IMO Activities to enhance Maritime Security Captain Kyung – Rae Min Head, Cargoes and Facilitation Section Maritime Safety Division IMO Hello Personal introduction. This presentation will address: the background to the IMO position on maritime security The measures required by SOLAS and the ISPS Code The responsibilities of governments, ports and companies Some implementation strategies

11 September 2001 In the wake of the tragic events of 11 September 2001 in the United States of America, IMO Secretary-General William A. O’Neil, consulted Member Governments on the need to review the measures already adopted by IMO to combat acts of violence and crime at sea.

Resolution A.924(22) (20 November 2001) - A call for a review of measures and procedures to prevent acts of terrorism which threaten the security of passenger and crews and the safety of ships; - A boost to the Organization’s technical co-operation programme of £1.5 million to help developing countries to address maritime securing issues. Twenty-second Assembly (November 2001): Assembly resolution A.924 called for a review of the existing international legal and technical measures to prevent and suppress terrorist acts against ships at sea and in port, and to improve security aboard and ashore. The Assembly also contributed to the IMO Technical Co-operation fund to assist States to develop maritime security.

Limburg – October 2002 Further impetus was added by the attack on the tanker LIMBURG off Yemen in October 2002

Diplomatic Conference December 2002 Conference resolution 1 Amendments to SOLAS Chapter V Chapter XI-1 Chapter XI-2 The Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security held at IMO headquarters in London from 9 to 13 December 2002, developed a new and comprehensive maritime security regime for international shipping.  The Conference was attended by 109 Contracting Governments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention. The Conference adopted, under Conference resolution 1, changes to SOLAS including additional provisions in chapters V and XI and the creation of a new chapter XI-2 addressing security.

Diplomatic Conference December 2002 Conference resolution 2 International Ship & Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) Part A – Mandatory Part B - Recommendatory The Diplomatic Conference also adopted, under Conference resolution 2, the International Ship & Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) Part A is mandatory. Part B although recommendatory, provides a process and a menu for achieving compliance with part A. [A list of the contents of SOLAS chapter XI-2 and the ISPS Code are in the annex to the speakers handed out earlier].

Diplomatic Conference December 2002 (1) Other Conference resolutions: Resolution 3 .- Further work by the International Maritime Organization pertaining to the enhancement of maritime security; Resolution 4 .- Future amendments to Chapters XI-1 and XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention on special measures to enhance maritime safety and security; Resolution 5 .- Promotion of technical co-operation and assistance; Resolution 6 .- Early implementation of the special measures to enhance maritime security; The Conference also made a further 9 security-related resolutions, giving policy statements and areas for future work by the Organization. (3 Further work by the International Maritime Organization pertaining to the enhancement of maritime security; 4 Future amendments to Chapters XI-1 and XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention on special measures to enhance maritime safety and security; 5 Promotion of technical co-operation and assistance; 6 Early implementation of the special measures to enhance maritime security; 7 Establishment of appropriate measures to enhance the security of ships, port facilities, mobile offshore drilling units on location and fixed and floating platforms not covered by chapter XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention; 8 Enhancement of security in co-operation with the International Labour Organization; 9 Enhancement of security in co-operation with the World Customs Organization; 10 Early implementation of long-range ships' identification and tracking; and 11 Human element-related aspects and shore leave for seafarers)

Diplomatic Conference December 2002 (2) Resolution 7 .- Establishment of appropriate measures to enhance the security of ships, port facilities, mobile offshore drilling units on location and fixed and floating platforms not covered by chapter XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention; Resolution 8 .- Enhancement of security in co-operation with the International Labour Organization; Resolution 9 .- Enhancement of security in co-operation with the World Customs Organization; Resolution 10 .- Early implementation of long-range ship’s identification and tracking; and Resolution 11 .- Human element-related aspects and shore leave for seafarers. The Conference also made a further 9 security-related resolutions, giving policy statements and areas for future work by the Organization. (3 Further work by the International Maritime Organization pertaining to the enhancement of maritime security; 4 Future amendments to Chapters XI-1 and XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention on special measures to enhance maritime safety and security; 5 Promotion of technical co-operation and assistance; 6 Early implementation of the special measures to enhance maritime security; 7 Establishment of appropriate measures to enhance the security of ships, port facilities, mobile offshore drilling units on location and fixed and floating platforms not covered by chapter XI-2 of the 1974 SOLAS Convention; 8 Enhancement of security in co-operation with the International Labour Organization; 9 Enhancement of security in co-operation with the World Customs Organization; 10 Early implementation of long-range ships' identification and tracking; and 11 Human element-related aspects and shore leave for seafarers)

SOLAS Chapter XI-2 (1) Regulations: 1 Definitions Application Obligations of Contracting Governments with respect to maritime security 4 Requirements for Companies and ships Specific responsibility for Companies Ship security alert system

SOLAS Chapter XI-2 (2) Regulations: 7 Threats to ships 8 Master’s discretion for ship safety and security 9 Control and compliance measures 10 Requirements for port facilities 11 Alternative security agreements 12 Equivalent security arrangements 13 Communication of information

