

Technical innovations, such as the use of simulators for training and assessment purposes have been recognized. Simulators are mandatory for training in the use of radar and automatic radar plotting aids (regulation I/12 and section A-I/12 of the STCW Code).

Parties are required to ensure that training, certification and other procedures are continuously monitored by means of a quality standards system (regulation I/8).

Every master, officer and radio operator are required at intervals not exceeding five years to meet the fitness standards and the levels of professional competence contained in Section A-I/11 of the STCW Code. In order to assess the need for revalidation of certificates after 1 February 2002, Parties must compare the standards of competence previously required with those specified in the appropriate certificate in part A of the STCW Code. If necessary, the holders of certificates may be required to undergo training or refresher courses (regulation I/11).

Chapter II: Master and deck department
The Chapter was revised and updated.

Chapter III: Engine department
The Chapter was revised and updated.

Chapter IV: Radiocommunication and radio personnel
The Chapter was revised and updated.

Chapter V: Special training requirements for personnel on certain types of ships
Special requirements were introduced concerning the training and qualifications of personnel on board ro-ro passenger ships. Previously the only special requirements in the Convention concerned crews on tankers. This change was made in response to proposals made by the Panel of Experts set up to look into ro-ro safety following the capsize and sinking of the ferry Estonia in September 1994. Crews on ro-ro ferries have to receive training in technical aspects and also in crowd and crisis management and human behaviour.

Chapter VI: Emergency, occupational safety, medical care and survival functions
The Chapter incorporates the previous Chapter VI: Proficiency in survival craft and includes mandatory minimum requirements for familiarization, basic safety training and instruction for all seafarers; mandatory minimum requirements for the issue of certificates of proficiency in survival craft, rescue boats and fast rescue boats; mandatory minimum requirements for training in advanced firefighting; and mandatory minimum requirements relating to medical first aid and medical care.

Chapter VII: Alternative certification
Regulations regarding alternative certification (also known as the functional approach) are included in a new Chapter VII. This involves enabling crews to gain training and certification in various departments of seafaring rather than being confined to one branch (such as deck or engine room) for their entire career.Although it is a relatively new concept, the 1995 Conference was anxious not to prevent its development. At the same time, the new Chapter is intended to ensure that safety and the environment are not threatened in any way. The use of equivalent educational and training arrangements is permitted under article IX.

Chapter VIII: Watchkeeping
Measures were introduced for watchkeeping personnel to prevent fatigue. Administrations are required to establish and enforce rest periods for watchkeeping personnel and to ensure that watch systems are so arranged that the efficiency of watchkeeping personnel is not impaired by fatigue.

The STCW Code
The regulations contained in the Convention are supported by sections in the STCW Code. Generally speaking, the Convention contains basic requirements which are then enlarged upon and explained in the Code.

Part A of the Code is mandatory. The minimum standards of competence required for seagoing personnel are given in detail in a series of tables. Chapter II of the Code, for example, deals with standards regarding the master and deck department.

Part B of the Code contains recommended guidance which is intended to help Parties implement the Convention. The measures suggested are not mandatory and the examples given are only intended to illustrate how certain Convention requirements may be complied with. However, the recommendations in general represent an approach that has been harmonized by discussions within IMO and consultation with other international organizations.

The 1997 Amendments
Adoption: June 1997
Entry into force: 1 January 1999

The amendments concern training for personnel on passenger ships. The amendments include an additional Regulation V/3 in Chapter V on Mandatory minimum requirements for the training and qualifications of masters, officers, ratings and other personnel on passenger ships other than ro-ro passenger ships. Related additions are also made to the STCW Code, covering Crowd management training; Familiarization training; Safety training for personnel providing direct service to passengers in passenger spaces; Passenger safety; and Crisis management and human behaviour training.

The 1998 Amendments
Adoption: 9 December 1998
Entry into force: 1 January 2003 (under tacit acceptance)

Amendments to the STCW Code are aimed at improving minimum standards of competence of crews, in particular relating to cargo securing, loading and unloading on bulk carriers, since these procedures have the potential to put undue stresses on the ship's structure. The amendments concern sections A-II/1 and A-II/2 under "Cargo handling and stowage at the operational and management levels".

The White List
The first so-called “White List” of countries deemed to be giving “full and complete effect” to the revised STCW Convention (STCW 95) was published by IMO following the 73rd session of the Organization’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), meeting from 27 November to 6 December 2000.

It is expected that ships flying flags of countries that are not on the White List will be increasingly targeted by Port State Control inspectors. A Flag state Party that is on the White List may, as a matter of policy, elect not to accept seafarers with certificates issued by non White List countries for service on its ships. If it does accept such seafarers, they will be required by 1 February 2002 also to have an endorsement, issued by the flag state, to show that their certificate is recognized by the flag state.

By 1 February 2002, masters and officers should hold STCW 95 certificates or endorsements issued by the flag State. Certificates issued and endorsed under the provisions of the 1978 STCW Convention will be valid until their expiry date.

The list will be kept under review and may be added to as other countries meet the criteria for inclusion.

International Convention on Load Lines, 1966

Adoption: 5 April 1966
Entry into force: 21 July 1968

Introduction and history
Load Lines 1966 - Annexes
Amendments 1971, 1975, 1979, 1983
Adoption of tacit amendment procedure 1988 Protocol
The 1995 amendments
The 2003 amendments - revision of technical annex

Introduction and history
It has long been recognized that limitations on the draught to which a ship may be loaded make a significant contribution to her safety. These limits are given in the form of freeboards, which constitute, besides external weathertight and watertight integrity, the main objective of the Convention.

The first International Convention on Load Lines, adopted in 1930, was based on the principle of reserve buoyancy, although it was recognized then that the freeboard should also ensure adequate stability and avoid excessive stress on the ship's hull as a result of overloading.

In the 1966 Load Lines convention, adopted by IMO, provisions are made determining the freeboard of tankers by subdivision and damage stability calculations.

The regulations take into account the potential hazards present in different zones and different seasons. The technical annex contains several additional safety measures concerning doors, freeing ports, hatchways and other items. The main purpose of these measures is to ensure the watertight integrity of ships' hulls below the freeboard deck.

All assigned load lines must be marked amidships on each side of the ship, together with the deck line. Ships intended for the carriage of timber deck cargo are assigned a smaller freeboard as the deck cargo provides protection against the impact of waves

Load Lines 1966 - Annexes
The Convention includes Annex I, divided into four Chapters:
· Chapter I - General;
· Chapter II - Conditions of assignment of freeboard;
· Chapter III - Freeboards;
· Chapter IV - Special requirements for ships assigned timber freeboards.·

Annex II covers Zones, areas and seasonal periods.
Annex III contains certificates, including the International Load Line Certificate.

Amendments 1971, 1975, 1979, 1983
The 1966 Convention provided for amendments to be made by positive acceptance. Amendments could be considered by the Maritime Safety Committee, the IMO Assembly or by a Conference of Governments. Amendments would then only come into force 12 months after being accepted by two-thirds of Contracting Parties.In practice, amendments adopted between 1971 and 1983 never received enough acceptances to enter into force. These included:

· the 1971 amendments - to make certain improvements to the text and to the chart of zones and seasonal areas;
· the 1975 amendments - to introduce the principle of 'tacit acceptance' into the Convention;
· the 1979 amendments - to make some alterations to zone boundaries off the coast of Australia; and
· the 1983 amendments - to extend the summer and tropical zones southward off the coast of Chile.

Adoption of tacit amendment procedure 1988

The 1988 Protocol
Adoption: 11 November 1988
Entry into force: 3 February 2000

The Protocol was primarily adopted in order to harmonize the Convention's survey and certification requirement with those contained in SOLAS and MARPOL 73/78.

All three instruments require the issuing of certificates to show that requirements have been met and this has to be done by means of a survey which can involve the ship being out of service for several days.

The harmonized system alleviates the problems caused by survey dates and intervals between surveys which do not coincide, so that a ship should no longer have to go into port or repair yard for a survey required by one Convention shortly after doing the same thing in connection with another instrument.

The 1988 Load Lines Protocol revised certain regulations in the technical Annexes to the Load Lines Convention and introduced the tacit amendment procedure (which was already applicable to the 1974 SOLAS Convention).Amendments to the Convention may be considered either by the Maritime Safety Committee or by a Conference of Parties.

Amendments must be adopted by a two-thirds majority of Parties to the Convention present and voting. Amendments enter into force six months after the deemed date of acceptance - which must be at least a year after the date of communication of adoption of amendments unless they are rejected by one-third of Parties. Usually, the date from adoption to deemed acceptance is two years.

The 1995 amendments
Adopted: 23 November 1995
Entry into force: 12 months after being accepted by two-thirds of Contracting Governments.
Status: 7 acceptances have been received (currently, 95 acceptances are required before the amendments can enter into force).The amendments concern the southern tropical zone off the coast of Australia and are now likely to be incorporated in a general revision of the Convention.

The 2003 amendments
Adopted: June 2003
Entry into force: 1 January 2005 (under tacit acceptance)

The amendments to Annex B to the 1988 Load Lines Protocol (i.e. the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966, as modified by the Protocol of 1988 relating thereto) include a number of important revisions, in particular to regulations concerning: strength and intact stability of ships; definitions; superstructure and bulkheads; doors; position of hatchways, doorways and ventilators; hatchway coamings; hatch covers; machinery space openings; miscellaneous openings in freeboard and superstructure decks; cargo ports and other similar openings; spurling pipes and cable lockers; side scuttles; windows and skylights; calculation of freeing ports; protection of the crew and means of safe passage for crew; calculation of freeboard; sheer; minimum bow height and reserve buoyancy; and others.

The amendments, which amount to a comprehensive revision of the technical regulations of the original Load Lines Convention, will not affect the 1966 LL Convention and will only apply to approximately two-thirds of the world's fleet, i.e., to those ships flying the flags of States Party to the 1988 LL Protocol. (See Status of Conventions - Summary)

International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships

Adoption: 5 October 2001

Entry into force: The convention will enter into force 12 months after 25 States representing 25% of the world's merchant shipping tonnage have ratified it. See status on conventions

The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships will prohibit the use of harmful organotins in anti-fouling paints used on ships and will establish a mechanism to prevent the potential future use of other harmful substances in anti-fouling systems.

Under the terms of the new Convention, Parties to the Convention are required to prohibit and/or restrict the use of harmful anti-fouling systems on ships flying their flag, as well as ships not entitled to fly their flag but which operate under their authority and all ships that enter a port, shipyard or offshore terminal of a Party.

Ships of above 400 gross tonnage and above engaged in international voyages (excluding fixed or floating platforms, FSUs and FPSOs) will be required to undergo an initial survey before the ship is put into service or before the International Anti-fouling System Certificate is issued for the first time; and a survey when the anti-fouling systems are changed or replaced.

Ships of 24 metres or more in length but less than 400 gross tonnage engaged in international voyages (excluding fixed or floating platforms, FSUs and FPSOs) will have to carry a Declaration on Anti-fouling Systems signed by the owner or authorized agent. The Declaration will have to be accompanied by appropriate documentation such as a paint receipt or contractor invoice.

Anti-fouling systems to be prohibited or controlled will be listed in an annex (Annex 1) to the Convention, which will be updated as and when necessary.

The harmful environmental effects of organotin compounds were recognized by IMO in 1989. In 1990 IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) adopted a resolution which recommended that Governments adopt measures to eliminate the use of anti-fouling paint containing TBT on non-aluminium hulled vessels of less than 25 metres in length and eliminate the use of anti-fouling paints with a leaching rate of more than four microgrammes of TBT per day.

In November 1999, IMO adopted an Assembly resolution that called on the MEPC to develop an instrument, legally binding throughout the world, to address the harmful effects of anti-fouling systems used on ships. The resolution called for a global prohibition on the application of organotin compounds which act as biocides in anti-fouling systems on ships by 1 January 2003, and a complete prohibition by 1 January 2008.

Annex I attached to the Convention and adopted by the Conference states that by an effective date of 1 January 2003, all ships shall not apply or re-apply organotins compounds which act as biocides in anti-fouling systems.

Given that this date has already passed, IMO has been urging States to ratify the convention as soon as possible in order to achieve entry into force conditions. In November 2001, the IMO Assembly adopted Resolution A.928(22) Resolution on early and effective application of the international convention on the control of harmful anti-fouling systems on ships.

In the case of the reference to a requirement being effective on 1 January 2003, if the convention comes into force at a later date, then the legal effect is the requirements are moved forward to that date. In other words, the legal effect of the 1 January 2003 date is suspended until the entry into force date. During such time before the entry into force of the convention, port States cannot apply any requirements of the convention to foreign ships calling into your ports. HOwever, flag States may apply the requirements of the convention to their national fleet, depending on their national legal system and decisions of that country, but they may not expect the International Certificates to be recognized as effective until the date of entry into force.

By 1 January 2008 (effective date), ships either:

(a) 

shall not bear such compounds on their hulls or external parts or surfaces; or

(b) 

shall bear a coating that forms a barrier to such compounds leaching from the underlying non-compliant anti-fouling systems.

This applies to all ships (including fixed and floating platforms, floating storage units (FSUs), and Floating Production Storage and Offtake units (FPSOs).

