1. 1982.gada 26.janvāra Parīzes saprašanās memorands par ostas valsts kontroli (turpmāk — memorands) ar šiem noteikumiem tiek pieņemts un apstiprināts.

2. Memorandā paredzēto saistību izpildi koordinē Satiksmes ministrija.

3. Memorands stājas spēkā tā 8.nodaļā paredzētajā laikā un kārtībā.

Ministru prezidents A.Kalvītis

Ārlietu ministrs A.Pabriks

Pieņemts un apstiprināts ar
Ministru kabineta
2005.gada 27.septembra noteikumiem Nr.744

Parīzes saprašanās memorands par ostas valsts kontroli

Beļģijas

Kanādas¹

Horvātijas ²

Dānijas

Igaunijas³

Somijas

Francijas

Vācijas (Federatīvās Republikas)

Grieķijas

Islandes⁴

Īrijas

Itālijas

Latvijas⁵

Nīderlandes

Norvēģijas

Polijas⁶

Portugāles

Krievijas Federācijas⁷

Slovēnijas⁸

Spānijas

Zviedrijas

Lielbritānijas un Ziemeļīrijas Apvienotās Karalistes

Jūras administrācijas (turpmāk tekstā — administrācijas)

Ņemot vērā Eiropas reģionālās konferences par kuģošanas drošību 1980.gada 2.decembrī pieņemto gala deklarāciju, kurā uzsvērta nepieciešamība palielināt kuģošanas drošību un jūras vides aizsardzību, kā arī vajadzība uzlabot dzīves un darba apstākļus uz kuģiem;

Uzsverot progresu, ko šajā nozarē sasniegusi Starptautiskā Jūras organizācija (turpmāk — SJO) un Starptautiskā Darba organizācija;

Uzsverot arī Eiropas Savienības ieguldījumu augstākminēto mērķu sasniegšanā;

Apzinoties, ka kuģa karoga valsts administrācijas ir galvenokārt atbildīgas par efektīvu starptautiskajos aktos izklāstīto standartu pielietošanu;

Atzīstot, ka nepieciešama ostu valstu efektīva darbība, lai novērstu standartam neatbilstošu kuģu ekspluatāciju;

Atzīstot arī nepieciešamību izvairīties no kropļojošas konkurences starp ostām;

Būdamas pārliecinātas, ka šo mērķu sasniegšanai nepieciešama uzlabota un saskaņota ostas valsts kontroles sistēma, sadarbības stiprināšana un informācijas apmaiņa;

Ir panākušas šādu vienošanos:

1.daļa. Saistības

1.1 Katra administrācija īstenos šī Memoranda un tā Pielikumu, kas ir neatņemama šī Memoranda sastāvdaļa, nosacījumus.

1.2 Katra administrācija saglabās efektīvu ostas valsts kontroles sistēmu lai nodrošinātu, ka ārvalstu tirdzniecības kuģi, kas ienāk tās valsts ostā vai noenkurojas šādā ostā, bez diskriminācijas attiecībā uz kuģa karogu, atbilst standartiem, kas izklāstīti 2.daļā norādītajos saistošajos tiesību aktos. Katra administrācija drīkst veikt arī pārbaudes uz kuģiem, kuri piestājuši pie šīs administrācijas jurisdikcijā esošajām jūras iekārtām.

1.3 Katrai administrācijai ik gadu jāveic kuģu inspekcijas tādā apjomā, kas atbilst 25% no vidējā individuālo tirdzniecības kuģu skaita (turpmāk — “kuģi”), kas ienākuši šīs valsts ostās pēdējo trīs kalendāro gadu laikā, par kuriem ir pieejama statistika.

1.4 Katra administrācija konsultēsies, sadarbosies un apmainīsies ar informāciju ar citām administrācijām, lai sekmētu Memoranda mērķu sasniegšanu.

1.5 Katrai administrācijai vai citai institūcijai atbilstoši situācijai jāizstrādā attiecīgas procedūras ločiem un ostu pārvaldēm, lai nekavējoties informētu kompetento ostas valsts administrāciju par gadījumiem, kad savu pienākumu pildīšanas laikā tiek atklāti trūkumi, kas var ietekmēt kuģa drošību vai kas var radīt draudus jūras videi.

2.daļa. Saistošie tiesību akti

2.1 Šī Memoranda izpratnē ‘saistošie tiesību akti’ ir:

.1 1966.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par kravas marku (turpmāk — LL 66 konvencija)

.2 1966.gada Starptautiskās konvencijas par kravas marku 1988.gada protokols (turpmāk — LL PROT 88)

.3 1974.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par cilvēku dzīvības aizsardzību uz jūras (turpmāk — SOLAS konvencija)

.4 1974.gada Starptautiskās konvencijas par cilvēku dzīvības aizsardzību uz jūras 1978.gada protokols (turpmāk — SOLAS PROT 78)

.5 1974.gada Starptautiskās konvencijas par cilvēku dzīvības aizsardzību uz jūras 1988.gada protokols (turpmāk — SOLAS PROT 88)

.6 1973.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par piesārņošanas novēršanu no kuģiem un tās 1978.gada un 1997.gada protokoli (turpmāk — MARPOL 73/78 konvencija)

.7 1978.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par jūrnieku sagatavošanu un diplomēšanu, kā arī sardzes pildīšanu (turpmāk — STCW 78)

.8 1972.gada Konvencija par starptautiskajiem kuģu sadursmju novēršanas noteikumiem (turpmāk — COLREG 72)

.9 1969.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par kuģu tilpības mērīšanu (turpmāk — Tilpības konvencija)

.10 Starptautiskās darba organizācijas (turpmāk — SDO) 1976.gada konvencija Nr.147 par minimālajām normām tirdzniecības kuģiem (turpmāk — SDO 147.konvencija)

.11 SDO 1976.gada Konvencijas par minimālajām normām tirdzniecības kuģiem 1996.gada protokols (turpmāk — SDO PROT 96)

.12 1992.gada Starptautiskā konvencija par civiltiesisko atbildību par naftas piesārņojuma izraisītiem zaudējumiem (turpmāk — CLC konvencija)

2.2 Attiecībā uz SDO 147.konvenciju un SDO PROT 96 katrai administrācijai ir jāpiemēro procedūras, kas izklāstītas 1.Pielikuma 7.daļā, piemērojot SDO publikāciju “Darba apstākļu inspekcija uz kuģiem: Ieteikumi pārbaudes norisei”.

2.3 Katrai administrācijai ir jāpiemēro tie saistošie tiesību akti, kas ir spēkā un kuriem tā ir pievienojusies. Ja saistošais tiesību akts tiek grozīts, katrai administrācijai ir jāpiemēro tie grozījumi, kas ir spēkā un kurus tās valsts ir pieņēmusi. Šādi grozītais akts ir jāuzskata par šīs administrācijas ‘saistošo tiesību aktu’.

2.4 Piemērojot saistošo tiesību aktu, administrācijām jānodrošina, ka to valstu, kas nav šī Memoranda dalībvalstis, kuģiem vai tādiem kuģiem, uz kuriem to izmēru dēļ neattiecas kāds no saistošajiem tiesību aktiem, netiktu piemēroti labvēlīgāki noteikumi. Šajā gadījumā administrācijām jāpiemēro procedūras, kas izklāstītas 1.pielikuma 3.daļā.

3.daļa. Inspekciju procedūras, trūkumu novēršana un aizturēšana

3.1 Pildot savas saistības, administrācijām ir jāveic inspekcijas, kas sastāv no kuģa apmeklējuma, lai pārbaudītu sertifikātus un dokumentus, kā tas noteikts 1.pielikuma 2.daļā. Turklāt administrācijām jāpārliecinās, ka apkalpe un kuģa vispārējais stāvoklis, ieskaitot mašīntelpas, dzīvojamās un dienesta telpas, un kuģa telpu higiēniskie apstākļi kopumā atbilst vispārpieņemtiem starptautiskiem standartiem.

Gadījumā, ja sertifikāti vai dokumenti nav derīgi, vai ir “skaidrs pamats” uzskatīt, ka kuģa vai kuģa aprīkojuma stāvoklis vai tā apkalpe būtiski atšķiras no attiecīgo tiesību aktu prasībām, ir jāveic detalizēta inspekcija, kā tas noteikts 1.pielikuma 5.daļā. “Skaidra pamata” piemēri ir minēti 1.pielikuma 4.daļā.

Administrācijām inspekcijās jāiekļauj atbilstības pārbaude kuģa operāciju veikšanai.

3.2 Administrācijām jānodrošina, ka inspekcijas saskaņā ar 3.daļas 3.1.punkta nosacījumiem tiek veiktas uz visiem kuģiem, kas nav pakļauti paplašinātai inspekcijai, ar prioritātes faktoru, kas lielāks kā 50 SIReNaC informācijas sistēmā, ar nosacījumu, ka ir pagājis vismaz vienu mēnesi ilgs periods, kopš veikta pēdējā inspekcija kādā no Memoranda reģiona ostām.

3.3 Kuģis, kas atbilst kādai no 1.pielikuma 8.daļas 8.2. punktā norādītajām kategorijām, tiek pakļauts paplašinātai inspekcijai 12 mēnešus pēc pēdējās paplašinātās inspekcijas, kas veikta kādā no Memoranda reģiona ostām.

Ja šāds kuģis tiek izvēlēts inspekcijai saskaņā ar 3.daļas 3.6. punktu, jāveic paplašinātā inspekcija. Tomēr laika periodā starp divām paplašinātām inspekcijām drīkst veikt arī inspekciju saskaņā ar 3.daļas 3.1. punktu.

Administrācijām jānodrošina, ka tiek veikta paplašinātā inspekcija uz kuģa, kuram šāda inspekcija ir obligāta saskaņā ar SIReNaC sistēmu, iebraucot pirmajā ostā 12 mēnešus pēc pēdējās paplašinātās inspekcijas.

3.4 Ja operatīvu iemeslu dēļ administrācija nav varējusi veikt inspekciju vai paplašinātu inspekciju kā noteikts attiecīgi 3.daļas 3.2. un 3.3.punktā, administrācijai nekavējoties jāinformē SIReNaC sistēma, ka šāda inspekcija nav notikusi.

3.5 Nekas šajās procedūrās neierobežo administrācijas darbību, veicot pasākumus savā jurisdikcijas zonā attiecībā uz saistošajos tiesību aktos noteikto prasību izpildi.

3.6 Izvēloties inspekcijai tādus kuģus, kas nav uzskaitīti 3.daļas 3.2. un 3.3. punktā, administrācijai jānosaka prioritātes kārtība, pamatojoties uz kritērijiem, kas minēti 1.pielikuma 1.daļā.

3.7 Administrācijām jācenšas izvairīties inspicēt tādus kuģus, kurus inspicējusi kāda cita administrācija pēdējo sešu mēnešu laikā, ja vien nav skaidra pamata inspekcijai. Inspekciju biežuma ierobežojums neattiecas uz kuģiem, kas minēti 3.daļas 3.6. un 3.2. punktā. Šajā gadījumā administrācijas drīkst inspicēt kuģi, ja to uzskata par nepieciešamu.

3.8 Inspekcijas veic attiecīgi kvalificētas personas, ko šim mērķim pilnvarojusi iesaistītā administrācija, kas pilda savus pienākumus, pamatojoties uz 7.pielikumā noteikto.

Ja administrācija nevar nodrošināt ar profesionālu ekspertu, kopā ar šīs administrācijas ostas valsts kontroles inspektoru inspekcijā var piedalīties attiecīgi kvalificēts eksperts. Ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram un personai, kas kopā ar viņu piedalās inspekcijā, nedrīkst būt komerciālas saistības ne inspekcijas ostā, ne uz inspicējamā kuģa, kā arī ostas valsts kontroles inspektors nedrīkst būt nodarbināts vai darboties tādas nevalstiskas organizācijas vārdā, kas izsniedz kuģa konvenciālos jeb klasifikācijas sertifikātus, vai kas veic inspekcijas, kuru rezultātā kuģiem tiek izsniegti šādi sertifikāti.

Katram ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram ir jāuzrāda identifikācijas dokuments, kuru izsniegusi viņa administrācija saskaņā ar nacionālo likumdošanu un kurā norādīts, ka attiecīgais ostas valsts kontroles inspektors ir pilnvarots veikt inspekcijas.

3.9.1 Katrai administrācijai jācenšas nodrošināt visu atklāto trūkumu novēršanu. Pie nosacījuma, ka veikti visi iespējamie pasākumi trūkumu novēršanai, izņemot tādus, kas minēti 3.daļas 3.10.1.punktā, kuģim var atļaut doties uz ostu, kur pilnībā var novērst šādus trūkumus.

3.9.2 Izņēmuma gadījumos, kad sākotnējās un detalizētās inspekcijas rezultātā tiek atklāts, ka kuģa un tā aprīkojuma vispārējais stāvoklis, ņemot vērā arī kuģa apkalpi un tās dzīves un darba apstākļus, neatbilst standartiem, administrācija drīkst inspekciju atlikt.

Inspekcija tiek atlikta, kamēr atbildīgās puses ir veikušas nepieciešamās darbības, lai panāktu, ka kuģis atbilst saistošo tiesību aktu prasībām.

Pirms inspekcijas atlikšanas administrācijai ir jāieprotokolē atklātie trūkumi, kuru dēļ kuģis tiek aizturēts, atbilstoši 1.pielikuma 9.daļas 9.3.3. un 9.3.4.punktā norādīto. Gadījumā, ja kuģis ir aizturēts un inspekcija ir atlikta, administrācijai pēc iespējas ātrāk par to jāziņo atbildīgajām pusēm. Ziņojumā jāiekļauj informācija par aizturēšanu. Turklāt jāpaziņo, ka inspekcija ir atlikta, kamēr administrācija nesaņems informāciju, ka kuģis atbilst attiecīgajām prasībām.

3.10.1 Gadījumos, kad trūkumi rada nepārprotamus draudus drošībai, veselībai vai apkārtējai videi, administrācijai jānodrošina, ka, izņemot 3.daļas 3.11.punktā noteikto, kuģis neiziet jūrā, kamēr draudi nav novērsti. Šo mērķu sasniegšanai jāveic attiecīgas darbības, kurās var iekļaut kuģa aizturēšanu vai formālu aizliegumu kuģim turpināt darbību sakarā ar atklātajām nepilnībām, kas kopā vai atsevišķi radītu ilgstošus draudus kuģa drošībai.

3.10.2 Par aizturēšanas gadījumu administrācijai nekavējoties rakstiski jāinformē karoga valsts administrācija^*), ziņojumā iekļaujot inspekcijas protokolu. Ja nepieciešams, jāinformē arī atzītā organizācija, kas izdevusi klases apliecības vai attiecīgos sertifikātus karoga valsts administrācijas vārdā. Augstākminētās puses rakstiski jāinformē arī par kuģa atbrīvošanu.

3.10.3 Ja aizturēšanas iemesls ir bojājumi, kas radušies negadījumā un kas noticis kuģa pārgājiena laikā uz ostu, vai kravas operāciju laikā, paziņojums par kuģa aizturēšanu netiek izdots, ja:

.1 pienācīgi izpildītas prasības, kas paredzētas SOLAS-74 I/11(c) noteikumā par ziņošanu karoga valsts administrācijai, ieceltajam inspektoram vai atzītajai organizācijai, kas atbildīgi par attiecīgās apliecības izdošanu;

.2 pirms iebraukšanas ostā vai tiklīdz ir konstatēts kuģa bojājumu fakts, kuģa kapteinis vai īpašnieks iesniedzis sīku izklāstu par negadījuma apstākļiem un bojājumiem ostas valsts kontroles administrācijai, kā arī informējis par to, kādas ziņas ir sniegtas kuģa karoga valsts administrācijai;

.3 kuģis veic koriģējošas darbības, kas pēc administrācijas ieskatiem ir pietiekamas, un

.4 pēc ziņojuma par koriģējošo darbību pabeigšanas saņemšanas administrācija ir pārliecinājusies, ka trūkumi, kas apdraudēja drošību, veselību vai apkārtējo vidi, ir novērsti.

3.10.4 Ja kuģim nav derīgu ISM sertifikātu, jāpielieto šāda procedūra:

.1 Ja inspekcijas laikā tiek atklāts, ka kuģim, uz kuru inspekcijas dienā attiecas Starptautiskais Drošas pārvaldes kodekss (turpmāk — ISM kodekss), nav Atbilstības dokumenta noraksta vai kuģa Drošas pārvaldes apliecības, kas izdota saskaņā ar ISM kodeksu, administrācijai kuģis jāaiztur.

.2 Neskatoties uz to, ka kuģim nav dokumentācijas, kas uzskaitīta 3.daļas 3.10.4.punkta 1.apakšpunktā, ja inspekcijas laikā nav atklāti citi trūkumi, kas pamato kuģa aizturēšanu, administrācija drīkst atcelt kuģa aizturēšanu, lai izvairītos no ostas pārslogošanas. Ja šāds lēmums ir pieņemts, administrācijai jāinformē visas iesaistītās administrācijas.

.3 Administrācijām jāveic visi nepieciešamie pasākumi, lai nodrošinātu, ka visi kuģi, kuri 3.daļas 3.10.4.punkta 2.apakš­punktā minētajos apstākļos drīkst atstāt tās valsts ostu, netiktu ielaisti citā Memoranda reģiona ostā, izņemot gadījumus, kas minēti 3.daļas 3.12.3.punktā, kamēr kuģa īpašnieks vai operators ir uzrādījis derīgus kuģa sertifikātus saskaņā ar ISM Kodeksu tās valsts administrācijai, kas kuģi aizturējusi.

3.10.5 Iebraukšanas aizliegums ostās noteiktiem kuģiem

1. Administrācijām jānodrošina, ka kuģim, kas atbilst 3.Pielikuma A nodaļas nosacījumiem, aizliedz iebraukšanu Memoranda reģiona ostās, izņemot gadījumus, kas minēti 3.daļas 3.12.3.punktā, ja kuģis

— kuģo ar tās valsts, kas iekļauta “melnajā sarakstā”, kas publicēts Memoranda gada pārskatā, un ir aizturēts vairāk kā divas reizes iepriekšējos 24 mēnešos kādā no Memoranda reģiona ostām;

— vai kuģo ar tādas valsts, kas Memoranda gada pārskatā raksturota kā “ļoti liela riska” vai “liela riska”, karogu, un ir aizturēts vairāk kā vienu reizi pēdējo 36 mēnešu laikā kādā no Memoranda reģiona ostām.

Iebraukšanas aizlieguma orderis stājas spēkā, tiklīdz kuģim ir atļauts atstāt ostu, kurā tas aizturēts attiecīgi otro vai trešo reizi.

2. Lai veiktu 1.apakšpunktā minētās darbības, administrācijām jārīkojas saskaņā ar 3.Pielikuma B nodaļā minētajām procedūrām.

3.11 Ja trūkumus, kā rezultātā kuģis aizturēts saskaņā ar 3.10.1. punktu, nevar novērst inspekcijas ostā, administrācija var atļaut attiecīgajam kuģim doties uz tuvāko atbilstošo kuģu remonta rūpnīcu, kuru izvēlas kuģa kapteinis un administrācija ar nosacījumu, ka tiek ievēroti noteikumi, kādus paredzējusi karoga valsts kompetentā institūcija un kam piekritusi administrācija. Šādiem noteikumiem, kuri var paredzēt kravas izkraušanu un/vai īslaicīgus remontus, jānodrošina, ka kuģa tālāka kuģošana neapdraud pasažieru un apkalpes drošību un veselību, vai citus kuģus, kā arī pārmērīgi neapdraud jūras vidi.

Ja kuģis kuģa dokumentācijas vai kuģa konstrukcijas defektu un trūkumu dēļ neatbilst SJO rezolūcijas A. 744(18) prasībām un ir pieņemts lēmums nosūtīt kuģi uz kuģu remonta rūpnīcu, administrācija var pieprasīt, lai tiktu veikti nepieciešamie kuģa konstrukciju biezuma mērījumi tajā ostā, kurā kuģis aizturēts, pirms kuģim ir atļauts iziet jūrā.

Ja kuģis ir aizturēts tāpēc, ka nav aprīkots ar funkcionējošu reisa datu reģistrācijas sistēmu, kad tāda bijusi obligāta, un šo trūkumu nevar novērst aizturēšanas ostā, kompetentā institūcija var atļaut kuģim doties uz tuvāko atbilstošo ostu, kur to var novērst, vai pieprasīt, lai šis trūkums tiktu novērsts tuvāko 30 dienu laikā.

Šajā gadījumā administrācijai jāinformē tā reģiona, kurā atrodas nākamā kuģa ieiešanas osta, kompetentā valsts administrācija, kā arī puses, kas minētas 3.10.2.punktā, un vajadzības gadījumā arī citas attiecīgās institūcijas. Informācijā jāiekļauj inspekcijas gala ziņojums un plānotais kuģa pienākšanas laiks un vieta. Papildus informācija jāievada SIReNaC informācijas sistēmā. Administrācijai, kas saņem šādu ziņojumu, jāinformē ziņojumu sniegusī administrācija par veiktajām darbībām.

3.12.1 Administrācijām jāveic darbības, lai nodrošinātu, ka:

.1 3.10.1. vai 3.11.punktā minētie kuģi, kas dodas jūrā, bet neatbilst prasībām, ko inspekcijas ostā noteikusi administrācija; vai

.2 3.11. punktā minētie kuģi, kas atsakās ievērot attiecīgo saistošo tiesību aktu prasības un doties uz norādīto remonta rūpnīcu;

netiktu ielaisti nevienā Memoranda dalībvalsts ostā, kamēr kuģa īpašnieks vai operators nav uzrādījis administrācijai, kas atklājusi kuģa defektu, pierādījumus, ka kuģis pilnībā atbilst attiecīgajām saistošo tiesību aktu prasībām.

3.12.2 3.12.1.punkta 1.apakšpunktā minētajos gadījumos administrācijai, kas atklājusi kuģa defektu, nekavējoties jābrīdina citas administrācijas.

3.12.1.punkta 2.apkšpunktā minētajos gadījumos administrācijai, kuras valstī atrodas kuģu remonta rūpnīca, nekavējoties jābrīdina citas administrācijas.

Pirms iebraukšanas aizlieguma administrācija var pieprasīt konsultācijas ar iesaistītā kuģa karoga valsts administrāciju.

3.12.3 Neskatoties uz 3.12.1.punkta nosacījumiem, attiecīgās ostas valsts administrācija var atļaut kuģim ienākt konkrētā ostā nepārvaramas varas gadījumā vai īpašu drošības apsvērumu dēļ, vai lai mazinātu piesārņojuma risku, ar nosacījumu, ka kuģa īpašnieks, operators vai kapteinis veic adekvātus pasākumus, kas apmierina attiecīgās valsts kompetento institūciju un nodrošina drošu ienākšanu ostā.

3.13 3.10.2. un 3.11.punkta nosacījumi nedrīkst mazināt saistošo tiesību aktu vai procedūru prasības, ko noteikušas starp­tautiskas organizācijas attiecībā uz brīdināšanas un ziņošanas procedūrām, kas saistītas ar ostas valsts kontroli.

3.14 Administrācijām jānodrošina, ka, pabeidzot inspekciju, kuģa kapteinim tiktu iesniegts ziņojums par inspekciju, kurā ietverti inspekcijas rezultāti un izklāstītas darbības, kuras nepieciešams veikt.

3.15 Ja 3.1.punktā minētā inspekcija apstiprina vai atklāj trūkumus attiecībā uz saistošo tiesību aktu prasībām, kas pamato kuģa aizturēšanu, visas inspekcijas izmaksas normālā pārskata periodā sedz kuģa īpašnieks vai operators vai viņu pārstāvis ostas valstī.

Visas izmaksas par inspekcijām, ko veic administrācija saskaņā ar 3.12.1.punkta nosacījumiem, sedz kuģa īpašnieks vai operators.

Lēmumu par kuģa aizturēšanu neatceļ, kamēr nav veikta pilna samaksa par kuģa inspekciju vai arī nav sniegts pietiekams nodrošinājums izmaksu atlīdzināšanai.

3.16 Par iesaistītās valsts administrācijas lēmumu kuģi aizturēt vai aizliegt iebraukšanu citās ostās kuģa īpašnieks vai operators vai viņu pārstāvis attiecīgajā valstī var celt prasību tiesā. Šādas prasības iesniegšana nav pamats lēmuma par kuģa aizturēšanu vai iebraukšanas aizliegumu citās ostās atcelšanai. Administrācijai ir jāinformē aizturētā kuģa kapteinis par tiesībām sniegt prasību tiesā.

3.17 Administrācijām jāveic nepieciešamās darbības, lai nodrošinātu, ka 5.pielikumā uzskaitītā informācija par inspicētajiem un aizturētajiem kuģiem tiktu publicēta vismaz reizi mēnesī.

3.18 Veicot inspekcijas saskaņā ar Memorandu, administrācijām jādara viss iespējamais, lai kuģis netiktu nepamatoti aizturēts vai aizkavēts. Šis Memorands neiespaido tiesības, kas noteiktas saistošajos tiesību aktos attiecībā uz zaudējumu atlīdzināšanu par nepamatotu kuģa aizturēšanu vai aizkavēšanu.

4.daļa. Informācijas sniegšana

4.1 Administrācijām jāsniedz informācija par inspekcijām, kas veiktas saskaņā ar Memorandu, un to rezultātiem, vadoties pēc procedūrām, kas izklāstītas 4.pielikumā.

4.2 Informāciju, kas minēta iepriekšējā punktā, var publicēt rakstiskā formā vai elektroniski, lai palīdzētu administrācijām informācijas, kas minēta 3.17.punktā, sniegšanā kā arī citos nolūkos saskaņā ar Komitejas, kas minēta 6.daļā, lēmumiem.

4.3 DSI, kas minēts 4.pielikumā, un Sekretariāts, kas minēts 6.daļas 4. punktā, var veicināt informācijas, kas iegūta no 4.pielikumā minētās informācijas sistēmas nemainītā veidā, publicēšanu elektroniski vai rakstiskā formā.

4.4 Ja inspekcijas vai aizturēšanas dati satur informāciju par privātpersonām, administrācijām jānodrošina šo personu privāto datu aizsardzība saskaņā ar attiecīgo starptautisko, Eiropas Kopienas un nacionālo likumdošanu un noteikumiem. Tomēr šāda aizsardzība neaizkavē informācijas sniegšanu par sabiedrībām, kuru kuģi ir inspicēti, vai iesaistīto fraktētāju vārdiem.

