PORT STATE CONTROL An update on IMOs work in 2003 GENERAL 1 This document contains information based on the outcome

of the eleventh session of the Sub-Committee on Flag State Implementation (FSI) held from 7 to 11 April 2003, the seventy-seventh session of the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) held from 28 May to 6 June 2003 and the forty-ninth session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) held from 14 to 18 July 2003, as far as PSC activities are concerned. OUTCOME OF FSI 11 Measures to enhance maritime security 2 Following the 2002 Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security, which adopted amendments to the SOLAS Convention and a new International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) in December last year, FSI 11 noted that in pursuance of Conference resolution 3 on Further work by the International Maritime Organization pertaining to the enhancement of maritime security, MSC 76 had instructed the Sub-Committee to give preliminary consideration to: .1 the review of the Procedures for port State control (resolution A.787(19) as amended by resolution A.882(21)) and, if found necessary, the development of appropriate amendments thereto; and the need and, if necessary, the development of any other guidance or guidelines to ensure the global, uniform and consistent implementation of the provisions of SOLAS chapter XI-2 or part A of the ISPS Code.

.2

3 The Sub-Committee considered the issue of developing global guidelines to assist PSC authorities in the conduct of port State control inspections relating to the ISPS Code and agreed that in order to facilitate a harmonized and consistent approach to PSC inspections and to enhance the preparedness of the shipping industry, there was a need to develop such global guidelines, which would be assisted by the work being carried out by regional PSC agreements and other authorities. 4 The Sub-Committee was informed by the delegation of the United States that they were developing recommendations on PSC activities with respect to the ISPS Code; by the delegation of the United Kingdom of development in the Paris MoU which had established a dedicated task force on this matter; and by the delegations of Japan and Argentina on recent discussions of the matter in both the Asia-Pacific MoU and Via del Mar Agreement respectively. 5 Having discussed the issue of the preparation of global guidelines before the 1 July 2004 entry into force date for the new SOLAS chapter XI-2 and the ISPS Code and the possibility to progress the work intersessionally, taking into account the foreseen establishment of a working group on security matters at MSC 77, FSI 11 decided not to establish an intersessional correspondence group and invited Members to submit proposals on global guidelines for PSC
/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-2authorities for the conduct of inspection in the context of the ISPS Code to FSI 12 (15 to 19 March 2004) for consideration. Unique IDs for shipowning and shipmanagement companies 6 FSI 11 considered the proposal for the adoption by the Organization of an IMO company number, similar to the ship identification number. The proposed IMO company number would also be issued by Lloyds Register Fairplay free of charge using the same electronic form method as for the IMO ship identification number and be made available, through current data services, to maritime and other regulatory authorities including PSC agreements. 7 Being convinced of the benefits of developing a unique IDs for shipowning and shipmanagement companies for maritime safety and maritime security purposes, FSI 11 recommended to MSC 77 that a high priority item on Unique IDs for companies and registered owners be included in the Sub-Committees work programme, with a target completion date of 2005, and in the provisional agenda for FSI 12. IMO number on ships plans, manuals and documents 8 FSI 11, having considered a proposal that ships plans, manuals and other documents required by the various IMO Conventions to be marked with the IMO ship identification number for maritime safety and maritime security purposes, since the IMO number on ships plan could also be of assistance for identifying that such information, which is required to be on board the ship, relates to the ship in question and for the conduct of investigative measures, recommended to MSC 77 that a high priority item on Marking ships plan, manuals and other documents with the IMO ship identification number should be included in the Sub-Committees work programme, with the target completion date of 2005 and in the provisional agenda for FSI 12. Reports on regional PSC agreements 9 Annual reports of the various PSC agreements and the United States Coast Guard were provided to, and noted by FSI 11, in particular: .1 information on the Paris MoU Annual Report 2001 (FSI 11/5/1 and FSI 11/INF.5), indicating that a total of 18,681 inspections were carried out in 2001 (11,358 in 2000), leading to 1,699 detentions (1,764 in 2000) for an overall detention rate of 9.09% (9.5% in 2000); information on the United States Coast Guard 2001 Port State Control Report (FSI 11/INF.2), indicating that a total of 10,711 examinations were conducted in 2001 (11,767 in 2000), leading to 172 detentions (193 in 2000) for an overall detention rate of 2.7% (3.6% in 2000). The report indicates an increase in the ISM Code-related deficiencies (20% of the overall deficiencies identified on detained vessels) and the classification society targeting methodology; information on the Asia-Pacific MoU Annual Report 2001 (FSI 11/INF.4), indicating that a total of 17,379 inspections were carried out in 2001 (16,034 in 2000), leading to 1,349 detentions (1,101 in 2000) for an overall detention rate of 7.76% (three-year rolling average 7.11% in 2000), that the Asia-Pacific MoU reached an annual inspection rate of 71% on a regional basis and that technical cooperation programmes were developed;