The Convention includes a clause in Article 12 which states that a ship shall be entitled to compensation if it is unduly detained or delayed while undergoing inspection for possible violations of the Convention.

The Convention provides for the establishment of a “technical group”, to include people with relevant expertise, to review proposals for other substances used in anti-fouling systems to be prohibited or restricted. Article 6 on Process for Proposing Amendments to controls on Anti-fouling systems sets out how the evaluation of an anti-fouling system should be carried out.

Resolutions adopted by the Conference

The Conference adopted four resolutions:

Resolution 1 Early and Effective Application of the Convention – The resolution invites Member States of the Organization to do its utmost to prepare for implementing the Convention as a matter of urgency. It also urges the relevant industries to refrain from marketing, sale and application of the substances controlled by the Convention.

Resolution 2 Future work of the Organization pertaining to the Convention – The resolution invites IMO to develop guidelines for brief sampling of anti-fouling systems; guidelines for inspection of ships; and guidelines for surveys of ships. The guidelines are needed in order to ensure global and uniform application of the articles of the Convention which require sampling, inspection and surveys.

The following have been developed and adopted:

• Guidelines for survey and certification of anti-fouling systems on ships - adopted by resolution MEPC.102(48);
• Guidelines for brief sampling of anti-fouling systems on ships - adopted by resolution MEPC.104(49); and
• Guidelines for inspection of anti-fouling systems on ships - adopted by resolution MEPC.105(49).

Resolution 3 Approval and Test Methodologies for Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships – This resolution invites States to approve, register or license anti-fouling systems applied in their territories. It also urges States to continue the work, in appropriate international fora, for the harmonization of test methods and performance standards for anti-fouling systems containing biocides.

 

Resolution 4 Promotion of Technical Co-operation – The resolution requests IMOMember States, in co-operation with IMO, other interested States, competent international or regional organizations and industry programmes, to promote and provide directly, or through IMO, support to States in particular developing States that request technical assistance for:

(a)

the assessment of the implications of ratifying, accepting, approving, or acceding to and complying with the Convention;

(b)

the development of national legislation to give effect to the Convention; and

(c)

the introduction of other measures, including the training of personnel, for the effective implementation and enforcement of the Convention.

It also requests Member States, in co-operation with IMO, other interested States, competent international and regional organisation and industry programmes, to promote co‑operation for scientific and technical research on the effects of anti-fouling systems as well as monitoring these effects.

 

Anti-fouling paints are used to coat the bottoms of ships to prevent sealife such as algae and molluscs attaching themselves to the hull – thereby slowing down the ship and increasing fuel consumption.

The new Convention defines “anti-fouling systems” as “a coating, paint, surface treatment, surface or device that is used on a ship to control or prevent attachment of unwanted organisms”.

In the early days of sailing ships, lime and later arsenic were used to coat ships' hulls, until the modern chemicals industry developed effective anti-fouling paints using metallic compounds.

These compounds slowly "leach" into the sea water, killing barnacles and other marine life that have attached to the ship. But the studies have shown that these compounds persist in the water, killing sealife, harming the environment and possibly entering the food chain. One of the most effective anti-fouling paints, developed in the 1960s, contains the organotin tributylin (TBT), which has been proven to cause deformations in oysters and sex changes in whelks.

 

International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments

Adoption: 13 February 2004
Entry into force: 12 months after ratification by 30 States, representing 35 per cent of world merchant shipping tonnage. See Status of Conventions

The Convention is divided into Articles; and an Annex which includes technical standards and requirements in the Regulations for the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments.

The main features of the Convention are outlined below.

Entry into force
The Convention will enter into force 12 months after ratification by 30 States, representing 35 per cent of world merchant shipping tonnage (Article 18 Entry into force).

General Obligations
Under Article 2 General Obligations Parties undertake to give full and complete effect to the provisions of the Convention and the Annex in order to prevent, minimize and ultimately eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments.

Parties are given the right to take, individually or jointly with other Parties, more stringent measures with respect to the prevention, reduction or elimination of the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments, consistent with international law. Parties should ensure that ballast water management practices do not cause greater harm than they prevent to their environment, human health, property or resources, or those of other States.

Reception facilities
Under Article 5 Sediment Reception Facilities Parties undertake to ensure that ports and terminals where cleaning or repair of ballast tanks occurs, have adequate reception facilities for the reception of sediments.

Research and monitoring
Article 6 Scientific and Technical Research and Monitoring calls for Parties individually or jointly to promote and facilitate scientific and technical research on ballast water management; and monitor the effects of ballast water management in waters under their jurisdiction.

Survey, certification and inspection
Ships are required to be surveyed and certified (Article 7 Survey and certification) and may be inspected by port State control officers (Article 9 Inspection of Ships) who can verify that the ship has a valid certificate; inspect the Ballast Water Record Book; and/or sample the ballast water. If there are concerns, then a detailed inspection may be carried out and "the Party carrying out the inspection shall take such steps as will ensure that the ship shall not discharge Ballast Water until it can do so without presenting a threat of harm to the environment, human health, property or resources."

All possible efforts shall be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed (Article 12 Undue Delay to Ships).

Technical assistance
Under Article 13 Technical Assistance, Co-operation and Regional Co-operation, Parties undertake, directly or through the Organization and other international bodies, as appropriate, in respect of the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments, to provide support for those Parties which request technical assistance to train personnel; to ensure the availability of relevant technology, equipment and facilities; to initiate joint research and development programmes; and to undertake other action aimed at the effective implementation of this Convention and of guidance developed by the Organization related thereto.

Annex - Section A General Provisions
This includes definitions, application and exemptions. Under Regulation A-2 General Applicability: "Except where expressly provided otherwise, the discharge of Ballast Water shall only be conducted through Ballast Water Management, in accordance with the provisions of this Annex."

Annex - Section B Management and Control Requirements for Ships
Ships are required to have on board and implement a Ballast Water Management Plan approved by the Administration (Regulation B-1). The Ballast Water Management Plan is specific to each ship and includes a detailed description of the actions to be taken to implement the Ballast Water Management requirements and supplemental Ballast Water Management practices.

Ships must have a Ballast Water Record Book (Regulation B-2) to record when ballast water is taken on board; circulated or treated for Ballast Water Management purposes; and discharged into the sea. It should also record when Ballast Water is discharged to a reception facility and accidental or other exceptional discharges of Ballast Water

The specific requirements for ballast water management are contained in regulation B-3 Ballast Water Management for Ships:

• Ships constructed before 2009 with a ballast water capacity of between 1500 and 5000 cubic metres must conduct ballast water management that at least meets the ballast water exchange standards or the ballast water performance standards until 2014, after which time it shall at least meet the ballast water performance standard.
• Ships constructed before 2009 with a ballast water capacity of less than 1500 or greater than 5000 cubic metres must conduct ballast water management that at least meets the ballast water exchange standards or the ballast water performance standards until 2016, after which time it shall at least meet the ballast water performance standard.
• Ships constructed in or after 2009 with a ballast water capacity of less than 5000 cubic metres must conduct ballast water management that at least meets the ballast water performance standard.
• Ships constructed in or after 2009 but before 2012, with a ballast water capacity of 5000 cubic metres or more shall conduct ballast water management that at least meets the standard described in regulation D-1 or D-2 until 2016 and at least the ballast water performance standard after 2016.
• Ships constructed in or after 2012, with a ballast water capacity of 5000 cubic metres or more shall conduct ballast water management that at least meets the ballast water performance standard.

Other methods of ballast water management may also be accepted as alternatives to the ballast water exchange standard and ballast water performance standard, provided that such methods ensure at least the same level of protection to the environment, human health, property or resources, and are approved in principle by IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC).

Under Regulation B-4 Ballast Water Exchange, all ships using ballast water exchange should:

• whenever possible, conduct ballast water exchange at least 200 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water at least 200 metres in depth, taking into account Guidelines developed by IMO;
• in cases where the ship is unable to conduct ballast water exchange as above, this should be as far from the nearest land as possible, and in all cases at least 50 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water at least 200 metres in depth.

When these requirements cannot be met areas may be designated where ships can conduct ballast water exchange. All ships shall remove and dispose of sediments from spaces designated to carry ballast water in accordance with the provisions of the ships' ballast water management plan (Regulation B-4).

Annex - Section C Additional measures
A Party, individually or jointly with other Parties, may impose on ships additional measures to prevent, reduce, or eliminate the transfer of Harmful Aquatic Organisms and Pathogens through ships' Ballast Water and Sediments.
In these cases, the Party or Parties should consult with adjoining or nearby States that may be affected by such standards or requirements and should communicate their intention to establish additional measure(s) to the Organization at least 6 months, except in emergency or epidemic situations, prior to the projected date of implementation of the measure(s). When appropriate, Parties will have to obtain the approval of IMO.

Annex - Section D Standards for Ballast Water Management
There is a ballast water exchange standard and a ballast water performance standard. Ballast water exchange could be used to meet the performance standard:

Regulation D-1 Ballast Water Exchange Standard - Ships performing Ballast Water exchange shall do so with an efficiency of 95 per cent volumetric exchange of Ballast Water. For ships exchanging ballast water by the pumping-through method, pumping through three times the volume of each ballast water tank shall be considered to meet the standard described. Pumping through less than three times the volume may be accepted provided the ship can demonstrate that at least 95 percent volumetric exchange is met.

Regulation D-2 Ballast Water Performance Standard - Ships conducting ballast water management shall discharge less than 10 viable organisms per cubic metre greater than or equal to 50 micrometres in minimum dimension and less than 10 viable organisms per milliliter less than 50 micrometres in minimum dimension and greater than or equal to 10 micrometres in minimum dimension; and discharge of the indicator microbes shall not exceed the specified concentrations.

The indicator microbes, as a human health standard, include, but are not be limited to:
a. Toxicogenic Vibrio cholerae (O1 and O139) with less than 1 colony forming unit (cfu) per 100 milliliters or less than 1 cfu per 1 gram (wet weight) zooplankton samples ;
b. Escherichia coli less than 250 cfu per 100 milliliters;
c. Intestinal Enterococci less than 100 cfu per 100 milliliters.

Ballast Water Management systems must be approved by the Administration in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3 Approval requirements for Ballast Water Management systems). These include systems which make use of chemicals or biocides; make use of organisms or biological mechanisms; or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the Ballast Water.

 

Prototype technologies
Regulation D-4 covers Prototype Ballast Water Treatment Technologies. It allows for ships participating in a programme approved by the Administration to test and evaluate promising Ballast Water treatment technologies to have a leeway of five years before having to comply with the requirements.

 

Review of standards
Under regulation D-5 Review of Standards by the Organization, IMO is required to review the Ballast Water Performance Standard, taking into account a number of criteria including safety considerations; environmental acceptability, i.e., not causing more or greater environmental impacts than it solves; practicability, i.e., compatibility with ship design and operations; cost effectiveness; and biological effectiveness in terms of removing, or otherwise rendering inactive harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in ballast water. The review should include a determination of whether appropriate technologies are available to achieve the standard, an assessment of the above mentioned criteria, and an assessment of the socio-economic effect(s) specifically in relation to the developmental needs of developing countries, particularly small island developing States.

 

Annex- Section E Survey and Certification Requirements for Ballast Water Management
Gives requirements for initial renewal, annual, intermediate and renewal surveys and certification requirements. Appendices give form of Ballast Water Management Certificate and Form of Ballast Water Record Book.

 

 

Resolutions adopted by the Conference
The Conference also adopted four resolutions:

• Conference resolution 1: Future work by the Organization pertaining to the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments
• Conference resolution 2: The use of decision-making tools when reviewing the standards pursuant to Regulation D-5
• Conference resolution 3: Promotion of technical co-operation and assistance
• Conference resolution 4: Review of the Annex to the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments

Background

The problem of invasive species is largely due to the expanded trade and traffic volume over the last few decades. The effects in many areas of the world have been devastating. Quantitative data show the rate of bio-invasions is continuing to increase at an alarming rate, in many cases exponentially, and new areas are being invaded all the time. Volumes of seaborne trade continue overall to increase and the problem may not yet have reached its peak.
Specific examples include the introduction of the European zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in the Great Lakes between Canada and the United States, resulting in expenses of billions of dollars for pollution control and cleaning of fouled underwater structures and waterpipes; and the introduction of the American comb jelly (Mnemiopsis leidyi) to the Black and Azov Seas, causing the near extinction of anchovy and sprat fisheries.
The problem of harmful aquatic organisms in ballast water was first raised at IMO in 1988 and since then IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), together with the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and technical sub-committees, have been dealing with the issue, focusing in the past decade first on guidelines and then on developing the new convention.

Going further into history, scientists first recognized the signs of an alien species introduction after a mass occurrence of the Asian phytoplankton algae Odontella (Biddulphia sinensis) in the North Sea in 1903.

But it was not until the 1970s that the scientific community began reviewing the problem in detail. In the late 1980s, Canada and Australia were among countries experiencing particular problems with unwanted species, and they brought their concerns to the attention of IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC).

In 1991 the MEPC adopted MEPC resolution 50(31) - Guidelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Organisms and Pathogens from Ships' Ballast Water and Sediment Discharges; while the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, recognized the issue as a major international concern.