ISPS Code (1) Preamble Part A and Part B 1 General (introduction, objectives and functional requirements) / Introduction 2 Definitions 3 Application 4 Responsibilities of Contracting Governments 5 Declaration of security

ISPS Code (2) 6 Obligations of the Company 7 Ship security 8 Ship security assessment 9 Ship security plan 10 Records 11 Company security officer Ship security officer 13 Training, drills and exercises on ship security

ISPS Code (3) 14 Port facility security 15 Port facility security assessment 16 Port facility security plan 17 Port facility security officer 18 Training, drills and exercises on port facility security 19 Verification and certification for ships

Rationale -- Risk management activity - Appropriate security measures - Risk assessment - ISPS Code standard framework evaluating risk change threat level change vulnerability of ships/port facility Functional security requirements for ships and port facilities No such thing as 100% security. In essence, the new SOLAS chapter XI-2 and the ISPS Code take the approach that ensuring the security of ships and port facilities is basically a risk management activity and that to determine what security measures are appropriate, an assessment of the risks must be made in each particular case. The purpose of the ISPS Code is to provide a standardized, consistent framework for evaluating risk, enabling governments to offset changes in threat levels with changes in vulnerability for ships and port facilities.

Responsibilities of Governments (1) Determination of Port Facilities Designated Authorities Recognised Security Organizations (RSOs) Under SOLAS chapter XI-2 and Part A of the Code Contracting Governments can establish Designated Authorities within Government to undertake their security responsibilities under the Code. Governments or Designated Authorities may also delegate the undertaking of certain responsibilities to Recognised Security Organizations (RSOs) outside Government.

Responsibilities of Governments (2) Three security levels: Security Level 1, normal: at which ships and port facilities normally operate Security Level 2, heightened: applying as long as there is a heightened risk of a security incident Security Level 3, exceptional: applying for the period of time when there is the probable or imminent risk of a security incident The setting of the security level applying at any particular time will be the responsibility of Contracting Governments and will apply to their ships and Port Facilities. The Code defines three security levels for international use:  Level 1, normal; base line similar minimum standard of security worldwide. Level 2, lasting for the period of time when there is a heightened risk of a security incident; and Level 3, lasting for the period of time when there is the probable or imminent risk of a security incident. Response actions to level three are more likely to be localized and specific, ideally in accordance with pre-determined contingency plans.

Responsibilities of Governments (3) Port Facility Security Assessment Approval of security plans Communication of information Contracting Governments are responsible for ensuring that Port Facility Security Assessment (PFSA) are conducted at all Port Facilities. The results of the PFSA have to be approved by the Government (or Designated Authority) The PFSPs and SSPs have to be approved by, or on behalf of, the ship’s Administration. Contracting Governments must provide certain information to IMO to facilitate effective communication between Company/Ship Security Officers and the Port Facility Security Officers responsible for the Port Facility their ships serve.

Responsibilities of Governments (4) Verification and certification for ships International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC) Seafarer identification document Contracting governments are responsible for ensuring the verification and certification of the ship’s compliance with the requirements of the Code on an initial, renewal and intermediate basis. The State is responsible for issuing International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC) to ships on its registry, indicating that it complies with the Code. The ISSC will be subject to Port State Control (PSC) inspections but such inspections will not extend to examination of the Ship Security Plan itself. Work on developing an up-to-date seafarer identification document is being undertaken in co-operation with the ILO

Responsibilities of Governments (5) Port state control Additional control measures The Contracting Government retains responsibility for ensuring that appropriate security measures are implemented, through effective oversight programmes. These measures will vary depending upon the security level set by the Contracting Government.

Responsibilities of the Company and the Ship (1) Company security officer (CSO) Ship security officer (SSO) Ship security assessment (SSA) Ship security plan(s) (SSP) Any company operating ships to which the Code applies will have to appoint a Company Security Officer (CSO) for the company and a Ship Security Officer (SSO) for each of its ships. The CSO’s responsibilities include ensuring that a Ship Security Assessment (SSA) is undertaken and that a Ship Security Plan (SSP) is prepared for each ship to which the Code applies. The SSP will indicate the operational and physical security measures necessary to operate at security level 1. The plan will also indicate the additional, or intensified, security measures the ship itself can take to move to security levels 2 and 3.

Responsibilities of the Company and the Ship (2) International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC) Automatic identification system (AIS) Ship security alert system (SSAS) Declaration of Security (DoS) Training The ship will have to carry an ISSC indicating that it complies with the Code. The mandatory fitting of ship-borne AIS for all ships of 500 gross tonnage and above, on international voyages has been accelerated, through amendments to Regulation 19 of SOLAS Chapter V, to the first safety equipment survey after 1 July 2004 or to 1 December 2004, whichever occurs earlier. Details and performance standards for a SSAS for seafarers to use to notify authorities and other ships of a terrorist hijacking, are detailed in a new regulation in SOLAS chapter XI-2. Further guidance is given in MSC/Circs 1072 (SSAS) and 1073 (MRCC) Where a DoS is necessary to address the sharing of security arrangements between the ship and the port facility, platform or other ship, the CSO/SSO will liase with the PFSO or equivalent . The CSO and SSO are responsible to ensure that all staff receive appropriate training.

