Thursday, August 2, 2018

updated contact points for SOPEP Dated 31.07.2018


MSC-MEPC.6/Circ.16
Annex, page 1
ANNEX
LIST OF NATIONAL OPERATIONAL CONTACT POINTS
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RECEIPT, TRANSMISSION AND PROCESSING OF
URGENT REPORTS ON INCIDENTS INVOLVING HARMFUL SUBSTANCES,
INCLUDING OIL FROM SHIPS TO COASTAL STATES
1 The following information is provided to enable compliance with Regulation 37 of
MARPOL Annex I which, inter alia, requires that the Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan
(SOPEP) shall contain a list of authorities or persons to be contacted in the event of a
pollution incident involving such substances. Requirements for oil pollution emergency plans
and relevant oil pollution reporting procedures are contained in Articles 3 and 4 of the 1990
OPRC Convention.
2 This information is also provided to enable compliance with Regulation 17 of
MARPOL Annex II which, inter alia, requires that the shipboard marine pollution emergency
plans for oil and/or noxious liquid substances shall contain a list of authorities or persons to
be contacted in the event of a pollution incident involving such substances. In this context,
requirements for emergency plans and reporting for hazardous and noxious substances are
also contained in Article 3 of the 2000 OPRC-HNS Protocol.
3 Resolution MEPC.54(32), as amended by resolution MEPC.86(44), on the SOPEP
Guidelines and resolution MEPC.85(44), as amended by resolution MEPC.137(53), on the
Guidelines for the development of Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans for Oil and/or
Noxious Liquid Substances adopted by the IMO require that these shipboard pollution
emergency plans should include, as an appendix, the list of agencies or officials of
administrations responsible for receiving and processing reports. Such list is developed and
up-dated by the Organization in compliance with Article 8 (Reports on incidents involving
harmful substances) and Protocol I (Provisions concerning Reports on Incidents Involving
Harmful Substances) of the MARPOL Convention. Under Article 8 of the MARPOL
Convention, each Party to the Convention shall notify the Organization with complete details
of authorities responsible for receiving and processing reports on incidents for circulation to
other Parties and Member States of the Organization. Attention is also drawn to both
Guidelines which stipulate that "in the absence of a listed focal point, or should any undue
delay be experienced in contacting the responsible authority by direct means, the master
should be advised to contact the nearest coastal radio station, designated ship movement
reporting station or rescue co-ordination centre (RCC) by the quickest available means".
4 The "List of national operational contact points responsible for the receipt,
transmission and processing of urgent reports on incidents involving harmful substances,
including oil from ships to coastal States" contained in the circular is updated at the end of
each calendar year. This list is an update of that contained in MSC-MEPC.6/Circ.16
dated 31 December 2017, as amended.
5 The above mentioned “List” is available on the Internet and can be accessed at
http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Circulars/Pages/CP.aspx (or select “National Contacts” link on
the bottom of the IMO homepage). This Internet version is updated on

Saturday, June 30, 2018

CIC Results on safety of Navigation in Black Sea MoU


The Black Sea MoU released the report on the CIC on Safety on Navigationincluding ECDIS, completed on November 30, 2017
From 01 September 2017 to 30 November 2017, the Black Sea MoU carried out a Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIConSafety of Navigation throughout the region.

The campaign involved all member States of the Black Sea MoU and was conducted in conjunction with the Tokyo MOU, Paris MOU and other MOUs. The aim of the campaign was to check the conformity of safety regulations for ships, the overall status of the vessel’s navigation safety and the competency of crew involved innavigation operations.
The Report documents the results of the Concentrated InspectionCampaign (CICon Safety of Navigationincluding ECDIS, which was carried out by six (6) Black Sea MoU Member Authorities.

The results

During the campaign, a total of 983 inspections were carried out with the CIC questionnaire involving 983 individual ships. Of this quantity 59 ships were detained with 21 (35.6%) detentions being within the CIC scope. This means that in 21 cases the navigationsystems are not meeting SOLAS requirements and had deficiencies, which were serious enough to detain the ship, resultinin a CIC-topic related detention rate of 2.14%.
A total of 180 questionnaires had at least a non-compliance to a requirement, resulting 18.3% of CIC inspections. 
The overall average of non-conformities was 2.68%.

The most notable non-conformities

7.6% Lack of exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance with the requirements of COLREG72

6.2% Lack of passage plan covering the whole voyage

2.9% Ship’s VDR/SVDR not record data fully

It has been observed that ships younger than 15 years age performing relatively well with 566 (58.58%) inspections with only two (2) CIC topic related detentions.

Older ships, particularly those 30 years and older, show reason for concern with majority of detentions 11 (52.4%) and 98 (40.0%) non-conformities, although subjectinone fourth of inspections 241 (24.5%).

High CIC topic related detention rate, CIC inspections with non-conformities, unfavourable results to the questions mentioned above raise concern on the industry level of compliance to the SOLAS Chapter V and in particular on the overall status of the vessel’snavigation safety.

Alert on detainable deficiencies

Following a recent Port State Control (PSC) inspections in all (MOU)s, seven deficiencies have been imposed that resulted in the detention of the vessels. We wish to draw attention to these detainable deficiencies to avoid re-occurrence

Emergency equipment for 2-way communication

The battery of the emergency equipment for 2-way communicationwas found expired. Ship Owners/ Managers / Operators are reminded on the requirements of the emergency equipment.
The equipment should be portable and capable of being used foron-scene communication between survival craft, between survival craft and ship and between survival craft and rescue unit. It may also be used for on-board communications when capable of operatingon appropriate frequencies.
The equipment should:
 be capable of being operated by unskilled personnel;
 be capable of being operated by personnel wearing gloves as specified for immersion suits in regulation 33 of chapter III of 1974 SOLAS Convention;
 be capable of single-handed operation except for channel selection;
 withstand drops on to a hard surface from a height of 1 m;
 be watertight to a depth of 1 m for at least 5 min;
 maintain watertightness when subjected to a thermal shock of 45°C under conditions of immersion;
 not be unduly affected by seawater, or oil, or both;
 have no sharp projections which could damage survival craft;
 be of small size and light weight;
 be capable of operating in the ambient noise level likely to be encountered on board ships or in survival craft;
 have provisions for its attachment to the clothing of the user;
 be resistant to deterioration by prolonged exposure to sunlight; and
 be either of a highly visible yellow/orange colour or marked with a surrounding yellow/orange marking strip.

The source of energy should be integrated in the equipment and may be replaceable. In addition, provision may be made to operate the equipment using an external source of electrical energy.
Equipment for which the source of energy is intended to be user-replaceable should be provided with a dedicated primary battery for use in the event of a distress situation. This battery should be equipped with a non-replaceable seal to indicate that it has not been used.
The primary battery should have sufficient capacity to ensure 8-hour operation at its highest rated power with a duty cycle of 1:9. This duty cycle is defined as 6-second transmission, 6-second receptionabove squelch opening level and 48-second reception below squelch opening level.

Line-throwing appliances

During the PSC inspection it was noted that the line-throwing appliances were found expired.
A line-throwing appliance complying with the requirements of section 7.1 of the LSA Code shall be provided.
Every line-throwing appliance shall:
 be capable of throwing a line with reasonable accuracy;
 include not less than four projectiles each capable of carrying the line at least 230 m in calm weather;