5.daļa. Ekspluatācijas pārkāpumi

Administrācijai pēc citas administrācijas pieprasījuma jācenšas savākt pierādījumus, ja radušās aizdomas par pārkāpumiem attiecībā uz COLREG 72 10.noteikumu un MARPOL 73/78 konvenciju. Ja radušās aizdomas, ka izdarīts pārkāpums saistībā ar kaitīgu vielu noplūdi, administrācijai pēc citas administrācijas pieprasījuma jāpārbauda ostā kuģis, kas iespējams izdarījis šādu pārkāpumu, lai iegūtu informāciju un, ja iespējams, paņemtu tās vielas paraugus, kas radījis piesārņojumu. Procedūras izplūdes noteikumu pārkāpumu izmeklēšanai ir uzskaitītas 2.pielikumā.

6.daļa. Organizācija

6.1 Tiek izveidota Komiteja, iekļaujot tajā pārstāvjus no katras administrācijas un Eiropas Kopienas Komisijas. Komitejas darbā un citās sanāksmēs pieaicina piedalīties konsultantus no katras starptautiskās valstiskās organizācijas, novērotājus un sabiedrotos.

6.2 Komitejas sēdes notiek vienreiz gadā vai biežāk, ja tā tiek nolemts.

6.3 Komiteja apņemas:

.1 veikt īpašos pienākumus, kas tai uzticēti saskaņā ar Memorandu;

.2 ar visiem nepieciešamajiem līdzekļiem, ieskaitot seminārus ostas valsts kontroles inspektoriem, veicināt procedūru un prakses harmonizāciju attiecībā uz inspekcijām, trūkumu novēršanu, kuģu aizturēšanu un 2.daļas 2.4.punta piemērošanu;

.3 izstrādāt vadlīnijas un procedūras inspekciju veikšanai saskaņā ar Memorandu;

.4 izstrādāt un pārskatīt informācijas apmaiņas procedūras;

.5 kontrolēt citus jautājumus attiecībā uz Memoranda darbību un efektivitāti.

6.4. Tiek izveidots Sekretariāts, ko nodrošina Nīderlandes Satiksmes, sabiedrisko darbu un ūdens vadības ministrija, un tā centrālais birojs atrodas Hāgā.

6.5. Sekretariāts, kas darbojas Komitejas vadībā un tam pieejamo resursu iespēju robežās, apņemas:

.1 sagatavot sanāksmes, izplatīt dokumentus un nodrošināt tādu palīdzību, kāda nepieciešama Komitejai, lai tā pildītu savus pienākumus;

.2 veicināt informācijas apmaiņu, veikt procedūras, kas aprakstītas 4.pielikumā, un sagatavot ziņojumus, ja tas nepieciešams Memoranda mērķu sasniegšanai;

.3 veikt citas pasākumus, ja tādi nepieciešami, lai nodrošinātu efektīvu Memoranda darbību.

7.daļa. Grozījumi

7.1 Administrācijas var ierosināt veikt grozījumus Memorandā.

7.2 Ja tiek ierosināts veikt grozījumus Memoranda daļās, tiek piemērota šāda procedūra:

.1 ierosinātie grozījumi ir jāiesniedz Sekretariātam izskatīšanai Komitejā;

.2 grozījumus var apstiprināt, ja par tiem nobalsojušas divas trešdaļas no klātesošajiem administrāciju pārstāvjiem, kas piedalās balsojumā Komitejā. Šādi apstiprinātus grozījumus Sekretariāts izplata administrācijām apstiprināšanai;

.3 grozījumi tiek uzskatīti par pieņemtiem vai nu sešus mēnešus pēc tam, kad administrāciju pārstāvji Komitejā tos apstiprinājuši, vai pēc jebkura cita laika perioda, ko vienbalsīgi noteikuši administrāciju pārstāvji Komitejā grozījumu apstiprināšanas brīdī, ja attiecīgā laika periodā kāda no administrācijām nav iesniegusi Sekretariātam savus iebildumus;

.4 grozījumi stājas spēkā 60 dienas pēc to apstiprināšanas vai pēc jebkura cita laika perioda, ko vienbalsīgi noteikuši administrāciju pārstāvji Komitejā.

7.3 Ja tiek ierosināts veikt grozījumus Memoranda pielikumos, tiek piemērota šāda procedūra:

.1 ierosinātie grozījumi ir jāiesniedz Sekretariātam, kurš tos izsūta izskatīšanai pārējām administrācijām;

.2 grozījumi tiek uzskatīti par pieņemtiem pēc trīs mēnešu termiņa beigšanās no dienas, kurā Sekretariāts tos izplatījis, ja kāda no administrācijām rakstiskā formā nepieprasa grozījumu izskatīšanu Komitejā. Šajā gadījumā tiek pielietota procedūra, kas aprakstīta 7.daļas 7.2.punktā;

.3 grozījumi stājas spēkā 60 dienas pēc to apstiprināšanas vai pēc jebkura cita laika perioda, ko vienbalsīgi noteikušas administrācijas.

8.daļa

8.1 Šis Memorands nemazina citu starptautisko līgumu saistības un tiesības.

8.2 Eiropas piekrastes vai Ziemeļatlantijas baseina no Ziemeļamerikas līdz Eiropai piekrastes valsts, kas atbilst 6.pielikuma kritērijiem, var pievienoties Memorandam, ja tam piekrīt visas Memoranda administrācijas.

8.3 Brīdī, kad šis Memorands stājas spēkā, “Saprašanās Memorands starp noteiktām jūras administrācijām par tirdzniecības kuģu uzturēšanas standartiem”, kas parakstīts Hāgā 1978.gada 2.martā, zaudē spēku.

8.4 Šis Memorands stājas spēkā 1982.gada 1.jūlijā.

8.5 Memoranda teksti angļu un franču valodā ir autentiski.

Parakstīts Parīzē angļu un franču valodā tūkstoš deviņi simti astoņdesmit otrā gada divdesmit sestajā janvārī.

¹ Kanādas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 1994.gada 3.maijā; Kanādas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 1994.gada 3.maijā.

² Horvātijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 1996.gada 8.novembrī. Horvātijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 1997.gada 1.janvārī.

³ Igaunijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 2005.gada 12.maijā. Igaunijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 2005.gada 1.jūlijā.

⁴ Islandes Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 2000.gada 11.maijā. Islandes Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 2000.gada 1.jūlijā.

⁵ Latvijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 2005.gada 12.maijā. Latvijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 2005.gada 1.jūlijā.

⁶ Polijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 1991.gada 27.novembrī. Polijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 1992.gada 1.janvārī.

⁷ Krievijas Federācijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 1995.gada 10.novembrī. Krievijas Federācijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 1996.gada 1.janvārī.

⁸ Slovēnijas Jūras administrācija pievienojusies Memorandam 2003.gada 15.maijā; Slovēnijas Jūras administrācijai Memorands stājies spēkā 2003.gada 22.jūlijā.

1.pielikums

OSTAS VALSTS KONTROLES PROCEDŪRAS

2.pielikums

IZMEKLĒŠANAS PROCEDŪRAS PAR MARPOL 73/78 KONVENCIJAS PRASĪBU PĀRKĀPUMIEM

Saturs

1.daļa Procedūras attiecībā uz MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I un II pielikumā noteiktajām prasībām par vielu atsūknēšanu

2.daļa MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz naftas atsūknēšanu pārkāpumi

3.daļa MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz naftas atsūknēšanu pārkāpumu iespējamo pierādījumu uzskaitījums

3.1 Darbības, kas jāveic, pamanot naftas piesārņojumu

3.2 Izmeklēšana uz kuģa

3.3 Izmeklēšana krastā

3.4 Iepriekš neminēta informācija

3.5 Secinājumi

4.daļa MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas II pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz vielu atsūknēšanu pārkāpumi

5.daļa MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas II pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz vielu atsūknēšanu pārkāpumu iespējamo pierādījumu uzskaitījums

5.1 Darbības, kas jāveic, pamanot naftas piesārņojumu

5.2 Izmeklēšana uz kuģa

5.3 Izmeklēšana krastā

5.4 Informācija, kas neietilpst iepriekšminētajā

5.5 Secinājumi

1.daļa. Procedūras attiecībā uz MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I un II pielikumā noteiktajām prasībām par vielu atsūknēšanu

1.1 Ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram pēc paziņojuma par iespējamu MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I un II pielikumā noteikto atsūknēšanas prasību neievērošanu saņemšanas jārīkojas saskaņā ar procedūrām, kas uzskaitītas šī pielikuma 2. un 3. daļā, lai izmeklētu MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I pielikumā noteikto atsūknēšanas prasību neievērošanu, un šī pielikuma 4. un 5. daļā, lai izmeklētu MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas II pielikumā noteikto atsūknēšanas prasību neievērošanu.

1.2 Veicot pārbaudi sakarā ar MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I un II pielikumā noteikto atsūknēšanas prasību iespējamo neievērošanu, ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram īpaši jāņem vērā SJO rezolūcijas A.787(19) 3.4.1 līdz 3.4.13 punktu nosacījumi, un ostas valsts administrācijas instrukcijas, kas balstītas uz šiem nosacījumiem.

1.3 Ja izmeklēšanas laikā ostas valsts inspektors ir atklājis trūkumus, kas ir acīmredzami bīstami drošībai, veselībai vai videi, jāpiemēro Memoranda 3.10.1 punkta prasības.

2.daļa. MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz naftas atsūknēšanu pārkāpumi

2.1 Šī pielikuma 2. un 3.daļas nosacījumi ir paredzēti, lai noteiktu informāciju, kas ir bieži nepieciešama karoga valsts administrācijai, lai celtu apsūdzību sakarā ar šādiem iespējamiem pārkāpumiem.

2.2 Sagatavojot ostas valsts ziņojumu par trūkumiem, kas saistīti ar atsūknēšanas prasību pārkāpumiem, krasta vai ostas valsts administrācijām ir ieteicams vadīties pēc iespējamo pierādījumu saraksta, kas norādīts šī pielikuma 3. daļā. Šajā sakarā jāņem vērā, ka:

.1 ziņojuma mērķis ir sniegt iegūstamo datu optimālu salīdzinājumu, tomēr, ja visu informāciju nav iespējams nodrošināt, jāsniedz tik daudz informācijas, cik iespējams;

.2 visai ziņojumā sniegtajai informācijai ir jābūt pamatotai ar faktiem, kuri kopumā varētu pārliecināt ostas vai krasta valsti par notikušo pārkāpumu.

2.3 Papildus ostas valsts ziņojumam par trūkumiem ostas vai krasta administrācijai ir jāsastāda ziņojums, pamatojoties uz iespējamo pierādījumu sarakstu. Ir svarīgi, lai šiem ziņojumiem tiktu pievienoti tādi dokumenti kā:

.1 piesārņojuma konstatētāja paziņojums. Papildus šī pielikuma 3. daļā pieprasītajai informācijai paziņojumā jāie­kļauj apsvērumi, kas likuši konstatētājam secināt, kas šis ir vienīgais iespējamais piesārņojuma avots.;

.2 ziņojumi par paraugu ņemšanu no naftas plankuma un kuģa. Šajos ziņojumos jānorāda paraugu ņemšanas vieta un laiks, jānorāda personas, kas ņēmušas paraugus, un saņemšanas kvītis, kurās norādītas personas, kas uzraudzījušas paraugu ņemšanas procesu un saņēmušas paraugus;

.3 ziņojumi par no naftas plankuma un no kuģa ņemto paraugu analīzēm; ziņojumā jāiekļauj analīžu rezultāti, izmantotās metodes apraksts, atsauce uz zinātnisko dokumentāciju, kas apliecina izmantotās metodes precizitāti un pamatojumu, vai tās kopija, un personu, kas veikušas analīzes, vārdi un pieredze;

.4 ostas valsts kontroles inspektora, kas pārbaudījis kuģi, ziņojums, viņa amats un organizācija;

.5 aptaujāto personu ziņojumi;

.6 liecinieku ziņojumi;

.7 naftas plankuma fotogrāfijas;

.8 Naftas operāciju žurnāla, Kuģa žurnāla, atsūknēšanas ierakstu utt. attiecīgo lappušu kopijas.

Visu novērojumu, fotogrāfiju un dokumentācijas pareizībai ir jābūt apliecinātai ar parakstu. Visas apliecības, apstiprinājumi un apliecinājumi jāveic saskaņā ar tās valsts likumiem, kas tos izdevusi. Visiem ziņojumiem jābūt tās personas parakstītiem, kas ziņojumu ir sastādījusi, ja iespējams, to paraksta arī liecinieki. Jābūt norādītam ziņojuma sastādīšanas datumam. Virs vai zem paraksta skaidri salasāmā veidā jābūt ierakstītiem to personu vārdiem, kas parakstījušas ziņojumus.

2.4 Šī pielikuma 2.2 un 2.3 punktā minētais ziņojums ir jānosūta karoga valsts administrācijai. Ja krasta valsts, kas konstatējusi piesārņojumu, un ostas valsts, kas veic izmeklēšanu uz kuģa, nav viena un tā pati, valstij, kas veic minēto izmeklēšanu, ir jānosūta iegūto dokumentu kopijas valstij, kas konstatējusi piesārņojumu un pieprasījusi izmeklēšanu.

3.daļa. MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas I pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz naftas atsūknēšanu pārkāpumu iespējamo pierādījumu uzskaitījums

3.1 Darbības, kas jāveic, pamanot naftas piesārņojumu

3.1.1 Ziņas par kuģi vai kuģiem, kas tiek turēti aizdomās par pārkāpuma izdarīšanu

.1 Kuģa vārds

.2 Iemesli, kāpēc kuģis tiek turēts aizdomās

.3 Novērošanas vai identificēšanas datums un laiks (UTC)

.4 Kuģa atrašanās vieta

.5 Karoga valsts un pieraksta osta

.6 Kuģa tips (piemēram, tankkuģis, kravas kuģis, pasažieru kuģis, zvejas kuģis), izmēri (aptuvenā tonnāža) un citi aprakstoši dati (piemēram, virsbūves krāsa un skursteņa marķējums)

.7 Iegrimes stāvoklis (piekrauts vai ar balastu)

.8 Aptuvenais kurss un ātrums

.9 Naftas plankuma izvietojums attiecībā pret kuģi (piemēram, kuģa pakaļgalā, kreisajā pusē, pie labā borta)

.10 Kuģa daļa, no kuras novērota noplūde

.11 Vai noplūde novērsta, kad kuģis pamanīts vai izsaukts pa radio

3.1.2 Ziņas par naftas plankumu

.1 Konstatēšanas datums un laiks (UTC), ja tas atšķiras no šī pielikuma 3.1.1.punkta 3.apakšpunktā minētā

.2 Naftas plankuma atrašanās vieta garuma un platuma grādos, ja tas atšķiras no šī pielikuma 3.1.1.4 punktā minētā

.3 Aptuvenais attālums jūras jūdzēs līdz tuvākajam orientierim krastā

.4 Aptuvenais naftas plankuma izmērs (garums, platums un kāds virsmas laukuma procents noklāts ar naftu)

.5 Naftas plankuma fiziskais apraksts (virziens un forma, piemēram, nepārtraukta, gabalaina vai vējrindām)

.6 Naftas plankuma izskats (norādīt kategorijas)

.1 A kategorija: tikko pamanāms labvēlīgos gaismas apstākļos

.2 B kategorija: pamanāms sudrabots spīdums uz ūdens virsmas

.3 C kategorija: var pamanīt pirmās krāsas pēdas

.4 D kategorija: spilgts krāsu savienojums

.5 E kategorija: krāsas sāk kļūt blāvas

.6 F kategorija: krāsas ir daudz tumšākas

.7 Debesu stāvoklis (spilgta saule, apmācies utt.), gaismas krišanas virziens un redzamība (kilometros) konstatēšanas brīdī

.8 Jūras stāvoklis

.9 Vēja ātrums un virziens

.10 Straumes ātrums un virziens

3.1.3 Konstatētāja/u identifikācija

.1 Konstatētāja vārds

.2 Organizācija, kuru konstatētājs pārstāv (ja tāda ir)

.3 Konstatētāja statuss šajā organizācijā

.4 Konstatēšana notikusi no lidaparāta/kuģa/krasta/citādi

.5 Kuģa vai lidaparāta nosaukums, no kura notikusi konstatēšana

.6 Konkrēta atrašanās vieta kuģim, lidaparātam, krastā vai citādi, no kurienes notikusi konstatēšana

.7 Darbības, kādās konstatētājs bija iesaistīts, kad notika konstatēšana, piemēram: patrulēšana, reiss, lidojums (pa ceļam no....uz...), utt.

3.1.4 Konstatēšanas metodes un dokumentācija

.1 Vizuāli

.2 Parastas fotogrāfijas

.3 Tālvadības uztveres ieraksti un/vai tālvadības uztveres fotogrāfijas

.4 No naftas plankuma paņemtie paraugi

.5 Jebkāds cits konstatēšanas veids (konkretizēt)

Piezīme: Noplūdes fotogrāfijai vajadzētu būt krāsainai. Fotogrāfijas var sniegt šādu informāciju: ka jūrā redzamā viela ir nafta; ka jūrā izplūdušās naftas daudzums pārsniedz Konvencijā pieļauto; ka nafta izplūst vai ir izplūdusi no konkrētā kuģa; atpazīt kuģi

Pieredze rāda, ka augstākminēto var panākt ar šādām trīs fotogrāfijām:

.1 ziņas par naftas plankumu, fotografējot gandrīz vertikāli no augstuma, kas mazāks par 300 metriem, lai saule būtu fotogrāfam aiz muguras;

.2 vispārējs skats uz kuģi un naftas plankumu, parādot, ka nafta izplūst no konkrētā kuģa; un

.3 ziņas par kuģi, lai to varētu atpazīt.

3.1.5 Cita informācija, ja ir nodibināti radiosakari

.1 Kuģa kapteinis ir informēts par piesārņojumu

.2 Kapteiņa paskaidrojums

.3 Kuģa pēdējā osta

.4 Kuģa nākamā osta

.5 Kuģa kapteiņa un kuģa īpašnieka vārds

.6 Kuģa pazīšanās signāls

3.2 Izmeklēšana uz kuģa

3.2.1 IOPP apliecības inspekcija

.1 Kuģa vārds

.2 Pazīšanās signāls

.3 Pieraksta osta

.4 Kuģa tips

.5 Izdošanas datums un vieta

.6 Apstiprinājuma datums un vieta

Piezīme: Ja kuģim nav IOPP apliecības, jāsniedz visa pieejamā informācija.

3.2.2 IOPP apliecības pielikumu inspekcija

.1 IOPP apliecības pielikuma 2., 3., 4., 5. un 6.daļas attiecīgie punkti (izņemot naftas tankkuģus)

.2 IOPP apliecības pielikuma 2., 3., 4., 5., 6., 7., 8., 9. un 10. punkts (naftas tank­kuģiem)

Piezīme: ja kuģim nav IOPP apliecības, jāsniedz ziņas par aprīkojumu un iekārtām uz kuģa, kas paredzētas jūras piesārņojuma novēršanai.

3.2.3 Naftas operāciju žurnāla inspekcija

.1 Naftas operāciju žurnāla I daļas attiecīgo lappušu kopijas, kas parāda periodu par pēdējām 30 dienām pirms ziņojuma par noplūdi

.2 Naftas operāciju žurnāla II daļas (ja uz kuģa tāds ir) attiecīgo lappušu kopijas, kas parāda pilnu kuģa iekraušanas/izkraušanas/noturības un tanku tīrīšanas ciklu. Jānoņem arī tanku shēmu kopijas.

3.2.4 Kuģa žurnāla inspekcija

.1 Pēdējā osta, iziešanas datums, iegrime priekšgalā un pakaļgalā

.2 Pašreizējā osta, ienākšanas datums, iegrime priekšgalā un pakaļgalā

.3 Kuģa atrašanās vieta brīdī, kad saņemts ziņojums par noplūdi, vai aptuveni tajā laikā

.4 Pārbaude uz vietas, vai kuģa žurnālā minētās pozīcijas atbilst Naftas operāciju žurnālā minētajām.

3.2.5 Citu kuģa dokumentu inspekcija

Citi pierādījumiem nozīmīgi dokumenti (ja nepieciešams, jānoņem kopijas) kā:

.1 pēdējie tanku uzmērīšanas akti

.2 uzraudzības un kontroles aprīkojuma veiktie pieraksti

3.2.6 Kuģa inspekcija

.1 Kuģa aprīkojuma atbilstība IOPP apliecības pielikumam

.2 Paņemtie paraugi. No kādām kuģa vietām paņemti.

.3 Naftas pēdas aizborta atsūknēšanas atveru tuvumā

.4 Mašīntelpas stāvoklis un bilžu saturs

.5 Naftas produktus saturošā ūdens separatora, filtrēšanas aprīkojuma un trauksmes, apturēšanas vai uzraudzības ierīču stāvoklis

.6 Nogulšņu un/vai uzglabāšanas tanku saturs

.7 Vērā ņemamas noplūdes avoti

Naftas tankkuģiem ir būtiski arī šādi papildus pierādījumi:

.8 Nafta uz atdalītā tīrā balasta virsmas

.9 Stāvoklis sūkņu telpu bilžās

.10 Stāvoklis sistēmā mazgāšanai ar jēlnaftu

.11 Stāvoklis inertās gāzes sistēmā

.12 Stāvoklis atsūknēšanas uzraudzības un kontroles sistēmā

.13 Nostādināšanas tanku stāvoklis (aptuvenais eļļas un ūdens daudzums)

3.2.7 Incidentā iesaistīto personu ziņojumi

Ja Naftas operāciju žurnāla I daļa nav pienācīgi aizpildīta, jāsaņem atbildes uz šādiem jautājumiem:

.1 Vai brīdī, kas norādīts avārijas ziņojumā, notika noplūde (nejauša vai tīša)?

.2 Vai atsūknēšana no bilžām tiek kontrolēta automātiski?

.3 Ja jā, kad šī sistēma pēdējoreiz tika darbināta un kad šī sistēma pēdējoreiz tika ieslēgta manuālajā režīmā?

.4 Ja nē, kurā datumā un cikos notika pēdējā bilžu nopludināšana?

.5 Kurā datumā un cikos notika pēdējā naftas nogulšņu nopludināšana un kā tā tika veikta?

.6 Vai parasti bilžu atsūknēšana notiek tieši jūrā vai bilžu ūdens vispirms tiek savākts tankā? Jānorāda savākšanas tanks

.7 Vai pēdējā laikā dīzeļdegvielas tanki ir izmantoti kā balasta tanki?

Ja Naftas operāciju žurnāla II daļa nav pienācīgi aizpildīta, vajag saņemt atbildes uz šādiem jautājumiem:

.8 Kāds bija kravas/balasta izvietojums uz kuģa brīdī, kad tas izgāja no pēdējās ostas?

.9 Kāds bija kravas/balasta izvietojums uz kuģa, kad tas ienāca pašreizējā ostā?

.10 Kad un kur tika veikta pēdējā iekraušana?

.11 Kad un kur tika veikta pēdējā izkraušana?

.12 Kad un kur notika pēdējā netīrā balasta atsūknēšana?

.13 Kad un kur notika pēdējā kravas tanku tīrīšana?

.14 Kad un kur notika pēdējā mazgāšana ar jēlnaftu un kuri tanki tika mazgāti?

.15 Kad un kur notika pēdējā noliešana no nostādināšanas tankiem?

.16 Kāds ir šķidruma līmenis nostādināšanas tankos un atbilstošais uzmērījumu augstums?

.17 Kurā tankā bija netīrais balasts pēdējā balasta pārgājiena laikā (ja kuģis iebrauca ostā ar balastu)?

.18 Kurā tankā bija tīrais balasts pēdējā balasta pārgājiena laikā (ja kuģis iebrauca osta ar balastu)?

Papildus var noderēt arī šāda informācija:

.19 Ziņas par pašreizējo kuģa pārgājienu (iepriekšējās ostas, nākamās ostas, pārvadājumu veids)

.20 Dīzeļdegvielas un balasta tanku saturs

.21 Iepriekšējā un nākošā bunkurēšana, dīzeļdegvielas tips

.22 Pieņemšanas iekārtu spēja vai nespēja uzņemt naftas atkritumus pašreizējā pārgājiena laikā

.23 Dīzeļdegvielas iekšējā pārsūknēšana pašreizējā pārgājiena laikā

Naftas tankkuģiem var noderēt arī šāda informācija

.24 Pārvadājumu veids, kādā kuģis ir iesaistīts kā īss/garš reiss, jēlnaftas vai naftas produktu pārvadāšana

.25 Kuri tanki ir tīri, kuri netīri

.26 Paredzētie vai veiktie remonti kravas tankos

Dažāda informācija:

.27 Komentāri attiecībā uz kuģa aprīkojumu

.28 Komentāri attiecībā uz ziņojumu par piesārņojumu

.29 Citi komentāri

3.3. Izmeklēšana krastā

3.3.1 Naftas paraugu analīze

Jānorāda paraugu analīžu metodes un rezultāti

3.3.2 Papildus informācija

Var būt noderīga papildus informācija par kuģi, kas iegūta no termināla personāla, tanku tīrīšanas veicējiem vai krasta pieņemšanas iekārtām.

Piezīme: Ja iespējams, jebkura informācija, kas minēta šajā punktā, ir jāapstiprina ar attiecīgiem dokumentiem kā parakstīti ziņojumi, pavadzīmes, kvītis utt.

3.4. Iepriekš neminēta informācija

3.5. Secinājumi

3.5.1 Izmeklētāja tehnisko secinājumu apkopojums

3.5.2 Norādes uz attiecīgajiem MARPOL 73/78 I pielikuma nosacījumiem, par kuru pārkāpšanu kuģis tiek turēts aizdomās.

3.5.3 Vai izmeklēšanas rezultāti ir pierādījuši trūkumu ziņojuma faktus?

4.daļa. MARPOL 73/78 II pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz vielu atsūknēšanu pārkāpumi

4.1 Šī pielikuma 4. un 5.daļas nosacījumi paredzēti, lai noteiktu informāciju, kas karoga valsts administrācijai būs nepieciešama lietas ierosināšanai par MARPOL 73/78 II pielikumā noteikto atsūknēšanas prasību pārkāpšanu.

