The Committee considered the security measures and procedures to be applied during ship/port interface when either the ship or the port facility do not comply with the requirements of chapter XI-2 and of the ISPS Code. 3
The Committee recalled paragraph B/9.51 of the ISPS Code which recommends that the ship security plan (SSP) should establish details of the procedures and security measures the ship should apply when:
- it is at a port of a State which is not a Contracting Government;
- it is interfacing with a ship to which the ISPS Code does not apply*;
- it is interfacing with a fixed or floating platform or a mobile drilling unit on location; or
- it is interfacing with a port or port facility which is not required to comply with chapter XI-2 and part A of the ISPS Code;
and thus considers that guidance, in this respect, is only required for those ships which have not already included appropriate provisions to this end in the approved SSP. 4
The Committee decided to recommend that in such cases, if the ship.s approved SSP does not already include provisions as recommended in paragraph B/9.51 of the ISPS Code, the ship should attempt to conclude, if possible, a Declaration of Security or to take the following action:
- record the actions taken by the Company Security Officer (CSO) and/or Ship Security Officer (SSO) to establish contact with the Port Facility Security Officer (PFSO), and/or any other persons responsible for the security of the port, ship or platform being interfaced;
- record the security measures and procedures put in place by the ship, bearing in mind the security level set by the Administration and any other available security-related information; and complete and sign, on behalf of the ship alone, a Declaration of Security;
- implement and maintain the security measures and procedures set out in the Declaration of Security throughout the duration of the interface;
- report the actions taken to the CSO and through the CSO to the Administration; and
- request the CSO to inform the authorities responsible for the exercise of control and compliance measures (regulation XI-2/9) and the PFSO(s) at the next port(s) of call of the difficulties the ship experienced and of the actions the ship itself took.
The Committee recognized that a ship should be able to address most of the ship security activities required by section A/7 of the ISPS Code. 6
In addition the Committee recognized that on certain occasions and, in particular, when a ship is required to call at a port of a State which is not a Contracting Government, the ship may be unable to identify the person responsible for the security of that port or to conclude with such a person a Declaration of Security.
* Refer to further work by the International Maritime Organization pertaining to Enhancement of maritime security and to 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, adopted by the 2002 SOLAS Conference on Maritime Security by resolutions 3 and 7 respectively.