.2

.3

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-3.4 .5 information on the activities of the Latin America Agreement (Via del Mar Agreement) in 2002 ( FSI 11/INF.6); and information on the Indian Ocean MoU Annual Report 2001 (FSI 11/INF.8), indicating that a total of 5,520 inspections were carried out in 2001 (4,949 in 2000), leading to 291 detentions (336 in 2000) for an overall detention rate of 5.27% (6.8% in 2000), that a website had been created and that an IT system for handling the regions inspection data was under development.

10 The delegation of Jamaica informed FSI 11 that the Members of the Caribbean Port State Control MoU met in November 2002 in Jamaica and as reflected in the IMO Secretariat report, the Members agreed to the introduction of a new internet-based computer system. In this context the Caribbean MoU is currently seeking technical assistance in the procurement (needs analyses and selection) to implementation stages of obtaining an effective Caribbean information centre. The delegation further advised that the Caribbean MoU has been facing constraints in receiving information from its Members as a result of an improperly functioning information centre. However, despite this, information has been received from six States (the Bahamas, Barbados, Cuba, Jamaica, Surinam and Trinidad and Tobago). It reveals that approximately 400 vessels were inspected with a detention rate of just over 9%. Three of the States (Barbados, Cuba and Jamaica) attained and exceeded the 15% target inspection rate. 11 The delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran informed FSI 11 of developments in the Caspian Sea region as well as the Persian Gulf region and expressed its willingness to work with littoral States of the Caspian Sea region and those of the Persian Gulf region for the establishment of a PSC regime in the Caspian Sea and the advancement of PSC activities in the Persian Gulf region. That delegation also requested the IMO to give consideration to assisting the regions achieve these important objectives. Reporting procedures on port State control detentions and analysis and evaluation of reports 12 MSC 75 noted the outcome of the consideration by the Sub-Committee of the use of statistics for the evaluation and analysis of reports on port State control detentions and, in particular, the need to identify the purpose and use of statistics for such an evaluation and analysis, and agreed that the matter should be further discussed at FSI 11 on the basis of the report and relevant recommendations of the correspondence group established by the Sub-Committee. Proposed measure 22 - Improve the uniformity of inspection and reporting practices for port State control and promote exchange of information which was identified by the MSC 73 Working Group on Oil Tanker Safety and Environmental Matters would be considered under the continuous item on Reporting procedures on port State control detentions and analysis and evaluation of reports at future sessions. 13 FSI 11 recalled that MEPC 48 and MSC 76 had agreed that: .1 the information contained in the lists of detentions and corresponding flag State comments should be made freely accessible via the internet on the IMO public website, reflecting both the factual situation regarding the detention of ships and the status of the exchange of information between the flag and port States concerned;

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-4.2 all detentions reported to the Organization should remain in the relevant lists together with all flag State comments recorded, including those on non-receipt of detention notification from port States; and that flag State comments should also be made freely accessible via Internet through the Equasis system.

.3

14 FSI 11 noted that the following information had been made available by the Secretariat on the IMO website (www.imo.org): .1 .2 list of contact points nominated by flag States exclusively for the notification of port State control detentions; and list of flag State comments received for the years 1998 to 2002.