4.2 Sastādot ostas valsts ziņojumu par trūkumiem, kas saistīti ar atsūknēšanas prasību pārkāpumiem, krasta vai ostas valsts administrācijām ieteicams vadīties pēc iespējamo pierādījumu saraksta, kas norādīts šī pielikuma 5. daļā. Šajā sakarā jāņem vērā, ka:

.1 ziņojuma mērķis ir sniegt iegūto datu optimālu salīdzinājumu; tomēr, ja visu informāciju nevar nodrošināt, jāsniedz tik daudz informācijas, cik iespējams; un

.2 ir svarīgi, lai visa ziņojumā iekļautā informācija tiktu apstiprināta ar faktiem, kas, kopumā ņemot, varētu pārliecināt ostas vai krasta valsts administrāciju, ka ir noticis pārkāpums; un

.3 ja izplūdušais produkts varēja būt nafta, uz to attiecas MARPOL 73/78 I pielikuma II papildinājuma 2.pielikums.

4.3 Papildus ostas valsts ziņojumam par trūkumiem ostas vai krasta administrācijai ir jāsastāda ziņojums, pamatojoties uz iespējamo pierādījumu sarakstu. Ir svarīgi, lai šiem ziņojumiem tiktu pievienoti tādi dokumenti kā:

.1 konstatētāja paziņojums par piesārņojumu. Papildus šī pielikuma 3.daļā pieprasītajai informācijai paziņojumā jāiekļauj apsvērumi, kas likuši konstatētājam secināt, kas šis ir vienīgais iespējamais piesārņojuma avots.;

.2 ziņojumi par paraugu ņemšanu no izplūdušās vielas plankuma un kuģa. Šajos ziņojumos jānorāda paraugu ņemšanas vieta un laiks, jānorāda personas, kas ņēmušas paraugus, un saņemšanas kvītis, kurās norādītas personas, kas uzraudzījušas paraugu ņemšanas procesu un saņēmušas paraugus;

.3 ziņojumi par izplūdušās vielas plankuma un kuģa paraugu analīzēm; ziņojumā jāiekļauj analīžu rezultāti, izmantotās metodes apraksts, atsauce uz zinātnisko dokumentāciju, kas apliecina izmantotās metodes precizitāti un pamatojumu, vai tās kopija, un personu, kas veikušas analīzes, vārdi un pieredze;

.4 ostas valsts kontroles inspektora, kas pārbaudījis kuģi, ziņojums, viņa amats un organizācija;

.5 aptaujāto personu ziņojumi;

.6 liecinieku ziņojumi;

.7 izplūdušās vielas plankuma fotogrāfijas;

.8 Kravas operāciju žurnāla, Kuģa žurnāla, atsūknēšanas pierakstu utt. attiecīgo lappušu kopijas.

Visu novērojumu, fotogrāfiju un dokumentācijas pareizībai ir jābūt apliecinātai ar parakstu. Visas apliecības, apstiprinājumi un apliecinājumi jāveic saskaņā ar tās valsts likumiem, kas tos izdevusi. Visiem ziņojumiem jābūt tās personas parakstītiem, kas ziņojumu ir sastādījusi, ja iespējams, to paraksta arī liecinieki. Jābūt norādītam ziņojuma sastādīšanas datumam. Virs vai zem paraksta skaidri salasāmā veidā jābūt ierakstītiem to personu vārdiem, kas parakstījušas ziņojumus.

4.4 Šī pielikuma 4.2 un 4.3 punktā minētais ziņojums ir jānosūta karoga valsts administrācijai. Ja krasta valsts, kas konstatējusi piesārņojumu, un ostas valsts, kas veic izmeklēšanu uz kuģa, nav viena un tā pati, valstij, kas veic minēto izmeklēšanu, ir jānosūta iegūto dokumentu kopijas valstij, kas konstatējusi piesārņojumu un pieprasījusi izmeklēšanu.

5.daļa. MARPOL 73/78 konvencijas II pielikumā noteikto prasību attiecībā uz vielu atsūknēšanu pārkāpumu iespējamo pierādījumu uzskaitījums

5.1 Darbības, kas jāveic, pamanot piesārņojumu

5.1.1 Ziņas par kuģi vai kuģiem, kas tiek turēti aizdomās par pārkāpuma izdarīšanu

.1 Kuģa vārds

.2 Iemesli, kāpēc kuģis tiek turēts aizdomās

.3 Novērošanas vai identificēšanas datums un laiks (UTC)

.4 Kuģa atrašanās vieta

.5 Karoga valsts un pieraksta osta

.6 Kuģa tips (piemēram, tankkuģis, kravas kuģis, pasažieru kuģis, zvejas kuģis), izmēri (aptuvenā tonnāža) un citi aprakstoši dati (piemēram, virsbūves krāsa un skursteņa marķējums)

.7 Iegrimes stāvoklis (piekrauts vai ar balastu)

.8 Aptuvenais kurss un ātrums

.9 Naftas plankuma izvietojums attiecībā pret kuģi (piemēram, kuģa pakaļgalā, kreisajā pusē, pie labā borta)

.10 Kuģa daļa, no kuras novērota noplūde

.11 Vai noplūde novērsta, kad kuģis pamanīts vai izsaukts pa radio

5.1.2 Ziņas par izplūdušās vielas plankumu

.1 Konstatēšanas datums un laiks (UTC), ja tas atšķiras no šī pielikuma 5.1.1.punkta 3.apakšpunkta minētā

.2 Plankuma atrašanās vieta garuma un platuma grādos, ja tas atšķiras no šī pielikuma 5.1.1.punkta 4.apakšpunktā minētā

.3 Aptuvenais attālums jūras jūdzēs līdz tuvākajai sauszemei

.4 Kartēs norādītais ūdens dziļums

.5 Naftas plankuma aptuvenais izmērs (garums, platums un kāds virsmas laukuma procents noklāts ar izplūdušo vielu)

.6 Naftas plankuma fiziskais apraksts (virziens un forma, piemēram, nepārtraukta, gabalaina vai vējrindām)

.7 Plankuma krāsa

.8 Debesu stāvoklis (spilgta saule, apmācies utt.), gaismas krišanas virziens un redzamība (kilometros) konstatēšanas brīdī

.9 Jūras stāvoklis

.10 Vēja ātrums un virziens

.11 Straumes ātrums un virziens

5.1.3 Ziņas par konstatētāju

.1 Konstatētāja vārds

.2 Organizācija, kuru konstatētājs pārstāv (ja tāda ir)

.3 Konstatētāja statuss šajā organizācijā

.4 Konstatēšana notikusi no lidaparāta/kuģa/krasta/citādi

.5 Kuģa vai lidaparāta nosaukums, no kura notikusi konstatēšana

.6 Konkrēta atrašanās vieta kuģim, lidaparātam, krastā vai citādi, no kurienes notikusi konstatēšana

.7 Darbības, kādās konstatētājs bija iesaistīts, kad notika konstatēšana, piemēram: patrulēšana, pārgājiens, lidojums (pa ceļam no....uz...), utt.

5.1.4 Konstatēšanas metodes un dokumentācija

.1 Vizuāli

.2 Parastas fotogrāfijas

.3 Tālvadības uztveres ieraksti un/vai tālvadības uztveres fotogrāfijas

.4 No izplūdušās vielas plankuma paņemtie paraugi

.5 Jebkāds cits konstatēšanas veids (konkretizēt)

Piezīme: Noplūdes fotogrāfijai vajadzētu būt krāsainai. Vislabākos rezultātus var sasniegt ar šādām trīs fotogrāfijām:

.1 ziņas par naftas plankumu, fotografējot gandrīz vertikāli no augstuma, kas mazāks par 300 metriem, lai saule būtu fotogrāfam aiz muguras;

.2 vispārējs skats uz kuģi un piesārņojuma plankumu, parādot, ka piesārņojošā viela izplūst no konkrētā kuģa; un

.3 ziņas par kuģi, lai to varētu atpazīt.

5.1.5 Cita informācija, ja ir nodibināti radiosakari

.1 Kuģa kapteinis ir informēts par piesārņojumu

.2 Kapteiņa paskaidrojums

.3 Kuģa pēdējā osta

.4 Kuģa nākamā osta

.5 Kuģa kapteiņa un kuģa īpašnieka vārds

.6 Kuģa pazīšanās signāls

5.2 Izmeklēšana uz kuģa

5.2.1 Apliecības inspekcija (CoF vai NLS apliecība)

.1 Kuģa vārds

.2 Pazīšanās signāls

.3 Pieraksta osta

.4 Kuģa tips

.5 Izdošanas datums un vieta

.6 Apstiprinājuma datums un vieta

5.2.2 P un A rokasgrāmatas inspekcija

.1 II pielikuma vielu saraksts, kuras kuģis drīkst pārvadāt

.2 Ierobežojumi tankiem, kuros šīs vielas drīkst pārvadāt

.3 Vai kuģis ir aprīkots ar efektīvu paraugu noņemšanas sistēmu

.4 Nogulšņu daudzums, kas atklāts pārbaudes laikā

5.2.3 Kravas operāciju žurnāla pārbaude

Jānokopē attiecīgās Kravas operāciju žurnāla lappuses, lai iegūtu pilnīgu informāciju par kuģa iekraušanu/izkraušanu/balastu un tanku tīrīšanas ciklu. Jānoņem arī tanku shēmu kopijas.

5.2.4 Kuģa žurnāla inspekcija

.1 Pēdējā ieiešanas osta, iziešanas datums, iegrime priekšgalā un pakaļgalā

.2 Pašreizējā osta, ienākšanas datums, iegrime priekšgalā un pakaļgalā

.3 Kuģa atrašanās vieta brīdī, kad saņemts ziņojums par noplūdi, vai aptuveni tajā laikā

.4 Pārbaude uz vietas, vai Kravas operāciju žurnālā norādītie laiki attiecībā uz atsūknēšanām atbilst kuģa atrašanās vietai pietiekošā attālumā no krasta, atbilst vajadzīgajam kuģa ātrumam un vajadzīgajam ūdens dziļumam

5.2.5 Citu kuģa dokumentu pārbaude

Citi pierādījumiem svarīgi dokumenti (nepieciešamības gadījumā jānoņem kopijas) ir:

.1 pašreizējās vai iepriekš pārvadātās kravas dokumenti kā arī attiecīgā informācija par nepieciešamo izkraušanas temperatūru, viskozitāti un/vai kušanas temperatūru

.2 ieraksti par vielas temperatūru izkraušanas laikā

.3 Monitoringa aprīkojumu, ja tāds ir, veiktie pieraksti.

5.2.6 Kuģa inspekcija

.1 Kuģa aprīkojums saskaņā ar P un A rokasgrāmatu

.2 Noņemtie paraugi; no kādām kuģa vietām ņemti

.3 Vērā ņemamas noplūdes avoti

.4 Kravas atlikumi uz atdalītā tīrā balasta virsmas

.5 Stāvoklis sūkņu telpu bilžās

.6 Atsūknēšanas uzraudzības sistēmas stāvoklis

.7 Nostādināšanas tanku saturs (aptuvenais ūdens un atlikumu daudzums)

5.2.7 Incidentā iesaistīto personu ziņojumi

Ja Kravas operāciju žurnāls nav pienācīgi aizpildīts, vajag saņemt atbildes uz šādiem jautājumiem:

.1 Vai avārijas ziņojumā norādītajā laikā notika noplūde (nejauša vai tīša)

.2 Kuri tanki tiks piepildīti ostā?

.3 Kuri tanki bijā jāmazgā, atrodoties jūrā? Vai tanki bija iepriekš mazgāti?

.4 Kad un kur tie tika tīrīti?

.5 Kādu vielu nogulsnes tajos bija?

.6 Kas tika izdarīts ar no tanka izskalotajām nogulsnēm?

.7 Vai nostādināšanas tanka vai kravas tanka, kas izmantots kā nostādināšanas tanks, saturs tika atsūknēts jūrā?

.8 Kad un kur notika atsūknēšana?

.9 Kāds ir nostādināšanas tanka vai kravas tanka, kas izmantots kā nostādināšanas tanks, saturs?

.10 Kurā tankā atradās netīrais balasts pēdējā balasta pārgājiena laikā (ja kuģis iebrauca ar balastu)?

.11 Kurā tankā atradās tīrais balasts pēdējā balasta pārgājiena laikā (ja kuģis iebrauca ar balastu)?

.12 Ziņas par kuģa pašreizējo pārgājienu (iepriekšējās ostas, nākamās ostas, pārvadājumu veids

.13 Pieredzētie sarežģījumi ar nodošanu krasta pieņemšanas iekārtās

.14 Pieredzētie sarežģījumi ar efektīvām paraugu noņemšanas operācijām

.15 Kuri tanki ir tīri vai netīri pienākšanas brīdī?

.16 Veiktie vai paredzētie remontdarbi kravas tankiem

Dažāda informācija

.17 Komentāri attiecībā uz kuģa aprīkojuma stāvokli

.18 Komentāri attiecībā uz ziņojumu par piesārņojumu

.19 Citi komentāri

5.3 Izmeklēšana krastā

5.3.1 Paraugu analīzes

Jānorāda paraugu analīžu metodes un rezultāti

5.3.2 Papildus informācija

Var būt noderīga papildus informācija par kuģi, kas iegūta no termināla personāla, tanku tīrīšanas veicējiem vai krasta pieņemšanas iekārtām.

Piezīme: Ja iespējams, jebkura informācija, kas minēta šajā punktā, ir jāapstiprina ar attiecīgiem dokumentiem kā parakstīti ziņojumi, pavadzīmes, kvītis utt.

5.3.3 Informācija no iepriekšējās izkraušanas ostas termināla

.1 Apstiprinājums, ka kuģis izkrauts, no tā noņemti paraugi un tam veikta iepriekšējā mazgāšana saskaņā ar P un A rokasgrāmatu

.2 Sarežģījumu raksturojums, ja tādi bijuši

.3 Administrāciju noteiktie ierobežojumi saskaņā ar kuriem kuģim atļauts doties jūrā

.4 Ierobežojumi attiecībā uz krasta pieņemšanas iekārtām

5.4 Iepriekš neminēta informācija

5.5 Secinājumi

.1 Izmeklētāja tehnisko secinājumu apkopojums

.2 Norādes uz attiecīgajiem MARPOL 73/78 II pielikuma nosacījumiem, par kuru pārkāpšanu kuģis tiek turēts aizdomās.

.3 Vai izmeklēšanas rezultāti ir pierādījuši trūkumu ziņojuma faktus?

3.pielikums

IEBRAUKŠANAS AIZLIEGUMS OSTĀS NOTEIKTIEM KUĢIEM

A. Kuģu kategorijas, kurām var aizliegt iebraukšanu (kā noteikts Memoranda 3.10.5.punkta 1.apakšpunktā)

.1 Gāzes un ķimikāliju tankkuģi;

.2 Beramkravu kuģi;

.3 Naftas tankkuģi;

.4 Pasažieru kuģi.

B. Procedūras saistībā ar iebraukšanas aizliegumu ostā (kā noteikts Memoranda 3.10.5. punkta 2.apakšpunktā)

.1 Ja ir konstatēta atbilstība Memoranda 3.10.5.punkta 2.apakšpunta nosacījumiem un kuģis ir aizturēts attiecīgi otro vai trešo reizi, ostas administrācijai rakstveidā ir jāinformē kuģa kapteinis un kuģa īpašnieks vai operators par kuģa iebraukšanas aizlieguma orderi.

Kompetentajai administrācijai jāinformē arī karoga valsts administrācija, iesaistītā klasifikācijas sabiedrība, Jūrlietu administratīvais centrs (turpmāk — DSI) un Sekretariāts.

Kuģa iebraukšanas aizlieguma orderis stājas spēkā uzreiz pēc atļaujas izsniegšanas kuģim iziet jūrā pēc tam, kad trūkumi, kas bijuši par pamatu kuģa aizturēšanai, ir novērsti.

.2 Lai panāktu iebraukšanas aizlieguma ordera atcelšanu, kuģa īpašniekam vai operatoram jāiesniedz oficiāls pieprasījums tās valsts administrācijai, kas izsniegusi orderi. Šim pieprasījumam jāpievieno karoga valsts administrācijas izsniegta apliecība, kas liecina, ka kuģis pilnībā atbilst attiecīgo starptautisko konvenciju prasībām. Vajadzības gadījumā kopā ar pieprasījumu atcelt iebraukšanas orderi jāiesniedz arī klasifikācijas sabiedrības, kuras klase bijusi piešķirta šim kuģim, izdota apliecība, kas apliecina, ka kuģis atbilst klasifikācijas sabiedrības noteiktajiem klases standartiem.

.3 Iebraukšanas aizlieguma orderi var atcelt tikai pēc atkārtotas kuģa inspekcijas, kuru veic tās valsts administrācija, kura izdevusi iebraukšanas aizlieguma orderi, un ja administrācija ir saņēmusi pierādījumus, ka kuģis pilnībā atbilst attiecīgajām starptautisko konvenciju prasībām. Inspekcijas vietu saskaņo kuģa īpašnieks ar orderi izdevušās valsts administrāciju.

Ja šī saskaņotā osta ir Memoranda reģiona osta, šīs ostas valsts kompetentā administrācija ar tās valsts administrācijas, kas izdevusi iebraukšanas aizliegumu ostā, piekrišanu drīkst atļaut kuģim ienākt attiecīgajā ostā tikai tādēļ, lai veiktu atkārtotu inspekciju un pārbaudītu, vai kuģis atbilst 2.daļā minētajām prasībām.

Atkārtotā inspekcija tiek veikta paplašinātās inspekcijas apjomā, un tās laikā jāpārbauda vismaz šī Memoranda I pielikuma 8.3 punktā minētie elementi.

Visus ar paplašināto inspekciju sais­tītos izdevumus sedz kuģa īpašnieks vai operators.

.4 Ja paplašinātas inspekcijas rezultāti apmierina administrāciju, kas izsniegusi iebraukuma aizlieguma orderi, iebraukuma aizlieguma orderis ir jāatceļ un rakstiski jāinformē par to kuģa īpašnieks vai operators.

Administrācijai rakstiski jāinformē arī karoga valsts administrācija, iesaistītā klasifikācijas sabiedrība, Jūrlietu informatīvais centrs un Sekretariāts.

.5 Informācija par kuģiem, kuriem aizliegts iebraukt Memoranda reģiona ostās, jāievieto SIReNaC sistēmā un jāpublicē saskaņā ar šī Memoranda 3.17 punkta nosacījumiem.

4.pielikums

INSPEKCIJU INFORMĀCIJAS SISTĒMA

1 Lai palīdzētu administrācijām izvēlēties kuģus, ko pārbaudīt savās ostās, administrācijas jānodrošina ar aktuālu informāciju par individuālu ārzemju karoga kuģu inspekcijām reģiona ostās pēdējos sešos mēnešos.

2 Francijas Transporta ministrijas DSI ir atbildīgs par inspekciju informācijas sistēmas vadīšanu un uzturēšanu.

3 Šiem mērķiem administrācijas apņemas nodrošināt DSI ar informāciju par savas valsts ostās inspicētajiem kuģiem, priekšroku dodot elektroniskai datu pārraidei. Informāciju ieteicams ievietot inspekciju datu bāzē katru dienu elektroniski, tiešā veidā.

4 Ātrākai informācijas apmaiņai informācijas sistēmā tiek izmantota sakaru iespēja, kas ļauj atsevišķām administrācijām tiešā, elektroniskā veidā apmainīties ar ziņojumiem, ieskaitot ziņojumus, kas norādīti Memoranda 3.11 punktā, un informācijas apmaiņu par darbības nosacījumu neievērošanu saskaņā ar Memoranda 5.daļu.

5 Šī pielikuma 3. un 4.daļā minētā informācija ir jāievada standartizētā formā un saskaņā ar standarta procedūrām, kas izklāstītas Jūrlietu administratīvā centra informācijas sistēmas lietotāju rokasgrāmatā.

6 Apstrādājot informāciju, Jūrlietu administratīvais centrs nedrīkst mainīt administrāciju sniegtos datus, izņemot gadījumus, kas minēti standarta procedūrās, ar nosacījumu, ka tiek saglabāti noteikti darbību kodi. Citos gadījumos Jūrlietu administratīvais centrs drīkst mainīt datus tikai pēc tās administrācijas lūguma, kas tos iesniegusi.

7 Jūrlietu administratīvajam centram jāorganizē datu apstrāde saskaņā ar šī pielikuma 3.daļu ar nosacījumu, ka dati ir viegli pieejami gan konsultatīviem mērķiem, gan to aktualizēšanai saskaņā ar procedūrām, kas izklāstītas Jūrlietu administratīvā centra informācijas sistēmas lietotāju rokasgrāmatā.

8 Ja izņēmuma apstākļos šī pielikuma 3. un 4.daļā minēto informāciju nav iespējams sniegt elektroniski, inspekcijas ziņojumā minētā informācija jānosūta pa faksu vai alternatīvā informācijas apmaiņas sistēmā.

9 Sekretariātam Komitejas vadībā ir jānodrošina informācija administratīviem mērķiem, piemēram, statistikas informācija. Tai ir jābūt balstītai uz datiem, ko sniedz Jūrlietu administratīvais centrs.

10 Iepriekšējos punktos minētā informācijas sistēma ir jāuztur tik ilgi, kamēr Memorands ir spēkā.

Nepārtraukti jāveic sistēmas kvalitātes uzraudzības un, ja nepieciešams, uzlabošanas darbi.

11 Jūrlietu administratīvajam centram ar administrācijas piekrišanu ir administrācijas vārdā jāiesniedz SJO ziņojumi par aizturēšanu saskaņā ar SOLAS 74 I/19 noteikumu, MARPOL 73/78 11.punktu, LL 66 21.punktu un STCW 78 X nodaļu.

12 Jūrlietu administratīvajam centram ar administrācijas piekrišanu ir administrācijas vārdā jāiesniedz SDO ziņojumi par aizturēšanu saskaņā ar SDO 147 konvencijas 4.nodaļu.

5.pielikums

INFORMĀCIJAS PUBLICĒŠANA PAR KUĢU AIZTURĒŠANU UN INSPEKCIJĀM

(saskaņā ar Memoranda 3.17. punktu)

I. Informācijā par aizturētajiem kuģiem ir jāiekļauj šādas ziņas:

— kuģa vārds;

— SJO numurs;

— kuģa tips;

— bruto tilpība

— būves gads, kas norādīts kuģa drošības apliecībā;

— kuģa īpašnieka vai operatora vārds vai nosaukums un adrese;

— ja kuģī pārvadā šķidras vai cietas beramkravas, fraktētāja, kas atbild par kuģa izvēli, vārds un adrese, un frakta tips;

— karoga valsts;

— klasifikācijas sabiedrība vai sabiedrības, kuras konkrētam kuģim izdevušas klasifikācijas apliecības, ja tādas ir;

— klasifikācijas sabiedrība vai sabiedrības, vai kāds cits subjekts, kas konkrētam kuģim karoga valsts administrācijas vārdā izdevis konvencijās paredzētās apliecības, minot arī attiecīgās apliecības;

— iepriekšējās paplašinātās inspekcijas osta un datums, vajadzības gadījumā norādot, vai ir dots rīkojums par aizturēšanu;

— osta un datums, kad notikusi pēdējā speciālā pārbaude, kā arī organizācijas nosaukums, kura šo pārbaudi veikusi;

— aizturēšanas reižu skaits pēdējos 24 mēnešos;

— aizturēšanas valsts un osta;

— datums, kurā atcelts lēmums par aizturēšanu;

— aizturēšanas ilgums dienās;

— atklāto trūkumu skaits un skaidri un precīzi formulēti aizturēšanas iemesli;

— pasākumu apraksts, ko veikusi kompetentā administrācija vai klasifikācijas sabiedrība, reaģējot uz kuģa aizturēšanu;

— ja kuģim ir aizliegta iebraukšana Memoranda reģiona ostās — skaidri un precīzi formulēti šī aizlieguma iemesli;

— norāde, vai klasifikācijas sabiedrība vai cita privāta struktūra, kas veikusi attiecīgo apsekošanu, ir atbildīga par trūkumiem, kas atsevišķi vai visi kopā devusi iemeslu aizturēšanai;

— to pasākumu apraksts, kas veikti gadījumos, kad kuģim dota atļauja reisam uz tuvāko piemēroto remonta rūpnīcu, vai
kad kuģim aizliegta iebraukšana visās Memoranda reģiona ostās.

II. Informācijā par inspicējamiem kuģiem jāiekļauj šādas ziņas:

— kuģa vārds;

— SJO numurs;

— kuģa tips;

— bruto tilpība;

— būves gads;

— kuģa īpašnieka vai operatora vārds vai nosaukums un adrese;

— ja kuģis pārvadā šķidras vai cietas beramkravas, fraktētāja, kas atbild par kuģa izvēli, nosaukums un adrese, un frakta tips;

— karoga valsts;

— klasifikācijas sabiedrība vai sabiedrības, kuras konkrētam kuģim izdevušas klasifikācijas apliecības, ja tādas ir;

— klasifikācijas sabiedrība vai sabiedrības vai jebkurš cits subjekts, kas konkrētam kuģim karoga valsts vārdā izdevis konvencijās paredzētās apliecības, minot arī attiecīgās apliecības;

— inspekcijas valsts, osta un datums;

— trūkumu skaits un raksturs.

6.pielikums

KVALITĀTES KRITĒRIJI PIEDERĪBAI MEMORANDAM SASKAŅĀ AR MEMORANDA 8.2 PUNKTU

Kvalitātes kritēriji.

Tādas valsts, kas atbilst Memoranda 8.2. punktā norādītajiem ģeogrāfiskajiem kritērijiem, Jūras administrācija var kļūt par Memoranda pilntiesīgu locekli ar nosacījumu, ka tiek izpildīti šādi kvalitātes kritēriji:

1 šādai Jūras administrācijai stingri jāievēro Memoranda saistības ar nolūku ieguldīt kopīgas pūles, lai novērstu nestandarta kuģu darbību;

2 šādai Jūras administrācijai ir jāratificē visi saistošie tiesību akti pirms piederības iegūšanas;

3 šādai Jūras administrācijai ir jābūt materiāltehniski pietiekoši nodrošinātai, lai atbilstoši realizētu atbilstību starptautiskajiem jūrlietu standartiem saistībā ar kuģošanas drošību, piesārņojuma novēršanu un dzīvošanas un darba apstākļiem uz savas valsts karoga kuģiem, ieskaitot atbilstoši kvalificētu inspektoru pieņemšanu darbā, lai darbotos administrācijas vārdā un apmierinātu Komiteju, kas izveidota saskaņā ar Memoranda 6.1 punktu;

4 šādai Jūras administrācijai ir jābūt materiāli tehniski pietiekoši nodrošinātai, lai pilnībā atbilstu visiem Memoranda nosacījumiem un varētu izpildīt tajā paredzētās darbības un saistības, ieskaitot atbilstoši kvalificētu ostas valsts kontroles inspektoru pieņemšanu darbā, lai darbotos administrācijas vārdā un apmierinātu Komiteju, kas izveidota saskaņā ar Memoranda 6.1 punktu;

5 Jūras administrāciju, kuras karogs ir parādījies aizturēšanas sarakstā, pārsniedzot vidējo procentuālo aizturēšanas skaitu, kas publicēts ikgadējā atskaitē trīs gadus pirms pieteikuma iesniegšanas kļūšanai par pilntiesīgu dalībvalsti, nevar uzņemt par Memoranda pilntiesīgu dalībvalsti;

6 šādai Jūras administrācijai, kļūstot par memoranda dalībvalsti, jānodrošina elektroniska piekļuve informācijas sistēmai, kas noteikta 4.pielikumā;

7 šādai Jūras administrācijai ir jāparaksta finansiāla vienošanās par Memoranda dalības maksas veikšanu un, kļūstot par memoranda dalībvalsti, jāveic iemaksas Memoranda budžetā kā noteikusi Komiteja, kas izveidota saskaņā ar Memoranda 6.1 punktu.