In November 1993, the IMO Assembly adopted resolution A.774(18) - Guidelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Organisms and Pathogens from Ships' Ballast Water and Sediment Discharges, based on the Guidelines adopted in 1991. The resolution requested the MEPC and the MSC to keep the Guidelines under review with a view to developing internationally applicable, legally-binding provisions.

The 20th Assembly of IMO in November 1997 adopted resolution A.868(20) - Guidelines for the control and management of ships' ballast water to minimize the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens.

The development of the draft mandatory instrument has been continuing since then until this week's adoption of the new instrument.

Some examples of aquatic bio-invasions causing major impact are listed in the table, but there are hundreds of other serious invasions which have been recorded around the world:

 

Name

Native to

Introduced to

Impact

Cholera
Vibrio cholerae (various strains)

Various strains with broad ranges

South America, Gulf of Mexico and other areas

Some cholera epidemics appear to be directly associated with ballast water

Cladoceran Water Flea
Cercopagis pengoi

Black and Caspian Seas

Baltic Sea

Reproduces to form very large populations that dominate the zooplankton community and clog fishing nets and trawls, with associated economic impacts

Mitten Crab
Eiocheir sinensis

Northern Asia

Western Europe, Baltic Sea and West Coast North America

Undergoes mass migrations for reproductive purposes. Burrows into river banks and dykes causing erosion and siltation. Preys on native fish and invertebrate species, causing local extinctions during population outbreaks. Interferes with fishing activities

Toxic Algae(Red/Brown/ Green Tides)
Various species

Various species with broad ranges

Several species have been transferred to new areas in ships' ballast water

May form Harmful Algae Blooms. Depending on the species, can cause massive kills of marine life through oxygen depletion, release of toxins and/or mucus. Can foul beaches and impact on tourism and recreation. Some species may contaminate filter-feeding shellfish and cause fisheries to be closed. Consumption of contaminated shellfish by humans may cause severe illness and death

Round Goby
Neogobius melanostomus

Black, Asov and Caspian Seas

Baltic Sea and North America

Highly adaptable and invasive. Increases in
numbers and spreads quickly. Competes for food and habitat with native fishes including commercially important species, and preys on their eggs and young. Spawns multiple
times per season and survives in poor water quality

North American Comb Jelly
Mnemiopsis leidyi

Eastern Seaboard of the Americas

Black, Azov and Caspian Seas

Reproduces rapidly (self fertilising hermaphrodite) under favourable conditions. Feeds excessively on zooplankton. Depletes zooplankton stocks; altering food web and ecosystem function. Contributed significantly to collapse of Black and Asov Sea fisheries in 1990s, with massive economic and social impact. Now threatens similar impact in Caspian Sea.

North Pacific Seastar
Asterias amurensis

Northern Pacific

Southern Australia

Reproduces in large numbers, reaching 'plague' proportions rapidly in invaded environments. Feeds on shellfish,
including commercially valuable scallop,
oyster and clam species

Zebra Mussel
Dreissena polymorpha

Eastern Europe (Black Sea)

Introduced to:
Western and northern Europe, including Ireland and Baltic Sea;eastern half of North America

Fouls all available hard surfaces in mass numbers. Displaces native aquatic life. Alters habitat, ecosystem and food web. Causes severe fouling problems on infrastructure and vessels. Blocks water intake pipes, sluices and irrigation ditches. Economic costs to USA alone of around
US$750 million to $1 billion between 1989 and 2000

Asian Kelp
Undaria pinnatifida

Northern Asia

Southern Australia,
New Zealand, West Coast of the United States, Europe and Argentina

Grows and spreads rapidly, both vegetatively and through dispersal of spores. Displaces native algae and marine life. Alters habitat, ecosystem and food web. May affect commercial shellfish stocks through space competition and alteration of habitat

European Green Crab
Carcinus maenus

European Atlantic Coast

Southern Australia, South Africa, the United States and Japan

Highly adaptable and invasive. Resistant to predation due to hard shell. Competes with and displaces native crabs and becomes a dominant species in invaded areas. Consumes and depletes wide range of prey species. Alters inter-tidal rocky shore ecosystem

Reference: http://globallast.imo.org/poster4_english.pdf

Single-hull oil tanker phase-out

What happened on 5 April 2005?
How many flag States does this affect?
What are the amendments exactly?
What does the revised regulation 13G say?
What is the phase-out timetable?
What about the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS)?
Can any single hull tankers operate beyond the dates set?
Which Administrations have communicated information on their implementation of the regulations?
What about tankers which have been converted, how do you determine the date of delivery?
What about heavy grades of oil (regulation 13H)
How many oil tankers are affected by the phase-out in 13G?
Will there be enough ship recycling capacity to absorb all the ships taken out of service?
Where can I find out more?

What happened on 5 April 2005?

On 5 April 2005, amendments to Annex I of MARPOL 73/78, adopted by IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) by resolution MEPC.111(50) in December 2003, entered into force for all Parties to the MARPOL Convention.

How many flag States does this affect?

MARPOL (Annexes I and II) has been ratified by 130 countries representing 97.07 per cent of world merchant shipping tonnage. See status of Conventions

What are the amendments exactly?

The amendments revised the existing regulation 13G on Prevention of accidental oil pollution - Measures for existing oil tankers of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 and added a new regulation 13H on Prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers carrying heavy grade oil as cargo. Consequential amendments to the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) for oil tankers were also adopted.

What does the revised regulation 13G say?

The revised regulation brings forward the phase-out schedule that was first established in 1992, and revised in 2001 for existing single-hull tankers. It says that tankers which are single hull should be phased out or converted to a "double hull" by the dates set out in the revised regulation.

What is the phase-out timetable?

The phase-out schedule is now as follows:

Category of oil tanker

Date or year

Category 1 - oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do not comply with the requirements for protectively located segregated ballast tanks (commonly known as Pre-MARPOL tankers)

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1982 or earlier
Anniversary date in 2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1982

Category 2 - oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do comply with the protectively located segregated ballast tank requirements (MARPOL tankers)

and
Category 3 - oil tankers of 5,000 tons deadweight and above but less than the tonnage specified for Category 1 and 2 tankers

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1977 or earlier
Anniversary date in 2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1977 but before 1 January 1978
Anniversary date in 2006 for ships delivered in 1978 and 1979
Anniversary date in 2007 for ships delivered in 1980 and 1981
Anniversary date in 2008 for ships delivered in 1982
Anniversary date in 2009 for ships delivered in 1983
Anniversary date in 2010 for ships delivered in 1984 or later

What about the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS)?

The CAS for oil tankers was adopted in 2001 alongside the revised phase-out schedule and is applicable to certain oil tankers under regulations 13G and 13H.

Although the CAS does not specify structural standards in excess of the provisions of other IMO conventions, codes and recommendations, its requirements stipulate more stringent and transparent verification of the reported structural condition of the ship and require that documentary and survey procedures have been properly carried out and completed.

The requirements of the CAS include enhanced and transparent verification of the reported structural condition of the ship and verification that the documentary and survey procedures have been properly carried out and completed. The Scheme requires that compliance with the CAS is assessed during the Enhanced Survey Programme of Inspections concurrent with intermediate or renewal surveys currently required by resolution A.744(18), as amended.

Under the revised regulation 13G, the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) is applicable to all single-hull tankers aged 15 years, or older.

Can any single hull tankers operate beyond the dates set?

The revised regulation 13G allows the Administration (flag State) to permit continued operation of category 2 or 3 tankers beyond its phase-out date in accordance with the schedule subject to satisfactory results from the CAS, but the continued operation must not go beyond the anniversary of the date of delivery of the ship in 2015 or the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery, whichever is earlier.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 oil tankers fitted with only double bottoms or double sides not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length or tankers fitted with double hull spaces not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements, which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation beyond its phase-out date in accordance with the schedule, provided that the ship was in service on 1 July 2001, the Administration is satisfied by verification of the official records that the ship complied with the conditions specified and that those conditions remain unchanged. Again, such continued operation must not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 can deny entry of single hull tankers which have been allowed to continue operation under the exemptions mentioned above, into the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction.

Which Administrations have communicated information on their implementation of the regulations?

Parties to MARPOL applying the provisions allowing for extended operation of category 2 or 3 tankers and Parties which will deny entry to those tankers must communicate this information to IMO. Please see circulars under the section Implementation of regulations 13G/13H

What about tankers which have been converted, how do you determine the date of delivery?

IMO's MEPC, at its 52nd session in October 2004, adopted a unified interpretation to regulation 13G(4) of MARPOL Annex I on Major Conversion, which clarified the situation.

It states that "For the purpose of determining the application date for the requirements of regulation 13G(4) of MARPOL Annex I, where an oil tanker has undergone a major conversion, as defined in regulation 1 of MARPOL Annex I, that has resulted in the replacement of the fore-body, including the entire cargo carrying section, the major conversion completion date of the oil tanker shall be deemed to be the date of delivery of the ship referred to in regulation 13G(4) of MARPOL Annex I, provided that:

• the oil tanker conversion was completed before 6 July 1996;
• the conversion included the replacement of the entire cargo section and fore-body and the tanker complies with all the relevant provisions of MARPOL Annex I applicable at the date of completion of the major conversion; and
• the original delivery date of the oil tanker will apply when considering the 15 years of age threshold relating to the first CAS survey to be completed in accordance with regulation 13G(6) of MARPOL Annex I.

What about heavy grades of oil (regulation 13H)

 

MARPOL regulation 13H on the prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers when carrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriage of HGO in single-hull tankers of 5,000 tons deadweight (DWT) and above after the date of entry into force of the regulation (5 April 2005), and in single-hull oil tankers of 600 DWT and above but less than 5,000 tons DWT, not later than the anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

Under regulation 13H, HGO means any of the following:

• crude oils having a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3;
• fuel oils having either a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50ºC higher than 180 mm2/s;
• bitumen, tar and their emulsions.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 tankers carrying HGO as cargo, fitted only with double bottoms or double sides, not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length, or tankers fitted with double hull spaces not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration, under certain conditions, may allow continued operation of such ships beyond 5 April 2005 until the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

Regulation 13H also allows for continued operation of oil tankers of 5,000 DWT and above, carrying crude oil with a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 but lower than 945 kg/ m3, if satisfactory results of the Condition Assessment Scheme warrant that, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship and provided that the continued operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration may allow continued operation of a single hull oil tanker of 600 DWT and above but less than 5,000 DWT, carrying HGO as cargo, if, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship, provided that the operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration may exempt an oil tanker of 600 DWT and above carrying HGO as cargo if the ship is either engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the Party's jurisdiction, or is engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the jurisdiction of another Party, provided the Party within whose jurisdiction the ship will be operating agrees. The same applies to vessels operating as floating storage units of HGO.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 can deny entry of single hull tankers carrying HGO which have been allowed to continue operation under the exemptions mentioned above, into the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction, or deny ship-to-ship transfer of heavy grade oil in areas under its jurisdiction except when this is necessary for the purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea.

 

 

How many oil tankers are affected by the phase-out in regulation 13G?

 

It is hard to give an exact figure as the number of oil tankers currently in operation needs to be considered. Oil tankers may be taken out of service for many different reasons or may be laid up at any specific time.

There are some figures available. According to figures produced by SSY Research, reported in Tradewinds (15.10.04), there are 173 single-hull tankers of over 200,000 DWT in existence, out of a total VLCC and ULCC fleet of 455 vessels. The single-hull VLCC fleet comprises a combined 46.8 million DWT, of the world VLCC and ULCC fleet total of 131.4 million DWT. There are still 14 vessels of pre-1980s vintage and 10 built between 1980 and 1984. After that the numbers increase, with 42 ships of 10.75 million DWT built in the period from 1985 to 1989.

 

 

Will there be enough ship recycling capacity to absorb all the ships taken out of service?

 

This issue was raised at the MEPC when the amendments were adopted. The MEPC adopted Resolution MEPC.113(50) Ship recycling for the smooth implementation of the amendments to Annex I of MARPOL 73/78.

The resolution recommends that Member Governments, especially the Governments of countries with shipbuilding, ship recycling and other shipping interests:

(a)

take initiatives to maintain adequate ship recycling facilities at world-wide level, based on the evaluation of the impact of the amendments to Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 on the demand for ships to be recycled; and

(b)

endeavour to promote research and development programmes to improve environment and safety level in ship recycling operation.

 

 

Where can I find out more?

 

INFORMATION RESOURCES ON DOUBLE HULL/SINGLE HULL SHIP DESIGN AND RELATED ISSUES

INFORMATION RESOURCES ON THE "ERIKA" ACCIDENT AND THE 2001 AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION 13G OF ANNEX I TO MARPOL 73/78

Industry sources (external websites for which IMO is not responsible)

International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited (ITOPF) www.itopf.com

International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (INTERTANKO) www.intertanko.com

International Chamber of Shipping www.marisec.org

Ship brokers and shipping consultancies - try www.wsdonline.com

Other NGOS

Greenpeace

WWF

Prevention of Pollution by Oil

Oil tankers transport some 1,800 million tonnes of crude oil around the world by sea including 50 percent of U.S. oil imports (crude oil and refined products).  Most of the time, oil is transported quietly and safely.

