Ref. T1/3.04 Circular letter No.2962 RESTRICTED ... · .9 the International Convention on Tonnage...

I:\C_L\2962.doc

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION 4 ALBERT EMBANKMENT LONDON SE1 7SR Telephone: 020 7735 7611 Fax: 020 7587 3210

IMO

E

Ref. T1/3.04 Circular letter No.2962 29 May 2009

RESTRICTED DISTRIBUTION To: All IMO Member States Subject: Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit herewith audit summary reports numbers 49179, 52070 and 87305 on three audited Member States prepared in accordance with paragraph 8.1.10 of the Framework for the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit (resolution A.974(24)). Consistent with his responsibilities under the Audit Scheme, the Secretary-General will release further audit summary reports as and when they have been agreed with the audited Member States concerned.

***

Circular letter No.2962

I:\C_L\2962.doc

ANNEX 1

AUDIT SUMMARY REPORT ASR No: 49179 BACKGROUND 1 The audit was undertaken using the principles established under the Framework and Procedures for the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme (resolution A.974(24)) and the Code for the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments, 2007 (resolution A.996(25)), hereinafter referred to as the “Code”. 2 Using the above-mentioned Code as the Audit Standard, the following mandatory IMO instruments were covered by the audit for the purpose of determining how the relevant flag State obligations and responsibilities relating to maritime safety and protection of the marine environment are carried out by the audited State:

.1 the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS 1974);

.2 the Protocol of 1978 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at

Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS PROT 1978); .3 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at

Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS PROT 1988); .4 the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as

modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, as amended (MARPOL 73/78); .5 the Protocol of 1997 to amend the International Convention for the Prevention of

Pollution from Ships, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL PROT 1997);

.6 the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and

Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW 1978); .7 the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL 66); .8 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966

(LL PROT 1988); .9 the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969

(TONNAGE 1969); and .10 the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at

Sea, 1972, as amended (COLREG 1972). 3 The State has only flag State obligations and responsibilities.

Circular letter No.2962 ANNEX 1 Page 2

I:\C_L\2962.doc

MEMBER STATE MARITIME ACTIVITIES General 4 The State’s obligations and responsibilities emanating from the mandatory IMO instruments to which it is a Party are carried out by a maritime authority (the Administration), which falls under the authority of the Ministry dealing with economy and external trade. 5 The State’s strategy, which includes strategic choices and a five-year business plan for the Administration appeared supportive of the State’s endeavours to meet its international obligations stemming from the mandatory IMO instruments to which it is Party. The strategy of the Administration rests on a quality system, which has existed for eight years. Commitment to continuous improvement was demonstrated by decisions taken at the management review of the Administration. 6 The requirements of IMO conventions and resolutions are transposed into the State’s national legislation, which is published in the official journal. The State has in place a process for incorporating into the national legislation all amendments to conventions to which it is a Party through the use of State decrees. These are also published on the website of the Administration and all interested parties are informed of any new legislation as well. The audit found that timely transposition of resolutions before their entry-into-force dates was sometimes lacking. 7 With regard to reporting to IMO, currently, the required information is not sent systematically. To address this problem, the Administration is installing a computerized system to handle the texts of IMO instruments, including the identification of reporting requirements. Flag State 8 The Administration is supported by a certification and approval agency with respect to surveys. 9 The Administration has granted authorization for performing surveys and certification of ships entitled to fly its flag to seven recognized organizations (ROs), all of which are IACS members. The Administration provides for a second verification level involving a network of inspectors abroad. The inspectors carry out flag State inspections under specific agreements with the Administration. 10 The Administration continuously exchanges information with ROs and an electronic online access is established to provide certification and survey data concerning its ships. Formal written agreements exist between the Administration and each RO for the performance of statutory duties relating to survey and certification. The agreements with ROs contain very general terms and definitions and have not been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of resolution A.739(18). Monitoring of ROs performance by the Administration is done by analysing the port State control reports, as well as those carried out by its network of inspectors. 11 Port State control reports are entered in the Administration’s database, together with the relevant deficiencies, which provide a mechanism for analysis. Analysis is then done by the State’s certification and approval agency. However, it was noted that these tools are not set up to look for shortcomings in ROs’ activities and it is an area where further progress could be made. Contract renewals and annual granting of access cards to ROs constitute effective ways to monitor ROs.