Atbilstības augstākminētajiem nosacījumiem novērtēšana attiecas uz katru gadījumu atsevišķi un nerada precedentu ne turpmākiem gadījumiem, ne esošajām Memoranda dalībvalstīm, ne potenciālajiem līguma parakstītājiem.

7.pielikums

MINIMĀLĀS PRASĪBAS OSTAS VALSTS KONTROLES INSPEKTORIEM

1. Pildot Memoranda 3.8 punkta nosacījumus, ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram ir jābūt atbilstoši kvalificētam un pilnvarotam no administrācijas puses veikt ostas valsts kontroles inspekcijas.

2. Atbilstoši kvalificētam ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram ir jābūt vismaz viena gada pieredzei karoga valsts kontroles inspektora amatā, veicot inspekcijas un kuģa apliecību izdošanu saskaņā ar saistošajiem tiesību aktiem, un vismaz vienai no šādām kvalifikācijām:

.1 kapteiņa diploms, kas dod tiesības vadīt kuģi ar tilpību 1600BT un lielāku (skatīt STCW II/2.noteikumu), vai

.2 vecākā mehāniķa diploms, kas dod tiesības strādāt uz kuģa, kura galvenā dzinēja jauda ir 3000KW un lielāka (skatīt STCW III/2.noteikumu), vai

.3 nokārtots eksāmens kuģu būves inženiera, mehānikas inženiera vai inženiera ar jūrniecības jomu saistītā specialitātē un darba pieredze šajā specialitātē vismaz 5 gadus.

Inspektoriem, kuru kvalifikācijas atbilst šī pielikuma 2.1 un 2.2 punkta prasībām, nepieciešama vismaz piecu gadu darba pieredze jūrā atbilstoši vai nu klāja vai mašīnas apkalpes virsnieka amatā.

3. Alternatīvi ostas valsts kontroles inspektors tiek uzskatīts par atbilstoši kvalificētu, ja:

.1 ir iegūta attiecīga augstākā izglītība vai izieta cita līdzīga apmācība, un

.2 ir izieta apmācība un iegūta kvalifikācija kuģošanas drošības inspektoru skolā, un

.3 ir iegūta vismaz 2 gadu pieredze karoga valsts kontroles inspektora amatā, veicot inspekcijas un apliecību izdošanu saskaņā ar saistošajiem tiesību aktiem.

4. Atbilstoši kvalificētam ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram ir jāprot mutiski un rakstiski kontaktēties ar jūrniekiem valodās, kuras visbiežāk izmanto jūrā.

5. Atbilstoši kvalificētam ostas valsts kontroles inspektoram ir attiecīgi jāpārzina saistošo tiesību aktu prasības un attiecīgās ostas valsts kontroles procedūras.

6. Ostas valsts kontroles inspektori, kuri neatbilst augstākminētajām prasībām, drīkst strādāt par inspektoriem, ja administrācija viņus pieņēmusi darbā pirms 1996.gada 1.jūlija.

PARIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PORT STATE CONTROL

The Maritime Authorities of

Belgium

Canada ¹

Croatia ²

Denmark

Estonia ³

Finland

France

Germany (Federal Republic of)

Greece

Iceland ⁴

Ireland

Italy

Latvia ⁵

Netherlands

Norway

Poland ⁶

Portugal

Russian Federation⁷

Slovenia ⁸

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

hereinafter referred to as ‘the Authorities’

Recalling the Final Declaration adopted on 2 December 1980 by the Regional European Conference on Maritime Safety which underlined the need to increase maritime safety and the protection of the marine environment and the importance of improving living and working conditions on board ship;

Noting with appreciation the progress achieved in these fields by the International Maritime Organization and the International Labour Organization;

Noting also the contribution of the European Union towards meeting the above mentioned objectives;

Mindful that the principal responsibility for the effective application of standards laid down in international instruments rests upon the authorities of the State whose flag a ship is entitled to fly;

Recognizing nevertheless that effective action by port States is required to prevent the operation of substandard ships;

Recognizing also the need to avoid distorting competition between ports;

Convinced of the necessity, for these purposes, of an improved and harmonized system of port State control and of strengthening co-operation and the exchange of information;

have reached the following understanding:

Section 1. Commitments

1.1 Each Authority will give effect to the provisions of the present Memorandum and the Annexes thereto, which constitute an integral part of the Memorandum.

1.2 Each Authority will maintain an effective system of port State control with a view to ensuring that, without discrimination as to flag, foreign merchant ships calling at a port of its State, or anchored off such a port, comply with the standards laid down in the relevant instruments as defined in section 2. Each Authority may also carry out controls on ships at off-shore installations.

1.3 Each Authority will achieve an annual total of inspections corresponding to 25% of the average number of individual foreign merchant ships, hereinafter referred to as ‘ships’, which entered the ports of its State during the three last calendar years for which statistics are available.

1.4 Each Authority will consult, cooperate and exchange information with the other Authorities in order to further the aims of the Memorandum.

1.5 Each Authority, or any other body, as the case may be, will establish an appropriate procedure for pilot services and port authorities to immediately inform the competent Authority of the port State, whenever they learn in the course of their normal duties that there are deficiencies which may prejudice the safety of the ship, or which may pose a threat of harm to the marine environment.

Section 2. Relevant instruments

2.1 For the purposes of the Memorandum ‘relevant instruments’ are the following instruments:

.1 the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LOAD LINES 66);

.2 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL PROT 88);

.3 the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS 74);

.4 the Protocol of 1978 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS PROT 78);

.5 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS PROT 88);

.6 the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocols of 1978 and 1997 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78);

.7 the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW 78);

.8 the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREG 72);

.9 the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 (TONNAGE 69);

.10 the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (ILO Convention No. 147) (ILO 147);

.11 the Protocol of 1996 to the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (ILO Convention No. 147) (ILO147 PROT 96);

.12 the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992.

2.2 With respect to ILO 147 and the ILO Protocol 1996, each Authority will apply the procedures referred to in section 7 of Annex 1 for the application of ILO publication “Inspection of Labour Conditions on board Ship: Guide-lines for procedure”.

2.3 Each Authority will apply those relevant instruments which are in force and to which its State is a Party. In the case of amendments to a relevant instrument each Authority will apply those amendments which are in force and which its State has accepted. An instrument so amended will then be deemed to be the ‘relevant instrument’ for that Authority.

2.4 In applying a relevant instrument, the Authorities will ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to ships of non-Parties or to ships below convention size. The Authorities will thereby apply the procedures specified in section 3 of Annex 1.

Section 3. Inspection Procedures, Rectification and Detention

3.1 In fulfilling their commitments the Authorities will carry out inspections, which will consist of a visit on board a ship in order to check the certificates and documents as referred to in section 2 of Annex 1. Furthermore the Authorities will satisfy themselves that the crew and the overall condition of the ship, including the engine room and accommodation and including hygienic conditions, meets generally accepted international rules and standards.

In the absence of valid certificates or documents or if there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of a ship or of its equipment, or its crew does not substantially meet the requirements of a relevant instrument, a more detailed inspection will be carried out, as referred to in section 5 of Annex 1. Examples of clear grounds are given in section 4 of Annex 1.

The Authorities will include control on compliance with on board operational requirements in their inspections.

3.2 The Authorities will ensure that an inspection in accordance with the provisions of section 3.1 is carried out on any ship not subject to expanded inspection with a target factor greater than 50 in the SIReNaC information system, provided that a period of at least one month has elapsed since the last inspection carried out in the region of the Memorandum.

3.3 A ship in one of the categories in section 8.2 of Annex 1, is liable to an expanded inspection after a period of twelve months since the last expanded inspection carried out in a port within the region of the Memorandum.

If such a ship is selected for inspection in accordance with section 3.6, an expanded inspection shall be carried out. However an inspection in accordance with section 3.1 may be carried out in the period between two expanded inspections.

The Authorities will ensure that an expanded inspection is carried out on a ship for which the inspection is indicated as mandatory by the SIReNaC system at its first port visited after a period of 12 months since the last expanded inspection.

3.4 In cases where, for operational reasons, an Authority is unable to carry out an inspection or an expanded inspection as referred to in sections 3.2 and 3.3 respectively, the Authority will, without delay, inform the SIReNaC system that such inspection did not take place.

3.5 Nothing in these procedures will be construed as restricting the powers of the Authorities to take measures within its jurisdiction in respect of any matter to which the relevant instruments relate.

3.6 In selecting for inspection ships other than those referred to in sections 3.2 and 3.3, the Authorities will determine the order of priority on the basis of the criteria indicated in section 1 of Annex 1.

3.7 The Authorities will seek to avoid inspecting ships which have been inspected by any of the other Authorities within the previous six months, unless they have clear grounds for inspection. The frequency of inspection does not apply to the ships referred to in 3.6 and in 3.2 in which case the Authorities will seek satisfaction whenever they will deem this appropriate.

3.8 Inspections will be carried out by properly qualified persons authorized for that purpose by the Authority concerned and acting under its responsibility, having regard in particular to Annex 7.

When the required professional expertise cannot be provided by the Authority, the port State control officer of that Authority may be assisted by any person with the required expertise. Port State control officers and the persons assisting them will have no commercial interest, either in the port of inspection or in the ships inspected, nor will port State control officers be employed by or undertake work on behalf of non-governmental organizations which issue statutory and classification certificates or which carry out the surveys necessary for the issue of those certificates to ships.

Each port State control officer will carry a personal document in the form of an identity card issued by his Authority in accordance with the national legislation, indicating that the port State control officer is authorized to carry out inspections.

3.9.1 Each Authority will endeavour to secure the rectification of all deficiencies detected. On the condition that all possible efforts have been made to rectify all deficiencies, other than those referred to in 3.10.1, the ship may be allowed to proceed to a port where any such deficiencies can be rectified.

3.9.2 In exceptional circumstances where, as a result of the initial control and a more detailed inspection, the overall condition of a ship and its equipment, also taking the crew and its living and working conditions into account, is found to be sub-standard, the Authority may suspend an inspection.

The suspension of the inspection may continue until the responsible parties have taken the steps necessary to ensure that the ship complies with the requirements of the relevant instruments.

Prior to suspending an inspection, the Authority must have recorded detainable deficiencies in the areas set out in 9.3.3 and 9.3.4 of Annex 1, as appropriate.

In cases where the ship is detained and an inspection is suspended, the Authority will as soon as possible notify the responsible parties. The notification will include information about the detention. Furthermore it will state that the inspection is suspended until the Authority has been informed that the ship complies with all relevant requirements.

3.10.1 In the case of deficiencies which are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment, the Authority will, except as provided in 3.11, ensure that the hazard is removed before the ship is allowed to proceed to sea. For this purpose appropriate action will be taken, which may include detention or a formal prohibition of a ship to continue an operation due to established deficiencies which, individually or together, would render the continued operation hazardous.

3.10.2 In the case of a detention, the Authority will immediately notify the flag State Administration ^*) in writing ,which includes the report of inspection. Like wise, the recognized organization which has issued the class certificates or the relevant certificates on behalf of the flag State Administration will be notified, where appropriate. The parties above will also be notified in writing of the release of detention.

3.10.3 Where the ground for a detention is the result of accidental damage suffered on the ship’s voyage to a port or during cargo operations, no detention order will be issued, provided that:

.1 due account has been given to the requirements contained in Regulation I/11(c) of SOLAS 74 regarding notification to the flag State Administration, the nominated surveyor or the recognized organization responsible for issuing the relevant certificate;

.2 prior to entering a port or immediately after a damage has occurred, the master or ship owner has submitted to the port State control authority details on the circumstances of the accident and the damage suffered and information about the required notification of the flag State Administration;

.3 appropriate remedial action, to the satisfaction of the Authority, is being taken by the ship, and

.4 the Authority has ensured, having been notified of the completion of the remedial action, that deficiencies which were clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment have been rectified.

3.10.4 The following procedure is applicable in the absence of ISM certificates:

.1 Where the inspection reveals that the copy of the Document of Compliance or the Safety Management Certificate issued in accordance with the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (ISM Code) are missing on board a vessel to which the ISM Code is applicable at the date of the inspection, the Authority will ensure that the vessel is detained.

.2 Notwithstanding the absence of the documentation referred to in 3.10.4.1, if the inspection finds no other deficiencies warranting detention the Authority may lift the detention order in order to avoid port congestion. Whenever such a decision is taken, the Authority will immediately inform all other Authorities thereof.

3. The Authorities will take the measures necessary to ensure that all ships authorised to leave a port of their State under the circumstances referred to in 3.10.4.2 will be refused access to any port within the States, the Authorities of which are signatories to the Memorandum, except in the situations referred to in 3.12.3, until the owner or operator of the vessel has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Authority in whose State detention was ordered, that the ship has valid certificates issued in accordance with the ISM Code.

3.10.5 Access refusal measures concerning certain ships

1. The Authorities will ensure that a ship in one of the categories of Annex 3, section A, is refused access to any port within the region of the Memorandum, except in the situations described in section 3.12.3 if the ship:

- either flies the flag of a State appearing in the black list as published in the annual report of the MOU, and has been detained more than twice in the course of the preceding 24 months in ports within the region of the Memorandum;

- or flies the flag of a State described as “very high risk” or “high risk” in the black list as published in the annual report of the MOU, and has been detained more than once in the course of the preceding 36 months in ports within the region of the Memorandum.

The refusal of access shall become applicable immediately the ship has been authorised to leave the port where it has been subject of a second or third detention as appropriate.

2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, the Authorities will comply with the procedures laid down in Annex 3 section B.

3.11 Where deficiencies which caused a detention as referred to in 3.10.1 cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the Authority may allow the ship concerned to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard available, as chosen by the master and the Authority, provided that the conditions determined by the competent authority of the flag State and agreed by the Authority are complied with. Such conditions, which may include discharging of cargo and/or temporary repairs, will ensure that the ship can proceed without risk to the safety and health of the passengers or crew, or risk to other ships, or without being an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment.

Where the decision to send a ship to a repair yard is due to a lack of compliance with IMO Resolution A. 744(18), either with respect to ship’s documentation or with respect to ship’s structural failures and deficiencies, the Authority may require that the necessary thickness measurements are carried out in the port of detention before the ship is allowed to sail.

If the vessel is detained because it is not equipped with a functioning voyage data recorder system, when its use is compulsory, and this deficiency cannot be readily rectified in the port of detention, the competent authority may allow the ship to proceed to the nearest appropriate port where it shall be readily rectified or require that the deficiency is rectified within a maximum period of 30 days.

In such circumstances the Authority will notify the competent authority of the region State where the next port of call of the ship is situated, the parties mentioned in 3.10.2 and any other authority as appropriate. Notification to Authorities shall include the final report of inspection and the estimated place and time of arrival. Additional notification will be made by means of the SIReNaC system. The Authority receiving such notification will inform the notifying Authority of action taken.

3.12.1 The Authorities will take measures to ensure that:

.1 ships referred to in 3.10.1 or 3.11 which proceed to sea without complying with the conditions determined by the Authority in the port of inspection; or

.2 ships referred to in 3.11 which refuse to comply with the applicable requirements of the relevant instruments by not calling into the indicated repair yard;

will be refused access to any port within the States, the Authorities of which are signatories to the Memorandum, until the owner or operator has provided evidence to the satisfaction of the Authority where the ship was found defective, that the ship fully complies with all applicable requirements of the relevant instruments.

3.12.2 In the circumstances referred to in 3.12.1.1, the Authority where the ship was found defective will immediately alert all other Authorities.

In the circumstances referred to in 3.12.1.2, the Authority in whose State the repair yard lies will immediately alert all other Authorities.

Before denying entry, the Authority may request consultations with the flag State Administration of the ship concerned.

3.12.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of 3.12.1, access to a specific port may be permitted by the relevant authority of that port State in the event of force majeure or overriding safety considerations, or to reduce or minimize the risk of pollution, provided that adequate measures to the satisfaction of the competent authority of such State have been implemented by the owner, the operator or the master of the ship to ensure safe entry.

3.13 The provisions of 3.10.2 and 3.11 are without prejudice to the requirements of relevant instruments or procedures established by international organizations concerning notification and reporting procedures related to port State control.

3.14 The Authorities will ensure that, on the conclusion of an inspection, the master of the ship is provided with a report of inspection, giving the results of the inspection and details of any action taken.

3.15 Should any inspection referred to in 3.1 confirm or reveal deficiencies in relation to the requirements of a relevant instrument warranting the detention of a ship, all costs relating to the inspections in any normal accounting period will be covered by the shipowner or the operator or by his representative in the port State.

All costs relating to inspections carried out by the Authority under the provisions of 3.12.1 will be charged to the owner or the operator of the ship.

The detention will not be lifted until full payment has been made or a sufficient guarantee has been given for the reimbursement of the costs.

3.16 The owner or the operator of a ship or his representative in the State concerned will have a right of appeal against a detention decision or refusal of access taken by the Authority of that State. An appeal will not cause the detention or refusal of access to be suspended. The Authority will properly inform the master of a ship of the right of appeal.

3.17 Each Authority will take necessary measure in order to ensure that information listed in Annex 5 on ships inspected and ships detained is published at least every month.

3.18 When exercising control under the Memorandum, the Authorities will make all possible efforts to avoid unduly detaining or delaying a ship. Nothing in the Memorandum affects rights created by provisions of relevant instruments relating to compensation for undue detention or delay. In any instance of alleged undue detention or delay the burden of proof lies with the owner or operator of the ship.

Section 4. Provision of information

4.1 Each Authority will report on its inspections under the Memorandum and their results, in accordance with the procedures specified in Annex 4.

4.2 Information provided in accordance with the previous paragraph may be made available for publication in printed form or by electronic means in order to assist Authorities with the publications mentioned in section 3.17 as well as for other purposes in accordance with decisions of the Committee mentioned in section 6.

4.3 DSI, mentioned in Annex 4 and the Secretariat, mentioned in section 6.4 may facilitate the publication of data by providing data in any electronic or printed format derived unaltered from the information system mentioned in Annex 4.

4.4 When inspection or detention data contain information concerning private persons the Authorities undertake to ensure protection of the privacy of those persons in accordance with applicable international, European Community and national laws and regulations. This protection shall however not prevent the publication of the company of ships inspected or publication of the names of charterers involved.

Section 5. Operational violations

The Authorities will upon the request of another Authority, endeavour to secure evidence relating to suspected violations of the requirements on operational matters of Rule 10 of COLREG 72 and MARPOL 73/78. In case of suspected violations involving the discharge of harmful substances, an Authority will, upon the request of another Authority, visit in port the ship suspected of such a violation in order to obtain information and where appropriate to take a sample of any alleged pollutant. Procedures for investigations into contravention of discharge provisions are listed in Annex 2.

Section 6. Organization

6.1 A Committee will be established, composed of a representative of each of the Authorities and of the Commission of the European Communities. An advisor from each of the International Governmental Organizations, Observers and Associates will be invited to participate in the work of the Committee and any other meetings.

6.2 The Committee will meet once a year and at such other times as it may decide.

6.3 The Committee will:

.1 carry out the specific tasks assigned to it under the Memorandum;

.2 promote by all means necessary, including seminars for port State control officers, the harmonization of procedures and practices relating to the inspection, rectification, detention and the application of 2.4;

.3 develop and review guidelines and procedures for carrying out inspections under the Memorandum;

.4 develop and review procedures for the exchange of information;

.5 keep under review other matters relating to the operation and the effectiveness of the Memorandum.

6.4 A secretariat provided by the Netherlands’ Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management will be set up and will have its office in The Hague.

6.5 The secretariat, acting under the guidance of the Committee and within the limits of the resources made available to it, will:

.1 prepare meetings, circulate papers and provide such assistance as may be required to enable the Committee to carry out its functions;

.2 facilitate the exchange of information, carry out the procedures outlined in Annex4 and prepare reports as may be necessary for the purposes of the Memorandum;

.3 carry out such other work as may be necessary to ensure the effective operation of the Memorandum.

Section 7. Amendments

7.1 Any Authority may propose amendments to the Memorandum.

7.2 In the case of proposed amendments to sections of the Memorandum the following procedure will apply:

.1 the proposed amendment will be submitted through the secretariat for consideration by the Committee;

.2 amendments will be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the representatives of the Authorities present and voting in the Committee. If so adopted an amendment will be communicated by the secretariat to the Authorities for acceptance;

.3 an amendment will be deemed to have been accepted either at the end of a period of six months after adoption by the representatives of the Authorities in the Committee or at the end of any different period determined unanimously by the representatives of the Authorities in the Committee at the time of adoption, unless within the relevant period an objection is communicated to the secretariat by an Authority;

.4 an amendment will take effect 60 days after it has been accepted or at the end of any different period determined unanimously by the representatives of the Authorities in the Committee.

7.3 In the case of proposed amendments to Annexes of the Memorandum the following procedure will apply:

.1 the proposed amendment will be submitted through the secretariat for consideration by the Authorities;

.2 the amendment will be deemed to have been accepted at the end of a period of three months from the date on which it has been communicated by the secretariat unless an Authority requests in writing that the amendment should be considered by the Committee. In the latter case the procedure specified in 7.2 will apply;

.3 the amendment will take effect 60 days after it has been accepted or at the end of any different period determined unanimously by the Authorities.

Section 8

8.1 The Memorandum is without prejudice to rights and obligations under any international Agreement.

8.2 A Maritime Authority of a European coastal State and a coastal State of the North Atlantic basin from North America to Europe, which complies with the criteria specified in Annex 6, may adhere to the Memorandum with the consent of all Authorities participating in the Memorandum.

8.3 When the Memorandum takes effect, it will supersede the ‘Memorandum of Understanding between Certain Maritime Authorities on the Maintenance of Standards on Merchant Ships’, signed at The Hague on 2 March 1978.

8.4 The Memorandum will take effect on 1 July 1982.

8.5 The English and French versions of the text of the Memorandum are equally authentic.

Signed at Paris in the English and French languages, this twenty-sixth day of January one thousand nine hundred and eighty-two.

¹ The Maritime Authority of Canada adhered to the Memorandum on 3 May 1994; for the Maritime Authority of Canada the Memorandum took effect on 3 May 1994.

² The Maritime Authority of Croatia adhered to the Memorandum on 8 November 1996; for the Maritime Authority of Croatia the Memorandum took effect on 1 January 1997.

³ The Maritime Authority of Estonia adhered to the Memorandum on 12 May 2005; for the Maritime Authority of Estonia the Memorandum took effect on 1 July 2005.

⁴ The Maritime Authority of Iceland adhered to the Memorandum on 11 May 2000; for the Maritime Authority of Iceland the Memorandum took effect on 1 July 2000.

⁵ The Maritime Authority of Latvia adhered to the Memorandum on 12 May 2005; for the Maritime Authority of Latvia the Memorandum took effect on 1 July 2005.

⁶ The Maritime Authority of Poland adhered to the Memorandum on 27 November 1991; for the Maritime Authority of Poland the Memorandum took effect on 1 January 1992.

⁷ The Maritime Authority of the Russian Federation adhered to the Memorandum on 10 November 1995; for the Maritime Authority of the Russian Federation the Memorandum took effect on 1 January 1996.

⁸ The Maritime Authority of Slovenia adhered to the Memorandum on 15 May 2003; for the Maritime Authority of Slovenia the Memorandum took effect on 22 July 2003.

Annex 1

PORT STATE CONTROL PROCEDURES

Contents

Section 1 Priority inspections

Section 2 Examination of certificates and documents

Section 3 No more favourable treatment

3.1 Ships of non-Parties

3.2 Ships below convention size

Section 4 Examples of “clear grounds” for a more detailed inspection

Section 5 More detailed inspection

5.1 General

5.2 Procedures for inspection of ship structural and equipment requirements

5.3 Crude oil washing

5.4 Unloading, stripping and prewash operations under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

5.5 Procedures for control of operational requirements

Section 6 Manning

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Manning control

6.3 Control under the provisions of STCW 78

Section 7 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (ILO 147) and ILO147 Protocol, 1996.

Section 8 Expanded inspection of certain ships

8.1 General provision for expanded inspection

8.2 Categories of ships subject to expanded inspection

8.3 Procedures for expanded inspection of certain categories of ships

Section 9 Rectification and detention

9.1 Principles governing rectification of deficiencies or detention of a ship

9.2 Detention related to minimum manning standards and certification

9.3 Procedures for the detention of ships of all sizes

Section 1. Priority inspections

1.1 Regardless of the value of the target factor, as referred to in Section 1.2, the following ships shall be considered as an overriding priority for inspection:

.1 Ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities in accordance with section 1.5 of the Memorandum;

.2 Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, which have failed to report all relevant information concerning the ship’s particulars, the ship’s movements and concerning the dangerous or polluting goods being carried to the competent authority of the port and coastal State;

.3 Ships which have been the subject of a report or notification by another Authority;

.4 Ships which have been the subject of a report or complaint by the master, a crew member, or any person or organization with a legitimate interest in the safe operation of the ship, shipboard living and working conditions or the prevention of pollution, unless the Authority concerned deems the report or complaint to be manifestly unfounded; the identity of the person lodging the report or complaint must not be revealed to the master or the shipowner of the ship concerned;

.5 Ships which have been:

— involved in a collision, grounding or stranding on their way to the port,

— accused of an alleged violation of the provisions on discharge of harmful substances or effluents,

— manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner whereby routing measures, adopted by the IMO, or safe navigation practices and procedures have not been followed, or

— otherwise operated in such a manner as to pose a danger to persons, property or the environment;

.6 Ships which have been suspended or withdrawn from their class for safety reasons in the course of the preceding 6 months.

