20.1 The Committee amended and approved the work programmes of the BLG and FSI Sub-Committees as well as provisional agendas for their forthcoming sessions, BLG 9 and FSI 13, respectively, on the basis of those approved by MSC 78 (MSC 78/26, annexes 36 and 37), which are set out at annex 12. The Committee decided that the new work items for the FSI and BLG Sub-Committees should be accommodated in their existing agendas as far as possible.

　

　

20.2 The Committee, noting the information provided in MEPC 52/20/1 and the decision of MSC 78, which revised and approved the work programmes of the DSC, NAV, DE, SLF and STW Sub-Committees (MSC 78, annex 36), amended and approved the environmental related items in the work programmes of the DSC, NAV, SLF and STW Sub-Committees, which are set out at annex 13. The Committee decided that the new work items for the Sub-Committees should be accommodated in their existing agendas as far as possible.

　

　

20.3 The Committee amended and approved the items to be included in the agendas for MEPC 53, MEPC 54 and MEPC 55 (MEPC 52/WP.5), which are set out at annex 14.

　

　

20.4 The Committee noted that MEPC 53 would be held from 18 to 22 July 2005 and that MEPC 54 and MEPC 55 were tentatively scheduled in March 2006 and October 2006 respectively.

　

　

20.5 The Committee recalled that paragraph 2.5 of the Guidelines on the organization and method of work of the MSC and MEPC and its subsidiary bodies (MSC/Circ.1099/MEPC/Circ.405) required that, at the end of every second year, the Committee Chairmen should submit to their respective Committees a joint plan covering the activities, priorities and meeting requirements of their subsidiary bodies over the following two years.

　

20.6 The Committee noted that the proposed plan by the Chairmen (MEPC 52/WP.6) took into account the technical workload of the Organization, the priorities assigned by the Assembly to subjects for consideration by the MSC and MEPC and the advice provided by the Chairmen of the sub-committees.

　

20.7 The Committee also noted the planned meeting weeks of the Committees' and sub-committees for the biennium 2006 - 2007 as shown below.

　

　

20.8 After consideration, the Committee approved, subject to concurrent decision of MSC 79, the plan of meeting weeks of the MSC and the MEPC and their subsidiary bodies for the biennium 2006 - 2007, for inclusion in the Secretary-General's relevant budget proposals. The Committee considered that the above meeting week requirements represented the minimum required to maintain the efficiency and effectiveness of the Organization's technical bodies.

　

　

20.9 The Committee agreed, in principle, to establish the following working/drafting groups at MEPC 53:

　

　

20.10 The Committee agreed to establish two intersessional correspondence groups, one on ship recycling, and the other on the review of PSSA Guidelines.

　

20.11 The terms of reference of the correspondence group are set out at annex 15.

　

　

20.12 The Committee confirmed that the OPRC/HNS Technical Group would meet during the week prior to MEPC 53 and report to the Committee on the outcome of its work.

　

20.13 The Committee agreed to hold an intersessional meeting of the Ballast Water Working Group during the week before MEPC 53.

　

20.14 The Committee agreed to hold an intersessional meeting of the Working Group on Ship Recycling for three days in the week before MEPC 53.

　

20.15 The Committee agreed to hold an intersessional meeting of the ESPH Working Group in 2005.

　

　

20.16 The Committee noted that there would be a need to establish a Technical Group on PSSAs during MEPC 53.

　

　

20.17 The Committee agreed to convene a Ballast Water Review Group at MEPC 53 to continue the development of the remaining guidelines under the BWM Convention based on the report of BLG 9 and the outcome of intersessional work.

　

　

20.18 The Committee agreed to hold a one-day open Technical Workshop on the GHG Indexing Scheme on Friday, 15 July 2004 prior to MEPC 53.

　

　

21.1 The Committee considered the report of the Chairmen's Meeting (MEPC 52/21), which was held on 15 May 2004 and discussed how to maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of the Committees and sub-committees.

　

　

21.2 The Committee noted that the new reporting procedure for sub-committees was initiated in September 2003 when it was approved by C 90 for trial by SLF 46 and DSC 8 and, subsequently, the provisional trial was extended to cover meetings of all the remaining sub-committees.