15 FSI 11 recalled that during its four previous sessions, it reviewed the format of the statistics on port State control prepared by the Secretariat, the last version of which, before discontinuation, is in document FSI 7/INF.7, without reaching an agreement, and started considering the establishment of a deficiency analysing process. FSI 9 considered that the report of the first Workshop for Port State Control (PSC) Agreement Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres was a valuable source of experience and referred it to the working group established at FSI 9. 16 The Sub-Committee, then, identified the following issues, which had still not been properly addressed: .1 development of a common coding system for deficiencies (in co-operation with the Contact group established by the Workshop for Port State Control (PSC) Agreement Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres which was conducting a review analysis of the current coding systems in use and seeking possible development of a common coding system (FSI 9/WP.3, paragraph 17)); suitability of the statistics and the information contained in documents FSI 7/INF.3 and FSI 7/INF.7 for evaluation purposes. The data provided for statistical purposes should be in raw form and the task of defining how this data should be used in the future was deferred to a Correspondence Group to be established by FSI 9. Input from qualified statisticians would be advisable, in view of the fact that the origins of the data were very disparate and that as a result it would be extremely difficult to obtain uniform statistical analysis; resumption of the production of PSC statistics and collation of PSC data by the Secretariat; further consideration on the use of the data provided and subsequent development of statistical analysis; analysis of the annual reports of PSC regimes; and harmonization of PSC procedures.

.2

.3 .4 .5 .6

17 FSI 11 had for its consideration a document submitted by New Zealand (FSI 11/6/2), which referred to the need for the collation of PSC data, involving the Secretariat, and for in/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-5depth analysis of the annual reports of regional PSC agreements, taking into account the possible future involvement of PSC-related data, together with casualty-related data, in the IMO voluntary Model Audit Scheme and discussed the following issues: .1 whether the Sub-Committee recognized that there was a definite need for it to consider global statistics on PSC detentions and inspections and, if so, whether it would agree with the continuance and further development of this system; whether the Sub-Committee could agree that the purposes, for which the information on PSC activities would be required and which would provide an ongoing point of reference for consideration and analysis of this information, would be to: .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 provide adequate information to IMO for collation, analysis and publication to the wider maritime community; monitor the performance of flag States in effectively implementing IMO instruments; monitor the performance of recognized organizations; identify trends in detention related, and other deficiencies; provide benchmarks of acceptable performance to flag States; provide an international benchmark for guidance to MoU on standards of vessels within their region; provide information to the Secretariat to enable intervention and/or technical co-operation, or expert assistance/training where a flag State has an unacceptable detention rate; and allow development of strategic goals and targets to be set by IMO for the performance of flag States and recognized organizations;

.2

.8 .3

whether the Sub-Committee, being mindful of the current widespread development of Internet-based PSC databases and of the developing qualitative approach to port State control through risk assessment could recommend that longer-term consideration should be given to extension of the IMO website to become a global maritime database which would include the results of all PSC inspections through electronic links with MOU databases; and whether the Sub-Committee could consider the integration of casualty and PSC data in order that a complete picture of a vessels activities and history would be available to the wider maritime community, and seafarers in particular.