.7 Ships which cannot be identified in the SIReNaC information system.

1.2 In determining the order of priority for the inspection of ships, the Authority shall take into account the order indicated by the target factor displayed on the SIReNaC information system. The following elements are relevant for the targeting factor:

.1 Ships visiting a port of a State, the Authority of which is a signatory to the Memorandum, for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more. In the absence of appropriate data for this purpose, the Authorities will rely upon the available SIReNaC data and inspect those ships which have not been registered in the SIReNaC following the entry into force of that database on 1 January 1993;

.2 Ships not inspected by any Authority within the previous 6 months;

.3 Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship’s construction and equipment, issued in accordance with the Conventions, and the classification certificates, have been issued by an organization which is not recognized by the Authority;

.4 Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the black-list as published in the annual report of the MOU

.5 Ships which have been permitted by the Authority to leave a port of its State on certain conditions:

a) deficiency to be rectified before departure

b) deficiency to be rectified at the next port

c) deficiencies to be rectified within 14 days

d) deficiencies for which other conditions have been specified

e) if ship related action has been taken and all deficiencies have been rectified;

.6 Ships for which deficiencies have been recorded during a previous inspection, according to the number of deficiencies;

.7 Ships which have been detained in a previous port;

.8 Ships flying the flag of a non-Party to a relevant instrument;

.9 Ships with class deficiency ratio above average;

.10 Ships in a category referred to in section 8 of this Annex;

.11 Other ships above 13 years old.

Section 2. Examination of certificates and documents

At the initial inspection the port State control officer will, as a minimum and to the extent applicable, examine the following documents:

.1 International Tonnage Certificate (1969);

.2 Passenger Ship Safety Certificate;

.3 Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate;

.4 Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate;

.5 Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate;

.6 Exemption Certificate and any list of cargoes (as per SOLAS II-2/53.1.3);

.7 Cargo Ship Safety Certificate;

.8 Document of Compliance (SOLAS 74, Regulation II-2/54)

.9 Dangerous goods special list or manifest, or detailed stowage plan;

.10 International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk, or the Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk, which-ever is appropriate;

.11 International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk, or the Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk, whichever is appropriate;

.12 International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate;

.13 International Pollution Prevention Certificate for the Carriage of Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk;

.14 International Load Line Certificate (1966);

.15 International Load Line Exemption Certificate;

.16 Oil Record Book, parts I and II;

.17 Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan

.18 Cargo Record Book;

.19 Minimum Safe Manning Document;

.20 Certificates issued in accordance with STCW Convention;

.21 Medical certificates (see ILO Convention No. 73);

.22 Table of shipboard working arrangements (see ILO Convention No. 180 and STCW95)

.23 Records of hours of work or rest of seafarers (see ILO Convention No. 180)

.24 Stability information;

.25 Copy of Document of Compliance and Safety Management Certificate issued in accordance with the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention;

.26 Certificates as to the ship’s hull strength and machinery installations issued by the classification society in question (only to be required if the ship maintains its class with a classification society);

.27 Survey Report Files (in case of bulk carriers or oil tankers);

.28 For ro-ro passenger ships, information on the A/A-max ratio;

.29 Document of authorization for the carriage of grain;

.30 Special Purpose Ship Safety Certificate;

.31 High Speed Craft Safety Certificate and Permit to Operate High Speed Craft;

.32 Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Safety Certificate;

.33 For oil tankers, the record of oil discharge monitoring and control system for the last ballast voyage;

.34 The muster list, fire control plan, and for passenger ships, a damage control plan, a decision-support system for the master (printed emergency plan);

.35 Ship’s log book with respect to the records of drills, including security drills, and the log for records of inspection and maintenance of lifesaving appliances and arrangements and fire fighting appliances and arrangements;

.36 Reports of previous port State control inspections;

.37 Cargo Securing Manual;

.38 For passenger ships, List of operational limitations;

.39 For passenger ships, a Plan for co-operation with SAR Services;

.40 Bulk Carrier Booklet;

.41 Loading/Unloading Plan for bulk carriers;

.42 Garbage Management Plan;

.43 Garbage Record Book;

.44 Certificate of insurance or any other financial security in respect of civil liability for oil pollution damage.

.45 International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC);

.46 Continuous Synopsis Record.

Section 3. No more favourable treatment

3.1 Ships of non-Parties

Ships entitled to fly the flag of a State which is not a Party to a relevant instrument and thus not provided with certificates representing prima facie evidence of satisfactory conditions on board, or manned with crew members who do not hold valid STCW certificates, will receive a more detailed or, as appropriate, expanded inspection. In making such an inspection the port State control officer will follow the same procedures as provided for ships to which the relevant instruments are applicable.

If the ship or the crew has some alternative form of certification, the port State control officer, in making this inspection, may take the form and content of this documentation into account. The conditions of such a ship and its equipment and the certification of the crew and the flag State’s minimum manning standard must be compatible with the aims of the provisions of the relevant instruments; otherwise the ship must be subject to such restrictions as are necessary to obtain a comparable level of safety and protection of the marine environment.

3.2 Ships below convention size

3.2.1 To the extent a relevant instrument is not applicable to a ship below convention size, the port State control officer’s task will be to assess whether the ship is of an acceptable standard in regard to safety, health or the environment. In making that assess­ment, the port State control officer will take due account of such factors as the length and nature of the intended voyage or service, the size and type of the ship, the equipment provided and the nature of the cargo.

3.2.2 In the exercise of his functions the port State control officer will be guided by any certificates and other documents issued by or on behalf of the flag State Administration. The port State control officer will, in the light of such certificates and documents and in his general impression of the ship, use his professional judgement in deciding whether and in what respects the ship will be further inspected. When carrying out a further inspection the port State control officer will, to the extent necessary, pay attention to the items listed in 3.2.3 of this Annex. The list is not considered exhaustive but is intended to give an exemplification of relevant items.

3.2.3 Items of general importance

3.2.3.1 Items related to the conditions of assignment of load lines:

.1 weather tight (or watertight as the case may be) integrity of exposed decks;

.2 hatches and closing appliances;

.3 weather tight closures to openings in superstructures;

.4 freeing arrangements;

.5 side outlets;

.6 ventilators and air pipes;

.7 stability information.

3.2.3.2 Other items related to the safety of life at sea:

.1 life saving appliances;

.2 fire fighting appliances;

.3 general structural conditions (i.e. hull, deck, hatch covers, etc.);

.4 main machinery and electrical installations;

.5 navigational equipment including radio installations.

3.2.3.3 Items related to the prevention of pollution from ships:

.1 means for the control of discharge of oil and oily mixtures e.g. oily water sepa-rating or filtering equipment or other equivalent means (tank(s) for retaining oil, oily mixtures, oil residues);

.2 means for the disposal of oil, oily mixtures or oil residues;

.3 presence of oil in the engine room bilges;

.4 means for the collection, storage and disposal of garbage.

3.2.4 In the case of deficiencies which are considered hazardous to safety, health or the environment the port State control officer will take such action, which may include detention as may be necessary, having regard to the factors mentioned in 3.2.1 of this Annex, to ensure that the deficiency is rectified or that the ship, if allowed to proceed to another port, does not present a clear hazard to safety, health or the environment.

Section 4. Examples of “clear grounds” for a more detailed inspection

In applying 3.1 of the Memorandum, “clear grounds” which warrant a more detailed inspection include the following:

.1 the ship has been identified as a priority case for inspection, under section 1.1 and section 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5b, 1.2.5.c, and 1.2.8 of this Annex;

.2 during examination of the certificates and documents referred to in section 2 of this Annex, inaccuracies have been revealed or the documents have not been properly kept or updated;

.3 indications that the relevant crew members are unable to communicate appro-priately with each other, or with other persons on board, or that the ship is unable to communicate with the shore-based authorities either in a common language or in the language of those authorities;

.4 evidence of cargo and other operations not being conducted safely or in accor-dance with IMO guidelines;

.5 failure of the master of an oil tanker to produce the record of the oil discharge monitoring and control system for the last ballast voyage;

.6 absence of an up-to-date muster list, or crew members not aware of their duties in the event of fire or an order to abandon the ship;

.7 the emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancellation proce-dures;

.8 the absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the conven-tions;

.9 evidence from the port State control officer’s general impressions and observa-tions that serious hull or structural deterioration or deficiencies exist that may place at risk the structural, watertight or weather tight integrity of the ship;

.10 excessively unsanitary conditions on board the ship;

.11 information or evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential shipboard operations relating to the safety of ships or the prevention of pollution, or that such operations have not been carried out;

.12 the absence of a table of shipboard working arrangements or records of hours of work or rest of seafarers (see ILO180).

Section 5. More detailed inspection

5.1 General

5.1.1 In the absence of valid certificates or documents or after the establishment of clear grounds, the port State control officer will:

.1 conduct a more detailed inspection in the area(s) where clear grounds were established;

.2 carry out a more detailed inspection in other areas at random; and

.3 include further checking of compliance with on-board operational requirements.

5.1.2 In the exercise of a more detailed inspection the port State control officer will take into account:

.1 the provisions of this section;

.2 the provisions of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code;

.3 the provisions of sections 6 and 7 of this Annex, as appropriate.

5.2 Procedures for inspection of ship structural and equipment requirements

Structure

5.2.1 The port State control officer’s impression of hull maintenance and the general state on deck, the condition of such items as ladder ways, guard-rails, pipe coverings and areas of corrosion or pitting will influence the port State control officer’s decision as to whether it is necessary to make the fullest possible examination of the structure with the ship afloat. Significant areas of damage or corrosion, or pitting of plating and associated stiffening in decks and hull affecting seaworthiness or strength to take local loads, may justify detention. It may be necessary for the underwater portion of the ship to be checked. In reaching a decision, the port State control officer will have regard to the seaworthiness and not the age of the ship, making an allowance for fair wear and tear over the minimum acceptable scantlings. Damage not affecting seaworthiness will not constitute grounds for judging that a ship should be detained, nor will damage that has been temporarily but effectively repaired for a voyage to a port for permanent repairs. However, in this assessment of the effect of damage, the port State control officer will have regard to the location of crew accommodation and whether the damage substantially affects its habitability.

5.2.2 The port State control officer will pay particular attention to the structural integrity and seaworthiness of bulk carriers and oil tankers (IMO Resolution A.744(18) as amended).

5.2.3 The port State control officer’s assessment of the safety of the structure of those ships will be based on the Survey Report File carried on board. This file should contain reports of structural surveys, condition evaluation reports (translated into English and endorsed by the flag State Administration), thickness measurement reports and a survey planning document.

5.2.4 If the Survey Report File necessitates a more detailed inspection of the structure of the ship or if no such report is carried, special attention will be given by the port State control officer, as appropriate, to hull structure, piping systems in way of cargo tanks or holds, pump-rooms, cofferdams, pipe tunnels, void spaces within the cargo area, and ballast tanks.

5.2.5 For bulk carriers, port State control officers will inspect holds’ main structure for any obviously unauthorized repairs. Where applicable, for bulk carriers the port State control officer will verify that the bulk carrier booklet has been endorsed, that any restrictions imposed on the carriage of solid bulk cargoes have been recorded in the booklet, that the bulk carrier loading triangle is permanently marked and that water level alarms in cargo holds are fitted.

Machinery spaces

5.2.6 The port State control officer will assess the condition of the machinery and of the electrical installations such that they are capable of providing sufficient continuous power for propulsion and for auxiliary services.

5.2.7 During inspection of the machinery spaces, the port State control officer will form an impression of the standard of maintenance. Frayed or disconnected quick-closing valve wires, disconnected or inoperative extended control rods or machinery trip mechanisms, missing valve hand wheels, evidence of chronic steam, water and oil leaks, dirty tank tops and bilges or extensive corrosion of machinery foundations are pointers to an unsatisfactory organization of the systems’ maintenance. A large number of temporary repairs, including pipe clips or cement boxes, will indicate reluctance to make permanent repairs.

5.2.8 While it is not possible to determine the condition of the machinery without performance trials, general deficiencies, such as leaking pump glands, dirty water gauge glasses, inoperable pressure gauges, rusted relief valves, inoperative or disconnected safety or control devices, evidence of repeated operation of diesel engine scavenge belt or crank-case relief valves, malfunctioning or inoperative automatic equipment and alarm systems, and leaking boiler casings or uptakes, would warrant inspection of the engine room log book and investigation into the record of machinery failures and accidents and a request for running tests of machinery.

5.2.9 If one electrical generator is out of commission, the port State control officer will investigate whether power is available to maintain essential and emergency services and should conduct tests.

5.2.10 If evidence of neglect becomes evident, the port State control officer will extend the scope of an investigation to include, for example, tests on the main and auxiliary steering gear arrangements, overspeed trips, circuit breakers, etc.

5.2.11 It must be stressed that while detection of one or more of the above deficiencies would afford guidance to a substandard condition, the actual combination is a matter for professional judgement in each case.

Conditions of assignment of load lines

5.2.12 It may be that the port State control officer has concluded that a hull inspection is unnecessary but, if dissatisfied on the basis of observations on deck, with items such as defective hatch closing arrangements, corroded air pipes and vent coamings, the port State control officer will examine closely the conditions of assignment of load lines, paying particular attention to closing appliances, means of freeing water from the deck and arrangements concerned with the protection of the crew.

Life-saving appliances

5.2.13 The effectiveness of life-saving appliances depends heavily on good maintenance by the crew and their use in regular drills. The lapse of time since the last survey for a Safety Equipment Certificate can be a significant factor in the degree of deterioration of equip-ment if it has not been subject to regular inspection by the crew. Apart from failure to carry equipment required by a convention or obvious defects such as holed lifeboats, the port State control officer will look for signs of disuse of, or obstructions to, survival craft launching equipment which may include paint accumulation, seizing of pivot points, absence of greasing, condition of blocks and falls and improper lashing or stowing of deck cargo.

5.2.14 Should such signs be evident, the port State control officer will be justified in making a detailed inspection of all life-saving appliances. Such an examination might include the lowering of survival craft, a check on the servicing of life rafts and any fitted marine evacuation system a check of means of recovery of survivors, the number and condition of life jackets and lifebuoys and ensuring that the pyrotechnics are still within their period of validity. It would not normally be as detailed as that for a renewal of the Safety Equipment Certificate and would concentrate on essentials for safe abandonment of the ship, but in an extreme case could progress to a full Safety Equipment Certificate inspection. The provision and functioning of effective overside lighting, means of alerting the crew and passengers and provision of illuminated routes to assembly points and embarkation positions will be given importance in the inspection.

Fire safety

5.2.15 The poor condition of fire and wash deck lines and hydrants and the possible absence of fire hoses and extinguishers in accommodation spaces might be a guide to a need for a close inspection of all fire safety equipment. In addition to compliance with convention requirements, the port State control officer will look for evidence of a higher than normal fire risk; this might be brought about by a poor standard of cleanliness in the machinery space, which together with significant deficiencies of fixed or portable fire-extinguishing equipment could lead to a judgement of the ship being substandard.

5.2.16 The port State control officer will examine the fire control plan on board in order to obtain a general picture of the fire safety measures provided in the ship and consider their compliance with convention requirements for the year of build. Queries on the method of structural protection will be addressed to the flag State Administration and the port State control officer will generally confine the inspection to the effectiveness of the arrangements provided.

5.2.17 The spread of fire could be accelerated if fire doors are not readily operable. The port State control officer will inspect for the operability and securing arrangements of those doors in the main zone bulkheads and stairway enclosures and in boundaries of high fire risk spaces, such as main machinery rooms and galleys, giving particular attention to those retained in the open position. Attention will also be given to main vertical zones which may have been compromised through new construction. An additional hazard in the event of fire is the spread of smoke through ventilation systems. Spot checks might be made on dampers and smoke flaps to ascertain the standard of operability. The port State control officer will also ensure that ventilation fans can be stopped from the master controls and that means are available for closing main inlets and outlets of ventilation systems.

5.2.18 Attention will be given to the effectiveness of escape routes by ensuring that vital doors are not maintained locked and that alleyways and stairways are not obstructed.

Regulations for preventing collisions at sea

5.2.19 A vital aspect of ensuring safety of life at sea is full compliance with the collision regulations. Based on observations on deck, the port State control officer will consider the need for close inspection of lanterns and their screening and means of making sound and distress signals.

Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate

5.2.20 The general condition of the ship may lead the port State control officer to consider matters other than those concerned with safety equipment and assignment of load lines, but nevertheless associated with the safety of the vessel, such as the effectiveness of items associated with the Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate, which can include pumping arrangements, means for shutting off air and oil supplies in the event of fire, alarm systems and emergency power supplies.

Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificates

5.2.21 The validity of the Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificates and associated Record of Equip-ment (Form R) may be accepted as proof of the provision and effectiveness of its associated equipment, but the port State control officer will ensure that appropriate certificated personnel are carried for its operation and for listening periods. Requirements for maintenance of radio equipment are contained in Regulation IV/15 of SOLAS 74. The radio log or radio records will be examined. Where considered necessary, operational checks may be carried out.

Equipment in excess of convention or flag State requirements

5.2.22 Equipment on board which is expected to be relied on in situations affecting safety or pollution prevention must be in operating condition. If such equipment is inoperative and is in excess of the equipment required by an appropriate convention and/or the flag State, it should be repaired, removed or, if removal is not practicable, clearly marked as inoperative and secured.

5.3 Crude oil washing

5.3.1 Inspection of crude oil washing operations

The port State control officer will ensure that crude oil washing is performed by all crude carriers either required to have a crude oil washing system or where the owner or operator chooses to install a crude oil washing system in order to comply with Regulation 13 of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78. In addition, compliance will be ensured with the operational requirements set out in the revised Specifications for the Design, Operation and Control of Crude Oil Washing Systems (IMO Resolution A.446(XI) , as amended by IMO Resolution A.497(XII)). This can best be done in the ports where the cargo is unloaded.

5.3.2 Procedures for in-port inspection of crude oil washing procedures

Inspections

5.3.2.1 The port State control officer will make the appropriate arrangements so as to ensure compliance with requirements governing the crude oil washing of oil tankers. This is not, however, to be construed as relieving terminal operators and ship owners of their obli-gations to ensure that the operation is undertaken in accordance with the regulations.

5.3.2.2 The inspection may cover the entire operation of crude oil washing or only certain aspects of it. It is thus in the interest of all concerned that the ship’s records with regard to the crude oil washing operations are maintained at all times so that a port State control officer may verify those operations undertaken prior to the inspection.

Ship’s personnel

5.3.2.3 The person in charge and the other nominated persons who have responsibility in respect of the crude oil washing operation must be identified. They must, if required, be able to show that their qualifications meet the requirements, as appropriate, of 5.2 and 5.3 of the revised Specifications for the Design, Operation and Control of Crude Oil Washing Systems (IMO Resolution A.446(XI), as amended by IMO Resolution A.497(XII)).

5.3.2.4 The verification may be accomplished by reference to the individual’s discharge papers, testimonials issued by the ship’s operator or by certificates issued by a training centre approved by an Administration. The numbers of such personnel must be at least as stated in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual.

Documentation

5.3.2.5 The following documents must be available for inspection:

.1 The IOPP Certificate and the Record of Construction and Equipment, to determine:

.1 whether the ship is fitted with a crude oil washing system as required in Regulation 13(6) or (8) of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78;

.2 whether the crude oil washing system is according to and complying with the requirements of Regulation 13(B) of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78;

.3 the validity and date of the COW Operations and Equipment Manual; and

.4 the validity of the Certificate.

.2 The approved COW Operations and Equipment Manual;

.3 The Oil Record Book; and

.4 The Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate to confirm that the inert gas system conforms to regulations contained in Chapter II-2 of SOLAS 74, as amended.

Inert gas system

5.3.2.6 Inert gas system regulations require that instrumentation shall be fitted for continuously indicating and permanently recording at all times when inert gas is being supplied, the pressure and the oxygen content of the gas in the inert gas supply main. Reference to the permanent recorder must indicate if the system had been operating before and during the cargo discharge in a satisfactory manner.

5.3.2.7 If conditions specified in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual are not being met then the washing must be stopped until satisfactory conditions are restored.

5.3.2.8 As a further precautionary measure, the oxygen level in each tank to be washed is to be determined at the tank. The metres used must be calibrated and inspected to ensure that they are in good working order. Readings from tanks already washed in port prior to inspection must be available for checking. Spot checks on readings may be instituted.

Electrostatic generation

5.3.2.9 It will be confirmed either from the cargo log or by questioning the person in charge that presence of water in the crude oil is being minimized as required by 6.7 of the revised Specifications (IMO Resolution A.446(XI), as amended by IMO Resolution A.497(XII)).

Communication

5.3.2.10 It will be established that effective means of communication exist between the person in charge and the other persons concerned with the crude oil washing operation.

Leakage on deck

5.3.2.11 Port State control officers will ensure that the crude oil washing piping system has been operationally tested for leakage before cargo discharge and that the test has been noted in the ship’s Oil Record Book.

Exclusion of oil from engine-room

5.3.2.12 It will be ascertained that the method of excluding cargo oil from the machinery space is being maintained by inspecting the isolating arrangements of the tank washing heater (if fitted) or of any part of the tank washing system which enters the machinery space.

Suitability of the crude oil

5.3.2.13 In judging the suitability of the oil for crude oil washing, the guidance and criteria contained in section 9 of the COW Operations and Equipment Manual must be taken into account.

Checklist

5.3.2.14 It will be determined from the ship’s records that the pre-crude oil wash operational checklist was carried out and all instruments functioned correctly. Spot checks on certain items may be instituted.

Wash programmes

5.3.2.15 Where the tanker is engaged in a multiple port discharge, the Oil Record Book must indicate if tanks were crude oil washed at previous discharge ports or at sea. It will be determined that all tanks which will, or may, be used to contain ballast on the forthcoming voyage will be crude oil washed before the ship departs from the port. There is no obligation to wash any tank other than ballast tanks at a discharge port except that each of these other tanks must be washed at least in accordance with 6.1 of the revised Specifications (IMO Resolution A.446(XI), as amended by IMO Resolution A.497(XII)). The Oil Record Book will be inspected to check that this is being complied with.

5.3.2.16 All crude oil washing must be completed before a ship leaves its final port of discharge.

5.3.2.17 If tanks are not being washed in one of the preferred orders given in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual, the port State control officer will determine that the reason for this, and the proposed order of tank washing, are acceptable.

5.3.2.18 For each tank being washed it will be ensured that the operation is in accordance with the COW Operations and Equipment Manual in that:

.1 the deck mounted machines and the submerged machines are operating either by reference to indicators, the sound patterns or other approved methods;

.2 the deck mounted machines, where applicable, are programmed as stated;

.3 the duration of the wash is as required; and

.4 the number of tank washing machines being used simultaneously does not exceed that specified.

Stripping of tanks

5.3.2.19 The minimum trim conditions and the parameters of the stripping operations are to be stated in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual.

5.3.2.20 All tanks which have been crude oil washed are to be stripped. The adequacy of the stripping is to be checked by hand dipping at least in the after most hand dipping location in each tank or by such other means provided and described in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual. It will be ascertained that the adequacy of stripping has been checked or will be checked before the ship leaves its final port of discharge.

Ballasting

5.3.2.21 Tanks that were crude oil washed at sea will be recorded in the Oil Record Book. These tanks must be left empty between discharge ports for inspection at the next discharge port. Where these tanks are the designated departure ballast tanks they may be required to be ballasted at a very early stage of the discharge. This is for operational reasons and also because they must be ballasted during cargo discharge if hydrocarbon emission is to be contained on the ship. If these tanks are to be inspected when empty, then this must be done shortly after the tanker berths. If a port State control officer arrives after the tanks have begun accepting ballast, then the sounding of the tank bottom would not be available. However, an examination of the surface of the ballast water is then possible. The thickness of the oil film should not be greater than that specified in 4.2.10(b) of the revised Specifications (IMO Resolution A.446(XI), as amended by IMO Resolution A.497(XII)).

5.3.2.22 The tanks that are designated ballast tanks will be listed in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual. It is, how­ever, left to the discretion of the master or responsible officer to decide which tanks may be used for ballast on the forthcoming voyage. It will be determined from the Oil Record Book that all such tanks have been washed before the tanker leaves its last discharge port. It must be noted that where a tanker back-loads a cargo of crude oil at an intermediate port into tanks designated for ballast, then it will not be required to wash those tanks at that particular port but at a subsequent port.

5.3.2.23 It will be determined from the Oil Record Book that additional ballast water has not been put into tanks which had not been crude oil washed during previous voyages.

5.3.2.24 It will be verified that the departure ballast tanks are stripped as completely as possible. Where departure ballast is filled through cargo lines and pumps these must be stripped either into another cargo tank, or ashore by the special small diameter line provided for this purpose.

5.3.2.25 The methods to avoid vapour emission where locally required will be provided in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual and they must be adhered to. The port State control officer will ensure that this is being complied with.

5.3.2.26 The typical procedures for ballasting listed in the COW Operations and Equipment Manual must be observed. The port State control officer will ensure this is being complied with.

5.3.2.27 When departure ballast is to be shifted, the discharge into the sea must be in compliance with Regulation 9 of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78. The Oil Record Book will be inspected to ensure that the ship is complying with this.

5.4 Unloading, stripping and prewash operations under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

5.4.1 Procedures for inspection of unloading, stripping and prewashing operations (mainly in unloading ports)

Introduction

5.4.1.1 The port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration exercising control in accordance with Regulation 8 of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 must be thoroughly acquainted with Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 and the custom of the port as of relevance to cargo handling, tank washing, cleaning berths, prohibition of lighters alongside, etc.

Documentation

5.4.1.2 The documentation required for the inspection referred to in this appendix consists of:

.1 CoF or NLS Certificate;

.2 cargo plan and shipping document;

.3 Procedures and Arrangements (P and A) Manual; and

.4 Cargo Record Book.

Information by ship’s staff

5.4.1.3 Of relevance to the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration is the following:

.1 the intended loading and unloading programme of the ship;

.2 whether unloading and stripping operations can be effected in accordance with the P and A Manual and if not the reason why it cannot be done;

.3 the constraints, if any, under which the efficient stripping system operates (i.e. back pressure, ambient air temperature, malfunctioning, etc.);

.4 whether the ship proceeds to, remains inside, or leaves a Special Area; and

.5 whether the ship requests an exemption from the prewashing and the discharge of residues in the unloading port.