Measures introduced by IMO have helped ensure that the majority of oil tankers are safely built and operated and are constructed to reduce the amount of oil spilled in the event of an accident. Operational pollution, such as from routine tank cleaning operations, has also been cut.

The most important regulations for preventing pollution by oil from ships are contained in Annex I of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78), The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea  (SOLAS), 1974 also includes special requirements for tankers.

In this section:

Oil pollution – background

Torrey Canyon disaster

1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

1978 Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention

Exxon Valdez disaster

1992 “double hull” amendments

The Erika disaster and revised single-hull phaseout schedule

The Prestige disaster

Revised MARPOL Annex I - entry into force 1 January 2007

Further Information

Oil pollution – background

The world's first oil tankers appeared in the late 19th century and carried kerosene for lighting, but the invention of the motor car fuelled demand for oil. During the Second World War, the standard oil tanker was the T2, 16,400 tonnes deadweight, but tankers grew rapidly in size from the 1950s onwards.

The first 100,000-tonne crude oil tanker was delivered in 1959 to cover the route from the Middle East to Europe round the Cape of Good Hope (thereby avoiding the Suez Canal which had been temporarily closed following political conflicts in 1956). Shippers saw economies of scale in larger tankers and by the mid-1960s, tankers of 200,000 tonnes deadweight- the Very Large Crude Carrier or VLCC - had been ordered. 

The potential for oil to pollute the marine environment was recognised by the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, 1954 (OILPOL 1954). The Conference adopting the Convention was organised by the United Kingdom government, and the Convention provided for certain functions to be undertaken by IMO when it came into being. In fact, the Convention establishing IMO entered into force in 1958 just a few months before the OILPOL convention entered into force, so IMO effectively managed OILPOL from the start, initially through its Maritime Safety Committee.

The OILPOL Convention recognised that most oil pollution resulted from routine shipboard operations   such as the cleaning of cargo tanks.  In the 1950s, the normal practice was simply to wash the tanks out with water and then pump the resulting mixture of oil and water into the sea.     

OILPOL 54   prohibited the dumping of oily wastes within a certain distance from land and in 'special areas' where the danger to the environment was especially acute.  In 1962 the limits were extended by means of an amendment adopted at a conference organised by IMO.

Meanwhile, IMO in 1965, set up a Subcommittee on Oil Pollution, under the auspices of its Maritime Safety committee, to address oil pollution issues.

Torrey Canyon disaster

Although the OILPOL Convention had been ratified, pollution control was at the time still a minor concern for IMO, and indeed the world was only beginning to wake up to the environmental consequences of an increasingly industrialised society.

But in 1967, the Torrey Canyon ran aground while entering the English Channel and spilled her entire cargo of 120,000 tons of crude oil into the sea.  This resulted in the biggest oil pollution incident ever recorded up to that time.  The incident raised questions about measures then in place to prevent oil pollution from ships and also exposed deficiencies in the existing system for providing compensation following accidents at sea.

It was essentially this incident that set in motion the chain of events that eventually led to the adoption of MARPOL - as well as a host of Conventions in the field of liability and compensation.

First, IMO called an Extraordinary session of its Council, which drew up a plan of action on technical and legal aspects of the Torrey Canyon incident.

It was still recognized, however, that although accidental pollution was spectacular, operational pollution was the bigger threat.

In 1969, therefore, the 1954 OILPOL Convention was again amended, this time to introduce a procedure known as 'load on top' which had been developed by the oil industry and had the double advantage of saving oil and reducing pollution.  Under the system, the washings resulting from tank cleaning are pumped into a special tank.  During the voyage back to the loading terminal the oil and water separate.  The water at the bottom of the tank is pumped overboard and at the terminal oil is pumped on to the oil left in the tank.

At the same time, the enormous growth in the maritime transport of oil and the size of tankers, the increasing amount of chemicals being carried at sea and a growing concern for the world's environment as a whole, made many countries feel that the 1954 OILPOL Convention was no longer adequate, despite the various amendments which had been adopted.

In 1969, the IMO Assembly decided to convene an international conference to adopt a completely new convention, which would incorporate the regulations contained in OILPOL 1954 (as amended).  At the same time, the Sub-Committee on Oil Pollution was renamed the Sub-Committee on Marine Pollution, to broaden its scope, and this became the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), which was eventually given the same standing as the Maritime Safety Committee, with a brief to deal with all matters relating to marine pollution.

The conference was set for October-November 1973, and preparatory meetings began in 1970.

Meanwhile, in 1971 IMO adopted amendments to OILPOL 1954, which limited the size of cargo tanks in all tankers ordered after 1972. The intention was that given certain damage to the vessel, only a limited amount of oil could enter the sea.

 

 

1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

 

The 1973 conference in October-November 1973 incorporated much of OILPOL 1954 and its amendments into Annex I, covering oil, while other annexes covered chemicals, harmful substances carried in packaged form, sewage and garbage.

Annex I expanded and improved on OILPOL in several ways. It specified requirements for continuous monitoring of oily water discharges and included the requirement for Governments to provide shore reception and treatment facilities at oil terminals and ports. It also established a number of Special Areas in which more stringent discharge standards were applicable, including the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Gulf, and Baltic Seas. These special areas would be implemented when the littoral States concerned had provided adequate reception facilities for dirty ballast and other oily residues.

 An important regulation of Annex I was Regulation 13 which required segregated  ballast tanks on new tankers over 70,000 deadweight tonnes.   The aim was to ensure that ballast water (taken on board to maintain stability, such as when a tanker is sailing empty to pick up cargo) is never going to be contaminated by oil carried as cargo or fuel.

As it turned out, there was slow progress at ratifying the Convention (partly due to technical problems in ratifying Annex II) and the non-ratification of MARPOL became a major concern.

At the same time, a series of tanker accidents in 1976-1977, mostly in or near United States waters and including the stranding of the Argo Merchant, led to demands for more stringent action to curb accidental and operational oil pollution. The Argo Merchant ran aground off Massachussetts in December 1976. It was a small tanker, carrying 27,000 tons of oil, but caused huge public concern as the oil slick threatened New England resorts and Georges Bank fishing ground.

The United States took the lead in asking the IMO Council, in May 1977, to consider adopting further regulations on tanker safety. The Council agreed to convene a Conference in February 1978 - the Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention. 

A working group met in May, June and July, and a combined MSC/MEPC met in October, to prepare basic documents for the Conference.

 

 

1978 Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention

 

The Conference, in February 1978, adopted a protocol to the 1973 MARPOL Convention, absorbing the parent Convention and expanding on the requirements for tankers to help make them less likely to pollute the marine environment.

The Protocol expanded the requirements for segregated ballast tanks to all new crude oil tankers of 20,000 dwt and above and all new product carriers of 30,000 dwt and above. The Protocol also required segregated ballast tanks to be protectively located, in other words, placed in areas of the ship where they will minimise the possibility of and amount of oil outflow from cargo tanks after a collision or grounding.

New tankers over 20,000 dwt were required to be fitted with crude oil washing system. Crude oil washing, or COW, is the cleaning or washing of cargo tanks with high-pressure jets of crude oil. This reduces the quantity of oil remaining on board after discharge.

The Protocol also called for existing tankers over 40,000 dwt to be fitted with either segregated ballast tanks or crude oil washing systems; while for an interim period, it also allowed for some tankers to use clean ballast tanks, whereby specific cargo tanks are dedicated to carry ballast water only.

Additional measures for tanker safety were incorporated into the 1978 Protocol to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974. These included the requirement for inert gas systems (whereby exhaust gases, which are low in oxygen and thus incombustible, are used to replace flammable gases in tanks) on all new tankers over 20,000 dwt and specified existing tankers. The SOLAS Protocol also included requirements for steering gear of tankers; stricter requirements for carrying of radar and collision avoidance aids; and stricter regimes for surveys and certification.

In order to speed up implementation of MARPOL, the Conference allowed that the Parties "shall not be bound by the provisions of Annex II of the Convention for a period of three years" from the date of entry into force of the Protocol, so that countries could accept Annex I and have three years to implement Annex II.

Both the 1978 MARPOL and SOLAS Protocols were seen as major steps in raising construction and equipment standards for tankers through more stringent regulations.

If the world needed further reminder of the need for strict regimes to control oil pollution, it got it just one month after the 1978 Conference, when the Amoco Cadiz ran aground off Brittany, giving France its worst oil spill ever. The tanker, filled with 223,000 tons of crude oil, lost its entire cargo, covering more than 130 beaches in oil. In places, the oil was up to 30 cm thick.

Sufficient States had ratified MARPOL by October 1982, and the MARPOL 1973/78 Convention entered into force on 2 October 1983.

Since the Convention entered into force, there have been a number of amendments to the Convention – see MARPOL 73/78.

 

 

Exxon Valdez disaster

 

It was another tanker accident which led to one of the most important changes to be made to Annex I of the Convention since the adoption of the 1978 Protocol.

In March 1989, the Exxon Valdez, loaded with 1,264,155 barrels of crude oil, ran aground in the northeastern portion of Prince William Sound, spilling about one-fifth of its cargo. It was the largest crude spill, to date, in US waters and - probably the one which gained the biggest media coverage to date. The U.S. public demanded action - and duly got it.

The United States introduced its Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90), making it mandatory for all tankers calling at U.S. ports to have double hulls.

The United States also came to IMO, calling for double hulls this time to be made a mandatory requirement of MARPOL. The implications of the Exxon Valdez spill were not lost on IMO Members, and the MEPC began discussions on how the U.S. proposals could be implemented.

As on previous occasions, there was some resistance on the part of the oil industry  to  double hulls  being  made mandatory,  due mainly to the cost of retrofitting existing tankers.

At the same time, several of IMO's Member States said that other designs should be accepted as equivalents and that measures for existing ships should also be contemplated.  In 1991 a major study into the comparative performances of the double-hull and mid-height deck tanker designs was carried out by IMO, with funding from the oil and tanker industry.

It concluded in January 1992 that the two designs could be considered as equivalent, although each gives better or worse outflow performance under certain conditions.

Eventually, the MEPC agreed to make mandatory double hulls or alternative designs "provided that such methods ensure the same level of protection against pollution in the event of a collision or stranding".  These design methods must be approved by the MEPC.

 

 

1992 “double hull” amendments

 

The amendments introducing double hulls (or an alternative) were contained in Regulation 13F - prevention of oil pollution in the event of collision or stranding. The amendments were adopted in March 1992 and entered into force in July 1993.

Regulation 13F applies to new tankers - defined as delivered on or after 6 July 1996 - while existing tankers must comply with the requirements of 13F not later than 30 years after their date of delivery.

Tankers of 5,000 dwt and above must be fitted with double bottoms and wing tanks extending the full depth of the ship's side.  The regulation allows mid-deck height tankers with double-sided hulls as an alternative to double hull construction.

Oil tankers of 600 dwt and above but less than 5,000 dwt, must be fitted with double bottom tanks and the capacity of each cargo tank is limited to 700 cubic metres, unless they are fitted with double hulls.

The MEPC also adopted Regulation 13G, concerned with existing tankers, which  makes provision for an enhanced programme of inspections to be implemented, particularly for tankers more than five years old.

Regulation 13G also allowed for future acceptance of other structural or operational arrangements - such as hydrostatic balance loading (HBL) - as alternatives to the protective measures in the Regulation.

The Erika disaster and revised single-hull phaseout schedule

On 12 December 1999 the 37,238-dwt tanker Erika broke in two in heavy seas off the coast of Brittany, France, while carrying approximately 30,000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil. Although the crew were saved, some 14,000 tonnes of oil were spilled and more than 100 miles of Atlantic coastline were polluted.

As a result of the Erika disaster, proposals were submitted to the MEPC to accelerate the phase-out of single-hull tankers contained in the 1992 MARPOL amendments.

The amendments to Regulation 13G in Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 were adopted by the MEPC’s 46th session in April 2001.

The Prestige disaster

The Prestige tanker incident of 2002 led to calls for further changes to MARPOL 73/78. The MEPC at its 49th session in July 2003 agreed to an extra session of the Committee, to be convened in December 2003, to consider the adoption of proposals for an accelerated phase-out scheme for single hull tankers, along with other measures including an extended application of the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) for tankers.

Revised MARPOL Annex I

The revised MARPOL Annex I Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil was adopted in October 2004 and enters into force on 1 January 2007. It incorporates the various amendments adopted since MARPOL entered into force in 1983, including the amended regulation 13G (regulation 20 in the revised annex) and regulation 13H (regulation 21 in the revised annex) on the phasing-in of double hull requirements for oil tankers. It also separates, in different chapters, the construction and equipment provisions from the operational requirements and makes clear the distinctions between the requirements for new ships and those for existing ships. The revision provides a more user-friendly, simplified Annex I.

New requirements in the revised Annex I include the following:

• Regulation 22 Pump-room bottom protection: on oil tankers of 5,000 tonnes deadweight and above constructed on or after 1 January 2007, the pump-room shall be provided with a double bottom.
• Regulation 23 Accidental oil outflow performance - applicable to oil tankers delivered on or after [date of entry into force of revised Annex I plus 36 months] 1 January 2010; construction requirements to provide adequate protection against oil pollution in the event of stranding or collision.

Oman Sea - new special area under MARPOL Annex I
The Oman Sea area of the Arabian Seas is designated a special area in the revised Annex I.

