Revoked
by MEPC.208(62)
Resolution
MEPC.105(49)
GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTION OF ANTI-FOULING SYSTEMS ON SHIPS
(Adopted on 18 July 2003)
THE
MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION COMMITTEE,
RECALLING
Article 38(a) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization
concerning the functions of the Marine Environment Protection Committee
conferred upon it by the international conventions for the prevention and
control of marine pollution,
RECALLING
ALSO that the International Conference on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling
Systems for Ships, 2001, held in October 2001, adopted the International
Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, 2001 (the
AFS Convention) together with four Conference resolutions,
RECALLING
FURTHER that Article 11 of the AFS Convention prescribes that ships to which
this Convention applies may, in any port, shipyard, or offshore terminal of a
Party, be inspected by officers authorized by that Party for the purpose of
determining whether the ship is in compliance with this Convention,
NOTING
that Article 3(3) of the AFS Convention prescribes that Parties to this
Convention shall apply the requirements of this Convention as may be necessary
to ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to ships of non-Parties to
this Convention,
NOTING
ALSO that Article 11(2) of the AFS Convention refers to the guidelines to be
developed by the Organization and Conference resolution 2 urges the
Organization to develop these guidelines as a matter of urgency for them to be
adopted before the entry into force of the Convention,
NOTING
FURTHER that through resolutions MEPC.102(48) and MEPC.104(49) the Organization
has developed "Guidelines for Survey and Certification of Anti-fouling
Systems on Ships" and "Guidelines for Brief Sampling of Anti-Fouling
Systems on Ships", respectively, and
HAVING
CONSIDERED the draft Guidelines for inspection of anti-fouling systems on ships
pursuant to the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling
Systems on Ships, 2001, prepared by the Sub-Committee on Flag State
Implementation at its eleventh session,
1.
ADOPTS the Guidelines for inspection of anti-fouling systems on ships pursuant
to the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems
on Ships, 2001, as set out in the Annex to this resolution;
2.
INVITES Governments to apply the Guidelines as soon as possible, or when the
Convention becomes applicable to them; and
3.
RECOMMENDS that the Guidelines be adopted as amendments to resolution A.787(19)
on Procedures for port State control, as further amended by resolution
A.882(21) once the AFS Convention has entered into force and that the
Guidelines be reviewed on a regular basis.
Annex.
GUIDELINES FOR INSPECTION OF ANTI-FOULING SYSTEMS ON SHIPS
Port
State control inspections of anti-fouling systems on ships are governed by
Article 11 of the AFS Convention. The process for conducting these inspections
is described below. The flow diagram in the Appendix to this annex also
describes the AFS port State inspection process.
SUB-PART 1.
Inspection of International Anti-Fouling System (IAFS) Certificate or
Declaration on Anti-Fouling System
1.
Ships required to carry an IAFS Certificate or Declaration on Anti-Fouling
System
.1 On boarding
and introduction to the master or responsible ship's officer, the port State
control officer (PSCO) should examine the IAFS Certificate or Declaration on
Anti-Fouling System, and the attached Record of Anti-Fouling Systems, if
appropriate.
.2 The IAFS
Certificate carries the information on the particulars of the ship and a series
of checkboxes to indicate if an anti-fouling system controlled under Annex I of
AFS 2001 has or has not been applied, removed or been covered with a sealer
coat, and if an anti-fouling system controlled under Annex I of AFS 2001 was
applied on the ship prior to or after the date specified in AFS 2001.
.3 As a
preliminary check, the validity of the IAFS Certificate should be confirmed by
verifying that the IAFS Certificate is properly completed and signed/endorsed
by the Administration, or by a recognized organization (RO) and stating that
the required survey has been performed. In reviewing the IAFS Certificate,
particular attention should be given to verifying that the initial survey
matches the dry dock period listed in the ship's log(s) and that only one box
should be marked.
.4 The Record of
Anti-Fouling Systems should be inspected to ensure that the records are
attached to the IAFS Certificate and are up to date. The most recent Record
must correlate with the correct checkbox on the front of the IAFS Certificate.
2.
Ships of Non-Parties to AFS 2001
.1 As ships of
non-Parties to AFS 2001 are not entitled to an IAFS Certificate, the PSCO
should look for documentation that contains all of the information in the IAFS
Certificate. The records described in
resolution MEPC.102(48), paragraphs 5.2.2 and 5.3.2 can be used as examples of
this types of documentation. If the ship has such documentation, the PSCO may
take its content into account in the evaluation of that ship's compliance.
.2 In all other
respects the PSCO should be guided by the procedures for ships referred to in
paragraph 1 above (Ships required to carry an IAFS Certificate).
SUB-PART 2.
Brief sampling of anti-fouling systems on ships
1.
In addition to reviewing the IAFS Certificate, the AFS 2001 specifies that the
inspection may also include a brief sampling of the ship's anti-fouling system.
The sampling must not affect the integrity, structure, or operation of the
anti-fouling system, taking into account the guidelines contained in resolution
MEPC.104(49).
2.
If a brief sampling is conducted, the time to process the results shall not be
used as a basis for preventing the movement and departure of the ship.
PART 2.
MORE THOROUGH INSPECTION
1.
