RESOLUTION MSC.433(98)
(adopted on 16 June 2017)
GUIDELINES
AND CRITERIA FOR SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS
THE MARITIME SAFETY COMMITTEE,
RECALLING Article 28(b) of the Convention on the International
Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the Committee,
HAVING ADOPTED at its sixty-third session by resolution MSC.31(63)
regulation V/8-1, of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
(SOLAS), 1974, on ship reporting systems which, inter alia, requires a ship
reporting system, when adopted and implemented in accordance with the
guidelines and criteria developed by the Organization, to be used by all ships,
HAVING CONSIDERED, at its ninety-eighth session, the
recommendation of the Sub-Committee on Navigation, Communications and Search
and Rescue at its fourth session,
1 ADOPTS the revised
Guidelines and criteria for ship reporting systems set out in the annex to
the present resolution;
2 INVITES
Governments developing ship reporting systems for adoption by the Organization
in accordance with SOLAS regulation V/11 to take account of the revised
Guidelines and criteria, set out in the annex to the present resolution;
3 ENCOURAGES
Governments that operate approved ship reporting systems to consider automated
electronic reporting means recognized by the Organization when reviewing their
ship reporting systems;
4 REQUESTS the
Secretary-General to bring this resolution to the attention of all Contracting
Governments to the SOLAS Convention and to Members of the Organization which
are not Contracting Governments to the Convention;
5 REVOKES
resolutions MSC.43(64),
MSC.111(73)
and MSC.189(79).
ANNEX
GUIDELINES
AND CRITERIA FOR SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS
CONTENTS
Preamble
1 Definitions
2 General
considerations for adopted ship reporting systems
2.1 Objectives
2.2 Communication
2.3 Shore-based authority
2.4 Participating ships
3 Criteria for
planning, proposing, and implementing adopted ship reporting systems by
Contracting Governments
3.1 Responsibility of the
Contracting Government or Governments
3.2 Planning or revising
ship reporting system for adoption
3.3 Proposing a ship
reporting system to the Organization for adoption
3.4 Implementation of an
adopted ship reporting system
4 Criteria for
assessment of proposals for adoption and review of adopted ship reporting
systems by the Organization
GUIDELINES
AND CRITERIA FOR SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS
PREAMBLE
These guidelines and criteria are associated with SOLAS regulation
V/11 and should, in accordance with regulation V/11, be complied with by
Contracting Governments when planning and proposing ship reporting systems to
the Organization for adoption and implementing such systems after adoption.
Ship reporting systems so adopted will be mandatory for use by all ships,
certain categories of ships, or ships carrying certain cargoes.
In addition to the adoption of mandatory ship reporting systems,
the Organization may also review and recognize those ship reporting systems of
a recommendatory nature and Contracting Governments are encouraged to submit
such systems to the Organization in accordance with SOLAS regulation V/11. Such
systems will be recommended by the Organization for voluntary use in
international waters if they comply as near as practicable with SOLAS
regulation V/11 and these guidelines and criteria.
1 DEFINITIONS
The following terms are used in connection with matters relating
to ship reporting systems:
.1 Adopted ship
reporting system means a ship reporting system, (hereinafter referred to as a
"system") that has been established by a Government or Governments
after it has been accepted by the Organization as complying with all
requirements of SOLAS regulation V/11.
.2 Shore-based
authority means the authority or authorities designated by a Contracting
Government or Governments with the responsibility for the management and
coordination of a system, the interaction with participating ships, and the
safe and effective operation of a system. Such an authority may or may not be
an authority in charge of a vessel traffic service.
.3 Interaction between
a shore-based authority and a participating ship means interchange of data
between ships participating in a system and a shore-based authority, aimed at
enhancing maritime safety or the protection of the marine environment.
.4 Hazardous cargoes
means:
.4.1 goods classified in
the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code;
.4.2 substances classified
in chapter 17 of the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of
Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code) and chapter 19 of the
International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying
Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code);
.4.3 oils as defined in
MARPOL Annex I;
.4.4 noxious liquid
substances as defined in MARPOL Annex II;
.4.5 harmful substances as
defined in MARPOL Annex III;
.4.6 radioactive materials
specified in the International Code for the Safe Carriage of Packaged
Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes on Board
Ships (INF Code).