Circular letter No.2962 ANNEX 1

Page 3

I:\C_L\2962.doc

12 All activities of the Administration are systematically entered in a database. 13 The Administration has in place an annual training scheme for its own personnel and every trained official receives a certificate. Technical advisors of the Administration are master mariners. Criteria of competence for the network of inspectors are close to those required for port State control inspectors. Inspectors recruited worldwide have no decision-making powers; but they are obliged to report to the Administration in cases where they identify serious deficiencies on board ships inspected for decision to be made by the Administration. Although the training of the network of inspectors is monitored and supervised by the Administration, there is a lack of a systematic approach by the Administration with regard to the follow-up and monitoring of the training system of personnel belonging to the certification and approval agency and the network of inspectors. 14 Exemptions are controlled and granted solely by the Administration, whose decision takes into account technical advice from the RO concerned. Exemptions issued under various international conventions were reviewed and it was found that they do not always appear in the Administration’s database. No report was available concerning sanctions applied in connection with violation of the provisions of mandatory instruments. 15 With regard to the STCW Convention, the Administration has selected a list of countries from the White List, which have been recommended by shipowners. Every certificate is verified and endorsements are issued for officers’ certificates. A computer application has been developed to facilitate the processing of applications, including issuing of the endorsements and dispensations; but it is not yet linked with the certificate verification database made available through the IMO website. 16 Safe manning is determined for a period of one year by the Administration on the basis of a proposal submitted by a company. Monitoring of safe manning is performed on three levels: random review of the hours worked over one month by all members of the crew; verification by the network of inspectors of the manning table of the ship and certificates and endorsements; and verification by ROs of certificates and endorsements during ISM audits. 17 The audit found that a mechanism exists for the execution of the State’s obligations and responsibilities with regard to the implementation and enforcement of maritime safety and pollution prevention requirements contained in the mandatory IMO instruments. However, the system could be improved by the development of procedures for the issuance of administrative instructions to implement applicable international rules and regulations and for the development and dissemination of interpretive national regulations. At present, interpretations are issued by ROs on behalf of the State. The audit noted also some cases where instructions were issued to ROs before a formal agreement was finalized with the RO concerned. 18 Casualty investigations are conducted by the accident investigation board, which comprises investigations of air, rail, sea and river casualties. It is an independent body with its own budget and it is answerable to the Ministry responsible for transport. It has the power to decide when an investigation is necessary. New legislation related to casualty investigations was approved in April 2008; but under the State’s Constitution, the old regulations, which are based on the Code for the investigation of marine casualties and incidents, will remain in force for a transitional period until the new regulations come into effect. This period will also allow time for transposition of the new guidelines and the new Code, which is due to enter into force in January 2010. Co-operation with other States in the region is either already agreed or envisaged in the area of casualty investigation and training of investigators.


I:\C_L\2962.doc

19 For casualty investigations sampled, it was evident that they had been entered into the GISIS database. The investigations were conducted by the network of inspectors and the reports made no recommendations for prevention of similar occurrences in the future. This is an area for improving the training system for investigators. Port State n/a Coastal State n/a FINDINGS General Non-conformity None Observation None Flag State Non-conformity 20 The agreements with recognized organizations (ROs) were signed in 1991. Resolution A.739(18) subsequently introduced a number of factors, which are not reflected in these agreements. As a result, the agreements use very general terms and definitions (SOLAS 74, chapter XI-1, regulation 1). Corrective action 21 Considering that annex 2 of resolution A.739(18) already forms an integral part of the State’s legislation currently in force, the Administration will amend the technical provisions contained in the agreements with ROs. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 31 July 2009. Observations (OB) 22 The Administration has no procedure in place for the issuance of administrative instructions to implement applicable international rules and regulations as well as to develop and disseminate any interpretive national regulations that may be needed (Code, part 2, paragraph 16.1).


Page 5

I:\C_L\2962.doc

Corrective action 23 The Administration will improve the existing system of legislative text and circulars by adding text of IMO resolutions and circulars and by clarification of ambiguous terms, such as “to the satisfaction of the Administration”. Appropriate circular letters to this effect will be issued. These circular letters will be placed on the website of the Administration and addressed to the respective organizations, to persons in charge within the Administration and to maritime companies. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 31 July 2009. OB 24 Training for the staff of the certification agency and other similar organizations, who perform surveys, is not formalized under the control of the Administration. Furthermore, a formal process was not in place to inform the Administration of any change of personnel within the network of inspectors, which would facilitate the monitoring and identification of training needs (Code, part 2, paragraphs 34 and 35). Corrective action 25 The Administration has established and maintains a quality system in accordance with the ISO 9001:2008 standard, which requires regular updates of personnel’s records. The Administration will monitor, through that system, individuals recruited externally to carry out specific missions and assure the continuous updating of their knowledge. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 31 July 2009. Port State Non-conformity

n/a Observation

n/a Coastal State Non-conformity

n/a Observation n/a


I:\C_L\2962.doc

Areas of positive development 26 Areas of positive development include:

.1 A well-run certified quality system which encompasses the entire Administration. .2 The Administration has a software program to deal with international legal text,

which is helpful for meeting the requirements of the various mandatory reports and will enable the State to fulfil its reporting obligations.

.3 The network of inspectors constitutes the first step towards achieving a ship

inspection system designed to monitor recognized organizations. Areas for further development 27 Areas for further development:

.1 Training of staff responsible for surveys should be formalized. .2 There is no requirement for the Administration to be informed of changes likely to

occur in the network of inspectors, although the Administration is aware of inspectors’ names at the outset. This leads to problems in carrying out follow-up staff training required under the Code.

.3 The issue still to be resolved by the Administration is whether the arrangements in

place to meet the requirements of resolution A.739(18), which stipulates that flag States must make provision for additional inspections by the Administration to monitor the activities of recognized organizations, are adequate. The Administration has the potential of carrying out inspections to monitor ships, network of inspectors and ROs. However, to ensure that the arrangement is effective, it should deploy its own staff or train a small team.

***


I:\C_L\2962.doc

ANNEX 2

AUDIT SUMMARY REPORT

ASR No: 52070 BACKGROUND 1 The audit was undertaken using the principles established under the Framework and Procedures for the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme (resolution A.974(24)) and the Code for the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments, 2007 (resolution A.996(25)), hereinafter referred to as the “Code”. 2 Using the above-mentioned Code as the Audit Standard, the following mandatory IMO instruments were covered by the audit for the purpose of determining how the relevant flag, port and coastal State obligations and responsibilities relating to maritime safety and protection of the marine environment are carried out by the audited State:






Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, as amended (MARPOL PROT 1997);





Sea, 1972, as amended (COLREG 1972).