If the results of the inspection, observations on board, or other information
leads to clear grounds for believing that the ship is in violation of the AFS
2001, or if the anti-fouling system does not correspond substantially with the
particulars of the IAFS Certificate, a more thorough inspection may be carried
out taking into account any of the following steps.
2.
Inspection of additional documentation, to include:
.1 ship's logs,
including entries regarding:
.1 date of last
repair, drydock or application of anti-fouling system, date of departure from
location;
.2 current port
and date of arrival; and
.3 ship's
position at or near the time the boarding took place; and
.2 inspection of
additional documentation described in paragraphs 5.2.2 and 5.2.3 of resolution
MEPC.102(48).
3.
If appropriate, spot check dates of last hull coating matches date in drydock?
4.
If the IAFS Certificate is not properly completed, information on the following
questions may be pertinent:
.1 "When
was the last time the ship's anti-fouling system was applied?";
.2 "If the
anti-fouling system is controlled under Annex 1 to AFS 2001 and was removed,
what was the name of the facility and date of the work performed?";
.3 "If the
anti-fouling system is controlled under Annex 1 of AFS 2001 and has been
covered by a sealer coat, what was the name of the facility and date
applied?";
.4 "What is
the name of the anti-fouling/sealer products and the manufacturer or distributor
for the existing anti-fouling system?"; and
.5 "If the
current anti-fouling system was changed from the previous system, what was the
type of anti-fouling system and name of the previous manufacturer or
distributor?".
5.
Performing additional verification, for example, more comprehensive sampling
and analysis of the ship's anti-fouling system. Such sampling and analysis will
likely be more detailed and comprehensive than the brief inspection that may be
carried out during the initial port State control inspection, and may involve
the use of laboratories and detailed scientific testing procedures. Refer to
the guidelines in resolution MEPC.104(49) when conducting these additional
samples or analyses.
6.
Additional information available to the PSCO, depending on the circumstances of
the case, such as reports of recent previous violations or alleged
contraventions received from other port States.
PART 3.
PORT STATE ACTION IN RESPONSE TO ALLEGED CONTRAVENTIONS
1.
Article 11(4) of AFS 2001 allows Parties to inspect ships on request of another
Party, if a request for an investigation is received and sufficient evidence
that the ship is operating or has operated in violation of the Convention is
provided. Article 12(2) permits port States conducting inspection to furnish
the Administration of the ship concerned such information and evidence as may
be in its possession that a violation has occurred. Experience has shown that
information furnished to the flag State is often inadequate to enable the flag
State to cause proceedings to be brought in respect of the alleged violation of
the AFS 2001 requirements. This part is intended to identify information which
is often needed by a flag State for the prosecution of such possible
violations.
2.
It is recommended that in preparing a port State report on deficiencies, where
contravention to AFS 2001 requirements is involved, the authorities of the
coastal or port State be guided by the itemized list of possible evidence as
shown in part 2. It should 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 should 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 had occurred.
3.
In addition to the port State report on deficiencies, a report should 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 PSCO of the suspected non-conforming anti-fouling system. In addition to
the information required in part 2, the statement should include considerations
which lead the PSCO to carry out a more detailed inspection;
.2 statements
concerning any sampling procedures of the anti-fouling system. These should
include: location of the vessel at the time it was sampled as well as an
indication of where the sample was taken from the hull, including the vertical
distance from the boot topping, the time of sampling, 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 any samples taken of the anti-fouling system; the reports should
include the results of the analyses, a description of the method employed,
reference to or copies of scientific documentation attesting to the accuracy
and validity of the method employed, the names of persons performing the
analyses and their experience and a description of the quality assurance
measures of the analyses;
.4 a statement
by the PSCO on board together with the PSCO's rank and organization;
.5 statements by
persons being questioned;
.6 statements by
witnesses;
.7 photographs
of the hull and sample areas; and
.8 copy of the
IAFS Certificate, including copies of relevant pages of the Record of Anti-fouling
Systems, log books, MSDS or similar, declaration of compliance from the
anti-fouling system manufacturer, invoices from the shipyard and other dry dock
records pertaining to the anti-fouling system, etc.
4.
All observations, photographs and documentation should be supported by a signed
verification of their authenticity. All certifications, authentications or
verifications should be executed in accordance with the laws of the State which
prepares them. All statements should be signed and dated by the person making
the statement. The names of the persons signing statements should be printed in
legible script above or below the signature.
5.
The reports referred to under paragraphs 2 and 3 of this part should be sent to
the flag State. If the coastal State observing the contravention and the port
State carrying out the investigation on board are not the same, the State
carrying out the latter investigation should also send a copy of its findings
to the State which initiated the investigation.
PART 4.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF PORT STATE TO NOTIFY THE CONTRAVENTION TO THE FLAG STATE
1.
Article 11(3) of AFS 2001 states that any time a ship is warned or detained, or
is dismissed or excluded from a port for violation of the Convention, the Party
taking such action shall immediately inform the flag Administration of the ship
concerned. The form in Appendix 5 should be used to inform the flag
Administration. In the event that the deficiencies identified by the PSCO
cannot be corrected in the port of inspection and the ship is allowed to sail
from that port, the guidance in paragraph 4.7.3 and the forms in Appendices 6
and 7 should be used.
APPENDIX.
AFS port State inspection process