The other special areas in Annex I are: Mediterranean Sea area; Baltic Sea area; Black Sea area; Red Sea area; "Gulfs" area; Gulf of Aden area; Antarctic area; and North West European Waters. In the special areas, there are stricter controls on discharge of oily wastes.

 

Further Information

Tanker safety - preventing accidental pollution

Responding to oil spills

MARPOL 73/78

Information Resources on current topics

Information Resources on the Prestige

Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans

 

Regulation 26 of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 requires that oil tankers of 150 tons gross tonnage or more and all ships of 400 tons gross tonnage or more carry an approved shipboard oil pollution plan (SOPEP). The International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990, also requires such a plan for certain ships.

Regulation 16 of Annex II of MARPOL 73/78 makes similar stipulations for all ships of 150 tons gross tonnage and above carrying noxious liquid substances in bulk: they are required to carry on board an approved marine pollution emergency plan for noxious liquid substances.

The latter should be combined with a SOPEP, since most of their contents are the same and the combined plan is more practical than two separate ones in case of an emergency. To make it clear that the plan is a combined one, it should be referred to as a shipboard marine pollution emergency plan (SMPEP).

The Guidelines for the Development of Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans have been developed by IMO to help Administrations and shipowners meet these requirements. Specimen formats are included.

See Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans, 2001 Edition which includes Guidelines for the development of Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plans (SOPEP) (Resolution MEPC.54(32), as amended by resolution MEPC.86(44) and Guidelines for the development of Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans for Oil and/or Noxious Lquid Substances (Resolution MEPC.85(44)).

See also MEPC.6/CIRC.8 (ANNEX 2 for SOPEP)
LIST OF NATIONAL OPERATIONAL CONTACT POINTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RECEIPT, TRANSMISSION AND PROCESSING OF URGENT REPORTS ON INCIDENTS INVOLVING HARMFUL SUBSTANCES, INCLUDING OIL FROM SHIPS TO COASTAL STATES.
This information enables compliance with Regulation 26 of Annex 1 of MARPOL 73/78 which, inter alia, requires that shipboard oil pollution emergency plans (SOPEP) shall contain a list of authorities or persons to be contacted in the event of an oil pollution incident.

 

 

Tanker safety - preventing accidental pollution

IMO's major function is to make shipping of all types safer, including tankers.  The measures incorporated in the numerous safety conventions and recommendations apply to these as well as other ships - and the safer a ship is, the less likely it is to be involved in an accident.

 

 

In this section:
SOLAS
Inert gas systems
Equipment duplication
Mandatory towing arrangements
MARPOL 73/78  - Reducing the consequences of accidents
Protective location, segregated ballast tanks
Double hulls

Single-hull phase-out timetable
Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS)

Enhanced inspections
Mandatory ship reporting systems
COLREGS
STCW Convention
ISM Code
The Erika incident
The Prestige incident

Further information

SOLAS

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea  (SOLAS), 1974 includes special requirements for tankers.  Fire safety provisions, for example, are much more stringent for tankers than ordinary dry cargo ships, since the danger of fire on board ships carrying oil and refined products is much greater.

Inert gas systems

It is not just fire which is dangerous - in certain circumstances a single spark can cause a disaster, for even tanks which contain no oil are filled with flammable gas which can explode unless proper procedures are followed.

The normal method is to fill these tanks with inert (non-explosive) gas from the ship's boiler flue: it is cleaned and then pumped into the empty tanks, or into the spaces left above the oil in loaded tanks.  An inert gas system is required on all new tankers and most existing tankers of 20,000 dwt and above.

Equipment duplication

IMO has introduced several measures over the years which are designed to ensure that, in the event of mechanical failure, the ship can still be controlled. SOLAS makes it necessary for essential parts of the steering gear of tankers to be duplicated.

As with other ships, much of the navigational equipment of tankers must also be duplicated.

Mandatory towing arrangements

Since 1 January 1996 all new tankers of 20,000 dwt and above have had to be fitted with an emergency towing arrangement fitted at either end of the ship. Existing ships had to be fitted with such an arrangement not later than 1 January 1999.

MARPOL 73/78  - Reducing the consequences of accidents

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships (MARPOL 73/78) includes regulations regarding subdivision and stability which are designed to ensure that, in any loading conditions, the ship can survive after being involved in a collision or stranding.

Protective location of segregated ballast tanks

The 1978 MARPOL Protocol introduced the concept known as protective location of segregated ballast tanks.  This means that the ballast tanks (which are empty on the cargo-carrying leg of the voyage and only loaded with water ballast for the return leg) are positioned where the impact of a collision or grounding is likely to be greatest.  In this way the amount of cargo spilled after such an accident will be greatly reduced.

The 1983 MARPOL amendments ban the carriage of oil in the forepeak tank - the ship's most vulnerable point in the event of a collision.

 

Double hulls

In 1992 MARPOL was amended to make it mandatory for tankers of 5,000 dwt and more ordered after 6 July 1993 to be fitted with double hulls, or an alternative design approved by IMO (Regulation 13F in Annex I of MARPOL 73/78). 

The requirement for double hulls that applies to new tankers has also been applied to existing ships under a programme that began in 1995 (Regulation 13G in Annex I of MARPOL 73/78).  . All tankers have to be converted (or taken out of service) when they reach a certain age (up to 30 years old). This measure is being phased in over a number of years because shipyard capacity is limited and it would not be possible to convert all single hulled tankers to double hulls without causing immense disruption to world trade and industry.

Although the double hull requirement was adopted in 1992, following the Erika incident off the coast of France in December 1999, IMO Member States discussed proposals for accelerating the phase-out of single hull tankers. As a result, in Aprill 2001, IMO adopted a revised phase-out schedule for single hull tankers, which entered into force on 1 September 2003 (the 2001 amendments to MARPOL 73/78).The new revised MARPOL regulation 13G set out a stricter timetable for the phasing-out of single-hull tankers.

In December 2003, further revisions to 13G were made, accelerating further the phase-out schedule. These amendments enter into force on 5 April 2005. A new Regulation on the prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers when carrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriage of HGO in single-hull tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above after the date of entry into force of the regulation (5 April 2005), and in single-hull oil tankers of 600 tons dwt and above but less than 5,000 tons dwt, not later than the anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

 

Accelerated phase-out for single-hull tankers
Under the revised regulation 13G of Annex I of MARPOL, the final phasing-out date for Category 1 tankers (pre-MARPOL tankers) is 2005. The final phasing-out date for category 2 and 3 tankers (MARPOL tankers and smaller tankers) is brought forward to 2010, from 2015.

The full timetable for the phasing out of single-hull tankers is as follows:

Category of oil tanker

Date or year

Category 1 -- oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do not comply with the requirements for protectively located segregated ballast tanks (commonly known as Pre-MARPOL tankers)

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1982 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1982

Category 2 - oil tankers of 20,000 tons deadweight and above carrying crude oil, fuel oil, heavy diesel oil or lubricating oil as cargo, and of 30,000 tons deadweight and above carrying other oils, which do comply with the protectively located segregated ballast tank requirements (MARPOL tankers)

and
Category 3 - - oil tankers of 5,000 tons deadweight and above but less than the tonnage specified for Category 1 and 2 tankers

5 April 2005 for ships delivered on 5 April 1977 or earlier
2005 for ships delivered after 5 April 1977 but before 1 January 1978
2006 for ships delivered in 1978 and 1979
2007 for ships delivered in 1980 and 1981
2008 for ships delivered in 1982
2009 for ships delivered in 1983
2010 for ships delivered in 1984 or later

 

 

Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS)

 

Under the revised regulation, the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) is applicable to all single-hull tankers of 15 years, or older.

The revised regulation allows the Administration (flag State) to permit continued operation of category 2 or 3 tankers beyond 2010 subject to satisfactory results from the CAS, but the continued operation must not go beyond the anniversary of the date of delivery of the ship in 2015 or the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery, whichever is earlier.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 oil tankers fitted with only double bottoms or double sides not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length or double hull spaces, not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements, which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation beyond 2010, provided that the ship was in service on 1 July 2001, the Administration is satisfied by verification of the official records that the ship complied with the conditions specified and that those conditions remain unchanged. Again, such continued operation must not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

 

Carriage of heavy grade oil
A new MARPOL regulation 13H on the prevention of oil pollution from oil tankers when carrying heavy grade oil (HGO) bans the carriage of HGO in single-hull tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above after the date of entry into force of the regulation (5 April 2005), and in single-hull oil tankers of 600 tons dwt and above but less than 5,000 tons dwt, not later than the anniversary of their delivery date in 2008.

Under the new regulation, HGO means any of the following:
a) crude oils having a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3;
b) fuel oils having either a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50ºC higher than 180 mm2/s;
c) bitumen, tar and their emulsions.

In the case of certain Category 2 or 3 tankers carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, fitted only with double bottoms or double sides, not used for the carriage of oil and extending to the entire cargo tank length, or double hull spaces not meeting the minimum distance protection requirements which are not used for the carriage of oil and extend to the entire cargo tank length, the Administration may allow continued operation of such ships beyond 5 April 2005 until the date on which the ship reaches 25 years of age after the date of its delivery.

Regulation 13(H) also allows for continued operation of oil tankers of 5,000 tons dwt and above, carrying crude oil with a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/ m3 but lower than 945 kg/ m3, if satisfactory results of the Condition Assessment Scheme warrant that, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship and provided that the continued operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration may allow continued operation of a single hull oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above but less than 5,000 tons deadweight, carrying heavy grade oil as cargo, if, in the opinion of the Administration, the ship is fit to continue such operation, having regard to the size, age, operational area and structural conditions of the ship, provided that the operation shall not go beyond the date on which the ship reaches 25 years after the date of its delivery.

The Administration of a Party to the present Convention may exempt an oil tanker of 600 tons deadweight and above carrying heavy grade oil as cargo if the ship is either engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the Party's jurisdiction, or is engaged in voyages exclusively within an area under the jurisdiction of another Party, provided the Party within whose jurisdiction the ship will be operating agrees. The same applies to vessels operating as floating storage units of heavy grade oil.

A Party to MARPOL 73/78 shall be entitled to deny entry of single hull tankers carrying heavy grade oil which have been allowed to continue operation under the exemptions mentioned above, into the ports or offshore terminals under its jurisdiction, or deny ship-to-ship transfer of heavy grade oil in areas under its jurisdiction except when this is necessary for the purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea.

 

Enhanced inspections

Since 1995 all tankers and bulk carriers aged five years and over have been subject to a specially enhanced inspection programme which is intended to ensure that any deficiencies - such as corrosion or wear and tear resulting from age or neglect - are detected.

Guidelines on enhanced surveys on tankers and bulk carriers are contained in Assembly resolution A. 744 (18), adopted in November 1993, as amended. 

 

Mandatory ship reporting

Since 1 January 1996, Governments have been able to propose to IMO the introduction of mandatory ship reporting systems in areas where there are special environmental or navigational concerns.

Mandatory reporting systems require ships to report in to shore authorities when they reach a designated routeing system and give the ship's name, cargo and other information. This enables the ship to be identified on radar and its course plotted throughout the system.

In December 2000, IMO adopted mandatory requirements for  the carriage of automatic identification systems (AISs) capable of providing information about the ship to other ships and to coastal authorities automatically. The regulation in SOLAS chapter V – Safety of Navigation, requires AIS to be fitted aboard all ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards engaged on international voyages, cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards not engaged on international voyages and passenger ships irrespective of size built on or after 1 July 2002.

Existing tankers (those constructed before 1 July 2002), had to fit AIS not later than the first survey for safety equipment on or after 1 July 2003.

 

COLREGS

The International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREGS) contains special provisions for ships such as tankers which, by virtue of their draught, have a reduced ability to manoeuvre.

STCW Convention

The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended in 1995 (STCW) includes several requirements aimed specifically at those working on tankers.

ISM Code

The International Safety Management (ISM) Code was adopted in 1994 and became mandatory for tankers in 1998. The ISM Code imposes strict standards on shipping companies.

 

The Erika incident

The sinking of the Erika off the coast of France in December 1999 led to a new, accelerated phase-out schedule for single-hull tankers - the revision of regulation 13G of MARPOL 73/78.

The investigations into the Erika incident carried out by the French government and the Maltese maritime authority concluded that age, corrosion, insufficient maintenance and inadequate surveys were all strong contributing factors to the structural failure of the ship.

There was a wide consensus that the Erika and other the recent accidents involving oil tankers pointed to a need for additional international measures to eradicate substandard vessels, particularly substandard oil tankers given the catastrophic impact such ships may have on the marine environment in the case of an accident.

Besides the revised phase-out scheme for single-hll tankers, IMO also adopted other measures in reponse to the incident:

- amendments adopted by IMO in October 2000 to raise by 50 percent the limits of compensation payable to victims of pollution by oil from oil tankers under the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC Convention) and the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (IOPC Fund).

- IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) in December 2000 adopted amendments to the guidelines on the enhanced programme of inspections during surveys of bulk carriers and oil tankers (resolution A.744(18)) with relation to the evaluation of the longitudinal strength of the hull girder of oil tankers.