I:\C_L\2962.doc

MEMBER STATE MARITIME ACTIVITIES General 3 Most of the obligations and responsibilities of the State emanating from the mandatory IMO instruments to which it is Party are carried out by the Ministry of Transport (MoT). MoT exercises the primary oversight of the maritime administration, which is the statutory body responsible for operational delivery of maritime safety, security, marine environment protection and other related services in all three capacities as flag, port and coastal State. The maritime administration has eight directorates, three of which are established at its headquarters, namely: administrative, legal and financial; international relations and projects; and quality management and inspections. Four regional directorates work within the limits of their territorial competence and a search and rescue directorate is established in one of the seaports of the State. 4 MoT has a 10-year Master Plan, which has been in place since 2005, with main emphasis on developing rail and road transport, an intermodal transport system, upgrading river transport system, port development, development of short sea shipping, etc. However, it was observed that the State does not have an explicit strategy for meeting its overall obligations and responsibilities contained in the mandatory IMO instruments to which it is a Party. 5 The State has in place a complex legislative and regulatory process for bringing into force treaties and amendments thereto, both for primary (laws or codes) and secondary legislation (ordinances). Primary and secondary legislations, once adopted or approved, are promulgated in the State Gazette to give full force of law. International law is incorporated into national legislation based on the Law on International Treaties and the Law on Legislative Acts of the State and has primacy over any conflicting provision of the domestic legislation. Overall, no systematic approach was identified for promulgating various amendments to mandatory IMO instruments (SOLAS, MARPOL, LL, etc.) and various Codes (LSA, FSS, etc.). It was established that the complex regulatory process could delay the timely incorporation of amendments to conventions into the national law. 6 The State does not always report to IMO as required by several mandatory instruments. The maritime administration has established a documented procedure, within its quality management system, defining the controls needed for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, retention time and disposal of records. However, the records were not always readily identifiable or retrievable. Flag State 7 The maritime administration is the main entity responsible for the implementation of all mandatory IMO instruments. Four other Ministries and regional governors have joint responsibilities at the interagency level in relation to the implementation of some mandatory IMO instruments. However, it was not possible to identify appropriate links between the maritime administration and those Ministries. 8 The Administration began delegating statutory functions and certification services for ships flying the flag of the State to recognized organizations (ROs) in 2004. This delegation was based on the 2002 amendments to its Merchant Shipping Code and secondary law, which is based on resolution A.739(18). Since 2004, six ROs, five of which are classification societies, have been authorized to act on behalf of the Administration and authorizations are documented in individual


Page 3

I:\C_L\2962.doc

agreements. Surveys required under the conventions are fully delegated to ROs except for ISM, TONNAGE and ISPS certification. The process could be further improved by timely reporting to IMO the specific responsibilities and authority delegated to ROs. Furthermore, the agreements with ROs should be reviewed to ensure full compliance with the requirements of the relevant IMO resolutions. 9 For the monitoring and oversight of ROs, the Administration maintains a biennial audit programme. However, it was established that audits of several ROs have not been carried out in accordance with the programme. The evidence that detentions of ships by foreign port State control authorities are properly and timely investigated with reference to RO related deficiencies was not easily retrievable. ROs are obliged, through the Memorandum of Agreement, to report to the Administration for further action, all cases where serious deficiencies have been identified on board ships flying the flag of the State. 10 Plan approval and oversight of ROs are dealt with by the head office and two of the regional offices. Oversight of ship inspections and surveys, search and rescue (SAR) and pollution prevention are dealt with by the regional directorates. It was evident that the head office of the Administration was unable to exercise an effective oversight programme due to lack of adequate number of qualified personnel. 11 The Administration recognizes equipment approved by other Administrations. Presently, the Administration has not authorized any organization to perform equipment type approval. The Administration interprets the phrase “to the satisfaction of the Administration” on a case-by-case basis. However, applicable guidance on the interpretation of such phrase for any mandatory IMO instrument was not available during the audit. 12 The Administration carries out inspections of ships in accordance with the procedures set out in the survey guidelines under the harmonized system of survey and certification. Implementation and enforcement process, as well as measures to be undertaken with regard to flag State control, follow the rules contained in the national law. In exercising control over ships and shipowners, the inspectors have written procedures. The process within the Administration for monitoring the validity of the statutory certificates issued solely by the Administration for ships engaged on international voyages was found to be insufficient. 13 There is no written internal procedure or clear instructions concerning the issuance of exemption from the requirements of mandatory IMO instruments. Requests for exemption or equivalence are to be notified by the relevant RO to the Administration for evaluation and decision on the application. 14 The Administration has implemented various enforcement measures through national legislation, including administrative penalties and suspension of licences. Although sampled cases confirmed the commitment of the Administration, it was also observed that the system is not yet effective enough to ensure full compliance of ships with the mandatory IMO instruments. 15 Tonnage certificates are issued by two regional directorates of the Administration, based mainly on the calculations carried out by an RO, although this has not been fully delegated to ROs. Oversight of ROs tonnage calculations is said to be conducted by the regional offices; but there was no record available to confirm such oversight programme.


I:\C_L\2962.doc

16 In the area of implementation of the STCW Convention, there are five maritime institutions providing courses leading to deck officers and engineers competencies for the merchant marine. The training colleges conduct education, training and examination themselves under the supervision of the Administration. Issuance of certificates of competency is done by the regional directorates.