　

21.3 The Committee also noted that, following extensive debate on the benefits of the new reporting procedure, the Chairmen's meeting agreed that clear expectations/priorities of the new reporting procedure should be identified, bearing in mind the need for flexibility and innovative thinking, while at the same time ensuring co-ordinated and harmonized procedures and working within the current logistic and financial resources, in particular, in the preparation of sub-committee report, containing summary of decisions, depending upon the workload and the type of agenda items under consideration.

　

21.4 The Committee noted further that, in accordance with the trial new reporting procedure, the reports of sub-committees would only contain a summary of decisions, annexes (if any) and the action requested of the reporting sub-committee's parent body. The ninety-second session of the Council authorized MSC 79 this December, taking into account the views of MEPC 52, to make appropriate decisions on the future of the new reporting procedure for implementation by the sub-committees during the first half of 2005 and to report to the ninety-fourth session of the Council in June 2005, seeking endorsement of its action.

　

21.5 In the ensuing discussion, there was general agreement in the Committee that the reports of sub-committees should, in addition to a summary of decisions, contain a good summary of the views expressed by delegations during discussion of an item, which may have influenced the decision, since this is very useful for reference when preparing proposals or documents for future meetings of the sub-committees and committees. As a result, the Committee recommended to halt the trial new reporting procedure and to return to the previous reporting procedure for the sub-committees.

　

　

21.6 The Committee noted that the Chairmen's Meeting discussed how to prepare the list of actions requested of the Committee(s) in the report of the sub-committees. Noting that such lists, in the past, often included requests to the appropriate parent Committee simply to "note" certain actions, the Chairmen's Meeting agreed that future lists should avoid such requests, if there were no immediate consequences or if the parent Committee was not invited to provide guidance or advice.

　

　

21.7 The Committee noted that after consideration of the draft Guidelines on the role and responsibilities of the sub-committee Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen prepared by the Secretariat, the Chairmen's Meeting agreed to request the Secretariat to modify the draft Guidelines to take into account the following points:

　

　

21.8 The Committee noted the views of the Chairmen's Meeting on issues remaining from the 2002 Chairmen's Meeting (MEPC 52//21, paragraphs 17 to 22), including the agreement that some flexibility should be introduced to allow working groups to start work on Monday mornings.

　

　

21.9 The Committee noted that, as instructed, the NAV, SLF, FP, STW, COMSAR, DE and FSI Sub-Committees had prepared their draft terms of reference (MEPC 52/21/1, annex) for consideration by the Committees.

　

21.10 The Committee also noted that the Chairmen's Meeting, following discussion, agreed that the following points should be highlighted in the terms of reference of the sub-committees (MEPC 52/21, paragraph 5):

　

21.11 The Committee, noting that the draft terms of reference of the sub-committees were still to be updated, agreed to give further consideration of the matter at MEPC 53 after MSC 79.

　

22.1 In accordance with rule 17 of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee unanimously re-elected Mr. Andreas Chrysostomou (Cyprus) as Chairman, and elected Mr. Ajoy Chatterjee (India) as Vice-Chairman, both for 2005.

　

　

23.1 The Committee noted that document MEPC 52/23 was a note by the Chairmen of the MSC, MEPC and the FAL Committees on the work and work method of the SPI Working Group. The document was also submitted to MSC 78 ( MSC 78/25/2), but owing to lack of time, MSC 78 decided to consider the matter at MSC 79 in December 2004.

　

23.2 The Committee noted further that FAL 31 considered the matter in July 2004 and took the following action (MEPC 52/11/5, paragraphs 6.3 and 7):

　

23.3 Having considered the decisions of FAL 31 on the matter, the Committee endorsed the proposal of the United States to request the Chairmen of the MEPC, MSC and FAL Committees to get together during C 93 (15 to 19 November 2004) to discuss and outline the options for the SPI Working Group for consideration at MEPC 53, recognizing that FAL 31 had already made its decisions.

　

　

23.4 The Committee recalled that FAL 30 prepared a list of certificates and documents required to be carried on board ships and, after endorsed by the MSC and MEPC, had been disseminated as FAL/Circ.90-MEPC/Circ.368-MSC/Circ.946 of 3 July 2000.

　

23.5 The Committee also recalled that MEPC 49 and subsequently MSC 77 and FAL 30 decided to revise the aforementioned circular to include new certificates and documents, as appropriate.