.4

18 The Sub-Committee recognized that harmonized PSC practices and enhanced consistency of data would ultimately allow the preparation of global statistics based on the valuable data collected through PSC activities, which could be developed as a tool for the conduct of worldwide analyses and identification of trends. In the absence of such harmonized approach, the majority of the views expressed supported the need to adopt a cautious approach before embarking on the preparation of global statistics and for the IMO to promote, as far as
/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-6practicable, the harmonization of data acquisition and the resulting statistical analyses, with a long-term goal for the possible production of useful global PSC data and statistics as proposed by New Zealand. 19 The Sub-Committee invited port States and PSC regimes to continue providing information on a regular basis to the Secretariat on the total number of inspections conducted per flag and per calendar year, on detentions, preferably in the electronic format approved at the second Workshop for port State control (PSC) Agreement Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres and to continue to include information on the classification societies involved in ship detentions. 20 Having considered the information contained in the list of contact points nominated by flag States exclusively for the notification of port State control detentions prepared by the Secretariat and released on the IMO website, the Sub-Committee noted that only thirteen countries had provided the relevant details and instructed the Secretariat to include information on the Head Office Ships Inspection contact details in the list, while encouraging Member States to provide information on contact points nominated exclusively for the receipt of PSC detention notifications with the associated email addresses. Review/appeal procedure 21 The Sub-Committee considered a submission on a recent incident in which the port State control authority detained a tanker for an unduly long period due to a minute leak from its cargo tank and did not respond to the flag States repeated appeals against the port State actions. The submission suggested that the Sub-Committee review the procedure for review/appeal by the flag State on port State control intervention. 22 The port State concerned voluntarily informed the Sub-Committee that the incident had occurred in its port and, in order to be transparent in any matter or incident concerning PSC interventions affecting another flag States interest but without revealing the identity of private parties involved, stated that the deficiency showing a crack in the hull with a leak from a laden tanker is sufficiently serious to justify the detention of the vessel and subsequent PSC action, in accordance with the IMO resolution A.787(19), as amended by resolution A.882(21) and regional MoU regulations. 23 Several delegations expressed the view that the Sub-Committee should take a balanced approach from the points of view of the flag State and port State, and recommended that the Sub-Committee should focus on any lessons which could be learnt from the incident. 24 After lengthy discussions, the Sub-Committee agreed that it is not the proper forum to discuss this particular incident, but recommended that a proper line of communication and co-operation should be maintained between the port State and flag State in the case of detention of a ship as a result of the PSC inspection. 25 In the course of the above discussion, it was suggested that the report on the incident from the Paris MoU Review Panel should be brought to IMO. Guidelines for inspection of ships anti-fouling systems under the 2001 AFS Convention 26 FSI 11 agreed to the draft MEPC resolution on Guidelines for brief sampling of antifouling systems, for submission to MEPC 49 together with an AFS circular containing examples of sampling methodologies. Having recognized the value of providing port State control officers
/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-7and Administrations with examples of sampling and analysis methodologies, the Sub-Committee agreed to develop draft Guidelines for inspections of ships anti-fouling systems as a new appendix to the existing guidance for Port State Control (resolution A.787(19), as amended by resolution A.882(21)), and to consider amending the current text on procedures for port State control. 27 Recognizing that the AFS Convention had still to enter into force and it could be misleading at this stage to include the Guidelines for inspection of ships anti-fouling systems as an appendix to resolution A.787(19), as amended by resolution A.882(21), FSI 11 agreed: .1 .2 to the draft MEPC resolution on Guidelines for inspections of ships anti-fouling systems for submission to MEPC 49; and to the draft amendments to resolution A.787(19), as amended by resolution A.882(21) for submission to MEPC 49, with the understanding that the MEPC approves these at a future session, when the AFS Convention has entered into force, for submission to the Assembly for adoption.

Measures to prevent accidents with lifeboats 28 FSI 11 considered the outcome of DE 46 on this issue and, having noted the following information: .1 concerning operational readiness, maintenance and inspections: .1.1 DE 46 completed draft amendments to SOLAS regulation III/20 on Operational readiness, maintenance and inspections for submission to MSC 77, including additional tests to be conducted during weekly and monthly inspections and a new annual dynamic test with an empty boat, without any persons onboard and without extra weight; and DE 46 also completed a draft MSC circular containing draft Guidelines for periodic servicing and maintenance of lifeboats, launching appliances and on-load release gear for submission to MSC 77, including a reference to the ISM Code in order to emphasize that preventive measures against accidents with lifeboats would benefit from an explicit reminder of the responsibility associated with safety management, enhanced co-operation between ships personnel and the manufacturers of the lifeboat arrangements during certain inspections, maintenance and repairs and added an appendix containing detailed description of the underlying processes connected with the thorough examination, dynamic winch brake test and overhaul of on-load release gear;

.1.2

.2

concerning emergency training and drills: .2.1 DE 46 completed draft amendments to SOLAS regulation III/19.3.3.3 for submission to MSC 77 following consideration of the potential contradiction between the responsibility of the Master to assess the risk and the explicit requirement that each lifeboat (should) be launched with its assigned operating crew onboard. DE 46 agreed to give full discretion to the Master for deciding the conditions for training and drills and to keep

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-8a reference to drills to be conducted, as far as practicable, as if there were an actual emergency; and .2.2 DE 46 could not complete, at this stage, draft amendments to SOLAS regulation III/19.3.3.4 (free-fall launching) but agreed that the requirement should apply to all crew with flexibility on whether the training should be conducted onboard or ashore, and invited STW 35 to consider the improvement in safety training regarding maintenance of lifeboats and associated equipment and safe practices during lifeboat drills, alternative to onboard training in free fall lifeboats, means of recording participation in free fall launched and shorebased training as an alternative to onboard training in general;