17 The recruitment criteria as well as the qualification and professional requirements for inspectors and port State control officers (PSCOs) are detailed in national legislation. The main requirements for inspectors and PSCOs include recognized degree in navigation, marine engineering, naval architecture or ships radio-electronics and communications, together with five years of seagoing service in an operational or management level, or other work experience. It was however observed that in a single case the above criteria were not strictly followed. 18 The investigation and analysis of marine casualties are regulated in the national legislation and promulgated in the State Gazette, which entered into force in January 2006. The ordinance fully transposed the requirements of the Code for the investigation of marine casualties and incidents. 19 The competent authority for investigation of marine accidents is a division within the MoT, which integrates accident investigations of land, air, sea and inland transport. The division did not have sufficient number of qualified marine investigators, which has a bearing on the systematic conduct of maritime accident investigations. The division receives daily information from the emergency response centre on situation in ports and in territorial waters. 20 Investigations conducted by the division, as provided for in the ordinance, are conducted in an impartial and independent way and do not aim at establishing blame or responsibility. The unit reports, including investigation reports, are provided directly to the Minister of Transport. However, reporting to IMO is still an area to be improved. Reports contain recommendations for prevention of future accidents and addressees are obliged to implement those recommendations without delay. 21 The competent authority in respect of dangerous cargo in the State is the Administration. It was noted that the full responsibility on transporting radioactive materials (Class 7) lies with another entity of the State. There is a documented procedure within the Administration in respect of approval, construction and testing of pressure vessels, approval of other packaging materials and procedure for road transport. Port State 22 The competent authority responsible for port State control activities is the maritime administration. Rights and obligations of the State in fulfilling its commitments as a port State are laid down in the Merchant Shipping Code and Ordinance on port State control. In addition, a documented procedure within the quality management system is in place to assist inspectors in carrying out their duties as PSCOs. In all cases of detention of foreign ships, reports of inspection are reviewed by the maritime administration.

23 Besides the general qualification requirements for inspectors, all PSCOs are also required to have at least one-year experience as a surveyor. There is a requirement for PSCOs to maintain their level of competence through periodic assessments; but there was no objective evidence of evaluation at the time of the audit. With regard to the training of inspectors, it was revealed that there is no systematic and documented training programme for new entrant PSCOs, as well as no in-service


Page 5

I:\C_L\2962.doc

training requirements for experienced PSCOs. The training of PSCOs is based on the availability of training seminars organized by regional port State control regimes, instead of the actual training needs of each PSCO. 24 Responsibilities for ensuring effective port reception facilities (PRF) for MARPOL Annexes are divided between the maritime administration and the Ministry dealing with environment and waters (MoE). MoE has overall oversight of substances that are removed from ships. 25 The MoE has established criteria for assessing PRF and only grants certification to those that meet the criteria. A randomly selected PRF was visited during the audit and was found to have a modern plant, capable of handling waste oil, garbage and sewage. 26 The maritime administration has procedures in place for control of the quality of the marine fuel on board of the ships in the State’s territorial waters, including testing of fuel samples in an accredited laboratory. However, the system could be improved with regard to maintaining a list of approved bunker suppliers. Coastal State 27 Coastal State obligations are shared between MoT and the Navy. MoT is primarily responsible for enforcement of obligations arising under SOLAS chapters IV and V for radio communications, SAR including MRCC and VTS. 28 Aids to navigation, including maintaining of lighthouses and buoys within the territorial waters, issuance of Navigational Warnings and Notices to Mariners and hydrographic services are the responsibilities of the Navy. State-owned company on port infrastructure is responsible for maintaining aids to navigation within the ports and their approaches. 29 The State has separate entities responsible for meteorological services and for broadcasting of meteorological information. FINDINGS General Nonconformities (NC) 30 There was no objective evidence that the State transposed and promulgated all amendments to mandatory IMO instruments into national legislation, which would give such amendments the force of law (SOLAS 1974, Article 1 and regulations III/3.10 (LSA Code), II-2/3.22 (FSS Code), II-1 /3-6.4; MARPOL 73/78, Article 1, Annex II, chapter 2, regulation 6.1; COLREG amendments, resolution A.910(22)). Corrective Action 31 The maritime administration will issue orders implementing all amendments to the annexes to mandatory IMO instruments, including mandatory codes, which are not promulgated in the State Gazette, no later than 1 June 2010. The inter-agency coordination body, to be established within the State, will make a proposal for approval of mechanism for timely enforcement of all amendments to the mandatory IMO instruments, which enter into force for the State, with planned completion date


I:\C_L\2962.doc

set for 1 January 2011. A report, on behalf of the Minister of Transport to the Council of Ministers on the provision of administrative capacity and financial resources for activities related to the translation and promulgation of amendments to mandatory IMO instruments, will be drafted and completed by 30 September 2009. NC 32 It was established that the State did not always report to IMO as required by several mandatory instruments (SOLAS regulations I/21(b), I/19(d), I/6(b) and IV/5.2; STCW 78, article X(3); MARPOL Article III, Annex I, regulation 6.3.2 and Annex II, regulation 8.2.4). Corrective Action 33 The directorate in charge of accident investigation will submit investigation report of any serious and very serious accident at sea to the IMO not later than two months after the publication of the official report. The maritime administration shall submit to the IMO, not later than 1 May 2009, information on the detained foreign-flagged ships in its ports under the PSC regime and amend accordingly the existing quality procedure, in order to include the requirements for submission of information on the detained foreign-flagged ships to IMO. The maritime administration will submit to IMO the missing information on ROs not later than 1 October 2009, and the missing information on the recent changes to the shore-based facilities in the Maritime Mobile Service and Maritime Mobile-Satellite Service established for sea areas, which the State has designated off its coasts, not later than 1 August 2009. Observations (OB) 34 It was established that the State has no strategy for meeting its overall obligations and responsibilities contained in the mandatory IMO instruments to which it is a Party. This was evidenced by the lack of documentation setting out the strategy; absence of continuous review and verification of the effectiveness of the State in respect of its international obligations; and the overall organizational performance and capability had not been accessed (Code, part 1, paragraph 3). Corrective Action 35 To achieve full compliance, maintain and enhance the State’s ability to fully meet its obligations under the mandatory IMO instruments, planned corrective action includes:

.1 Drafting and implementing a maritime safety and marine pollution prevention strategy based on the mandatory IMO instruments to which the State is Party. The maritime administration will draft and submit for approval to the inter-agency coordination body, to be established by the State, a strategy for achieving a high level of safety of its ships, as well as criteria for assessment of fulfilment of the obligations under the mandatory IMO instruments. The maritime administration will also draft and submit to the Council of Ministers a report on the measures necessary for the provision of the maritime administration with adequate administrative capacity, the attraction of highly qualified and experienced professionals, and improvement of their remuneration. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 May 2010.


Page 7

I:\C_L\2962.doc

.2 A mechanism will be developed through which the Ministry of Transport will monitor and evaluate the activity of the maritime administration related to the fulfilment of the obligations under the mandatory IMO instruments. The maritime administration will submit an annual report to the Minister of Transport on its assessment of maritime safety and protection of the marine environment activities based on approved criteria for their achievement. The report will be drafted in accordance with the form to be approved by the Minister of Transport, and accompanied by proposal for corrective measures. The report will be submitted not later than the 1st of March each year. The deadline for approval of the form of the report is 1 December 2010.

.3 An inter-agency coordination body dealing with maritime safety and marine

pollution prevention from ships will be established by a government decree. The interagency coordination body, which will report to the Minister of Transport, will comprise deputy ministers of the ministries involved and will carry out consultations, coordination and cooperation between the legal entities and natural persons engaged in the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments. The inter-agency coordination body will be tasked to approve the strategy for maritime safety and marine environment protection; monitor and coordinate the activities of the institutions involved in fulfilling the obligations under the respective mandatory IMO instruments. The interagency coordination body will draft mandatory guidelines for the respective institutions, based on the assessment of maritime safety and marine environment protection activities aiming at improving the performance of these institutions. It will also draft and enforce a mechanism for incorporation into national legislation of all amendments to the applicable mandatory IMO instruments to which the State is Party. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 October 2009.

OB 36 During the audit, it was established that on several occasions the records were not readily identifiable and retrievable (Code, part 1, paragraph 10). Corrective Action 37 All employees of the relevant departments of regional directorates shall be required to submit copies of all certificates obtained from training courses not later than 31 March 2009. Personnel files of the maritime administration employees will be checked and updated as necessary. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 October 2009. Ship files related to surveys performed, which are maintained in regional directorates, will be checked to verify and ensure the availability of all required documents. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 December 2009. All employees in the survey departments of regional directorates will become familiar with ships’ surveys findings and the maintenance of related records through a special refresher course. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 May 2009.


I:\C_L\2962.doc

Flag State Non-conformity 38 It was established that the Administration does not satisfactorily comply with the requirements of the mandatory IMO instruments concerning the authorization of organizations to act on its behalf (SOLAS 74, regulations I/6 and XI-1/1; MARPOL, Annex I, regulation 6; Annex II, regulation 8; Annex IV, regulation 4; Annex VI, regulation 5; LL 66, Article 13 and resolutions A.739(18) and A.789(18)). Corrective Action 39 The Administration will analyse all agreements concluded with ROs. Where necessary, the Administration will amend existing agreements to bring them in conformity with the mandatory requirements, or in the absence of an agreement, one will be concluded with the RO concerned. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 October 2009. Observations (OB) 40 It was established that guidance or interpretation concerning those requirements found in several mandatory IMO instruments that are to the satisfaction, discretion or opinion of the Administration are not provided. There is no written procedure or clear instructions concerning the evaluation and approval of requests submitted for exemptions from the requirements of SOLAS, as well as the issuance of relevant exemption certificates (Code, part 2, paragraphs 16.1 and 16.5). Corrective Action 41 A quality procedure will be drafted on interpretation and implementation of the provisions of all relevant mandatory IMO instruments, which grants discretion to the Administration to decide on approvals and exemptions from the application of certain requirements. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 September 2009. OB 42 The oversight programme established by the Administration for the monitoring of its ROs is not always properly implemented (Code, part 2, paragraph 20). Corrective Action 43 The approved schedule for audits of ROs every two years and meetings with them shall be strictly observed. The organization of the Administration’s activity emanating from the mandatory IMO instruments and the maintained documentation thereto will be analysed. A mechanism for optimization will be drafted, aiming at systematization of the maintained documentation, which must be easily and quickly accessible and retrievable. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 October 2009.


