В публикации поднимается множество проблем современного морского права, в рассмотрении которых принимает участие Морской институт Великобритании в рамках Международной морской организации (ИМО). В частности, обсуждаются вопросы, связанные с разработкой Полярного кодекса, внедрением рекомендаций по предотвращению несчастных случаев со спасательными шлюпками, дальнейшим ограничением содержания серы в топливе. Особенное внимание уделяется защите морской среды от загрязнения и обеспечению прав моряков в случае чрезвычайного морского происшествия, а также проблеме поиска места (порта) убежища судами, терпящими бедствие или нуждающимися в помощи. Рассматриваются также иные проблемы, связанные с обеспечением безопасности мореплавания.
| Тhe first sitting of the Нuman Element and Watchkeeping Sub-committee (HTW 1) took place in February. Opening the meeting, the Secretary General (SG) highlighted the IMO’s long history of working for a robust safety culture within the industry. He encouraged the sub-committee to validate the six updated model courses submitted to this session. Other important tasks were to undertake a review of the out-dated current guidance and to develop functional and practical guidelines for future updating of model courses. Нe also encouraged the fmalisation of the Polar Code and the training requirements for officers and crew serving on board ships operating in polar waters. |
The Nautical Institute has been closely involved in developing the Mandator)’ Code for Ships operating in Polar Waters. Captain David (Duke) Snider was attending this meeting. Duke Snider is our ice expert from Canada and has been involved in this for some time. The training requirements for officers were discussed at the working group, which noted that basic and advanced training for Masters and chief mates and navigating officers should be defined in chapter V of the STCW Convention and Code. Application of the training requirements should be defined in Chapter 1 3 of the Polar Code. The draft text of chapter 13 for inclusion in the Polar Code was approved by the Sub-committee.
The Republic ot Korea presented a paper on the problems with ECDIS familiarisation training and the need to develop guidelines for onboard ECDIS familiarisation training. This provoked a lively discussion, but while there was some sympathy for the proposal, the consensus was that this should be taken no further. 1 lowever, a paper bv Singapore on guidance for security-related training was sent to the working group for further consideration.
Some other items that were discussed were:
- Development of a globally consistent format for the certificate of training and education issued under the STCW Convention.
- The development of the international code of safety for ships using gases or low flashpoint fuels (IGF Code).
Sub-committee on Ships’ Systems and Equipment
Our volunteer delegate for this was Zillur Rahman Bhuiyan from Bangladesh.
The SG highlighted the concerns of the industry Lifeboat Group on the practical implementation of the guidelines for evaluation and replacement of lifeboat release and retrieval systems. The IMO has been carnring out work to prevent accidents with lifeboats and looking at matters related to the evaluation of lifeboat release and retrieval systems.
Requirements for onboard lifting appliances and winches are being developed, following the high number of accidents and injuries resulting from mechanical failure of these devices. ‘The group considered the correspondence group’s input on this subject, which suggested that future guidelines should be limited to onboard cargo lifting appliances (this does not include stores cranes, lifts and escalators and gear on fishing vessels), and should apply to new and existing onboard lifting appliances only.
This led to a lively debate, including comments that:
1. The scope and applicability should not only be limited to cargo- lifting appliances and should be further clarified.
2. Operational procedures and maintenance are already regulated on a mandatory basis via the ISM Code.
3. A renewal survev needs to be consistent with other surveys and should therefore take place at five yearly intervals.
4. Standards for loose gear, steel wire rope and shackles should be developed.
A working group was established to consider this further, the main results of which are that:
- All lifting appliances should be considered and not limited to cargo handling appliances.
- Elevators and escalators should not be considered.
- Equipment regulated by the LSA code should not be included.
- With available data onboard lifting appliances might be defined as stationary or mobile load handling appliances used on board ships for suspending, raising or lowering loads or for moving loads from one position to another while suspended. It was noted that this definition may be further expanded or refined by a correspondence group.
Marine Environment Protection Committee
This session had a total of 146 documents to consider – compared with just 11 items on the agenda at the Committee’s first meeting in 1974 – which mainly focused on follow-up work to the International Conference on Marine Pollution.
The SG advised that his top priority target for IMO is to reduce marine casualties by half. Other important activities included the verification of goal based standards for tankers and bulk carriers; the accelerated implementation of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), and the study on the availability of Annex VI compliant low- sulphur fuels which must be completed before decisions can be taken on the introduction of further sulphur restrictions in 2020.
The SG also declared his disappointment with the slow pace of ratification of several adopted conventions directly related to the work of the Committee, including the Ballast Water Management Convention which since May 2013 has only gained two additional ratifications. To date 38 states with 30% of the world’s tonnage have embraced the convention; 5% short of the point at which it will come into force.
Some important matters discussed during MEPC were the NOx Technical Code Guidelines concerning the use of dual fuel engines, which were adopted. The 2014 Shipboard Incineration Standard was also adopted. This covers the design, manufacture, performance, operation and testing of incinerator plants with capacities up to 4,000kW per unit.
The MEPC granted basic approval to four BWM systems and final approval to two more that make use of active substances.
Guidelines for the reduction of underwater noise from commercial shipping were approved in a move to address adverse impacts on marine life.
Finally, the guidance for port reception facilities and users was approved.
Legal Committee
The next meeting at IMO was the Legal Committee (LEG 101). This had a verv short agenda and therefore only sat for three days. We had two volunteer delegates attending Ms Helene Hunter-Davies and Captain Francois Laffoucriere from France, both qualified lawyers and Master Mariners.