- Furthermore, IMO has taken action on several other operational matters base don a list of measures aimed at enhancing safety and minimizing the risk of oil pollution, drawn up in response to the Erika incident.

 

The Prestige incident

The Prestige incident of November 2002 led to further calls for amendments to the phase-out schedule for single hull tankers.

The MEPC at its 49th session in July 2003 agreed to an extra session of the Committee, to be convened in December 2003, to consider the adoption of proposals for an accelerated phase-out scheme for single hull tankers, along with other measures including an extended application of the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) for tankers.

 

Further Information

Please see latest summary reports of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) and Maritime Safety Committee (MSC).

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988

Adoption: 10 March 1988
Entry into force: 1 March 1992

Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, 1988

Adoption: 10 March 1988
Entry into force: 1 March 1992

The Protocol extends the requirements of the Convention to fixed platforms such as those engaged in the exploitation of offshore oil and gas.

Introduction
Resolution A.584(14) Measures to prevent unlawful acts
MSC Circular Measures to prevent unlawful acts
Convention aims
Amendment procedure
Review of the SUA Convention and its Protocol - A diplomatic Conference to adopt amendments to the 1988 SUA Convention and Protocol1 will be held in October 2005, IMO's Legal Committee agreed at its 89th session from 25 to 29 October 2004

Introduction
Concern about unlawful acts which threaten the safety of ships and the security of their passengers and crews grew during the 1980s, with reports of crews being kidnapped, ships being hi-jacked, deliberately run aground or blown up by explosives. Passengers were threatened and sometimes killed.

In November 1985 the problem was considered by IMO's 14th Assembly and a proposal by the United States that measures to prevent such unlawful acts should be developed by IMO was supported.

Resolution A.584(14)
The Assembly adopted resolution A.584(14) Measures to prevent unlawful acts which threaten the safety of ships and the security of their passengers and crew which notes "with great concern the danger to passengers and crews resulting from the increasing number of incidents involving piracy, armed robbery and other unlawful acts against or on board ships, including small craft, both at anchor and under way."

The IMO Assembly directed the Maritime Safety Committee to develop, on a priority basis, detailed and practical technical measures, including both shoreside and shipboard measures, to ensure the security of passengers and crews on board ships. The measures were to take into account the work of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in the development of standards and recommended practices for airport and aircraft security.

In December 1985 further support came from the United Nations General Assembly which called upon IMO "to study the problem of terrorism aboard or against ships with a view to making recommendations on appropriate measures."

MSC Circular
The MSC in 1986 issued a Circular (MSC/Circ.443) on Measures to prevent unlawful acts against passengers and crews on board ships - which states that Governments, port authorities, administrations, shipowners, shipmasters and crews should take appropriate measures to prevent unlawful acts which may threaten passengers and crews. The Circular gives guidelines on measures that can be taken - with application to passenger ships engaged on international voyages of 24 hours or more and port facilities which service them.

In November 1986 the Governments of Austria, Egypt and Italy proposed that IMO prepare a convention on the subject of unlawful acts against the safety of maritime navigation 'to provide for a comprehensive suppression of unlawful acts committed against the safety of maritime navigation which endanger innocent human lives, jeopardize the safety of persons and property, seriously affect the operation of maritime services and thus are of grave concern to the international community as a whole."

Convention aims
The proposal was supported, and in March 1988 a conference was held in Rome which adopted the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

The main purpose of the convention is to ensure that appropriate action is taken against persons committing unlawful acts against ships. These include the seizure of ships by force; acts of violence against persons on board ships; and the placing of devices on board a ship which are likely to destroy or damage it.

The convention obliges Contracting Governments either to extradite or prosecute alleged offenders.

Amendment procedure
IMO may convene a conference of States parties to the Convention for the purpose of revising or amending the convention, at the request of one third or ten States Parties, whichever is the highest.

Review of the SUA Convention and its Protocol
A diplomatic Conference to adopt amendments to the 1988 SUA Convention and Protocol will be held in October 2005, IMO's Legal Committee agreed at its 89th session from 25 to 29 October 2004.

The main purpose of the SUA Convention is to ensure that appropriate action is taken against persons committing unlawful acts against ships. These acts include the seizure of ships by force: acts of violence against persons on board ships and the placing of devices on board a ship which are likely to destroy or damage it. The Convention obliges Contracting Governments either to extradite or prosecute alleged offenders. Similar provisions are contained in the SUA Protocol, relating to unlawful acts against fixed platforms located on the continental shelf.

The 2005 Conference will consider the adoption of two Protocols incorporating substantial amendments aimed at strengthening the SUA treaties in order to provide an appropriate response to the increasing risks posed to maritime navigation by international terrorism.

In preparation for the October 2005 diplomatic Conference, the Legal Committee agreed to hold a second session of its working group on the revision of the SUA Convention and Protocol (from 31 January to 4 February 2005), followed by a two-week Legal Committee meeting from 18 to 29 April 2005 to continue its consideration of the draft Protocols (as well as to consider other Legal Committee issues).

Proposed amendments to the treaties in the revised draft Protocols include a substantial broadening of the range of offences included in Article 3 of the SUA Convention and the introduction of provisions for boarding vessels suspected of being involved in terrorist activities in Article 8.

Work on the revision of the SUA treaties followed the adoption in 2001 of Assembly resolution A.924(22) which called for a review of measures and procedures to prevent acts of terrorism which threaten the security of passengers and crews an the safety of ships. The SUA amendments will complement the International Ship and Port Facilities Security (ISPS) Code, which entered into force in July 2004, by providing a legal basis for the arrest, detention and extradition of terrorists in the unfortunate event that a terrorist attack against shipping nevertheless occurs.

 

International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, 1979

Adoption: 27 April 1979
Entry into force: 22 June 1985

Introduction
Amendment Procedure
IMO search and rescue areas
Revision of SAR Convention
The 1998 amendments - Entry into force: 1 January 2000
Chapter 1 - Terms and Definitions
Chapter 2 - Organization and Co-ordination
Chapter 3 - Co-operation between States
Chapter 4 - Operating Procedures
Chapter 5 - Ship reporting systems
International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue (IAMSAR) Manual
2004 amendments - persons in distress at sea


Introduction
The 1979 Convention, adopted at a Conference in Hamburg, was aimed at developing an international SAR plan, so that, no matter where an accident occurs, the rescue of persons in distress at sea will be co-ordinated by a SAR organization and, when necessary, by co-operation between neighbouring SAR organizations.

Although the obligation of ships to go to the assistance of vessels in distress was enshrined both in tradition and in international treaties (such as the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974), there was, until the adoption of the SAR Convention, no international system covering search and rescue operations. In some areas there was a well-established organization able to provide assistance promptly and efficiently, in others there was nothing at all.

The technical requirements of the SAR Convention are contained in an Annex, which was divided into five Chapters. Parties to the Convention are required to ensure that arrangements are made for the provision of adequate SAR services in their coastal waters.

Parties are encouraged to enter into SAR agreements with neighbouring States involving the establishment of SAR regions, the pooling of facilities, establishment of common procedures, training and liaison visits. The Convention states that Parties should take measures to expedite entry into its territorial waters of rescue units from other Parties.

The Convention then goes on to establish preparatory measures which should be taken, including the establishment of rescue co-ordination centres and subcentres. It outlines operating procedures to be followed in the event of emergencies or alerts and during SAR operations. This includes the designation of an on-scene commander and his duties.

Parties to the Convention are required to establish ship reporting systems, under which ships report their position to a coast radio station. This enables the interval between the loss of contact with a vessel and the initiation of search operations to be reduced. It also helps to permit the rapid determination of vessels which may be called upon to provide assistance including medical help when required.

Amendment Procedure
The SAR Convention allowed for amendments to the technical Annex to be adopted by a Conference of STCW Parties or by IMO's Maritime Safety Committee, expanded to include all Contracting Parties, some of whom may not be members of the Organization. Amendments to the SAR Convention enter into force on a specified date unless objections are received from a required number of Parties.

IMO search and rescue areas
Following the adoption of the 1979 SAR Convention, IMO's Maritime Safety Committee divided the world's oceans into 13 search and rescue areas, in each of which the countries concerned have delimited search and rescue regions for which they are responsible.

Provisional search and rescue plans for all of these areas were completed when plans for the Indian Ocean were finalized at a conference held in Fremantle, Western Australia in September 1998.

Revision of SAR Convention
The 1979 SAR Convention imposed considerable obligations on Parties - such as setting up the shore installations required - and as a result the Convention was not being ratified by as many countries as some other treaties. Equally important, many of the world's coastal States had not accepted the Convention and the obligations it imposed.

It was generally agreed that one reason for the small number of acceptances and the slow pace of implementation was due to problems with the SAR Convention itself and that these could best be overcome by amending the Convention.

At a meeting in October 1995 in Hamburg, Germany, it was agreed that there were a number of substantial concerns that needed to be taken into account, including:

- lessons learned from SAR operations;

- experiences of States which had implemented the Convention;

- questions and concerns posed especially by developing States which were not yet Party to the Convention;

- need to further harmonize the IMO and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) SAR provisions;

- inconsistent use of Convention terminology and phraseology.

IMO's Sub-Committee on Radio-Communications and Search and Rescue (COMSAR) was requested to revise the technical Annex of the Convention. A draft text was prepared and was approved by the 68th session of the MSC in May 1997, and was then adopted by the 69th MSC session in May 1998.

The 1998 amendments
Adopted: 18 May 1998
Entry into force: 1 January 2000

The revised technical Annex of the SAR Convention clarifies the responsibilities of Governments and puts greater emphasis on the regional approach and co-ordination between maritime and aeronautical SAR operations.

The revised Annex includes five Chapters:

Chapter 1 - Terms and Definitions

This Chapter updates the original Chapter 1 of the same name.

Chapter 2 - Organization and Co-ordination

Replaces the 1979 Chapter 2 on Organization. The Chapter has been re-drafted to make the responsibilities of Governments clearer. It requires Parties, either individually or in co-operation with other States, to establish basic elements of a search and rescue service, to include:

- Legal framework

- Assignment of a responsible authority

- Organization of available resources

- Communication facilities

- Co-ordination and operational functions

- Processes to improve the service including planning, domestic and international co-operative relationships and training.

Parties should establish search and rescue regions within each sea area - with the agreement of the Parties concerned. Parties then accept responsibility for providing search and rescue services for a specified area.

The Chapter also describes how SAR services should be arranged and national capabilities be developed. Parties are required to establish rescue co-ordination centres and to operate them on a 24-hour basis with trained staff who have a working knowledge of English.

Parties are also required to "ensure the closest practicable co-ordination between maritime and aeronautical services".

Chapter 3 - Co-operation between States
Replaces the original Chapter 3 on Co-operation.

Requires Parties to co-ordinate search and rescue organizations, and, where necessary, search and rescue operations with those of neighbouring States. The Chapter states that unless otherwise agreed between the States concerned, a Party should authorize, subject to applicable national laws, rules and regulations, immediate entry into or over its territorial sea or territory for rescue units of other Parties solely for the purpose of search and rescue.

Chapter 4 - Operating Procedures
Incorporates the previous Chapters 4 (Preparatory Measures) and 5 (Operating Procedures).

The Chapter says that each RCC (Rescue Co-ordination Centre) and RSC (Rescue Sub-Centre) should have up-to-date information on search and rescue facilities and communications in the area and should have detailed plans for conduct of search and rescue operations. Parties - individually or in co-operation with others should be capable of receiving distress alerts on a 24-hour basis. The regulations include procedures to be followed during an emergency and state that search and rescue activities should be co-ordinated on scene for the most effective results. The Chapter says that "Search and rescue operations shall continue, when practicable, until all reasonable hope of rescuing survivors has passed".

Chapter 5 - Ship reporting systems
Includes recommendations on establishing ship reporting systems for search and rescue purposes, noting that existing ship reporting systems could provide adequate information for search and rescue purposes in a given area.

IAMSAR Manual
Concurrently with the revision of the SAR Convention, the IMO and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) jointly developed the International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue (IAMSAR) Manual, published in three volumes covering Organization and Management; Mission Co-ordination; and Mobile Facilities.

The IAMSAR Manual revises and replaces the IMO Merchant Ship Search and Rescue Manual (MERSAR), first published in 1971, and the IMO Search and Rescue Manual (IMOSAR), first published in 1978.

The MERSAR Manual was the first step towards developing the 1979 SAR Convention and it provided guidance for those who, during emergencies at sea, may require assistance from others or who may be able to provide assistance themselves. In particular, it was designed to aid the master of any vessel who might be called upon to conduct SAR operations at sea for persons in distress. The manual was updated several times with the latest amendments being adopted in 1992 - they entered into force in 1993.

The second manual, the IMOSAR Manual, was adopted in l978. It was designed to help Governments to implement the SAR Convention and provided guidelines rather than requirements for a common maritime search and rescue policy, encouraging all coastal States to develop their organizations on similar lines and enabling adjacent States to co-operate and provide mutual assistance. It was also updated in 1992, with the amendments entering into force in 1993.

This manual was aligned as closely as possible with ICAO Search and Rescue Manual to ensure a common policy and to facilitate consultation of the two manuals for administrative or operational reasons. MERSAR was also aligned, where appropriate, with IMOSAR.