Page 9

I:\C_L\2962.doc

OB 44 It was established that measures to secure observance of international rules and standards by ships entitled to fly the flag of the State in order to ensure compliance by the Administration with its international obligations could not be demonstrated (Code, part 2, paragraphs 21.1 and 21.2). Corrective Action 45 The procedure dealing with carrying out surveys of ships and issuing documents to the ships will be amended not later than 1 June 2009, in order to include the control over the validity of the certificates issued by the Administration. When the new register of ships is implemented, a module, which monitors and informs of the expiry of ships’ certificates, will be activated. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 June 2010. OB 46 It was established that the State does not always ensure that qualified technical personnel (surveyors/inspectors) are recruited and it does not have a systematic and documented training programme for new entrants as well as updating of the knowledge of existing technical personnel (Code, part 2, paragraphs 28, 35, 36.5, 36.7; part 4, paragraph 56). Corrective Action 47 Analysis of the training of inspectors from relevant departments of the regional directorates and evaluation of the need for additional training will be included in the Administration’s annual activity report. The identified areas of additional training will be laid down in the Administration’s Annual Plan for Staff Training in accordance with the existing procedure. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 January 2010. Workshops on amendments to mandatory IMO instruments will be planned and organized annually for inspectors tasked with PSC inspections and ships’ surveys and certification. OB 48 During the audit it could not be established that lessons learned, following accident investigation, had been identified in order to prevent reoccurrence of such an accident and if the results of such investigations were made public (Code, part 2, paragraph 40). Corrective Action 49 The directorate in charge of accident investigation will publish the reports from accidents investigated in the national and English languages on the official website of the Ministry of Transport, as provided for in the relevant Ordinance. The report will be published ten days after a draft is completed.


I:\C_L\2962.doc

Port State Non-conformities (NC) 50 Reception facilities required by MARPOL Annex II are not available within the State, although the ports handle such cargoes (MARPOL 73/78, Annex II, chapter 8, regulation 18.1). Corrective Action 51 The interagency coordination body will organize the assessment of the issue related to reception facilities regulated by MARPOL Annex II and will draft a plan for these facilities to become fully compliant with the respective requirements of the MARPOL Convention. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 31 December 2010. Adequate reception facilities conforming to the approved plan will be set up. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 31 December 2013. NC 52 There was no objective evidence that the State maintains a list of local suppliers of fuel oil to ships (MARPOL 73/78, Annex VI, regulation 18(7)(a)). Corrective Action 53 The maritime administration, through the ministry in charge of environment, will require the ship suppliers association to present updated list of the local suppliers of fuel oil to ships, as well as to inform the maritime administration of any subsequent changes to the list. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 September 2009 and continuously thereafter. The maritime administration will submit to IMO the list of the authorized local suppliers of fuel oil to ships and a quotation of the national legislation regulating this matter not later than 31 December 2009. Observation

None Coastal State Non-conformity 54 There was no evidence to suggest that the State carries out periodic exercises to test the effectiveness of passenger ship search and rescue co-operation plans (SOLAS 74, regulation V/7.3). Corrective Action 55 The maritime administration will amend the existing quality procedure in order to include a provision for the documentation of the periodic exercises on search and rescue with passenger ships. The deadline for the implementation of this action is 1 June 2009.


Page 11

I:\C_L\2962.doc

Observation

None Areas of positive development 56 Areas of positive development include:

.1 The State maintains an effective port State control programme. .2 The one reception facility visited has a modern plant and is capable of handling

waste oil, garbage and sewage. .3 The maritime administration’s personnel are dedicated and devoted to achieve

conformity with the requirements of the mandatory IMO instruments with available resources.

.4 The maritime administration maintains a quality management system certified

to ISO 9001:2000. .5 Pollution prevention inspectors at regional directorates of the maritime

administration are well trained to discharge their duties properly.

Areas for further development 57 Areas for further development include:

.1 National FSI training program should be organized in order to update knowledge of all stakeholders involved in the State maritime activities.

.2 The Ministry of Transport should develop a strategy to meet the objectives of the

mandatory IMO instruments and establish an effective system to review and verify activities of the maritime administration.

.3 Additional qualified staff should be provided to the accident investigating unit in

order to carry out investigations promptly. .4 It is recommended to provide additional properly qualified staff at maritime

administration’s head office and its regional offices for effective implementation of the mandatory IMO instruments. Some of the audit findings could be due to lack of resources including manpower. A study should be done to identify areas where an increase in resources could contribute to improvement.

.5 Review of trends and statistical data for the merchant fleet would improve oversight

and understanding of strategies to improve the performance of the fleet. .6 Since instructions are forwarded in national language and the responsibility of

translations lies with individual ROs, there could be inconsistencies on the application by ROs of specific instructions.


I:\C_L\2962.doc

.7 Assessments procedure should be adopted to determine trend analysis to ensure that reception facilities under the MARPOL Convention remain adequate for future demands.

.8 The legislative and regulatory processes could be refined to avoid delay in the timely

transposition of some amendments to the mandatory IMO instruments. Also the effectiveness of current procedures should be revisited to ensure that the tacit amendments to the instruments are fully implemented.

.9 Review the current follow up arrangements to ensure the timely examination of

national ships detained by port States. .10 A control and monitoring procedure should be developed and implemented in order

to provide for the collection of statistical data so that trend analyses can be conducted to identify problem area and provide a timely response to deficiencies and alleged pollution incidents by its ships as reported by port and coastal States.

.11 Procedures should be developed to apply the vague expression “to the satisfaction of

the Administration” as contained in the various mandatory IMO instruments. .12 The Administration should document its evaluation and review process of

organizational objectives in a more formal manner to improve its ability to assess the overall performance, which will assist them to improve the delivery of its flag State responsibilities.