Responsibilities of the Port Facility (1) Port facility security assessment (PFSA) Port facility security officer (PFSO) Port facility security plan(s) (PFSP) Contracting Governments will have to undertake a Port Facility Security Assessment (PFSA) of its Port Facilities. This assessment is to be undertaken by the Contracting Government, a Designated Authority, or the Recognised Security Organization. PFSAs will need to be reviewed over time. The results of the PFSA have to be approved by the Government or Designated Authority and will be used to help determine which Port Facilities are required to appoint a Port Facility Security Officer (PFSO). The responsibilities of the PFSO are defined in the ISPS Code, including training and drills. The PFSO is responsible for the preparation of the Port Facility Security Plan (PFSP).

Responsibilities of PFSO (1) Operational and physical security measures Respond to security level Declaration of security (DoS) Training The PFSO is responsible for the implementation of the operational and physical security measures detailed in the PFSP, ensuring that the Port facility always meets (or exceeds) the minimum standards required at security level 1. The plan should also indicate the additional, or intensified, security measures the Port Facility can take to move to security level 2, and contingency plans and measures necessary to respond to a security level 3 situation being declared the authorities. Where a DoS is necessary to address the sharing of security arrangements between the ship and the port facility, platform or other ship, the PFSO will liase with the CSO/SSO or equivalent. The PFSO is responsible to ensure that all staff receive appropriate training.

ISPS Code PFSP SSP PFSA SSA Company Security Officer Contracting Government Set Security Level Local Administrator Manage Different Security Level Request Declaration of Security Port Facility Security Officer Ship Security Officer PFSA SSA

SOLAS AMENDMENTS AND THE ISPS CODE ENTRY INTO FORCE 1 JULY 2004

Recent Progress The Diplomatic Conference outlined a number of areas for further development, many of which have been included in the work programme of IMO, especially the Maritime Safety Committee and its subordinate bodies

MSC 77 (1) (May/June 2003) Provision of SSAS – MSC/Circ.1072 Directives for MRCCs on acts of violence – MSC/Circ 1073 Interim guidelines for the authorization of RSOs – MSC/Circ 1074 Revised performance standards for SSAS – MSC.147(77) Amendments to resolution A.890 – Safe Manning

MSC 77 (2) (May/June 2003) Guidance on implementation of SOLAS XI-2 and ISPS Code (MSC/Circ.1097) Mobile and immobile floating units International Ship Security Certificate Issuance Subsequent failures or suspension Training and Certification Implementation of the new regime Guidance on security aspects of floating platforms, ISSCs, training and certification and implementation have been given in MSC/Circ 1097.

Future Work Programme MSC 77 updated the future work programme of the Organization, taking into account what has already been done

Future Work Programme (1) Long-range identification/tracking Functional requirements Carriage requirements Co-operation between IMO/WCO Co-operation between IMO/ILO - Seafarer ID - Joint ILO/IMO WG on Port Security Early implementation of long range identification and tracking was required by Conference resolution 10. Cooperation with WCO on security of closed cargo transport units (containers), required by Conference resolution 9, will be addressed shortly. [New specifications for seafarer identification have been agreed and will be issued shortly] IMO has co-operated with ILO to produce a Code of Practice for security in the wider port area, complementary to the security provisions of SOLAS and the ISPS Code.

Future Work Programme (2) - Model courses for CSO, SSO and PFSO Review of resolutions A.787 and A.882 (Port State Control) Guidance on control and compliance - Further guidance on uniform and consistent implementation of SOLAS XI-2 and ISPS Model courses are being validated for publication in September 2003. Work on the review of guidelines for Port State Control is ongoing. MSC Circulars addressing some aspects of control and compliance have already been issued as previously mentioned (MSC/Circs 1097 -general clarification)

Future Work Programme (3) - Review of facilitation aspects - FAL Forms - EDI - Review of resolution A.872 – Prevention and suppression of illicit smuggling of drugs

Future Work Programme (4) Review of cargo related IMO instruments: Recommendations on the safe transport of dangerous cargoes and related activities in port areas (MSC/Circ.675); IMO/ILO/UNECE Guidelines for packing of CTUs (MSC/Circ.787); and Model course on safe packing of CTUs (3.18) Some interim guidance has been given in MSC Circ/1097, and the IMO continues to develop guidance material.

Co-operation IMO / WCO Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Integrity of the multi-modal transport chain Container examination Container sealing Ship/port interface Exchange of information Project activities Reciprocal representation

IMO - Safe, secure and efficient shipping on clean oceans www.imo.org IMO - Safe, secure and efficient shipping on clean oceans Implementation of IMO conventions is the key to achieving our objectives of safer shipping and cleaner oceans