5.4.1.4 When tank washing is required without the use of water the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration is to be informed about the tank washing procedure and disposal of residues.

5.4.1.5 When the Cargo Record Book is not up to date, any information on prewash and residue disposal operations outstanding must be supplied.

Information from terminal staff

5.4.1.6 Terminal staff must supply information on limitations imposed upon the ship in respect of back pressure and/or reception facilities.

Control

5.4.1.7 On boarding and introduction to the master or responsible ship officer’s, the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration will examine the necessary documentation.

5.4.1.8 The documentation may be used to establish the following:

.1 noxious liquid substances to be unloaded, their categories and stowage (cargo plan, P and A Manual);

.2 details (possibilities and limitations) of efficient stripping system, if fitted (P and A Manual);

.3 tanks which require prewashing with disposal of tank washings to reception facilities (shipping document and cargo temperature);

.4 tanks which require prewashing with disposal of tank washings either to reception facilities or into the sea (P and A Manual, shipping document and cargo temperature);

.5 prewash operations and/or residue disposal operations outstanding (Cargo Record Book); and

.6 tanks which may not be washed with water due to the nature of substances involved (P and A Manual).

5.4.1.9 In respect of the prewash operations referred to in 5.4.1.8 of this Annex, the following information is of relevance (P and A Manual):

.1 pressure required for tank washing machines;

.2 duration of one cycle of the tank washing machine and quantity of water used;

.3 washing programmes for the substances involved;

.4 required temperature of washing water; and

.5 special procedures.

5.4.1.10 The port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration, in accordance with Regulation 8 of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78, will ascertain that unloading, stripping and/or prewash operations are carried out in conformance with the information obtained in accordance with 5.4.1.2 of this Annex (Documentation). If this cannot be achieved, alternative measures will be taken to ensure that the ship does not proceed to sea with more than the quantities of residue specified in Regulation 5A to Annex II to MARPOL 73/78, as applicable. If the residue quantities cannot be reduced by alternative measures the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration will inform his Administration.

5.4.1.11 Care must be taken to ensure that cargo hoses and piping systems of the terminal are not drained back to the ship.

5.4.1.12 If a ship is exempted from certain pumping efficiency requirements under Regulation 5A of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 or requests an exemption from certain stripping or prewashing procedures under Regulation 8 of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 the conditions for such exemption set out in the said regulations will be observed. These concern:

.1 Regulation 5A(6). The ship is constructed before 1 July 1986 and is exempted from the requirement for reducing its residue quantities to specified limits (i.e. category B substances 0.3 m³ or 1 m³ and category C substances 0.9 m³ or 3 m³). Whenever a cargo tank is to be washed or ballasted, a prewash is required with disposal of prewash slops to shore reception facilities. The CoF or NLS Certificate must have been endorsed to the effect that the ship is solely engaged in restricted voyages;

.2 Regulation 5A(7). The ship is never required to ballast its cargo tanks and tank washing is only required for repair or drydocking. The CoF or NLS Certificate must indicate the particulars of the exemption. Each cargo tank must be certified for the carriage of only one named substance;

.3 Regulations 8(2)(b)(i), 8(5)(b)(i), 8(6)(c)(i) and 8(7)(c)(i). Cargo tanks will not be washed or ballasted prior to the next loading;

.4 Regulations 8(2)(b)(ii), 8(5)(b)(ii), 8(6)(c)(ii) and 8(7)(c)(ii). Cargo tanks will be washed and prewash slops will be discharged to reception facilities in another port. It must be confirmed in writing that an adequate reception facility is available at that port for such purpose; and

.5 Regulations 8(2)(b)(iii), 8(5)(b)(iii), 8(6)(c)(iii) and 8(7)(c)(iii). The cargo resi-dues can be removed by ventilation.

5.4.1.13 The port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration must endorse the Cargo Record Book under section J whenever an exemption referred to under 5.4.1.12.3, 5.4.1.12.4 and 5.4.1.12.5 of this Annex has been granted, or whenever a tank having unloaded category A substances has been prewashed in accordance with the P and A Manual.

5.4.1.14 Alternatively, for category A substances, Regulation 8(3) of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78, residual concentration must be measured by the procedures which each port State authorizes. In this case the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration must endorse in the Cargo Record Book under section K whenever the required residual concentration has been achieved.

5.4.1.15 In addition to 5.4.1.13 of this Annex, the port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration must endorse the Cargo Record Book whenever the unloading, stripping or prewash of category B, C and D substances, in accordance with the P and A Manual, has actually been witnessed.

5.4.1.16 The port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration must be aware that certain “oil like” noxious liquid substances may be carried on product carriers. Such substances must be indicated on the IOPP Certificate. For the control of ships carrying such substances, the Control Procedures under Annex I to MARPOL 73/78 apply. The port State control officer or the surveyor authorized by the port State Administration exercising control in accordance with Regulation 8 of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 must be thoroughly acquainted with Annex I to MARPOL 73/78.

5.5 Procedures for control of operational requirements

5.5.1 In the exercise of a more detailed inspection, the port State control officer will not include any operational tests or impose physical demands which, in the judgement of the master, could jeopardize the safety of the ship, crew, passengers, control officers or cargo.

5.5.2 When carrying out operational control, the port State control officer will ensure, as far as possible, no interference with normal shipboard operations, such as loading and unloading of cargo and ballasting, which is carried out under the responsibility of the master, nor will the port State control officer require demonstration of operational aspects which would unnecessarily delay the ship.

5.5.3 Having assessed the extent to which operational requirements are complied with, the port State control officer then has to exercise professional judgement to determine whether the operational proficiency of the crew as a whole is of a sufficient level to allow the ship to sail without danger to the ship or persons on board, or presenting an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment.

Muster list

5.5.4 The port State control officer may determine if the crew members are aware of their duties indicated in the muster list.

5.5.5 The port State control officer may ensure that muster lists are exhibited in conspicuous places throughout the ship, including the navigational bridge, the engine room and the crew accommodation spaces. When determining if the muster list is in accordance with the regulations, the port State control officer may verify whether:

.1 the muster list shows the duties assigned to the different members of the crew;

.2 the muster list specifies which officers are assigned to ensure that lifesaving and fire appliances are maintained in good condition and are ready for immedi­ate use;

.3 the muster list specifies the substitutes for key persons who may become disabled, taking into account that different emergencies may call for different actions;

.4 the muster list shows the duties assigned to crew members in relation to passen-gers in case of emergency;

.5 the format of the muster list used on passenger ships is approved and that the list includes translation into the working language, if it is not the official language.

5.5.6 To determine whether the muster list is up to date, the port State control officer may require an up-to-date crew list, if available, to verify this. Other possible means, e.g. Safe Manning Document, may be used for this purpose.

5.5.7 The port State control officer may determine whether the duties assigned to crew members manning the survival craft (lifeboats or life rafts) are in accordance with the regulations and verify that a deck officer or certificated person is placed in charge of each survival craft to be used. However, the flag State Administration, having due regard to the nature of the voyage, the number of persons on board and the characteristics of the ship, may permit persons practised in the handling and operation of life rafts to be placed in charge of life rafts in lieu of persons qualified as above. A second-in-command must have been nominated in the case of lifeboats.

5.5.8 The port State control officer may determine whether the crew members are familiar with the duties assigned to them in the muster list and are aware of the locations where they should perform their duties.

Communication

5.5.9 The port State control officer may determine if the key crew members are able to communicate with each other, and with passengers as appropriate, in such a way that the safe operation of the ship is not impaired, especially in emergency situations.

5.5.10 The port State control officer may ask the master which languages are used as the working languages and may verify whether the language has been recorded in the logbook.

5.5.11.1 The port State control officer may ensure that the key crew members are able to understand each other during the inspection or drills. The crew members assigned to assist passengers must be able to give the necessary information to the passengers in case of an emergency.

Search and Rescue Plan

5.5.11 bis For passenger ships trading on fixed routes, the port State control officer may verify that there is on board an approved plan for co-operation with appropriate search and rescue services in event of an emergency.

Emergency training and drills

5.5.12 The port State control officer will check the on board training and examine the dates and details of the muster as recorded in such logbook as may be prescribed by the Administration. The port State control officer witnessing a fire and abandon ship drill will ensure that the crew members are familiar with their duties and the proper use of the ship’s installations and equipment.

Fire drills

5.5.13 The port State control officer may witness a fire drill carried out by the crew assigned to these duties on the muster list. After consultation with the master of the vessel, one or more specific locations of the ship may be selected for a simulated fire. A crew member may be sent to the location(s) and activate a fire alarm system or use other means to give alarm.

5.5.14 At the location the port State control officer can describe the fire indication to the crew member and observe how the report of fire is relayed to the bridge or damage control centre. At this point most ships will sound the crew alarm to summon the fire-fighting parties to their stations. The port State control officer will observe the fire-fighting party arriving on the scene, breaking out their equipment and fig­hting the simulated fire. Team leaders must be capable of giving orders as appropriate to their crews and passing the word back to the bridge or damage control centre on the conditions. The fire-fighting crews will be observed for proper donning and the use of their equipment. The port State control officer will make sure that all the gear is complete. Merely mustering the crew with their gear is not acceptable. Crew response to personnel injuries can be checked by selecting a crew member as a simulated casualty. The port State control officer will observe how the word is passed and the response of stretcher and medical teams. Handling a stretcher properly through narrow passageways, doors and stairways is difficult and takes practice.

5.5.15 The drill must, as far as practicable, be conducted as if there were an actual emergency.

5.5.16 Those crew members assigned to other duties related to a fire drill, such as the manning of the emergency generators, the CO₂₂ room, the sprinkler and emergency fire pumps, must also be involved in the drill. The port State control officer may ask these crew members to explain their duties and if possible to demonstrate their familiarity.

5.5.17 On passenger ships, special attention will be paid to the duties of those crew members assigned to the closing of manually operated doors and fire dampers. These closing devices must be operated by the responsible persons in the areas of the simulated fire(s) during the drill. Crew members not assigned to the fire-fighting teams are generally assigned to locations throughout the passenger accommodations to assist in passenger evacuation. These crew members will be asked to explain their duties and the meaning of the various emergency signals and asked to point out the two means of escape from the area, and where the passengers are to report. Crew members assigned to assist passengers must be able to communicate at least enough information to direct a passenger to the proper muster and embarkation stations.

Abandon ship drills

5.5.18 After consultation with the master, the port State control officer may require an abandon ship drill for one or more survival craft. The essence of this drill is that the survival craft are manned and operated by the crew members assigned to them on the muster list. If possible the port State control officer will include the rescue boat(s) in this drill. Chapter III of SOLAS 74 gives specific requirements on abandon ship training and drills, of which the following principles are particularly relevant.

5.5.19 The drill must, as far as practicable, be conducted as if there was an actual emergency.

5.5.20 The abandon ship drill must include:

.1 summoning of (passengers and) crew to the muster station(s) with the required alarm and ensuring that they are aware of the order to abandon ship as specified in the muster list;

.2 reporting to the stations and preparing for the duties described in the muster list;

.3 checking that (passengers and) crew are suitably dressed;

.4 checking that life jackets are correctly donned;

.5 lowering of at least one lifeboat after the necessary preparation for launching;

.6 starting and operating the lifeboat engine; and

.7 operation of the davits used for launching life rafts;

.8 a mock search and rescue of passengers trapped in their staterooms;

.9 instructions in the use of radio life saving appliances;

.10 testing of emergency lighting for mustering and abandonment; and

.11 if the ship is fitted with marine evacuation systems, exercising of the procedures required for the deployment of such systems up to the point of immediately preceding actual deployment.

5.5.21 If the lifeboat lowered during the drill is not the rescue boat, the rescue boat must be lowered as well, taking into account that it is boarded and launched in the shortest possible time. The port State control officer will ensure that crew members are familiar with the duties assigned to them during abandon ship operations and that the crew member in charge of the survival craft has complete knowledge of the operation and equipment of the survival craft.

5.5.22 Each survival craft must be stowed in a state of continuous readiness so that two crew members can carry out preparations for embarking and launching in less than 5 minutes.

5.5.23 On passenger ships, it is required that lifeboats and davitlaunched life rafts are capable of being launched within a period of 30 minutes.

5.5.24 On cargo ships, it is required that lifeboats and davit launched life rafts are capable of being launched within a period of 10 minutes.

Damage control plan and Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP)

5.5.25 The port State control officer may determine if a damage control plan on a passenger ship is provided and whether the appropriate crew members are familiar with their duties and the proper use of the ship’s installations and equipment for damage control and pollution emergency purposes.

5.5.26 The port State control officer may determine if the officers of the ship are aware of the contents of the damage control booklet which must be available to them, or of the damage control plan.

5.5.27 The officers may be asked to ex­plain the action to be taken in various damage conditions.

5.5.28 The officers may also be asked to explain about the boundaries of the watertight compartments, the openings therein with the means of closure and position of any controls thereof and the arrangements for the correction of any list due to flooding.

5.5.29 The officers must have a sound knowledge of the effect of trim and stability of their ship in the event of damage to and consequent flooding of a compartment and counter-measures to be taken.

5.5.30 The provisions referred to in 5.5.25 to 5.5.29 of this Annex apply accordingly to the damage control plan for cargo ships and to the SOPEP for all ships. Where applicable, for bulk carriers the port State control officer may determine the familiarity of officers with the cargo holds flooding scenarios and the instructions on evacuation preparedness.

Fire control plan

5.5.31 The port State control officer may determine if a fire control plan or booklet is provided and whether the crew members are familiar with the information given in the fire control plan or booklet.

5.5.32 The port State control officer may verify that fire control plans are permanently exhibited for the guidance of the ship’s officers. Alternatively, booklets containing the information of the fire control plan may be supplied to each officer, and one copy must at all times be available on board in an accessible position. Plans and booklets must be kept up to date, any alterations being recorded thereon as soon as possible.

5.5.33 The port State control officer may determine that the responsible officers, especially those who are assigned to related duties on the muster list, are aware of the information provided by the fire control plan or booklet and how to act in case of a fire.

5.5.34 The port State control officer may ensure that the officers in charge of the ship are familiar with the principal structural members which form part of the various fire sections and the means of access to the different compartments.

Decision support system for masters of passenger ships

5.5.34 bis For passenger ships the port State control officer may verify that a decision support system for emergency management is provided on the navigation bridge, consisting as a minimum of a printed emergency plan or plans.

Bridge operation

5.5.35 The port State control officer may determine if officers in charge of a navigational watch are familiar with bridge control and navigational equipment (including electronic charts where fitted), changing the steering mode from automatic to manual and vice versa, and the ship’s manoeuvring characteristics.

5.5.36 The officer in charge of a navigational watch must have knowledge of the location and operation of all safety and navigational equipment. Moreover, this officer must be familiar with procedures which apply to the navigation of the ship in all circumstances and must be aware of all information available.

5.5.37 The port State control officer may also verify the familiarity of the officers on all the information available to them such as manoeuvring characteristics of the ship, life-saving signals, up-to-date nautical publications, checklists concerning bridge procedures, instructions, manuals, etc.

5.5.38 The port State control officer may verify the familiarity of the officers with procedures such as periodical tests and checks of equipment, preparations for arrival and departure, change over of ste­ering modes, signalling, communications, manoeuvring, emergencies and log book entries.

5.5.38.1 The Permit to Operate for High Speed Craft (POHSC) includes limitations of the maximum significant wave height (and wind force for hovercraft) within which the craft may operate. When carrying out inspections of HSC, PSCOs may verify by the logbook and the weather records whether these limitations have been respected. PSCOs may find that a voyage had to be completed when worse weather conditions than permitted were encountered, but a new voyage should not commence in such conditions.

5.5.38.2 Procedures for obtaining up-to-date forecasts before every voyage should also be checked. Forecasts of significant wave heights should cover a relevant period. When the conditions are marginal the master should obtain updates from the port State weather services or ships in the vicinity. If procedures are found to be lacking, owners should be required to confirm their corrective action. PSCOs should question logbook entries which record conditions significantly below forecasts of conditions above operating limits. If further evidence is needed, hindcasts (i.e. reports of the actual weather over a given period) may be available from the port weather service but these should normally only be obtained when there is significant doubt. Where a HSC is found to have breached its weather limitations, action may include sending a warning letter to the owners with a copy to the flag State.

Cargo operation

5.5.39 The port State control officer may determine if ship’s personnel assigned specific duties related to the cargo and cargo equipment are familiar with those duties, any dangers posed by the cargo and with the measures to be taken in such a context.

5.5.39 bis The port State control officer may verify that the master has been provided with appropriate written information on the precautions for the proper stowage and safe carriage of cargo.

5.5.40 With respect to the carriage of solid bulk cargoes, the port State control officer will verify, as appropriate, that cargo loading is performed in accordance with a ship’s loading plan and unloading in accordance with a ship’s unloading plan agreed by the ship and the terminal, taking into account the information provided by the loading instrument, where fitted.

5.5.41 The port State control officer, when appropriate, may determine whether the responsible crew members are familiar with the relevant provisions of the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes, particularly those concerning moisture limits and trimming of the cargo, the Code of Safe Practice for Ships Carrying Timber Deck Cargoes and the Code of Safe Practice for Cargo Stowage and Securing.

5.5.42 Some solid materials transported in bulk can present a hazard during transport because of their chemical nature or physical properties. SOLAS regulation VI/2 and Section 2 of the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes give general precautions. Section 4 of the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes contains the obligation imposed on the shipper to provide all necessary information to ensure a safe transport of the cargo. The port State control officer may determine whether all relevant details, including all relevant certificates of tests, have been provided to the master from the shipper.

5.5.43 For some cargoes, such as cargoes which are subject to liquefaction, special precautions are given in section 7 of the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes. The port State control officer may determine whether all precautions are met with special attention for the stability of those vessels engaged in the transport of cargoes subject to liquefaction and solid hazardous waste in bulk.

5.5.44 Officers responsible for cargo handling and operation and key crew members of oil tankers, chemical tankers and liquefied gas carriers must be familiar with the cargo and cargo equipment and with the safety measures as stipulated in the relevant sections of the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and of the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code).

5.5.45 For the carriage of grain in bulk, reference is made to part C of Chapter VI of SOLAS 74 and the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Grain in Bulk (IMO Resolution MSC.23(59)).

5.5.46 The port State control officer may determine whether the operations, cargo securing and loading manuals include all the relevant information for safe loading and unloading operations in port as well as in transit conditions.

Operation of the machinery

5.5.47 The port State control officer may determine if responsible ship’s personnel are familiar with their duties related to operating essential machinery, such as:

.1 emergency and stand-by sources of electrical power;

.2 auxiliary steering gear;

.3 bilge and fire pumps; and

.4 any other equipment essential in emergency situations.

5.5.48 The port State control officer may verify whether the responsible ship’s personnel are familiar with, inter alia:

.1 Emergency generator:

.1.1 actions which are necessary before the engine can be started;

.1.2 different possibilities to start the engine in combination with the source of starting energy; and

.1.3 procedures when the first attempts to start the engine fail.

.2 Stand-by generator engine:

.2.1 possibilities to start the stand-by engine, automatic or by hand;

.2.2 blackout procedures; and

.2.3 load-sharing system.

5.5.49 The port State control officer may verify whether the responsible ship’s personnel are familiar with, inter alia:

.1 which type of auxiliary steering gear system applies to the ship;

.2 how it is indicated which steering gear unit is in operation; and

.3 what action is needed to bring the auxiliary steering gear into operation.

5.5.50 The port State control officer may verify whether the responsible ship’s personnel are familiar with, inter alia:

.1 Bilge pumps:

.1.1 number and location of bilge pumps installed on board the ship (including emergency bilge pumps);

.1.2 starting procedures for all these bilge pumps;

.1.3 appropriate valves to operate; and

.1.4 most likely causes of failure of bilge pump operation and their possible remedies.

.2 Fire pumps:

.2.1 number and location of fire pumps installed on board the ship (including the emergency fire pump);

.2.2 starting procedures for all these pumps; and

.2.3 appropriate valves to operate.

5.5.51 The port State control officer may verify whether the responsible ship’s personnel are familiar with, inter alia:

.1 starting and maintenance of lifeboat engine and/or rescue boat engine;

.2 local control procedures for those systems which are normally controlled from the navigating bridge;

.3 use of the emergency and fully independent sources of electrical power of radio installations;

.4 maintenance procedures for batteries;

.5 emergency stops, fire detection system and alarm system operation of water-tight and fire doors (stored energy systems); and

.6 change of control from automatic to manual for cooling water and lube oil sys-tems for main and auxiliary engines.

Manuals, instructions, etc.

5.5.52 The port State control officer may determine if the appropriate crew members are able to understand the information given in manuals, instructions, etc., relevant to the safe condition and operation of the ship and its equipment and that they are aware of the requirements for maintenance, periodical testing, training, drills and recording of log book entries.

5.5.53 The following information must, inter alia, be provided on board and port State control officers may determine whether it is in a language or languages understood by the crew and whether crew members concerned are aware of the contents and are able to respond accordingly:

.1 instructions concerning the maintenance and operation of all the equipment and installations on board for the fighting and containment of fire must be kept under one cover, readily available in an accessible position;

.2 clear instructions to be followed in the event of an emergency must be provided for every person on board;

.3 decks shall be sequentially numbered. Mimic plans indicating positions on board and escape routes and illustrations and instructions in appropriate languages must be posted in passenger cabins and be conspicuously displayed at muster stations and other passenger spaces to inform passengers of their muster station, the essential action they must take in an emergency and the method of donning life jackets;

.4 posters and signs must be provided on or in the vicinity of survival craft and their launching controls and shall illustrate the purpose of controls and the procedures for operating the appliance and give relevant instructions or warnings;

.5 instructions for on-board maintenance of life-saving appliances;

.6 training manuals must be provided in each crew mess room and recreation room or in each crew cabin. The training manual, which may comprise several volu-mes, must contain instructions and information, in easily understood terms illustrated wherever possible, on the life-saving appliances provided in the ship and on the best method of survival;

.7 Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan in accordance with Regulation 26 of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78; and

.8 stability booklet, associated stability plans and stability information.

Oil and oily mixtures from machinery spaces

5.5.54 The port State control officer may determine if all operational requirements of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78 have been met, taking into account:

.1 the quantity of oil residues generated;

.2 the capacity of sludge and bilge water holding tank; and

.3 the capacity of the oily water separator.

5.5.55 An inspection of the Oil Record Book will be made. The port State control officer may determine if reception facilities have been used and note any alleged inadequacy of such facilities.

5.5.56 The port State control officer may determine whether the responsible officer is familiar with the handling of sludge and bilge water. The relevant items from the guidelines for systems for handling oily wastes in machinery spaces of ships may be used as guidance. Taking into account the above, the port State control officer may determine if the ullage of the sludge tank is sufficient for the expected generated sludge during the next intended voyage. The port State control officer may verify that, in respect of ships for which the flag State Administration has waived the requirements of Regulation 16(1) and (2) of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78, all oily bilge water is retained on board for subsequent discharge to a reception facility.

5.5.57 When reception facilities in other ports have not been used because of inadequacy, the port State control officer will advise the master to report the inadequacy of the reception facility to the ship’s flag State, in conformity with MEPC/Circ.215 of 25 April 1989.

Loading, unloading and cleaning procedures for cargo spaces of tankers

5.5.58 The port State control officer may determine if all operational requirements of Annexes I or II to MARPOL 73/78 have been met taking into account the type of tanker and the type of cargo carried, including the inspection of the Oil Record Book and/or Cargo Record Book. The port State control officer may determine if the reception facilities have been used and note any alleged inadequacy of such facilities.

5.5.59 For the control on loading, unloading and cleaning procedures for tankers carrying oil, reference is made to 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 of this Annex where procedures have been set out for the inspection of crude oil washing operations.

5.5.60 For the control on loading, unloading and cleaning procedures for tankers carrying noxious liquid substances, reference is made to 5.4.1 of this Annex where procedures have been set out for the inspection of unloading, stripping and prewash operations

5.5.61 When reception facilities in other ports have not been used because of inadequacy, the port State control officer will advise the master to report the inadequacy of the reception facility to the ship’s flag State, in conformity with MEPC/Circ.349 of 18 November 1998.

5.5.62 When a vessel is permitted to proceed to the next port with residues of noxious liquid substances on board in excess of those permitted to be discharged into the sea during the ship’s passage, it will be ascertained that the residues can be received by that port. At the same time that port will be informed if practicable.

Dangerous goods and harmful substances in packaged form

5.5.63 The port State control officer may determine if the required shipping documents for the carriage of dangerous goods and harmful substances carried in packaged form are provided on board and whether the dangerous goods and harmful substances are properly stowed and segregated and the crew members are familiar with the essential action to be taken in an emergency involving such packaged cargo.

5.5.64 Ship types and cargo spaces of ships built after 1 September 1984 intended for the carriage of dangerous goods must comply with the requirements of Regulation II-2/54 of SOLAS 74, in addition to the requirements of Regulation II-2/53 (for cargo ships) and the requirements of Regulations II-2/3 and II-2/39 (for passenger ships), unless such requirements have already been met by compliance with requirements elsewhere in the Convention. The only exemption permissible is when dangerous goods in limited quantities are carried.

5.5.65 Annex III to MARPOL 73/78 contains requirements for the carriage of harmful sub-stances in packaged form which are identified in the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code) as marine pollutants. Cargoes which are determined to be marine pollutants must be labelled and stowed in accordance with Annex III to MARPOL 73/78.

5.5.66 The port State control officer may determine whether a Document of Compliance is on board and whether the ship’s personnel are familiar with this document provided by the flag State Administration as evidence of compliance of construction and equipment with the requirements. Additional control may consist of:

.1 whether the dangerous goods have been secured in conformity with the cargo securing manual and stowed on board in conformity with the Document of Compliance, using the dangerous goods manifest or the stowage plan, required by Chapter VII of SOLAS 74. This manifest or stowage plan may be combined with the one required under Annex III to MARPOL 73/78;

.2 whether inadvertent pumping of leaking flammable or toxic liquids is not possible in case these substances are carried in under-deck cargo spaces; or

.3 determining whether the ship’s personnel are familiar with the relevant provisions of the Medical First Aid Guide and Emergency Procedures for Ships Carrying Dangerous Goods.

Garbage

5.5.67 The port State control officer may determine if all operational requirements of Annex V to MARPOL 73/78 have been met. The port State control officer may determine if the reception facilities have been used and note any alleged inadequacy of such facilities.