2004 amendments - persons in distress at sea

Adoption: May 2004
Entry into force: 1 January 2006

The amendments to the Annex to the Convention include:

• addition of a new paragraph in chapter 2 (Organization and co-ordination) relating to definition of persons in distress;
• new paragraphs in chapter 3 (Co-operation between States) relating to assistance to the master in delivering persons rescued at sea to a place of safety; and
• a new paragraph in chapter 4 (Operating procedures) relating to rescue co- ordination centres initiating the process of identifying the most appropriate places for disembarking persons found in distress at sea.

 

Trafficking or transport of illegal migrants by sea / Persons in distress at sea

Persons in distress at sea

Trafficking or transport of illegal migrants by sea

The Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) - 73rd session: 27 November - 6 December 2000 agreed to implement a reporting procedure to keep track of incidents of unsafe practices associated with the trafficking or transport of illegal migrants by sea and urged Governments and international organizations to report promptly such practices they become aware of.

A circular giving details of incidents reported will be issued biannually. The reports should include, where available, ship and shipowner's details, voyage details, date, time and position of the incident, a description of the incident and measures taken, and information concerning the migrants including number, nationality, sex, any whether any are minors.

An advisory Circular ((MSC/Circ.896. Rev.1).) outlining Interim measures for combating unsafe practices associated with the trafficking or transport of migrants by sea, which notes that migrants often are transported on ships that are not properly manned, equipped or licensed for carrying passengers on international voyages. It says States should take steps relating to maritime safety, in accordance with domestic and international law, to eliminate these unsafe practices associated with the trafficking or transport of migrants by sea. The Circular was revised and updated in June 2001

Relevant provisions of MSC/Circ.896 are reflected in chapter II on "Smuggling of Migrants by Sea" of the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air and Sea, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. The protocol was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 15 November 2000 and was officially signed at a ceremony in Palermo, Italy, in December 2000.

Persons in distress at sea

In May 2004, the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) adopted amendments to the SOLAS and SAR Conventions concerning the treatment of persons rescued at sea, and/or asylum seekers, refugees and stowaways. The amendments were developed in response to resolution A.920 on Review of safety measures and procedures for the treatment of persons rescued at sea, adopted by IMO's 22nd Assembly following a number of incidents that highlighted concerns surrounding the treatment of persons rescued at sea.

The prime concern with respect to such incidents was that, unless the matter was considered in all its aspects and appropriate action was taken, there might be a negative impact on the integrity of the global search and rescue system which IMO has put in place.

The amendments include:

• SOLAS - chapter V (Safety of Navigation) - to add a definition of search and rescue services; to set an obligation to provide assistance, regardless of nationality or status of persons in distress, and mandate co-ordination and co-operation between States to assist the ship's master in delivering persons rescued at sea to a place of safety; and to add a new regulation on master's discretion. The SOLAS amendments are expected to enter into force on 1 July 2006.
• SAR - Annex to the Convention - addition of a new paragraph in chapter 2 (Organization and co-ordination) relating to definition of persons in distress, new paragraphs in chapter 3 (Co-operation between States) relating to assistance to the master in delivering persons rescued at sea to a place of safety and a new paragraph in chapter 4 (Operating procedures) relating to rescue co- ordination centres initiating the process of identifying the most appropriate places for disembarking persons found in distress at sea. The SAR amendments are expected to enter into force on 1 January 2006.

The MSC also adopted related Guidelines on the treatment of persons rescued at sea. The aim is to provide guidance with regard to humanitarian obligations and obligations under the relevant international law.

 

Assembly resolution

During its 22nd session in november 2001, the IMO Assembly adopted a resolution submitted by Secretary-General Mr. William A. O'Neil addressing the plight of refugees and asylum seekers who become rescued from by merchant vessels.

The resolution on Review of safety measures and procedures for the treatment of persons rescued at sea recommends a comprehensive review of safety measures and procedures for the treatment of rescued persons. It follows a number of recent incidents involving asylum seekers, refugees and stowaways, which the Assembly noted had brought to the fore issues relating to the thoroughness of IMO legislation and the degree of preparedness of the maritime and coastal community to deal with such people satisfactorily.

The resolution recalls IMO measures and recommendations which are aimed at ensuring that the life of persons on board ships, including small craft, whether underway or at anchor, is safeguarded at any time pending their delivery to a place of safety.

The resolution requests IMO to review all IMO instruments so that any existing gaps, inconsistencies, ambiguities, vagueness or other inadequacies can be identified and any action needed can be taken.

Meanwhile, Mr. O’Neil has proposed that a review of the existing legislation concerning the delivery of persons rescued at sea to a place of safety, regardless of their nationality and status or the circumstances in which they are found, should be undertaken by an inter-agency group within the UN system, with a view to strengthening and harmonizing the competence of the agencies involved. The proposed review would identify any existing gaps, inconsistencies, duplications or overlaps in that legislation. Mr. O’Neil has received positive responses to this proposal from the High Commissioner of UNHCR, the Executive Director of UN Drug Control and Crime prevention and the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Mr. O’Neil has also proposed the establishment of a co-ordinating mechanism (possibly in the form of an inter-agency co-ordinating panel to be activated when the circumstances require it) to ensure that the response of the United Nations in any future emergency can be co-ordinated in a consistent manner.

Further Information

Information Resources on Stowaways/Migrants

Stowaways

An international convention relating to stowaways was adopted in Brussels in 1957, but it has not yet entered into force and is unlikely to do so.

In recent years, however, the problem of stowaways has increased and it is generally recognized that there is an urgent need for international agreement on the allocation of responsibilities to enable the successful resolution of cases involving stowaways.

In 2000, IMO’s Facilitation Committee agreed at its 28th session (30 October – 3 November 2000) to include formalities for dealing with stowaways in the Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic (FAL Convention), and these were adopted in Janaury 2002, with entry into force expected to be on 1 May 2003.

The FAL Convention - which was adopted in 1965 to prevent unnecessary delays in maritime traffic, to aid co-operation between Governments, and to secure the highest practicable degree of uniformity in formalities and other procedures.

Amendments to the FAL Convention to incorporate standards and recommended practices on dealing with stowaways were adopted in January 2002, and entered into force in 2003.

In the FAL Convention, standards are internationally-agreed measures which are "necessary and practicable in order to facilitate international maritime traffic" and recommended practices as measures the application of which is "desirable".

The standards and recommended practices for stowaways reflect the Guidelines on the Allocation of Responsibilities to Seek the Successful Resolution of Stowaway Cases (Resolution A.871 (20)), adopted in 1997, which established basic principles to be applied in dealing with stowaways.

The guidelines in the resolution state that the resolution of stowaway cases is difficult because of different national legislation in the various countries involved. Nevertheless, some basic principles can be applied generally.

Stowaways entering a country without the required documents are, in general, illegal immigrants, and decisions on how to deal with such situations are the prerogative of the countries concerned. Stowaway asylum seekers should be treated in compliance with international protection principles set out in relevant treaties.

The guidelines advocate close co-operation between shipowners and port authorities. Where national legislation permits, national authorities should consider prosecuting stowaways concerning any damage caused. Countries should permit the return of stowaways who are identified as being their citizens or who have a right of residence, while the country where a stowaway originally embarked should normally accept his or her return pending final case disposition.

The guidelines say that every effort should be made to avoid situations where a stowaway has to be detained on board a ship indefinitely.

The guidelines then go on to establish in greater detail the responsibilities of the master, of the shipowner or operator, of the country of the first scheduled port of call after the discovery of the stowaway (the port of disembarkation), of the country where the stowaway first boarded the ship, of the stowaway's apparent or claimed country of nationality, of the flag State of the vessel, and of any countries of transit during repatriation.

The Assembly resolution refers to the difficulties encountered by masters and owners in disembarking stowaways from ships. It emphasizes the need for co-operation and states that "in normal circumstances, through such co-operation stowaways should, as soon as practicable, be removed from the ship and returned to the country of nationality-citizenship or to the port of embarkation, or to any other country which would accept the stowaway."

The resolution also requested the Facilitation Committee to monitor the effectiveness of the Guidelines; to keep them under review; and to take such further action, including the development of a binding instrument, as may be considered necessary.

In 1998, the Facilitation Committee issued a Circular (FAL.2/Circ.50, revised in 1999 by FAL.2/Circ.50.Rev.1) inviting IMO Member Governments and international organizations in consultative status to provide the Organization with information on stowaway incidents. IMO now issues quarterly reports on stowaway incidents.

Further Information

Piracy and armed robbery against ships

Acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships are of tremendous concern to IMO and to shipping in general. The fight to prevent and suppress these acts is linked to the measures to improve security on ships and in port faciltiies, adopted in December 2002.

The following definition of piracy is contained in article 101 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):

“Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship
or aircraft;
(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts
making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(c) any act inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in sub-paragraph (a) or (b).”

IMO is implementing an anti-piracy project, begun in 1998. Phase one consisted of a number of regional seminars and workshops attended by Governmental representatives from countries in piracy-infested areas of the world; while phase two consisted of a number of evaluation and assessment missions to different regions. Further missions are planned, in agreement with, and upon request by, countries concerned. IMO is taking the lead in the proposed development of regional co-operation activities and agreements/ arrangements.

To assist in anti-piracy measures, IMO issues reports on piracy and armed robbery against ships submitted by Member Governments and international organizations. The reports, which include names and descriptions of ships attacked, position and time of attack, consequences to the crew, ship or cargo and actions taken by the crew and coastal authorities, are now circulated monthly, with quarterly and annual summaries.

IMO has issued the following circulars:

• Revised MSC/Circ.622 Recommendations to Governments for preventing and suppressing piracy and armed robbery against ships suggests possible counter-measures that could be employed by Rescue Co-ordination Centres and security forces. Now also includes draft Regional agreement on co-operation in preventing and suppressing acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships.
• Revised MSC/Circ.623 Guidance to shipowners and ship operators, shipmasters and crews on preventing and suppressing acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships contains comprehensive advice on measures that can be taken onboard to prevent attacks or, when they occur, to minimize the danger to the crew and ship.

In November 2001, the IMO Assembly adopted the Code of Practice for the Investigation of the Crimes of Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships (resolution A.922(22)) as well as Measures to prevent the registration of phantom ships (resolution A.923(22)).

Piracy and armed robbery against ships is dealt with by the Maritime Safety committee (MSC) as well as by the Facilitation Committee.

 

Further information

INFORMATION RESOURCES ON PIRACY AND ARMED ROBBERY AT SEA

INFORMATION RESOURCES ON MARITIME SECURITY

Directives for Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centres (MRCCs)(MSC/Circ.967) - Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centres (MRCCs), in most incidents of piracy and armed robbery against ships, are the first point of contact between the ship and coastal authorities concerned, following the Master's decision to request assistance.

Information Resources on Current Topics

 

Press Briefings

Summary reports of Maritime Safety Committee (MSC)

Summary reports of Facilitation Committee (FAL)

Briefing 17/2001:The number of acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships reported to the IMO during 2000 was up by more than 50 per cent over the equivalent figure for 1999, the Organization’s Maritime Safety Committee was told at its 74th session. The Committee invited all Governments (of flag, port and coastal States) and the industry to intensify their efforts to eradicate to eradicate these unlawful acts.

Briefing 08/2001: A meeting initiated by IMO to address growing concern about the level and severity of attacks in south-east Asia took place in Singapore on 15 and 16 March 2001. It brought together representatives from Asian and Pacific countries that either experience extensive piracy or armed robbery activities in waters off their coasts or which it was felt could play a substantial role in addressing the problem due to their strategic location in relation to the most affected areas.

 

"Places of refuge" - addressing the problem of providing places of refuge to vessels in distress

Images of oiled seabirds with a stricken tanker in the background are, thankfully, rarer than the news media might have the general public believe. Yet when there is an incident, coastal States need to be prepared. The issue of "places of refuge" is one aspect of contingency planning in the consideration of which the rights and interests of coastal States as well as the need to render assistance to vessels that are damaged or disabled or otherwise in distress at sea ought to be taken into account.

In November 2003, the IMO Asembly adopted two resolutions addressing the issue of places of refuge for ships in distress - an important step in assisting those involved in incidents that may lead to the need for a place of refuge to make the right decisions at the right time.

Resolution A.949(23) Guidelines on places of refuge for ships in need of assistanceare intended for use when a ship is in need of assistance but the safety of life is not involved. Where the safety of life is involved, the provisions of the SAR Convention should continue to be followed.

The guidelines recognize that, when a ship has suffered an incident, the best way of preventing damage or pollution from its progressive deterioration is to transfer its cargo and bunkers, and to repair the casualty. Such an operation is best carried out in a place of refuge. However, to bring such a ship into a place of refuge near a coast may endanger the coastal State, both economically and from the environmental point of view, and local authorities and populations may strongly object to the operation.

Therefore, granting access to a place of refuge could involve a political decision which can only be taken on a case-by-case basis. In so doing, consideration would need to be given to balancing the interests of the affected ship with those of the environment.