　

23.6 The Committee noted that, pursuant to the instruction of the Committees, the Secretariat had prepared a revised list of certificates and documents required to be carried on board ships and the associated draft FAL/MEPC/MSD circular (MEPC 52/23/1, annex).

　

23.7 The Committee, noting that FAL 31 (July 2004) had reviewed the revised list and the associated draft FAL/MEPC/MSD circular (MEPC 52/11/5, paragraph 3), approved, subject to concurrent decision of MSC 79, the joint circular.

　

　

23.8 The Committee noted that the Council, at its ninety-second session, having considered the issue and taking into account the outcome of MEPC 51, LEG 88, MSC 78 and TC 54 on the matter, as well as a submission by Denmark, New Zealand and Sweden:

　

23.9 In considering the proposed amendment to Rule 9 of the Rules of Procedure contained in annex 2 of document MEPC 52/23/2 to make the meetings of the Committee and its subsidiary bodies open to the public, many delegations expressed their concern regarding the word "public", which could be construed that anybody can observe IMO meetings.

　

23.10 The Marshall Islands proposed to retain the text of Rule 9 and to keep the meeting private but to add a sentence to deal with the attendance of the news media taking into account the Guidelines approved by the Council. The proposal of the Marshall Islands received support and the Chairman proposed to work with the Secretariat and prepare a draft sentence in the line of the proposal of the Marshall Islands.

　

23.11 In line with the proposal of the Marshall Islands, and pursuant to Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Committee, the Chairman, together with the Secretariat, prepared an amendment to Rule 9, by adding a paragraph to the existing Rule 9 as follows:

　

23.12 The Committee, after consideration, adopted the amendment to Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure, as set out in annex 16 and requested the Secretariat to bring this to the attention of the MSC and the Legal Committee for information and action as appropriate.

　

　

23.13 The Committee noted the information provided by the International Council of Cruise Lines (ICCL) in the document MEPC 52/23/3 regarding a joint initiative between members of the ICCL and the Conservation International (IC) to protect the world's oceans with the creation and funding of the Ocean Conservation and Tourism Alliance (OCTA), which would focus on the protection of biodiversity in top cruise destinations and promote industry practices that minimize the cruise industry's environmental impact as well as the establishment of a science panel in conservation, environmental technologies and cruise industry environmental practices. More information on the joint initiative could be found in the following web sites: www.iccl.org;www.conservation.org;and www.celb.org/xp/CELB/programs/travel-leisure/cruises.xml. The Committee thanked ICCL for providing such information.

　

　

23.14 The Committee noted the information provided by Denmark, Germany, OCIMF and ICS (MEPC 52/INF.10) on the newly revised ICS/OCIMF publication, entitled "Ship-to-Ship Transfer Guide (Petroleum) - 4^th Edition 2004", and thanked the sponsors for providing such information.

　

　

23.15 In response to the Secretary-General's opening speech regarding the work initiated by HELMEPA where children from Greece cleaned a beach in Turkey and children from Turkey cleaned a beach in Greece, the delegate from Greece provided further information on the activities of the HELMEPA and other Marine Environment Protection Associations, underscoring initiatives on environmental awareness among the youth such as the holding of a drawing contest, dissemination of a poster, strengthening linkages among associations and exchange visits.

　

　

23.16 The Committee expressed deep appreciation to Mr. A. Chrysostomou (Chairman of the Committee), to Mr. M. Hunter (Chairman of the Working Group on Ballast Water), to Capt. M. Ahmed (Chairman of the Working Group on Ship Recycling), to Mr. B. Okamura (Chairman of the Working Group on Air Pollution), to Mrs. M. Tiemens-Idzinga (Chairman of the Drafting Group on Amendments to MARPOL Annex II and the IBC Code), to Mr. Z. Alam (Chairman of the Drafting Group on Amendments to MARPOL Annex I) and to Ms. L.S. Johnson (Chairman of the Informal Group on the PSSA Guidelines) for their outstanding contribution to the success of MEPC 52.

　

23.17 The Committee, noting that this was the last session that Mr. A.P. Burgel (Head of the Netherlands Delegation to the Committee) would attend, also expressed deep appreciation for his outstanding contribution to the work of the Committee over many years, and wished him all the best in the future.