.3

concerning float-free free-fall lifeboats for bulk carriers, DE 45 could not complete, at this stage, draft amendments to paragraphs 1.8 and 1.9 of SOLAS regulation III/31, since more time might be needed to address issues not sufficiently covered within the LSA Code and resolution A.689(17) on Testing of lifesaving appliances.

and having discussed the above information on the completed and future work of the DE and STW Sub-Committees on this matter, concluded that all identified shortcomings relevant to measures to prevent accidents with lifeboats pertinent to the scope of the FSI Sub-Committee were sufficiently covered and no further action was needed by this Sub-Committee on the item. Illegal, unregulated, unreported (IUU) fishing and implementation of resolution A.925(22) 29 FSI 11 considered the information from FAO on the Expert Consultation to review port State measures to combat IUU fishing containing guidelines and principles for the establishment of regional Memoranda of Understanding on port State measures to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing. Development of a draft Code for the implementation of [mandatory] instruments 30 Having amended the title of the draft Code on Flag State Implementation to be developed in the context of the review of resolution A.847(20) in order to address the issue of the stakeholders to be covered by the Code to read draft Code for the implementation of [mandatory] instruments FSI 11, in considering an outline of the draft Code, agreed that it should be comprised of four parts, including a first part dealing with common issues concerning all stakeholders and three subsequent parts relating to the flag, coastal and port States. PSC officer training for bulk carriers 31 MSC 76 having agreed that port States and the various PSC Memoranda of Understanding established world-wide should be strongly recommended to develop specialized training for port State control officers in bulk carrier design and operation, pinpointing the vulnerable areas within the structure, in particular of older ships, FSI 11 deferred consideration of the matter to FSI 12 and accepted the kind offer of the delegation of the United Kingdom to provide FSI 12 with a submission which would assist in the preparation of a draft MSC circular on this matter.

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

-9Ship recycling-related matters 32 FSI 11 was requested by the MEPC to provide input to the relevant parts of the draft IMO Guidelines on ship recycling and advice on possible procedures and requirements for de-registration of ships before recycling, in particular, concerning the following port State-related aspects of the draft Guidelines, which was agreed as follows: 5.2 Port State

[The port State functions also in respect of recycling of ships as a supplement to flag State control, when it executes port State control.] 5.2.1 Establishment of port State control routines for ships destined for recycling

The only port State in a position to control issues related to a ship destined for recycling is that of the final place of arrival of an operational vessel i.e. the port where the recycling operation is to take place (see Recycling State below) or the port where a vessel, because of the measures taken to prepare it for recycling, it is rendered non-operational and is intended to be towed to the recycling yard. Ships destined for recycling would still be subject to current port State control procedures, as any other ship, in accordance with applicable international regulations. Co-ordination between the port State and the flag State is encouraged to ensure the ship meets all relevant IMO requirements, and any other applicable requirements. 5.2.2 Implementation

Port States should: encourage the widespread use of IMO guidelines within the industry; co-operate with flag States and recycling States to facilitate implementation of the guidelines.

Mandatory reports under MARPOL 73/78 33 FSI 11 noted, on the basis of the information received by the Secretariat in the context of contraventions to MARPOL 73/78, that the total number of ships boarded for port State control, was, according to the received reports, 61,518 for 2001, while the total number of ships detained in port or denied entry was 671, or 1.1% of those boarded. Work programme and agenda for FSI 12 34 FSI 11 agreed to include the item of its work programme on PSC on seafarers working hours in the agenda for FSI 12.