The SG opened the meeting by remarking on the tragic accident to the Korean ferrv Sewol on 16 April. 1 le further stated that it was time for the IMO to take further action to improve the safety of passenger ships.
The International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) introduced a document reporting a survey on the 2006 Guidelines on fair treatment of seafarers in the event of a maritime accident.
Thirty nine states of IMO had replied to the questionnaire representing 22.5% of the membership. The survey found that:
- No state expressed the view that the guidelines inadequately or unduly protected the rights of seafarers, or w ere unfair to other parties.
- Some states had already passed either all or some of the principles of the guidelines into their laws.
- Some states replied that their existing laws adequately protected the seafarer.
- Some states indicated that model legislation from IMO would assist them to pass the guidelines into their law.
- Some states specifically requested the provision ot information by IMO regarding the meaning of the guidelines.
The Committee advised that it would be helpful if states that had not vet answered the survey would do so and if the sponsors of the survey could undertake to further analyse the responses and to report to the next committee.
There was a discussion on the implementation of IMO Instruments; places of refuge for ships in need of assistance. There appears to be no shortage of reports on ships being denied access to safe refuge where salvage and/or pollution response could be carried out safely.
The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) introduced a document with other industry sponsors informing the Committee that a ship would only request a place of refuge if it was in distress or in need of assistance, and that early and decisive intervention would minimise the risk of structural deterioration and mitigate the threat of pollution from the ship’s cargo and bunkers.
Another delegation with a view to raising awareness on this issue informed the Committee on the explosion and fire on the MS Flaminia, where it took the ship over tw o months to find a place of refuge.
Maritime Safety Committee
Our next, and busiest, meeting was the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC). Our volunteer delegate was Captain Bob Kieran from Dublin.
The SG again stated that it was now time to take further action to improve the safety of passenger ships earn ing hundreds of passengers, regardless of the nature of navigation, international or domestic. This is very important as in some parts of the world travel by ship is the onlу means of getting from one place to another.
It is now two vears since the Costa Concordia hit the rocks and partially sank off the Island of Giglio with a loss of 32 lives. The SG advised that, while a lot of time and effort had been expended and hundreds ot pages of documents have been generated which concluded that the IMO is working, that is not enough. The IMO must be able to summarise what actions have been taken to date and what more the Committee will do, two years after the accident. The general public and the maritime community would like simple answers to simple questions such as What went wrong? What were the lessons learned? What measures have been or will be adopted in response to the tragic incident? It should be noted that the cruise industry is also working hard to improve safety procedures.
In regard to piracy and armed robbery against ships the SG was pleased to inform the Committee that no ships had been taken off the coast of Somalia since 10 May 2012. However the situation in West Africa is not improving and he urged all coastal countries to cooperate and communicate with each other in this matter.
The Committee was urged to make all efforts to finalise the Polar Code, which will do much to enhance the safety of ships operating in these areas. During the following discussion, it was decided that any ship required to carry SOLAS certificates will be required to comply w ith the Code, whether on an international voyage or not.
We supported a paper by Canada calling for the employment of a qualified ice navigator on ships where the officers had not had the experience or training. Unfortunately, this was not accepted, and the consensus was that any ship operating in Polar Waters should have to have appropriately trained officers, without the specific requirement for a qualified ice navigator. The Committee approved the draft International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters in principle.
The Royal Institute of Naval Architects (RINA) submitted an interesting paper on capacity and seating capacity in lifeboats. RINA expressed the view that the space available in passenger ship lifeboats should be reviewed, as the average size of passengers does appear to have increased. The Committee discussed this and the following views were expressed:
- No compelling need had been demonstrated.
- It was not an issue identified in the casualty report on the Costa Concordia.
- Regular drills and tests conducted bv several member governments did not indicate there was a need to conduct such a review.
- It was however a safety related subject and it should not be overlooked.
Unfortunately the Committee decided not to progress this further in light of the above.
Two new traffic separation schemes were adopted, one on the Pacific Coast of Panama and the other at the approaches to Puerto Cristobel.
The last MSC adopted amendments to the IMSBC Code w hich should enter into force on 1 January 2015. However, since the code itself w as first adopted, there have been a number of casualties in vessels carrying cargoes subject to that code, resulting in the loss of many lives. During the discussion, the Committee noted that the code is not directed at any particular ship type, but at all ships that carry dry cargoes in bulk. It emphasised that cargoes must be loaded and carried in accordance with the IMSBC Code and applicable statutory provisions.
Places of refuge were also discussed. Intertanko highlighted in particular the situation of the chemical tanker Maritime, which suffered structural damage in December 201 3 and was not granted a place of refuge until 14 April 2014, despite repeated requests. Assembly Resolution A.949(23) on places of refuge does argue the case for places of refuge but also acknowledges that States have no obligation to act. Japan confirmed that coastal states have the right to make the decision on whether to accept a casualty, taking into consideration the threat to public safety.
The above again is just a snapshot of the goings on at the International Maritime Organization. There are far too many subjects, decisions and papers to be reported in depth, however should any member wish further information, please contact me on jmd@nautinst.org and I will do what I can to assist.
Автор:
Captain John Dickinson
FNI, Head of Delegation
Источник:
Seaways. – 2014. – August. – Р. 24 – 25.