A second resolution, A.950(23) Maritime Assistance Services (MAS), recommends that all coastal States should establish a maritime assistance service (MAS). The principal purposes would be to receive the various reports, consultations and notifications required in a number of IMO instruments; monitoring a ship's situation if such a report indicates that an incident may give rise to a situation whereby the ship may be in need of assistance; serving as the point of contact if the ship's situation is not a distress situation but nevertheless requires exchanges of information between the ship and the coastal State, and for serving as the point of contact between those involved in a marine salvage operation undertaken by private facilities if the coastal State considers that it should monitor all phases of the operation.

The need to review the issues surrounding the need for places of refuge was included in a list of measures aimed at enhancing safety and minimizing the risk of oil pollution, drawn up in December 2000 in response to the Erika incident of December 1999.

Further urgency to the work came in the aftermath of the incident involving the fully laden tanker Castor which, in December 2000, developed a structural problem in the Mediterranean Sea. In early 2001, IMO Secretary-General Mr. William O'Neil suggested that the time had come for the Organization to undertake, as a matter of priority, a global consideration of the problem of places of refuge for disabled vessels and adopt any measures required to ensure that, in the interests of safety of life at sea and environmental protection, coastal States reviewed their contingency arrangements so that such ships are provided with assistance and facilities as might be required in the circumstances.

The November 2002 sinking of the Prestige further highlighted the issue.

Background on places of refuge
Further information - information resources on places of refuge

Background on places of refuge

The notion of providing refuge for ships in distress was raised at IMO during the late 1980s, when the Legal Committee was considering the draft provisions of the International Convention on Salvage (eventually adopted in 1989). At the time, it was suggested that there should be an obligation on States to admit vessels in distress into their ports. Although this was endorsed by some delegations, others expressed doubt on the desirability of including such a "public law" rule in a private law convention. It was also pointed out that the interests of coastal States would need to be duly taken into account in any such provision. Doubt was also expressed whether such a provision would in fact affect the decisions of the authorities of coastal States in specific cases.

As a result, Article 11 of the Salvage Convention , as eventually adopted, reads: "A State Party shall, whenever regulating or deciding upon matters relating to salvage operations such as admittance to ports of vessels in distress or the provisions of facilities to salvors, take into account the need for co-operation between salvors, other interested parties and public authorities in order to ensure the efficient and successful performance of salvage operations for the purpose of saving life or property in danger as well as preventing damage to the environment in general."

The issue of refuge for ships in need of assistance was brought to the fore again when a working group of IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), established in December 2000 to consider post-Erika safety-related issues, listed "ports of refuge" among the topics selected for further consideration.

Subsequently, in late December 2000-early January 2001, the Castor incident unfolded, resulting in the damaged tanker being towed around the Mediterranean Sea for over a month before a place could be found where a successful lightering operation could be carried out. Soon after, Mr. William A. O'Neil, Secretary-General of IMO at the time, suggested that the time had come for IMO to undertake, as a matter of priority, a global consideration of the problem of stricken vessels in need of assistance and to adopt whatever measures might be required to ensure that such ships could be provided with appropriate assistance and facilities as dictated by the prevailing circumstances.

The issue was discussed at some considerable depth by the MSC in May 2001, when the Committee's attention was drawn to the fact that, although the term "ports of refuge" had been widely used in shipping practice, it did not appear in any of the relevant conventions (eg UNCLOS, SOLAS, Salvage, OPRC, etc.). Use of the word "port" might be too narrow and restrictive vis-à-vis the envisaged scope of the geographical area which might, in case of an emergency, be able to provide facilities and services (including putting in place contingency arrangements) to ships in distress, in particular laden tankers; hence the proposal by the IMO Secretariat to use the wider term "places of refuge". Another term used was "safe haven"; however, since both words denote almost the same thing, the one renders the other redundant and superfluous. The Committee eventually decided to use the term "places of refuge" in its further work on the issue; and advised other IMO Committees (the MEPC and Legal Committee) accordingly.

Ships with structural damage and a dirty or volatile cargo in their tanks are not among the most welcomed visitors in the coastal waters of any State and there is little point in attempting to apportion blame on those who have made decisions to keep stricken ships away from their coastlines. Nonetheless, in some cases, a refusal could result in compounding the problem, which may ultimately result in endangering life, the ship and the environment.

During the debate on places of refuge, the legal issues surrounding this concept were analysed and the question was asked whether a coastal State is under an obligation, or at least is not precluded, under international law, from providing a place (where a ship can be taken when it is disabled, damaged or otherwise in distress and is posing a serious risk of pollution), in order to remove the ship from the threat of danger and undertake repairs or otherwise deal with the situation.

International law recognizes the right of States to regulate entry into their ports (UNCLOS, Article 2, refers to the sovereignty of a coastal State over its land territory, internal waters, archipelagic waters and the territorial sea).

The right of a foreign ship to stop and anchor in cases of force majeure or distress is explicitly referred to by UNCLOS in the case of navigation in the territorial sea (Article 18(2)), straits used for international navigation (Article 39.1(c)) and in archipelagic waters (Article 54).

The right of a foreign ship to enter a port or internal waters of another State in situations of force majeure or distress is not regulated by UNCLOS, although this constitutes an internationally accepted practice, at least in order to preserve human life. This, however, does not preclude the adoption of rules or guidelines complementing the provisions of UNCLOS.

Meanwhile, the right of a coastal State to take action to protect its coastline from marine pollution is well established in international law. Relevant provisions include: UNCLOS, Articles 194, 195, 198, 199, 211, 221, 225; Salvage Convention, Article 9; and Facilitation Convention, Article V(2).

Under longstanding maritime tradition and the practice of good seamanship, the master of a ship faced with a serious emergency is expected to seek shelter to avoid disaster. To some extent the practice is codified in the revised Chapter V of SOLAS, which requires that the owner, the charterer or the company operating the ship or any other person, shall not prevent or restrict the master of the ship from taking or executing any decision which, in the master's professional judgement, is necessary for safe navigation and protection of the marine environment.

Similarly, SOLAS Article IV provides that ships which are not subject to the provisions of the Convention at the time of their departure on any voyage, shall not become subject to the provisions of the Convention on account of any deviation from their intended voyage due to stress of weather or any other case of force majeure.

The duty to render assistance to vessels and persons in distress at sea is a well-established principle of international maritime law (Article 98 of UNCLOS) and SOLAS regulation V/7 requires Governments to ensure that any necessary arrangements are made for distress communication and co-ordination in their area of responsibility and for the rescue of persons in distress at sea round their coasts. These arrangements shall include the establishment, operation and maintenance of such search and rescue facilities as are deemed practicable and necessary, having regard to the density of the seagoing traffic and the navigational dangers and shall, so far as possible, provide adequate means of locating and rescuing such persons.

By focussing more on human life and safety rather than on what is to be done with the ship in cases of force majeure or distress, these provisions do not of themselves give a right of entry to a place of refuge, nor do they explicitly refer to the question of a coastal State's obligation to establish places of refuge. On the other hand, neither do they preclude such a principle.

Given this background, it has proved possible for IMO to develop the Guidelines on places of refuge for ships in need of assistance mentioned earlier on in a manner which retains a proper and equitable balance between the rights and interests of coastal States and the need to render assistance to ships which are damaged or disabled or otherwise in distress at sea.

It would be highly desirable if, taking the IMO Guidelines into account, coastal States designated places of refuge for use when confronted with situations involving ships (laden tankers, in particular) in need of assistance off their coasts and, accordingly, drew up relevant emergency plans, instead of being unprepared to face such situations and, because of that, risking the wrong decision being made by improvising or, in the heat of the moment, acting under pressure from groups representing various interests.

Further information

Information resources on places of refuge

Liability and Compensation Conventions

 

International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 - 23/3/2001

The Convention was adopted to ensure that adequate, prompt, and effective compensation is available to persons who suffer damage caused by spills of oil, when carried as fuel in ships' bunkers.

 

International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS), 1996 - 3/5/1996

The Convention will make it possible for up to 250 million SDR (about US$320 million) to be paid out in compensation to victims of accidents involving HNS, such as chemicals.

 

Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea (PAL), 1974 - 28/4/1987

The Convention is designed to consolidate and harmonize two earlier Brussels conventions dealing with passengers and luggage and adopted in 1961 and 1967 respectively.

 

Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC), 1976 - 1/12/1986

The Convention replaces the International Convention Relating to the Limitation of the Liability of Owners of Seagoing Ships, which was signed in Brussels in 1957, and came into force in 1968.

 

International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (FUND), 1971 - 16/10/1978

The Convention establishes a Fund for providing compensaton for oil pollution incidents beyond that provided for by the CLC Convention.

 

Convention relating to Civil Liability in the Field of Maritime Carriage of Nuclear Material (NUCLEAR), 1971 - 15/7/1975

In 1971 IMO, in association with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the European Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), convened a Conference which adopted a Convention to regulate liability in respect of damage arising from the maritime carriage of nuclear substances.

 

International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC), 1969 - 29/11/1969

The Civil Liability Convention covers those who suffer oil pollution damage resulting from maritime casualties involving oil-carrying ships. The Convention places the liability for such damage on the owner of the ship from which the polluting oil escaped or was discharged.

 

Prevention of Marine Pollution Conventions

 

International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships - 10/10/2001

The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships was adopted in October 2001.

 

Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 (HNS Protocol) - 15/3/2000

The Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances, 2000 (HNS Protocol) follows the principles of the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990 (OPRC) and was formally adopted by States already Party to the OPRC Convention at a Diplomatic Conference held at IMO headquarters in London in March 2000.

 

International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990 - 13/5/1995

In July 1989, a conference of leading industrial nations in Paris called upon IMO to develop further measures to prevent pollution from ships. This call was endorsed by the IMO Assembly in November of the same year and work began on a draft convention aimed at providing a global framework for international co-operation in combating major incidents or threats of marine pollution.

 

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78) - 1/1/1978

The MARPOL Convention is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. It is a combination of two treaties adopted in 1973 and 1978 respectively and updated by amendments through the years.

 

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 - 30/8/1975

The Inter-Governmental Conference on the Convention on the Dumping of Wastes at Sea, which met in London in November 1972 at the invitation of the United Kingdom, adopted this instrument, generally known as the London Convention.

 

International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties, 1969 - 6/5/1975

The Convention affirms the right of a coastal State to take such measures on the high seas as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate danger to its coastline or related interests from pollution by oil or the threat thereof, following upon a maritime casualty. The 1973 Protocol extended the Convention to cover substances other than oil.

 

Maritime Safety Conventions

 

International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F), 1995 - 7/7/1995

The Convention is the first attempt to make standards of safety for crews of fishing vessels mandatory. The revised Document for Guidance on Training and Certification of Fishing Vessel Personnel produced jointly by IMO and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) takes into account the provisions of the STCW-F Convention.

 

International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, 1979 - 22/6/1985

The 1979 Convention, adopted at a Conference in Hamburg, was aimed at developing an international SAR plan, so that, no matter where an accident occurs, the rescue of persons in distress at sea will be co-ordinated by a SAR organization and, when necessary, by co-operation between neighbouring SAR organizations.

 

International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 - 28/4/1984

The 1978 STCW Convention was the first to establish basic requirements on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers on an international level. Previously the standards of training, certification and watchkeeping of officers and ratings were established by individual governments, usually without reference to practices in other countries. As a result standards and procedures varied widely, even though shipping is the most international of all industries.

 

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974 - 25/5/1980

The SOLAS Convention in its successive forms is generally regarded as the most important of all international treaties concerning the safety of merchant ships. The first version was adopted in 1914, in response to the Titanic disaster, the second in 1929, the third in 1948 and the fourth in 1960.

 

Convention on the International Maritime Satellite Organization, 1976 - 16/7/1979

IMO recognised the potential for satellite communications to assist in distress situations at sea soon after the launch of the world's first telecommunications satellite, Telstar, in 1962.

 

International Convention for Safe Containers, 1972 (CSC) - 6/9/1977

In the 1960s, there was a rapid increase in the use of freight containers for the consignment of goods by sea and the development of specialized container ships. In 1967, IMO undertook to study the safety of containerization in marine transport. The container itself emerged as the most important aspect to be considered.

 

Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREGs) - 15/7/1977

The 1972 Convention was designed to update and replace the Collision Regulations of 1960 which were adopted at the same time as the 1960 SOLAS Convention.

 

 

1-7 8 (total 10)

 

(3 Conventions are not listed here. See complete list of conventions for this.)

Other IMO Conventions

 

International Convention on Salvage, 1989 - 14/7/1996

The Convention replaced a convention on the law of salvage adopted in Brussels in 1910 which incorporated the "'no cure, no pay" principle under which a salvor is only rewarded for services if the operation is successful.

 

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988 - 1/3/1992

The main purpose of the convention is to ensure that appropriate action is taken against persons committing unlawful acts against ships. These include the seizure of ships by force; acts of violence against persons on board ships; and the placing of devices on board a ship which are likely to destroy or damage it. The convention obliges Contracting Governments either to extradite or prosecute alleged offenders.

 

International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 - 18/7/1982

The Convention, adopted by IMO in 1969, was the first successful attempt to introduce a universal tonnage measurement system.

 

Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic, 1965 - 5/3/1967

The Convention's main objectives are to prevent unnecessary delays in maritime traffic, to aid co-operation between Governments, and to secure the highest practicable degree of uniformity in formalities and other procedures. In particular, the Convention reduces to just eight the number of declarations which can be required by public authorities.

 

 

1-4 (total 4)