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

- 10 OUTCOME OF MSC 77 Report on the Workshop for port State control MoU Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres 35 The Committee recalled that MSC 76 had considered document MSC 76/14/2 (Secretariat) reporting on the outcome of the second Workshop for port State control MoU Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres, which had been conducted at the Organizations Headquarters in July 2002, and had decided that some of the recommendations made by the Workshop needed further consideration and that it would be more appropriate for the outcome of the Workshop to be first considered in depth by MSC 77 before it was referred to the FSI Sub-Committee for further action. 36 The Committee considered the Workshops final report and its summary of conclusions and recommendations and, as requested of it in paragraph 4 of document MSC 77/16/2: .1 .1.1 instructed the Secretariat to: prepare, and submit to FSI 12, an analysis, including cost, on the provision of a monthly updated version of the LR-Fairplay world fleet database to be released on the IMO secure internet for the purpose of allowing all the regional PSC organizations to download the data set and Member States to be granted access to the same data; inform any interested regional PSC organization on the progress of the introduction of the company identification number scheme with respect to DOCs issued in compliance with the ISM Code requirements; continue to convey to future Workshops the outcome of the deliberation by IMO bodies on matters of direct relevance to port State control; and make available to ILO information on detentions based on deficiencies related to the requirements contained in ILO conventions, including those deficiencies which may refer to both IMO and ILO requirements, in order to avoid duplication of the reporting procedures, and to make such information available to ILO on the basis of the information collected through the proposed electronic template for reporting detentions to IMO; requested the FSI Sub-Committee to comment on the proposal for the Sub-Committee to carry out in-depth analyses of the annual reports submitted to it by the regional PSC organizations and for future meetings of the Workshop to be informed accordingly;

.1.2

.1.3 .1.4

.2

.3 .4

agreed that, for the time being, meetings of the Workshop should be held on the basis of one workshop every two years; and noted the request for the Organization to continue providing technical co-operation support to assist the regional PSC organizations, in particular with respect to: .4.1 capacity-building through training programmes for:

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

- 11 .4.2 .4.3 .4.4 .4.5 PSCOs; database managers; and other related technical issues;

the establishment of information centres within the remit of those TC activities funded by IMO; the development of a distance learning package for training of PSCOs; the participation of the Secretariat at regional port State control Committee meetings; and technical advisory missions.

37 With regard to the request of the Workshop for the provision of technical co-operation support for the establishment of information centres referred to in paragraph 16.10.4.2, the Committee invited the TCC to consider this matter as this falls within its competence. Guidance on port State control 38 The Committee noted the intention of the United States to develop guidance for port State control with regard to maritime security further, by an informal correspondence group, prior to consideration and full discussion by the FSI Sub-Committee, and invited Member Governments and parties to other PSC Memoranda of Understanding to consider participating in and/or developing of similar guidelines respectively. OUTCOME OF MEPC 49 Inspection of Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships 39 The Committee adopted the Guidelines for Inspection of Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships by resolution MEPC.105(49), with the understanding that once the AFS Convention has entered into force the Guidelines could form a new appendix to resolution A.787(19) as amended by resolution A.882(21) on Procedures for port State control, pending decision by the MEPC. The Committee decided to put in abeyance the review and approval of the draft amendments to resolution A.787(19), as amended by resolution A.882(21), contained in annex 7 of FSI 11/23 until the AFS Convention has entered into force; Communication of CAS information to EQUASIS 40 The Committee recalled that at MEPC 48 it agreed to provide information regarding the particulars of the Statement of Compliance (SOC), issued in accordance with the provisions of the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS), to the EQUASIS Secretariat for further dissemination through the EQUASIS System. 41 In this context the Committee noted that IMOs Legal Office, taking into account the restrictive wording of paragraph 14.2 of CAS, which stipulates that the CAS electronic database shall be accessible only to Parties to MARPOL 73/78, could not support the transfer of CAS data to EQUASIS. 42 The Committee also noted the information provided in document MEPC 49/13/4 submitted by France, Singapore, Spain and the United Kingdom regarding the decision of the
/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc

- 12 EQUASIS Supervisory Committee to reiterate its request for a full supply of CAS information for further dissemination to the public in order to achieve full transparency. 43 After an exchange of views, the Committee re-affirmed its decision at MEPC 48 to make available the CAS information under the current MARPOL Annex I to EQUASIS and agreed that there was no need to amend paragraph 14.12 of CAS at present. However, the Committee noted that this decision might need to be reviewed in light of the proposed amendments to regulation 13G of MARPOL Annex I in the wake of Prestige. THIRD IMO WORKSHOP FOR PSC AGREEMENT SECRETARIES AND DIRECTORS OF INFORMATION CENTRES 44 The tentative dates for the third IMO Workshop PSC Agreement Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres are from 9 to 11 June 2004. ____________

/opt/scribd/conversion/tmp/scratch26540/69087867.doc