5.5.68 “Guidelines for the implementation of Annex V to MARPOL 73/78” * ) were approved at the MEPC at its twenty-ninth session and have been published. One of the objectives of these guidelines is to assist vessel operators complying with the requirements set forth in Annex V and domestic laws.

5.5.69 The port State control officer may determine whether:

.1 ship’s personnel are aware of these Guidelines, in particular section 3 “Minimi-zing the amount of potential garbage” and section 4 “Shipboard garbage hand-ling and storage procedures”;

.2 ship’s personnel are familiar with the disposal and discharge requirements of Annex V to MARPOL 73/78 inside and outside a special area and are aware of the areas determined as special areas under Annex V to MARPOL 73/78; and

.3 ship’s personnel is familiar with the procedures of the garbage management plan for collecting, storing, processing and disposing of garbage and with the keeping of the Garbage Record Book.

5.5.70 When reception facilities in other ports have not been used because of inadequacy, the port State control officer will advise the master to report the inadequacy of the reception facility to the ship’s flag State, in conformity with MEPC/Circ.215 of 25 April 1989.

Section 6. Manning

6.1 Introduction

The guiding principles for port State control of the manning of a foreign ship will be to establish conformity with:

.1 the flag State’s safe manning requirements. Where this is in doubt the flag State will be consulted; and

.2 the international provisions as laid down in SOLAS 74, STCW 78 and IMO Resolution A.890(21).

.3 the provisions of ILO 147 which inter alia refer to the ILO Convention No. 53, Article 3 and 4.

6.2 Manning control

6.2.1 If a ship is manned in accordance with a safe manning document or equivalent document issued by the flag State, the port State control officer will accept that the ship is safely manned unless the document has clearly been issued without regard to the principles contained in the relevant instruments in which case the port State control officer will act according to the procedures defined in 6.2.3 of this Annex.

6.2.2 If the actual crew number or composition does not conform to the manning document, the port State will request the flag State for advice as to whether or not the ship should be allowed to sail with the actual number of crew and its composition. Such a request and response will be by expedient means and either Party may request this communication in writing. If the actual crew number or composition is not brought into accordance with the safe manning document or the flag State does not advise that the ship could sail, the ship may be considered for detention after the criteria set out in 9.2 of this Annex have been taken into proper account.

6.2.3 If the ship does not carry a safe manning document or equivalent, the port State will request the flag State to specify the required number of crew and its composition and to issue a document as quickly as possible.

In case the actual number or composition of the crew does not conform to the specifica-tions received from the flag State the procedure as contained in 6.2.2 of this Annex applies.

If the flag State does not respond to the request this will be considered as clear grounds for a more detailed inspection to ensure that the number and composition of the crew is in accordance with the principles laid down in 6.1 of this Annex. The ship will only be allowed to proceed to sea if it is safe to do so, taking into account the criteria for detention indicated in 9.2 of this Annex. In any such case the minimum standards to be applied will be no more stringent than those applied to ships flying the flag of the port State.

6.3 Control under the provisions of STCW 78

6.3.1 Without prejudice to other rights and obligations on control by port State control officers concerning communication and information on board, control exercised by the port State control officer will be limited to the following:

.1 verification that all seafarers serving on board, who are required to be certifi-cated, hold an appropriate certificate or a valid dispensation, or provide docu-mentary proof that an application for an endorsement has been submitted to the flag State Administration;

.2 verification that the numbers and certificates of the seafarers serving on board are in conformity with the applicable safe manning requirements of the flag State Administration; and

.3 assessment of the ability of the seafarers of the ship to maintain watch keeping standards as required by the Convention if there are clear grounds for believing that such standards are not being maintained because any of the following have occurred:

.1 the ship has been involved in a collision, grounding or stranding, or

.2 there has been a discharge of substances from the ship when under-way, at anchor or at berth which is illegal under any international convention, or

.3 the ship has been manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner whereby routeing measures adopted by the IMO or safe navigation practices and procedures have not been followed, or

.4 the ship is otherwise being operated in such a manner as to pose a danger to persons, property or the environment.

6.3.2 In assessing the watch keeping standards the port State control officer may check that watch schedules clearly show rest periods, are posted and easily accessible and that all persons who are assigned duty as officer in charge of a watch or as a rating forming part of a watch are provided a minimum of 10 hours of rest in any 24 hour period of which at least 6 hours are consecutive and 70 hours in each seven day period. These periods do not need to be maintained in case of an emergency or drill or in other overriding operational conditions which, in any case, should be recorded. Watch schedules may also be in conformity with the requirements of ILO Convention No. 180 (see Section 7).

Section 7. Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147) and ILO 147 Protocol, 1996.

7.1 Inspections on board ships under ILO 147 and ILO Protocol 1996 will relate to:

.1 the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138); or

the Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised),1936 (No. 58); or

the Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920 (No. 7);

.2 the Medical Examination (Seafarers) Convention, 1946 (No. 73);

.3 the Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134) (Articles 4 and 7);

.4 the Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92);

.5 the Food and Catering (Ships’ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68) (Article 5);

.6 the Accommodation and Crews (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1970 (No. 133);

.7 the Seafarers’ Hours of Work and the Manning of Ships Convention, 1996 (No. 180);

.8 the Officers’ Competency Certificates Convention, 1936 (No. 53) (Articles 3 and 4).

Inspection regarding certificates of competency is dealt with in section 6 of this Annex. In the exercise of control of the conventions listed in .1 to .7 above, the port State control officer will decide, on the basis of the clear grounds listed in section 4 of this Annex and his professional judgement, whether the ship will receive a more detailed inspection. All complaints regarding conditions on board will be investigated thoroughly and action taken as deemed necessary. He will also use his professional judgement to determine whether the conditions on board give rise to a hazard to the safety or health of the crew which necessitates the rectification of conditions and may, if necessary, detain the ship until appropriate corrective action is taken. Reporting procedures for detentions are provided in Annex 4.

7.2 The port State control officer, when carrying out an inspection as referred to in 7.1 of this Annex, will further take into account the considerations given in the ILO publication “Inspection of Labour Conditions on board Ship: Guide-lines for procedure” and the IMO/ILO Guidelines for the Development of Tables of Seafarers’ Shipboard Working Arrangements and Formats of Records of Seafarers’ Hours of Work or Hours of Rest.

7.3 The conventions relevant in the framework of the provisions of 7.4 of this Annex are:

.1 the Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (no. 22);

.2 the Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (no. 23);

.3 the Shipowners’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (no.55); or

the Sickness Insurance (Sea) Convention, 1936 (no. 56); or

the Medical Care and Sickness Benefits Convention, 1969 (no. 130);

.4 the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Conven-tion, 1948 (no. 87);

.5 the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (no. 98);

.6 the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (no. 108);

.7 the Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (no. 135);

.8 the Health Protection and Medical Care (Seafarers) Convention, 1987 (no. 164);

.9 the Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987, (no. 166).

7.4 If the port State control officer receives a report, notification or complaint to the effect that the standards laid down in the conventions listed in 7.3 of this Annex are not met, the matter will be reported by the Authority, if possible with evidence, to the flag State Administration for further action, with a copy to the ILO.

7.5 Those parts of the ILO publication “Inspection of Labour Conditions on board Ship: Guide-lines for procedure” which deal with:

.1 control procedures for national flag ships;

.2 vocational training;

.3 officers’ certificates of competency (regulated under STCW95);

.4 hours of work and manning (regulated under ILO180/STCW95);

are not considered as relevant provisions for the inspection of ships but as information to port State control officers only.

Section 8. Expanded inspection of certain ships

8.1 General provision for expanded inspection

The ships referred to in 8.2 of this Annex will be subject to an expanded inspection by any of the Authorities only once during a period of 12 months. However, these ships

may be subject to the inspection provided for in 3.1 of the Memorandum. Expanded inspections will be carried out in accordance with the procedures in section 8.3.

8.2 Categories of ships subject to expanded inspection

8.2.1 Oil tankers with a gross tonnage of more than 3000 and older than 15 years of age , as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates.

8.2.2 Bulk carriers, older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates;

8.2.3 Passenger ships older than 15 years of age other than ro-ro ferries and high-speed passenger craft operating in regular service under the provision of Council Directive 1999/35/EC;

8.2.4 Gas and chemical tankers older than 10 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship’s safety certificates.

8.3 Procedures for expanded inspection of certain categories of ships

8.3.1 Subject to their practical feasibility or any constraints relating to the safety of persons, the ship or the port, the following items at least are considered as part of an expanded inspection. Port State control officers must be aware that it may jeopardize the safe execution of certain on-board operations, e.g. cargo operations, if tests having a direct effect thereon are required to be carried out during such operations.

8.3.2 Ships in general (categories as listed in 8.2 of this Annex):

.1 black-out and start of emergency generator;

.2 inspection of emergency lighting;

.3 operation of emergency fire pump with two fire hoses connected to the fire main line;

.4 operation of bilge pumps;

.5 closing of watertight doors;

.6 lowering of one seaside lifeboat to the water;

.7 test of remote emergency stop for e.g. boilers, ventilation and fuel pumps;

.8 testing of steering gear including auxiliary steering gear;

.9 inspection of emergency source of power to radio installations;

.10 inspection and, to the extent possible, test of oily-water separator.

8.3.3 Oil tankers:

In addition to the items listed in 8.3.2 of this Annex, the following items are also considered as part of the expanded inspection for oil tankers:

.1 fixed deck foam system;

.2 fire fighting equipment in general;

.3 inspection of fire dampers to engine room, pump room and accommodation;

.4 control of pressure of inert gas and oxygen content thereof;

.5 ballast tanks: at least one of the ballast tanks within the cargo area to be examined from tank manhole/deck access in first instance and entered if inspector establishes clear ground for further inspection;

.6 verification that the following documents are on board, review them and confirm that the flag State or Classification Society has endorsed them:

(1) reports of structural surveys,

(2) condition evaluation reports,

(3) thickness measurement reports,

(4) descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A.744(18).

8.3.4 Bulk carriers:

In addition to the items listed in 8.3.2 of this Annex, the following items are also considered as part of the expanded inspection for bulk carriers:

.1 possible corrosion of deck machinery foundations;

.2 possible deformation and/or corrosion of hatch covers;

.3 possible cracks or local corrosion in transverse bulkheads;

.4 access to cargo holds;

.5 verification that the following documents are on board, review them and confirm that the flag State or Classification Society has endorsed them:

(1) reports of structural surveys,

(2) condition evaluation reports,

(3) thickness measurement reports,

(4) descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A.744(18).

8.3.5 Gas and chemical tankers:

In addition to the items listed in 8.3.2 of this Annex, the following items are also considered as part of the expanded inspection for gas and chemical tankers:

.1 cargo tank monitoring and safety devices relating to temperature, pressure and ullage;

.2 oxygen analysing and explosimeter devices, including their calibration. Availability of chemical detection equipment (bellows) with an appropriate number of suitable gas detection tubes for the specific cargo being carried;

.3 cabin escape sets giving suitable respiratory and eye protection, for every person on board (if required by the products listed in the International Certifi-cate of Fitness or Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemi-cals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk, as applicable);

.4 check that the product being carried is listed in the International Certificate of Fitness or the Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk, as applicable;

.5 the fixed fire fighting installations on deck whether they be foam or dry chemical or other, as required by the product carried.

8.3.6 Passenger ships:

In addition to the items listed in 8.3.2 of this Annex, the following items are also considered as part of the expanded inspection for passenger ships:

.1 testing of fire detection and alarm system;

.2 testing of proper closing of fire doors;

.3 test of public address system;

.4 fire drill where, as a minimum, all sets of fireman’s outfits must be demon-strated and part of the catering crew take part;

.5 demonstration that key crew members are acquainted with the damage control plan.

If deemed appropriate the inspection may be continued while the ship is on passage to our from ports of States, the Authorities of which are signatories to the Memorandum, with the consent of the master or the operator. Port State control officers must not obstruct the operation of the ship, nor must they induce situations that, in the master’s judgement, could endanger the safety of the passengers, the crew and the ship.

Section 9. Rectification and detention

9.1 Principles governing rectification of deficiencies or detention of a ship

In taking a decision concerning the rectification of a deficiency or detention of a ship, the port State control officer will take into consideration the results of the detailed inspection carried out in accordance with section 3 of the Memorandum and the procedures mentioned in section 6 and in 9.3 of this Annex.

The port State control officer will exercise his professional judgement in determining whether to detain the ship until the deficiencies are corrected or to allow it to sail with certain deficiencies without unreasonable danger to the safety, health, or the environ-ment, having regard to the particular circumstances of the intended voyage. As regards minimum manning standards and the provisions of ILO Convention No. 147 and the ILO 147 Protocol 1996, special procedures will be observed set out in sections 6 and 7 of this Annex.

9.2 Detention related to minimum manning standards and certification

Before detaining a ship for reasons of deficient manning standards and certification, the following will be considered, giving due regard to 9.3.4.9 of this Annex:

.1 length and nature of the intended voyage or service;

.2 whether or not the deficiency poses a danger to ships, persons on board or the environment;

.3 whether or not appropriate rest periods of the crew can be observed;

.4 size and type of ship and equipment provided; and

.5 nature of cargo.

9.3 Procedures for the detention of ships of all sizes.

9.3.1 Introduction

These procedures will be used if deficiencies are found during the course of a ship inspection. They are intended for guidance of the port State control officer and are not to be considered as a checklist.

9.3.2 Main criteria

When exercising his professional judgement as to whether or not a ship should be detained the port State control officer will apply the following criteria:

.1 Timing: ships which are unsafe to proceed to sea will be detained upon the first inspection irrespective of the time the ship will stay in port;

.2 Criterion: the ship will be detained if the deficiencies on a ship are sufficiently serious to merit a port State control officer returning to the ship to satisfy himself that they have been rectified before the ship sails.

The need for the port State control officer to return to the ship classifies the seriousness of the deficiencies. However, it does not impose such an obligation for every case. It implies that the Authority will verify, one way or other, preferably by a further visit, that the deficiencies have been rectified before departure.

9.3.3 Application of main criteria

When deciding whether the deficiencies found in a ship are sufficiently serious to merit detention the port State control officer will assess whether:

.1 the ship has relevant, valid documentation;

.2 the ship has the crew required in the Minimum Safe Manning Document.

During inspection the port State control officer will further assess whether the ship and/or crew is able to:

.3 navigate safely throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.4 safely handle, carry and monitor the condition of the cargo throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.5 operate the engine room safely throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.6 maintain proper propulsion and steering throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.7 fight fires effectively in any part of the ship if necessary during the forthcoming voyage;

.8 abandon ship speedily and safely and effect rescue if necessary during the forthcoming voyage;

.9 prevent pollution of the environment throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.10 maintain adequate stability throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.11 maintain adequate watertight integrity throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.12 communicate in distress situations if necessary during the forthcoming voyage;

.13 provide safe and healthy conditions on board throughout the forthcoming voyage;

.14 provide the maximum of information in case of accident (as provided by the voyage data recorder).

If the result of any of these assessments is negative, taking into account all deficiencies found, the ship will be strongly considered for detention. A combination of deficiencies of a less serious nature may also warrant the detention of the ship.

9.3.4 Detainable deficiencies

To assist the port State control officer in the use of these procedures there follows a list of deficiencies, grouped under relevant Conventions and/or Codes, which are considered of such a serious nature that they may warrant the detention of the ship involved. This list is not considered exhaustive but is intended to give an exemplification of relevant items. However, the detainable deficiencies in the area of STCW 78, listed in 9.3.4.9 of this Annex, are the only grounds for detention under this Convention.

9.3.4.1 General

.1 the lack of valid certificates and documents as required by the relevant instru-ments. However, ships flying the flag of States not a party to a Convention (relevant instrument) or not having implemented an other relevant instrument, are not entitled to carry the certificates provided for by the Convention or other relevant instrument. Therefore, absence of the required certificates will not by itself constitute reason to detain these ships, however, in applying the ‘no more favourable treatment’ clause, substantial compliance with the provisions must be required before the ship sails.

9.3.4.2 Areas under SOLAS 74 (References are given in brackets)

.1 failure of proper operation of propulsion and other essential machinery, as well as electrical installations;

.2 insufficient cleanliness of engine room, excess amount of oily-water mixtures in bilges, insulation of piping including exhaust pipes in engine room contami-nated by oil, improper operation of bilge pumping arrangements;

.3 failure of the proper operation of emergency generator, lighting, batteries and switches;

.4 failure of the proper operation of the main and auxiliary steering gear;

.5 absence, insufficient capacity or serious deterioration of personal lifesaving appliances, survival craft and launching arrangements;

.6 absence, non-compliance or substantial deterioration to the extent that it can not comply with its intended use of fire detection system, fire alarms, fire fighting equipment, fixed fire extinguishing installation, ventilation valves, fire dam-pers, quick closing devices;

.7 absence, substantial deterioration or failure of proper operation of the cargo deck area fire protection on tankers;

.8 absence, non-compliance or serious deterioration of lights, shapes or sound signals;

.9 absence or failure of the proper operation of the radio equipment for distress and safety communication;

.10 absence or failure of the proper operation of navigation equipment, taking the provisions of Regulation V/12(o) of SOLAS 74 into account;

.11 absence of corrected navigational charts, and/or all other relevant nautical publications necessary for the intended voyage, taking into account that type-approved electronic chart display and information system (ECDIS) operating on official data may be used as a substitute for the charts;

.12 absence of non-sparking exhaust ventilation for cargo pump rooms (Regulation II-2/59.3.1 of SOLAS 74);

.13 Serious deficiency in the operational requirements listed in 5.5 of this Annex;

.14 Number, composition or certification of crew not corresponding with safe man-ning document;

.15 Failure to carry out the enhanced survey programme in accordance with SOLAS 74, Chapter XI, Regulation 2;

.16 Absence or failure of a VDR, when its use is compulsory.

9.3.4.3 Areas under the IBC Code (References are given in brackets)

.1 transport of a substance not mentioned in the Certificate of Fitness or missing cargo information (16.2);

.2 missing or damaged high pressure safety devices (8.2.3);

.3 electrical installations not intrinsically safe or corresponding to code require-ments (10.2.3);

.4 sources of ignition in hazardous locations referred to in 10.2 (11.3.15);

.5 contraventions of special requirements (15);

.6 exceeding of maximum allowable cargo quantity per tank (16.1);

.7 insufficient heat protection for sensitive products (16.6).

9.3.4.4 Areas under the IGC Code (References are given in brackets)

.1 transport of a substance not mentioned in the Certificate of Fitness or missing cargo information (18.1);

.2 missing closing devices for accommodations or service spaces (3.2.6);

.3 bulkhead not gastight (3.3.2);

.4 defective air locks (3.6);

.5 missing or defective quick closing valves (5.6);

.6 missing or defective safety valves (8.2);

.7 electrical installations not intrinsically safe or not corresponding to code requirements (10.2.4);

.8 ventilators in cargo area not operable (12.1);

.9 pressure alarms for cargo tanks not operable (13.4.1);

.10 gas detection plant and/or toxic gas detection plant defective (13.6);

.11 transport of substances to be inhibited without valid inhibitor certificate (17/19).

9.3.4.5 Areas under LOADLINES 66

.1 significant areas of damage or corrosion, or pitting of plating and associated stiffening in decks and hull effecting seaworthiness or strength to take local loads, unless proper temporary repairs for a voyage to a port for permanent re-pairs have been carried out;

.2 a recognized case of insufficient stability;

.3 absence of sufficient and reliable information, in an approved form, which by rapid and simple means, enables the master to arrange for the loading and bal-lasting of his ship in such a way that a safe margin of stability is maintained at all stages and at varying conditions of the voyage, and that the creation of any unacceptable stresses in the ship’s structure are avoided;

.4 absence, substantial deterioration or defective closing devices, hatch closing arrangements and water tight doors;

.5 overloading;

.6 absence of or impossibility to read draught mark.

9.3.4.6 Areas under Annex I to MARPOL 73/78 (References are given in brackets)

.1 absence, serious deterioration or failure of proper operation of the oily-water filtering equipment, the oil discharge monitoring and control system or the 15 ppm alarm arrangements;

.2 remaining capacity of slop and/or sludge tank insufficient for the intended voyage;

.3 oil record book not available (20(5));

.4 unauthorized discharge bypass fitted;

.5 survey report file missing or not in conformity with Regulation 13G(3)(b) of the Convention.

9.3.4.7 Areas under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 (References are given in brackets)

.1 absence of the P&A Manual;

.2 cargo is not categorized (3(4));

.3 no cargo record book available (9(6));

.4 transport of oil-like substances without satisfying the requirements (14);

.5 unauthorized discharge by-pass fitted.

9.3.4.8 Areas under Annex V to MARPOL 73/78

.1 absence of the garbage management plan;

.2 no garbage record book available;

.3 ship’s personnel not familiar with disposal/discharge requirements of garbage management plan.

9.3.4.9 Areas under STCW 78

.1 Failure of seafarers to hold a certificate, to have an appropriate certificate, to have a valid dispensation or to provide documentary proof that an application for an endorsement has been submitted to the flag State Administration;

.2 Failure to comply with the applicable safe manning requirements of the flag State Administration;

.3 Failure of navigational or engineering watch arrangements to conform to the requirements specified for the ship by the flag State Administration;

.4 Absence in a watch of a person qualified to operate equipment essential to safe navigation, safety radiocommunications or the prevention of marine pollution;

.5 Failure to provide proof of professional proficiency for the duties assigned to seafarers for the safety of the ship and the prevention of pollution;

.6 Inability to provide for the first watch at the commencement of a voyage and for subsequent relieving watches persons who are sufficiently rested and otherwise fit for duty.

9.3.4.10 Areas under ILO Conventions

.1 insufficient food for voyage to next port;

.2 insufficient potable water for voyage to next port;

.3 excessively unsanitary conditions on board;

.4 no heating in accommodation of a ship operating in areas where temperatures may be excessively low;

.5 excessive garbage, blockage by equipment or cargo or otherwise unsafe condi-tions in passageways/accommodations;

.6 clear evidence that watch keeping and other duty personnel for the first watch or subsequent relieving watches are impaired by fatigue.

9.3.4.11 Areas which may not warrant a detention, but where e.g. cargo operations have to be suspended

.1 failure of the proper operation (or maintenance) of inert gas system, cargo related gear or machinery will be considered sufficient ground to stop cargo operation.

Annex 2

PROCEDURES FOR INVESTIGATIONS UNDER MARPOL 73/78

Contents

Section 1 Procedures for discharge requirements under Annexes I and II to MARPOL 73/78

Section 2 Contravention of discharge provisions under Annex I to MARPOL 73/78

Section 3 Itemized list of possible evidence on alleged contravention of the discharge provisions of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78

3.1 Action on sighting oil pollution

3.2 Investigation on board

3.3 Investigation ashore

3.4 Information not covered by the foregoing

3.5 Conclusion

Section 4 Contravention of discharge provisions under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

Section 5 Itemized list of possible evidence on alleged contravention of the discharge provi-sions of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

5.1 Action on sighting pollution

5.2 Investigation on board

5.3 Investigation ashore

5.4 Information not covered by the foregoing

5.5 Conclusion

Section 1. Procedures for discharge requirements under Annexes I and II to MARPOL 73/78

1.1 Acting upon a report or notification of an alleged violation of the discharge requirements under Annexes I and II to MARPOL 73/78, the port State control officer will be guided by the procedures set out in sections 2 and 3 of this Annex with regard to investigations into alleged contravention of the discharge provisions of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78 and in sections 4 and 5 of this Annex with regard to investigations into alleged contravention of the discharge provisions of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78.

1.2 When exercising control on alleged violations of the discharge requirements under Annexes I and II to MARPOL 73/78, the port State control officer will give due regard to the provisions of 3.4.1 to 3.4.13 of IMO Resolution A.787(19), and to the instructions of the port State Administration based on these provisions.

1.3 In the event that his investigation reveals deficiencies which are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment, the port State control officer will apply the provisions of 3.10.1 of the Memorandum.

Section 2. Contravention of discharge provisions under Annex I to MARPOL 73/78

2.1 The provisions of sections 2 and 3 of this Annex are intended to identify information which is often needed by a flag State Administration for the prosecution of such possible violations.

2.2 It is recommended that in preparing a port State report on deficiencies, where contra-vention of the discharge requirements is involved, the authorities of the coastal or port State be guided by the itemized list of possible evidence as shown in section 3 of this Annex. It must be borne in mind in this connection that:

.1 the report aims to provide the optimal collation of obtainable data; however, even if all the information cannot be provided, as much information as possible must be submitted;

.2 it is important for all the information included in the report to be supported by facts which, when considered as a whole, would lead the port or coastal State to believe a contravention had occurred.

2.3 In addition to the port State report on deficiencies, a report must be completed by a port or coastal State, on the basis of the itemized list of possible evidence. It is important that these reports are supplemented by documents such as:

.1 a statement by the observer of the pollution. In addition to the information re-quired in 3.1 of this Annex, the statement must include considerations which lead the observer to conclude that none of any other possible pollution sources is in fact the source;

.2 statements concerning the sampling procedures both of the slick and on board. These must include location of and time when samples were taken, identity of person(s) taking the samples and receipts identifying the persons having custody and receiving transfer of the samples;

.3 reports of analyses of samples taken of the slick and on board; the reports must include the results of the analyses, a description of the method employed, refer-ence to or copies of scientific documentation attesting to the accuracy and validity of the method employed and names of persons performing the analyses and their experience;

.4 a statement by the port State control officer on board together with the port State control officer’s rank and organization;

.5 statements by persons being questioned;

.6 statements by witnesses;

.7 photographs of the oil slick;

.8 copies of relevant pages of Oil Record Books, log books, discharge recordings, etc.

All observations, photographs and documentation must be supported by a signed verification of their authenticity. All certifications, authentications or verifications shall be executed in accordance with the laws of the State which prepares them. All statements must be signed and dated by the person making the statement and, if possible, by a witness to the signing. The names of the persons signing statements must be printed in legible script above or below the signature.

2.4 The report referred to in 2.2 and 2.3 of this Annex must be sent to the flag State Administration. If the coastal State observing the pollution and the port State carrying out the investigation on board are not the same, the State carrying out the latter investigation must also send a copy of its findings to the State observing the pollution and requesting the investigation.