.13 Effective communication systems between all stakeholders responsible for the

mandatory IMO instruments should be developed to ensure promulgated policies or standards are implemented consistently.

.14 Hydrographic facilities should be upgraded and the appropriate officials should be

trained to carry out better hydrographic services.

***


I:\C_L\2962.doc

ANNEX 3

AUDIT SUMMARY REPORT

ASR No: 87305 BACKGROUND 1 The audit was undertaken using the principles established under the Framework and Procedures for the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme (resolution A.974(24)) and the Code for the implementation of mandatory IMO instruments, 2007 (resolution A.996(25)), hereinafter referred to as the “Code”. 2 Using the above-mentioned Code as the Audit Standard, the following mandatory IMO instruments were covered by the audit for the purpose of determining how the relevant flag, port and coastal State obligations and responsibilities relating to maritime safety and protection of the marine environment are carried out by the audited State:






Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL PROT 1997);





Sea, 1972, as amended (COLREG 1972).


I:\C_L\2962.doc

MEMBER STATE MARITIME ACTIVITIES General 3 The State has in place a clear mechanism for bringing mandatory IMO instruments and amendments thereto into force through national law. Whilst there is some delay when Parliamentary approval is required for legislation, this does not appear to have an adverse effect on the State’s overall ability to effectively implement and enforce its international maritime obligations on the entry-into-force dates of amendments. This is accomplished through prior legislation adopting the original treaty instrument, which provides for Marine Orders to be issued for technical requirements subject to the IMO tacit acceptance procedures and specific regulations implementing other IMO treaties adopted by Parliament, except for some MARPOL amendments. 4 The audit established that the maritime administration has a corporate plan for the period 2008-2011 and has undertaken reviews to improve their overall organizational performance as well as compliance with mandatory IMO instruments at the national, departmental and organizational levels. Long-term objectives are established to promote continuous improvements in the areas of ship safety, environmental protection and response, safety of navigation, search and rescue and they are communicated through the annual corporate report of the maritime safety authority (MSA) and other supporting organization plans. Measures based on pollution incidents, port State control results, ship deficiencies and marine casualty incidents are used to determine trends. 5 The audit further established that the State has in place an overall strategy to meet its obligations and responsibilities as a maritime administration under the various mandatory IMO instruments. These measures confirm compliance with the Code, part 1, paragraph 3. Flag State 6 The maritime safety authority (MSA) is the governmental organization primarily responsible for the implementation and enforcement of safety and environmental protection obligations and responsibilities emanating from the mandatory IMO instruments to which the State is Party. There are other specialized governmental entities for the implementation of specialized functions contained in the applicable mandatory instruments, such as hydrographic services, casualty investigation and search and rescue. The division of responsibilities and authority between MSA and the other entities is defined in national laws and/or in interagency memorandums of agreement/understanding. 7 The Administration has authorized seven recognized organizations (ROs), which have signed a formal agreement with the Administration. The agreements are in accordance with resolutions A.739(18) and A.789(19). All ROs are full members of IACS. The Administration also has minimum criteria for authorizing RO and it conducts independent quality system audits on all seven ROs. The Administration has the option of attending as observers at one IACS quality audit of an RO and it conducts onboard oversight of RO performance. 8 The Administration has in place adequate procedures for the revocation or suspension of Seafarer’s certificates and documents for acts of negligence or misconduct relating to the performance of duties. Monetary fines and criminal offences are dealt with by the appropriate department of the government.


Page 3

I:\C_L\2962.doc

9 Equivalences and exemptions are handled directly by the Administration. Type approval to IMO standards is accepted from Parties to the treaty concerned and equipment approval has been delegated to ROs. 10 Evaluation and issuance of Safe Manning Certificate is the responsibility of the Administration, which applies resolution A.890(21) in determining manning levels. 11 The Administration has in place adequate measures for planning, organizing and the management of all training of marine surveyors. There are written procedures for employing new personnel/surveyors that include an assessment of their qualifications and a training and qualification process to attain certification as a surveyor. The qualifications required for surveyors are in conformity with the principles set out in the Code, part 2, paragraphs 27 to 37. 12 An independent agency established by national law is responsible for accident investigation. The agency, which is functionally under the same governmental department as MSA, report annually to Parliament. The agency has statutory obligations to carry out investigations, without blame, to:

.1 arrive at findings as to their causes and contributing factors; .2 identify safety deficiencies and to make recommendations designed to eliminate or

reduce any such safety deficiencies; and .3 report publicly on its investigations and findings.

13 The accident investigation obligations and responsibilities of the State are carried out effectively and consistent with the Code, part 2, paragraphs 38 to 41. Port State 14 MSA is responsible for port State control (PSC). The State is a member of PSC MoUs. The IMO procedures for PSC have been adopted into national law. All PSC inspection reports are forwarded to the Head office of MSA and are reviewed by the appropriate division, which retains exclusive authority for their final entry of detentions into the MoU databases. Information to flag State and ROs, in case of detention, is done directly by the PSCO or the regional office concerned after a detention. 15 Training and qualification of PSC officers are carried out in accordance with IMO and MoU guidelines using a fixed qualification scheme. 16 MSA liaises with the port industry to address port waste reception facilities and has recently implemented a programme of waste reception facility gap analyses for individual ports. These gap analyses are based on resolution MEPC.83(44). A Marine Notice has been issued to inform the shipping industry of MEPC/Circ.469/Rev.1 and MEPC/Circ.470, and MSA has investigated several reports received and reported back to the flag State and IMO accordingly. Coastal State 17 The State effectively discharges all of its coastal State obligations through a number of governmental entities who share coastal State responsibilities according to SOLAS chapters IV