2 GENERAL
CONSIDERATIONS FOR ADOPTED SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS
2.1 Objectives
Ship reporting systems should be considered for adoption by the
Organization only if supported by a demonstrated need to address one or more of
the following: the improvement of the safety of life at sea, the safety and
efficiency of navigation and/or to increase the protection of the marine
environment. They may or may not be operated as part of a vessel traffic
service.
2.2 Communication
2.2.1 Reports
2.2.1.1 Communication between
a shore-based authority and a participating ship should be limited to
information essential to achieve the objectives of the system and, unless there
is an emergency involving the safety of life at sea or a threat to the marine
environment, the information should not be used for any other purpose.
2.2.1.2 The communication
system should enable the shore-based authority and the participating ship to
exchange information. The communication should be clear and simple and avoid
imposing an undue burden on masters, officers of the watch and pilots. If
verbal communications are used, the language should enable the shore-based
authority and the participating ship to understand each other clearly. Where
language difficulties exist and in particular where requested by the master or
the shore-based authority, a mutually agreed upon language or English, using
the Standard Marine Communication Phrases*, should be used.
___________________
* See resolution A.918(22) on IMO
Standard Marine Communication Phrases
2.2.1.3 The initial report
required from a ship entering the system should generally be limited to the
ship's name, call sign, IMO identification number if applicable, and position.
2.2.1.4 Other supplementary
information may also be requested in the initial report if justified in the
proposal for adoption as necessary to ensure the effective operation of the
system. Such supplementary information required may include, for example, the
intended movement of the ship through the area covered by the system, any
operational defects or difficulties affecting the ship, and, as set forth in
1.4 above, the general categories of any hazardous cargoes on board.
2.2.1.5 In the case of an
emergency or threat to the marine environment, the shore-based authority may
request that the participating ship provides as soon as practicable the precise
details of any hazardous cargoes, including their location on board the ship.
2.2.1.6 The system should be
planned to transmit information quickly and securely in the most effective way.
2.2.2 Technical considerations
2.2.2.1 The reliability of
communications and the availability of communication frequencies should be
assured. Shore-based authorities, if practicable, should consider automated
electronic means of ship reporting, recognised by the Organization, to reduce
ships' reporting burden.
2.2.2.2 Careful attention
should be given to the format and structure of the message and the mode of
transmission. Communication should be conducted in conformity with resolution A.851(20) on ship
reporting, taking into account any other relevant guidelines, criteria,
regulations or instruments developed by the Organization. If practicable, ship
reporting systems should be automated using available electronic means,
recognised by the Organization.
2.3 Shore-based
authority
2.3.1 The
varying objectives, area of coverage and complexity of a system will dictate
the level of staffing of the shore-based authority and the necessary
qualifications and standard of training of the operators. These standards
should, as appropriate, take account of the recommendations of the
Organization*.
___________________
* Refer to resolution A.857(20) on
Guidelines for Vessel Traffic Services
2.3.2 For
interaction with ships participating in the system, the shore-based authority
should be equipped with radio installations compatible with the requirements of
SOLAS chapter IV - Radiocommunications and any other electronic means,
recognized by the Organization necessary to accomplish the objectives of the
system.
2.3.3 The
shore-based authority should have the ability to relay information relating to
distress, maritime safety or threats to the marine environment without delay to
the appropriate national or international maritime authorities, with a view to
the initiation of response action.
2.3.4 If
necessary for the operation of the system, a shore-based authority should have
a database with the capacity to retain, update, supplement and retrieve
information once reported. Information retained in the system should be made
available only on a selective and secure basis to authorities required to
respond to distress, maritime safety or threats to the marine environment.
2.4 Participating ships
2.4.1 Participating
ships required by a system to report to a shore-based authority should do so
without delay upon entering and, if necessary, when leaving the area of the
system in accordance with the provisions of each system so adopted. A ship may
be required to provide additional reports or information to update or modify an
earlier report.