Section 3. Itemized list of possible evidence on alleged contravention of the discharge provisions of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78

3.1 Action on sighting oil pollution

3.1.1 Particulars of ship or ships suspected of contravention

.1 Name of ship

.2 Reasons for suspecting the ship

.3 Date and time (UTC) of observation or identification

.4 Position of ship

.5 Flag and port of registry

.6 Type (e.g. tanker, cargo ship, passenger ship, fishing vessel), size (estimated tonnage) and other descriptive data (e.g. superstructure colour and funnel mark)

.7 Draught condition (loaded or in ballast)

.8 Approximate course and speed

.9 Position of slick in relation to ship (e.g. astern, port, starboard)

.10 Part of the ship from which side discharge was seen emanating

.11 Whether discharge ceased when ship was observed or contacted by radio

3.1.2 Particulars of slick

.1 Date and time (UTC) of observation if different from 3.1.1.3 of this Annex

.2 Position of oil slick in longitude and latitude if different from 3.1.1.4 of this Annex

.3 Approximate distance in nautical miles from the nearest landmark

.4 Approximate overall dimension of oil slick (length, width and percentage thereof covered by oil)

.5 Physical description of oil slick (direction and form e.g. continuous, in patches or in windrows)

.6 Appearance of oil slick (indicate categories)

.1 Category A: Barely visible under most favourable light condition

.2 Category B: Visible as silvery sheen on water surface

.3 Category C: First trace of colour may be observed

.4 Category D: Bright band of colour

.5 Category E: Colours begin to turn dull

.6 Category F: Colours are much darker

.7 Sky conditions (bright sunshine, overcast, etc.), light fall and visibility (kilo-metres) at the time of observation

.8 Sea state

.9 Direction and speed of surface wind

.10 Direction and speed of current

3.1.3 Identification of the observer(s)

.1 Name of the observer

.2 Organization with which observer is affiliated (if any)

.3 Observer’s status within the organization

.4 Observation made from aircraft/ship/shore/otherwise

.5 Name or identity of ship or aircraft from which the observation was made

.6 Specific location of ship, aircraft, place on shore or otherwise from which observation was made

.7 Activity engaged in by observer when observation was made, for example: patrol, voyage, flight (en route from .... to ....), etc.

3.1.4 Method of observation and documentation

.1 Visual

.2 Conventional photographs

.3 Remote sensing records and/or remote sensing photographs

.4 Samples taken from slick

.5 Any other form of observation (specify)

Note: A photograph of the discharge must preferably be in colour. Photographs can provide the following information: that a material on the sea surface is oil; that the quantity of oil discharged does constitute a violation of the Convention; that the oil is being, or has been discharged from a particular ship; and the identity of the ship.

Experience has shown that the aforementioned can be obtained with the following three photographs:

.1 details of the slick taken almost vertically down from an altitude of less than 300 metres with the sun behind the photographer;

.2 an overall view of the ship and “slick” showing oil emanating from a particular ship; and

.3 details of the ship for the purposes of identification.

3.1.5 Other information if radio contact can be established

.1 Master informed of pollution

.2 Explanation of master

.3 Ship’s last port of call

.4 Ship’s next port of call

.5 Name of ship’s master and owner

.6 Ship’s call sign

3.2 Investigation on board

3.2.1 Inspection of IOPP Certificate

.1 Name of ship

.2 Distinctive number or letters

.3 Port of registry

.4 Type of ship

.5 Date and place of issue

.6 Date and place of endorsement

Note: If the ship is not issued an IOPP Certificate, as much as possible of the requested information must be given.

3.2.2 Inspection of supplement to the IOPP Certificate

.1 Applicable paragraphs of sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the supplement to the IOPP Certificate (non-oil tankers)

.2 Applicable paragraphs of sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the supplement to the IOPP Certificate (oil tankers)

Note: If the ship does not have an IOPP Certificate, a description must be given of the equipment and arrangements on board, designed to prevent marine pollution.

3.2.3 Inspection of Oil Record Book

.1 Sufficient pages of the Oil Record Book - Part I must be copied to cover a period of 30 days prior to the reported incident

.2 Sufficient pages of the Oil Record Book - Part II (if on board) must be copied to cover a full loading/unloading/ballasting and tank cleaning cycle of the ship. A copy of the tank diagram must also be taken.

3.2.4 Inspection of log book

.1 Last port, date of departure, draught forward and aft

.2 Current port, date of arrival, draught forward and aft

.3 Ship’s position at or near the time the incident was reported

.4 Spot check if positions mentioned in the log book agree with positions noted in the Oil Record Book.

3.2.5 Inspection of other documentation on board

Other documentation relevant for evidence (if necessary make copies) such as:

.1 recent ullage sheets

.2 records of monitoring and control equipment

3.2.6 Inspection of ship

.1 Ship’s equipment in accordance with the supplement of the IOPP Certificate

.2 Samples taken. State location on board

.3 Traces of oil in vicinity of overboard discharge outlets

.4 Condition of engine-room and contents of bilges

.5 Condition of oily water separator, filtering equipment and alarm, stopping or monitoring arrangements

.6 Contents of sludge and/or holding tanks

.7 Sources of considerable leakage

On oil tankers the following additional evidence may be pertinent:

.8 Oil on surface of segregated or dedicated clean ballast

.9 Condition of pump-room bilges

.10 Condition of crude oil washing system

.11 Condition of inert gas system

.12 Condition of monitoring and control system

.13 Slop tank contents (estimate quantity of water and of oil)

3.2.7 Statements of persons concerned

If Part I of the Oil Record Book. has not been properly completed, information on the following questions may be pertinent:

.1 Was there a discharge (accidental or intentional) at the time indicated on the incident report?

.2 Is the bilge discharge controlled automatically?

.3 If so, at what time was this system last put into operation and at what time was this system last put on manual mode?

.4 If not, what were date and time of the last bilge discharge?

.5 What was the date of the last disposal of residue and how was disposal effected?

.6 Is it usual to effect discharge of bilge water directly to the sea, or to store bilge water first in a collecting tank? Identify the collecting tank

.7 Have oil fuel tanks recently been used as ballast tanks?

If Part II of the Oil Record Book has not been properly completed, information on the following questions may be pertinent:

.8 What was the cargo/ballast distribution in the ship on departure from the last port?

.9 What was the cargo/ballast distribution in the ship on arrival in the current port?

.10 When and where was the last loading effected?

.11 When and where was the last unloading effected?

.12 When and where was the last discharge of dirty ballast?

.13 When and where was the last cleaning of cargo tanks?

.14 When and where was the last crude oil washing operation and which tanks were washed?

.15 When and where was the last decanting of slop tanks?

.16 What is the ullage in the slop tanks and the corresponding height of interface?

.17 Which tanks contained the dirty ballast during the ballast voyage (if ship arrived in ballast)?

.18 Which tanks contained the clean ballast during the ballast voyage (if ship ar-rived in ballast)?

In addition the following information may be pertinent:

.19 Details of the present voyage of the ship (previous ports, next ports, trade)

.20 Contents of oil fuel and ballast tanks

.21 Previous and next bunkering, type of oil fuel

.22 Availability or non-availability of reception facilities for oily wastes during the present voyage

.23 Internal transfer of oil fuel during the present voyage

In the case of oil tankers the following additional information may be pertinent:

.24 The trade the ship is engaged in, such as short/long distance, crude or product or alternating crude/product, lightering service, oil/dry bulk

.25 Which tanks clean and dirty

.26 Repairs carried out or envisaged in cargo tanks

Miscellaneous information:

.27 Comments in respect of condition of ship’s equipment

.28 Comments in respect of pollution report

.29 Other comments

3.3 Investigation ashore

3.3.1 Analyses of oil samples

Indicate method and results of the samples’ analyses

3.3.2 Further information

Additional information on the ship, obtained from oil terminal staff, tank cleaning contractors or shore reception facilities may be pertinent.

Note: Any information under this heading is, if practicable, to be corroborated by documentation such as signed statements, invoices, receipts, etc.

3.4 Information not covered by the foregoing

3.5 Conclusion

3.5.1 Summing up of the investigator’s technical conclusions

3.5.2 Indication of applicable provisions of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 which the ship is suspected of having contravened.

3.5.3 Did the results of the investigation warrant the filing of a deficiency report?

Section 4. Contravention of discharge provisions under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

4.1 The provisions of sections 4 and 5 of this Annex are intended to identify information which will be needed by a flag State Administration for the prosecution of violations of the discharge provisions under Annex II to MARPOL 73/78.

4.2 It is recommended that in preparing a port State report on deficiencies, where contra-vention of the discharge requirements is involved, the authorities of a coastal or port State will be guided by the itemized list of possible evidence as shown in section 5 of this Annex. It must be borne in mind in this connection that:

.1 the report aims to provide the optimal collation of obtainable data; however, even if all the information cannot be provided, as much information as possible must be submitted; and

.2 it is important for all the information included in the report to be supported by facts which, when considered as a whole, would lead the port or coastal State to believe a contravention has occurred; and

.3 the discharge may have been oil, in which case annex 2 to appendix II of Annex I to MARPOL 73/78 Control Procedures applies.

4.3 In addition to the port State report on deficiencies, a report must be completed by a port or coastal State, on the basis of the itemized list of possible evidence. It is important that these reports are supplemented by documents such as:

.1 a statement by the observer of the pollution. In addition to the information re-quired in 5.1 of this Annex, the statement must include considerations which have led the observer to conclude that none of any other possible pollution sources is in fact the source;

.2 statements concerning the sampling procedures both of the slick and on board. These include location of and time when samples were taken, identity of per-son(s) taking the samples and receipts identifying the persons having custody and receiving transfer of the samples;

.3 reports of analyses of samples taken of the slick and on board; the reports must include the results of the analyses, a description of the method employed, refer-ence to or copies of scientific documentation attesting to the accuracy and validity of the method employed and names of persons performing the analyses and their experience;

.4 a statement by the port State control officer on board together with the port State control officer’s rank and organization;

.5 statements by persons being questioned;

.6 statements by witnesses;

.7 photographs of the slick; and

.8 copies of relevant pages of the Cargo Record Book, log books, discharge recordings, etc.

All observations, photographs and documentation must be supported by a signed verification of their authenticity. All certifications, authentications or verifications shall be executed in accordance with the laws of the State which prepares them. All statements must be signed and dated by the person making the statement and, if possible, by a witness to the signing. The names of the persons signing statements must be printed in legible script above or below the signature.

4.4 The report referred to in 4.2 and 4.3 of this Annex must be sent to the flag State Administration. If the coastal State observing the pollution and the port State carrying out the investigation on board are not the same, the State carrying out the latter investiga-tion must also send a copy of its findings to the State observing the pollution and request-ing the investigation.

Section 5. Itemized list of possible evidence on alleged contravention of the discharge provisions of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78

5.1 Action on sighting pollution

5.1.1 Particulars of ship or ships suspected of contravention

.1 Name of ship

.2 Reasons for suspecting the ship

.3 Date and time (UTC) of observation or identification

.4 Position of ship

.5 Flag and port of registry

.6 Type, size (estimated tonnage) and other descriptive data (e.g. superstructure, colour and funnel mark)

.7 Draught condition (loaded or in ballast)

.8 Approximate course and speed

.9 Position of slick in relating to ship (e.g. astern, port, starboard)

.10 Part of the ship from which discharge was seen emanating

.11 Whether discharge ceased when ship was observed or contacted by radio

5.1.2 Particulars of slick

.1 Date and time (UTC) of observation if different from 5.1.1.3 of this Annex

.2 Position of slick in longitude and latitude if different from 5.1.1.4 of this Annex

.3 Approximate distance in nautical miles from the nearest land

.4 Depth of water according to sea chart

.5 Approximate overall dimension of slick (length, width and percentage thereof covered)

.6 Physical description of slick (direction and form, e.g. continuous, in patches or in windrows)

.7 Colour of slick

.8 Sky conditions (bright sunshine, overcast, etc.), light fall and visibility (kms) at the time of observation

.9 Sea state

.10 Direction and speed of surface wind

.11 Direction and speed of current

5.1.3 Identification of the observer(s)

.1 Name of the observer

.2 Organization with which observer is affiliated (if any)

.3 Observer’s status within the organization

.4 Observation made from aircraft (ship) (shore) or otherwise

.5 Name or identity of ship or aircraft from which the observation was made

.6 Specific location of ship, aircraft, place on shore or otherwise from which observation was made

.7 Activity engaged in by observer when observation was made, for example: patrol, voyage, flight (en route from ... to ...), etc.

5.1.4 Method of observation and documentation

.1 Visual

.2 Conventional photographs

.3 Remote sensing records and/or remote sensing photographs

.4 Samples taken from slick

.5 Any other form of observation (specify)

Note: A photograph of the discharge must preferably be in colour. The best results may be obtained with the following three photographs:

.1 details of the slick taken almost vertically down from an altitude of less than 300 metres with the sun behind the photographer;

.2 an overall view of the ship and “slick” showing a substance emanating from the particular ship; and

.3 details of the ship for the purposes of identification.

5.1.5 Other information if radio contact can be established

.1 Master informed of pollution

.2 Explanation of master

.3 Ship’s last port of call

.4 Ship’s next port of call

.5 Name of ship’s master and owner

.6 Ship’s call sign

5.2 Investigation on board

5.2.1 Inspection of the certificate (CoF or NLS Certificate)

.1 Name of ship

.2 Distinctive number or letters

.3 Port of registry

.4 Type of ship

.5 Date and place of issue

.6 Date and place of endorsement

5.2.2 Inspection of P and A Manual

.1 List of Annex II substances the ship is permitted to carry

.2 Limitations as to tanks in which these substances may be carried

.3 Ship equipped with an efficient stripping system

.4 Residue quantities established at survey

5.2.3 Inspection of Cargo Record Book

Sufficient pages of the Cargo Record Book should be copied to cover a full loading/un-loading/ballasting and tank cleaning cycle of the ship. A copy of the tank diagram should also be taken.

5.2.4 Inspection of log book

.1 Last port, date of departure, draught forward and aft

.2 Current port, date of arrival, draught forward and aft

.3 Ship’s position at or near the time the incident was reported

.4 Spot check if times entered in the Cargo Record Book in respect of discharges correspond with sufficient distance from the nearest land, the required ship’s speed and with sufficient water depth

5.2.5 Inspection of other documentation on board

Other documentation relevant for evidence (if necessary make copies) such as:

.1 cargo documents of cargo presently or recently carried, together with relevant information on required unloading temperature, viscosity and/or melting point

.2 records of temperature of substances during unloading

.3 records of monitoring equipment if fitted

5.2.6 Inspection of ship

.1 Ship’s equipment in accordance with the P and A Manual

.2 Samples taken; state location on board

.3 Sources of considerable leakage

.4 Cargo residues on surface of segregated or dedicated clean ballast

.5 Condition of pump room bilges

.6 Condition of monitoring system

.7 Slop tank contents (estimate quantity of water and residues)

5.2.7 Statements of persons concerned

If the Cargo Record Book has not been properly completed, information on the following questions may be pertinent:

.1 Was there a discharge (accidental or intentional) at the time indicated on the incident report?

.2 Which tanks are going to be loaded in the port?

.3 Which tanks needed cleaning at sea? Had the tanks been prewashed?

.4 When and where were these cleaned?

.5 Residues of which substances were involved?

.6 What was done with the tank washing slops?

.7 Was the slop tank, or cargo tank used as a slop tank, discharged at sea?

.8 When and where was the discharge effected?

.9 What are the contents of the slop tank or cargo tank used as slop tank?

.10 Which tanks contained the dirty ballast during the ballast voyage (if ship arrived in ballast)?

.11 Which tanks contained the clean ballast during the ballast voyage (if ship ar-rived in ballast)?

.12 Details of the present voyage of the ship (previous ports, next ports, trade)

.13 Difficulties experienced with discharge to shore reception facilities

.14 Difficulties experienced with efficient stripping operations

.15 Which tanks are clean or dirty on arrival?

.16 Repairs carried out or envisaged in cargo tanks

Miscellaneous information

.17 Comments in respect of condition of ship’s equipment

.18 Comments in respect of pollution report

.19 Other comments.

5.3 Investigation ashore

5.3.1 Analyses of samples

Indicate method and results of the samples’ analyses

5.3.2 Further information

Additional information on the ship, obtained from terminal staff, tank cleaning contrac-tors or shore reception facilities may be pertinent

Note: Any information under this heading is, if practicable, to be corroborated by documentation such as signed statements, invoices, receipts, etc.

5.3.3 Information from previous unloading port terminal

.1 Confirmation that the ship unloaded, stripped or prewashed in accordance with its P and A Manual

.2 The nature of difficulties if any

.3 Restrictions by authorities under which the ship was permitted to sail

.4 Restrictions in respect of shore reception facilities

5.4 Information not covered by the foregoing

5.5 Conclusion

.1 Summing up of the investigator’s conclusions

.2 Indication of applicable provisions of Annex II to MARPOL 73/78 which the ship is suspected of having contravened

.3 Did the results of the investigation warrant the filing of a deficiency report?

Annex 3

ACCESS REFUSAL MEASURES CONCERNING CERTAIN SHIPS

A. CATEGORIES OF SHIPS SUBJECT TO REFUSAL OF ACCESS (as referred to in section 3.10.5.1 of the Memorandum)

1. Gas and chemical tankers;

2. Bulk carriers;

3. Oil tankers;

4. Passenger ships.

B. PROCEDURES RELATING TO REFUSAL OF ACCESS (as referred to in section 3.10.5.2 of the Memorandum)

1. If the conditions described in section 3.10.5.2 of the memorandum are met, the Authority of the port in which the ship is detained for the second or third time, as appropriate, must inform the captain and the owner or the operator of the ship in writing of the access refusal order served on the ship.

The competent authority must also inform the flag State administration, the classification society concerned, the Departement des Systèmes d’Information (DSI) and the Secretariat.

The access refusal order will take effect as soon as the ship has been authorised to leave the port after remediation of the deficiencies leading to the detention.

2. In order to have the access refusal order lifted, the owner or the operator must address a formal request to the Authority of the State that imposed the access refusal order. This request must be accompanied by a certificate from the flag State administration showing that the ship fully conforms to the applicable provisions of the international conventions. The request for the lifting of the access refusal order must also be accompanied, where appropriate, by a certificate from the classification society which has the ship in class showing that the ship conforms to the class standards stipulated by that society.

3. The access refusal order may only be lifted following a re-inspection of the ship at an agreed port by inspectors of the Authority that imposed the access refusal order and if evidence is provided to the satisfaction of this Authority that the vessel fully complies with the applicable requirements of the International Conventions.

If the agreed port is located within the region of the Memorandum, the competent authority of the State of the port of destination may authorise, with the agreement of the Authority that imposed the access refusal order, the ship to proceed to the port of destination in question, for the sole purpose of verifying that the ship meets the conditions specified in paragraph 2.

The re-inspection shall consist of an expanded inspection that must cover at least the relevant items of section 8.3 of the annex 1 to the Memorandum.

All costs of this expanded inspection will be borne by the owner or the operator.

4. If the results of the expanded inspection satisfy the Authority that imposed the measure, the access refusal order must be lifted. The owner or the operator of the ship must be informed thereof in writing.

The Authority must also notify its decision in writing to the flag State administration, the classification society concerned, the DSI and the Secretariat.

5. Information relating to ships that have been refused access to ports within the region of the Memorandum will be made available in the SIReNaC system and published in conformity with the provisions of section 3.17 of the Memorandum.

Annex 4

INFORMATION SYSTEM ON INSPECTIONS

1 To assist Authorities in their selection of foreign flag ships to be inspected in their ports it is necessary to have at the disposal of Authorities up to date information on inspections of an individual foreign flag ship in one of the other regional ports within the preceding six months.

2 Within the French ministry in charge of transportation, the Département des Systèmes d’Information (DSI) of the Direction Générale des Affaires Maritimes et des Gens de Mer (DAMGM) is in charge of hosting and management of the inspections information system.

3 For that purpose the Authorities undertake to provide DSI, preferably by means of computerized data transmission, with information on ships inspected in the national ports. The insertion of information into the inspection files will preferably be realized by means of direct, computerized input on a daily basis.

4 For the purpose of exchanging rapid information, the information system will embrace a communication facility which allows for a direct, computerized exchange of messages between individual Authorities, including the notifications as referred to in Section 3.11 of the Memorandum and the exchange of information on operational violations as referred to in section 5 of the Memorandum.

5 The information as in 3 and 4 above will be handled in a standardized form and in accordance with standardized procedures as set out in the guide for users of the information system provided by DSI.

6 In handling the information DSI will not amend any data provided by the Authorities, except as provided for in standardized procedures ensuring the consistency of the use of certain action taken codes. Otherwise DSI will make amendments to data only on a specific request of the originating Authority.

7 DSI will organize the processing of information as in paragraph 3 above so as to ensure that inspection data are easily accessible both for purposes of consultation and updating in accordance with procedures as set out in the guide for users of the information system provided by DSI.

8 If, in exceptional circumstances the information as in 3 and 4 above cannot be provided by computerized transmission, the information contained in the report of inspection shall be provided by telefax facilities as an alternative system of exchanging information.

9 Information for administrative purpose, such as statistical information, will be provided by the Secretariat under the guidance of the Committee. This will be based on data provided by DSI.

10 The information system indicated in the foregoing paragraphs will be implemented as long as the Memorandum takes effect.

Studies to monitor and, where necessary, to improve the quality of the system will be carried out on a continuous basis.

11 With the consent of the Authority, DSI will, on behalf of that Authority, submit detention reports to the International Maritime Organization in accordance with Regulation I/19 of SOLAS 74, Article 11 of MARPOL 73/78, Article 21 of LOADLINES 66 and Article X of STCW 78.

12 With the consent of the Authority, DSI will, on behalf of that Authority, submit detention reports to the International Labour Organization in accordance with Article 4 of ILO 147.

Annex 5

PUBLICATION OF INFORMATION RELATED TO DETENTIONS AND INSPECTIONS

(As referred to in section 3.17 of the Memorandum)

I. Information on ships detained will include the following:

– name of the ship;

– IMO number;

– type of ship;

– tonnage;

– year of construction as determined on the basis of the date indicated in the ship’s safety certificates;

– name and address of the company of the ship;

– in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and address of the charterer responsible for the selection of the vessel and the type of charter;

– flag State;

– the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any;

– the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates delivered;

– port and date of the last expanded inspection stating, where appropriate, whether a detention was ordered;

– port and date of the last special survey and the name of the organisation which carried out the survey;

– number of detentions during the 24 previous months;

– country and port of detention;

– date when the detention was lifted;

– duration of detention, in days;

– number of deficiencies found and the reasons for detention, in clear and explicit terms;

– description of the measures taken by the competent authority and, where relevant, by the classification society as a follow-up to detention;

– if the ship has been refused access to any port within the region of the Memorandum, the reasons for such measure in clear and explicit terms;

– indication, where relevant, of whether the classification society or any other private body that carried out the survey has a responsibility in relation to the deficiencies which, alone or in combination, led to detention;

– description of the measures taken in the case of a ship which has been allowed to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard, or which has been refused access to any port within the region of the Memorandum.

II. Information concerning ships inspected will include the following:

– name of the ship;

– IMO number;

– type of ship;

– tonnage;

– year of construction;

– name and address of the company of the ship;

– in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and address of the charterer responsible for the selection of the vessel and the type of charter;

– flag State;

– the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any;

– the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates delivered;

– country, port and date of inspection;

– number and nature of deficiencies.

Annex 6

QUALITATIVE CRITERIA FOR ADHERENCE TO THE MEMORANDUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH 8.2 OF THE MEMORANDUM

Qualitative criteria.

A Maritime Authority of a State, meeting the geographical criterion specified in 8.2 of the Memorandum, may adhere as a full member, provided that all of the following qualitative criteria have been met:

1 such Maritime Authority will explicitly subscribe to the commitments under the Memorandum, with a view to contributing to the common endeavour to eliminate the operation of sub-standard ships;

2 such Maritime Authority will have ratified all relevant instruments in force, before adherence shall be accomplished;

3 such Maritime Authority will have sufficient capacity, logistically and substantially, to appropriately enforce compliance with international maritime standards regarding maritime safety, pollution prevention and living and working conditions on board with regard to ships entitled to fly its flag, which will include the employment of properly qualified inspectors acting under the responsibility of its Administration, to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Committee referred to in 6.1 of the Memorandum;

4 such Maritime Authority will have sufficient capacity, logistically and substantially, to comply in full with all provisions and activities specified in the Memorandum in order to enhance its commitments, which will include the employment of properly qualified port State control officers acting under the responsibility of its Administration, to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Committee referred to in 6.1 of the Memorandum;

5 a Maritime Authority, whose flag has appeared in the list of detentions exceeding the average detention percentage, as published in the annual report in any of three years immediately preceding its application for full membership, cannot be accepted as a full member of the Memorandum;

6 such Maritime Authority will, as of its effective date of membership, establish an on-line connection to the information system referred to in Annex 4;

7 such Maritime Authority will sign a financial agreement for paying its share in the operating cost of the Memorandum and will, as of its effective date, pay its financial contribution to the budget as approved by the Committee referred to in 6.1 of the Memorandum.

Assessment of compliance with the above conditions will only be valid for each individual case and will not create a precedent for any future cases, neither for the Authorities present under the Memorandum, nor for the potential new signatory.

Annex 7

MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR PORT STATE CONTROL OFFICERS

1. In pursuance of the provisions of 3.8 of the Memorandum, the port State control officer must be properly qualified and authorized by the Authority to carry out port State control inspections.

2. A properly qualified port State control officer must have completed a minimum of one year’s service as a flag State surveyor dealing with surveys and certification in accordance with the relevant instruments and be in possession of:

.1 a certificate of competency as master, enabling that person to take command of a ship of 1600 tons gross tonnage or more (see STCW, Reg. II/2), or

.2 a certificate of competency as chief engineer, enabling that person to take up that task on board a ship whose main power plant has a power equal or superior to 3000 kW (see STCW, Reg. III/2), or

.3 have passed an examination as a naval architect, mechanical engineer or an engineer related to the maritime fields and worked in that capacity for at least 5 years.

The port State control officers mentioned under .1 and .2 above must have served for a period of not less than five years at sea as officer in the deck or engine department.

3. Alternatively, a port State control officer is deemed to be properly qualified if that person:

.1 holds a relevant university degree or an equivalent training, and

.2 has been trained and qualified at a school for ship safety inspectors, and

.3 has served at least 2 years as a flag State surveyor dealing with surveys and certification in accordance with the relevant instruments.

4. A properly qualified port State control officer must be able to communicate orally and in writing with seafarers in the language most commonly spoken at sea.

5. A properly qualified port State control officer must have appropriate knowledge of the provisions of the relevant instruments and of the relevant procedures on port State control.

6. Port State control officers not fulfilling the above criteria are also accepted if they are employed for port State control by the Authorities before 1 July 1996.