I:\C_L\2962.doc

and V. MSA acts as the lead agency for legal and regulatory authority with respect to the fulfilment of coastal State responsibilities under the mandatory IMO instruments. 18 The State has fully operational equipment and systems for GMDSS. MSA, in collaboration with the defence force and police, provides outstanding search and rescue (SAR) services. The modus operandi between the three entities is detailed in a formal agreement. There are also contracts with civilian entities for the provision of SAR asset and assistance. 19 Maritime safety information broadcast is in place and effective. MSA has ultimate responsibility for the provision of aids to navigation (AtoN) within territorial waters, whilst the local government and port authorities are responsible for inland and ports AtoNs. 20 Hydrograhic services are provided through the Navy and the State’s Hydrograhic Service. 21 The audit established that coastal State responsibilities were carried consistent with the requirement of the mandatory IMO instrument concerned. FINDINGS General Non-conformity None Observation None Flag State Non-conformity None Observation 22 An evaluation of the manning for an FPSO was conducted in accordance with A.890(21) but without the use of MSA form 1018 as specified in MSA’s own internal instructions (Code, part 1, paragraph 10 and part 2, paragraph 16.5). Corrective action 23 Instead of using the Administrations form, the full resolution A.890(21), as amended, will continue to be used to determine if a manning proposal submitted by a shipping company meets the requirements. The Administration will remove the “aide-memoire” form from its computer system and revise the “Safe Manning Assessment” procedure to reflect that resolution A.890(21), as amended, is utilized.


Page 5

I:\C_L\2962.doc

Port State Non-conformities (NC) 24 The State is a Party to all Annexes of MARPOL. Although it has all the national arrangements and legislation in place for the implementation of MARPOL 73/78, its national legislation has no provisions for port reception facilities. Even though it was observed that there are many port reception facilities commercially in operation, the State can not enforce the provisions of MARPOL 73/78 regarding port reception facilities at the national level (MARPOL, Articles 1(1) and 11(1)(a)). Corrective action 25 Given the existing arrangements where, under the Constitution, the central government shares responsibility for regulating shipping with the States and other Constitutionally established regions, the maritime authority will include waste reception facilities as part of its ongoing discussions with the States and other regions. They will be encouraged to develop appropriate legislation. The maritime authority will work with the responsible government department to ensure that the possibility of national legislation for waste reception facilities is considered as part of future work on developing a single national jurisdiction for the operational standards of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, as amended (MARPOL 73/78). NC 26 Although the State is a Party to Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78, there was no evidence to show that ports and terminals within the State had reception facilities or services for Annex VI of MARPOL 73/38 (MARPOL, Article 17(1)). Corrective action 27 Details of waste reception facilities, which are available in 52 ports and are considered sufficient for the time being in relation to the exhaust gas cleaning residues, are published in the form of a booklet on waste reception facilities and are also reproduced on the maritime authority’s website and included in the IMO GISIS database. The next edition of the booklet will be produced in early 2009 and will include reference to the availability of facilities to receive exhaust gas cleaning residues. The booklet will be reviewed and updated each year. Observation None Coastal State Non-conformity None Observation None


I:\C_L\2962.doc

Areas of positive development 28 Areas of positive development include:

.1 The State participates in various outreach activities with the maritime community to stimulate a culture for the improvement of safety and environmental protection (Code, part 1, paragraph 12).

.2 MSA has implemented a risk based decision making approach that anticipates areas

of potential process failures and internally reallocates resources as a preventative measure. This system provides a unique anticipatory methodology that utilizes leading indicators (Code, part 1, paragraph 14).

.3 MSA has a fully integrated approach for maritime search and rescue and other coastal

State responsibilities. MSAs programs and personnel provide an excellent source of knowledge and experience to other Member States that are seeking to develop or enhance their own abilities in the area of coastal State responsibilities.

.4 MSA’s Internet-based flag and port State control targeting program utilizes all

available data to measure and monitor ship activity and assigns control measures in a fair and transparent manner that promotes safety and environmental protection while facilitating commerce.

.5 The casualty investigation system greatly benefits from national legislation that

protects the use of investigatory reports and materials from use in punitive actions against companies and individuals. This overarching legal framework allows for analysis of the full spectrum of potential causal factors in a non-attribution atmosphere, which promotes full disclosure of key facts.

Areas for further development 29 Areas for further development include:

.1 SOLAS chapter 1, regulation 6 provides that when an Administration requests that a ship flying its flag be detained by a port State authority, that port State shall give necessary assistance and ensure that the ship shall not sail until it can proceed to sea, or leave port for the purpose of proceeding to the appropriate repair yard without danger to the ship or the persons on board. Although the State would likely detain the ship pending verification of the alleged deficiencies by its surveyors, this conditional detention process could be improved to align it more closely with the intent of SOLAS.

.2 SOLAS chapter V, regulation 7, regarding search and rescue service, refers to several

resolutions (i.e. A.225(VII), A.530(13), A.616(15), A.894(21)) that are not mandatory. Although the State implements these resolutions in practice, there are no provisions in national legislation that memorialize this as official practice.

____________

Ref. T1/3.04 Circular letter No.2962 RESTRICTED ... · .9 the International Convention on Tonnage...

Documents

Transcript of Ref. T1/3.04 Circular letter No.2962 RESTRICTED ... · .9 the International Convention on Tonnage...