2.4.2 Failure
of a ship's radiocommunication equipment, or other electronic means for
communications recognized by the Organization should not, of itself, be
considered as a failure to comply with the rules of a reporting system;
however, the shipmaster should endeavour to ensure communication is restored as
soon as practicable. If a technical failure prevents the ship from reporting,
the master should enter the fact and reasons for not reporting in the ship's
log.
3 CRITERIA FOR
PLANNING, PROPOSING AND IMPLEMENTING ADOPTED SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS BY
CONTRACTING GOVERNMENTS
3.1 Responsibility of
the Contracting Government or Governments
It is the responsibility of the Contracting Government or
Governments to plan, propose to the Organization and implement systems or
amendments to such systems.
3.2 Planning or
revising ship reporting system for adoption
3.2.1 A
Contracting Government or Governments should establish the objectives and clearly
define the area of a system. All information for effective utilization of such
a system by mariners should be conveyed to the appropriate maritime
administrations and hydrographic authorities at least six months prior to the
date of implementation.
3.2.2 In
planning or revising a system, Contracting Governments should take account of
such factors as:
.1 hydrographical and
meteorological elements, such as prevailing winds and currents, shifting
shoals, local hazards, aids to navigation, and visibility;
.2 the character of
ship traffic, including the density of such traffic, conflicting navigation
patterns, narrow fairways, areas where ships converge or cross, the record of
maritime casualties, the categories of ships navigating in the area, interference
by ship traffic with other marine-based activities, and ships carrying
hazardous cargoes or types and quantities of bunker fuel;
.3 environmental
considerations;
.4 equipment
requirements, and methods of ship-to-shore communication and data processing so
as to ensure reliability and clear communication between the shore-based
authority and participating ships;
.5 the shore-based
facilities (including hardware and software) and the personnel qualifications
and training required to support the operation of the proposed system; and
.6 the procedural and
communication interfaces of the system with other maritime safety or pollution
response systems, including any adjacent ship reporting system.
3.2.3 In
planning a system, a Contracting Government should consider whether the
authority exists, or should be established, under domestic law to assess
violations of any proposed requirements of a system.
3.3 Proposing a ship
reporting system to the Organization for adoption
Systems and amendments thereto should be proposed to the
Organization for adoption. The proposal should include:
.1 the objectives and
demonstrated need for the proposed system;
.2 categories of ships
required to participate in the system;
.3 relevant information
pertaining to the hydrographical and meteorological elements, the
characteristics of ship traffic and any environmental aspects of the area;
.4 the delineation of
the reporting system as shown on a nautical chart (type of nautical chart as
appropriate) and a description of the system including the geographical
coordinates. The coordinates should be given in the WGS 84 datum; in addition,
geographical coordinates should also be given in the same datum as the nautical
chart if this chart is based on a datum other than WGS 84;
.5 the format and
content of the reports required, the times and geographical positions for
submitting reports, the shore-based authority to whom these reports should be
sent and, if any are to be provided, the available services;
.6 the information to
be provided to the participating ship and the procedures to be followed;
.7 the proposed
communication requirements for the system, including frequencies on which
reports should be transmitted and information to be reported;
.8 the relevant rules
and regulations in force in the area of the proposed system;
.9 the shore-based
facilities (including hardware and software) and personnel qualifications and
training required to support the operation of the proposed system;
.10 a summary of the
measures used to date, if any, and the reasons why these measures are
considered to be inadequate;
.11 information
concerning the applicable procedures if the communication facilities of the
shore-based authority fail;
.12 a description, if
appropriate, of any plans that have been prepared for responding to an
emergency involving the safety of life at sea or threats to the marine
environment;
.13 details of the
measures to be taken in accordance with 3.4.1.5, if a ship fails to comply with
the requirements of the system;
.14 reference to the
relevant data exchange standard, if applicable;
.15 necessary provision
to consider cyber-risk management guidelines adopted by the Organization*, if
applicable;
.16 consideration of
automated ship reporting by electronic means, recognised by the Organization,
to reduce ships' reporting burden; and
.17 the proposed
effective date of the reporting system should be as soon as practicable but not
earlier than six months after adoption by the Organization.
___________________
* MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3 on
Guidelines on maritime cyber risk management