.1 to instruct DSC 7 to review the recommendations on the safe transport of dangerous cargoes and related activities in port areas and the IMO/ILO UN ECE Guidelines for packing of CTUs and the related Model Course in light of any security measures to be included (paragraph 3.5.1);

　

.2 to consider the need to prepare the amendments to the 3 instruments mentioned in paragraph 3.4.1 (paragraph 3.5.2);

　

.3 to consider the need for the development of the outline of a port security instrument in co-operation with ILO (paragraph 3.5.3);

　

.4 to endorse, in principle, an accelerated implementation schedule of AIS for all ships of 500 gross tonnage and above, on international voyages, [not later than the first survey for safety equipment on or after 1 July 2004[2006] [31 December 2004 [2006]], whichever occurs earlier], the final implementation date would have to be decided by the December Conference (paragraph 5.5.1);

　

.5 to leave the early implementation of AIS carriage requirements for ships on domestic voyages to the relevant competent authority of the flag State (paragraph 5.5.2);

　

.6 to instruct NAV 48 to complete the technical specification for all AIS related standards in time for the December Conference (paragraph 5.5.3);

　

.7 to further consider the security of the equipment against outside interference and the training of ship board personnel (paragraph 5.5.6);

　

.8 to instruct the NAV and COMSAR Sub-Committee's to start work on the means of the practical use of a long range interface in shipborne AIS equipment (paragraph 5.7.1);

　

.9 to note that, following concurrence of the MSC Chairman, the ISWG requested COMSAR 6, which met in the week following the session of the ISWG, to initially consider the issue in .8 above, and to report to MSC 75 thereon, providing also information which other international organizations would have to be involved in that development (paragraph 5.7.2);

　

.10 to note that possible requirements for offshore facility security plans, should be further discussed(paragraph 5.12.3);

　

.11 to note that a requirement for a Ship Security Officer (SSO) should be incorporated in the SOLAS Convention [or the associated mandatory part of the International Code for the Security of Ships and of Port Facilities (ISC)] rather than the STCW Convention (paragraph 5.16.2);

　

.12 to incorporate a requirement for port security plans in SOLAS chapter XI [or the mandatory part of the IS Code], addressing only the SPI, which needed further identification and definition and stipulate which ports it would apply to (e.g. ports frequently visited by ships engaged in international voyages) (paragraph 5.22.2);

　

.13 to authorize more detailed work to be undertaken in close co-operation with ILO on comprehensive Port Facility Security Plans (PFSP) requirements (paragraph 5.22.5);

　

.14 to endorse the incorporation of a new regulation for Port Vulnerability Assessment (PVA) in SOLAS chapter XI [or the mandatory part of the IS Code] (paragraph 5.25.1);

　

.15 to note the Plan B and Plan A approach by the ISWG on the seafarer identity document (paragraph 5.31.6);

　

.16 to establish whether the ILO Governing body has agreed to the development of a Protocol to ILO No.108 on an accelerated timescale, and to decide what to do with the text retained in double square brackets (paragraph 5.31.8);

　

.17 to note that the ISWG referred the question on the ownership and control of the ship (annex 4) to LEG 84 for comments thereon to MSC 75 (paragraph 5.38.4);

　

.18 to consider the issue in .17 above further based on the LEG 84 comments and substantive proposals submitted (paragraph 5.38.5);

　

.19 to note that, following the concurrence of the MSC Chairman, the ISWG requested COMSAR 6 and DE 45 to consider the issue of means of raising an alarm on ships under terrorist attack initially, with priority, and to report thereon to MSC 75 (paragraph 5.41);

　

.20 to instruct NAV 48 to start work on the issue in .20 above on a priority basis (paragraph 5.42);

　

.21 to instruct the Secretariat to commence or improve co-operation with other relevant international organizations involved in the transport chain without delay (paragraph 5.49.4);

　

.22 to recommend the formalization of a co-operation agreement with WCO, without prejudice to the decisions of the Council thereon (paragraph 5.49.5);

　

.23 to note that following the concurrence by the MSC Chairman, the ISWG instructed DE 45 to consider the issue of maritime security equipment to prevent unauthorized boarding in ports and at sea in the widest sense, if sufficient time was available, and to report to MSC 75, without pre-empting the Committee's decisions thereon (paragraph 5.54);

　

.24 to further discuss the issue of ship security equipment, based on the DE 45 outcome and substantive proposals submitted thereon (paragraph 5.53);

　

.25 to consider the issue of how best to integrate maritime security in the long term goal and work plan of the organization and to develop a strategy on maritime security (paragraph 5.59);

　

.26 to consider the draft Conference Resolution for adoption of amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention, as amended, and draft amendments to SOLAS regulation V/l9.2.4 and new draft regulations XI/5 to 7, as set out in annex 1 to MSC 75/ISWG/WP.4 and to refer them to the Working Group on Maritime Security for further revision, for approval at MSC 75, with a view to adoption by the Maritime Security Conference in December 2002 (paragraph 5.64.1 to .3 and annex 1);

　

.27 to consider the provisional framework of Part A of the Draft International Code for the Security of ships and of port facilities and refer it to the Working Group on Maritime Security for further revision, for approval at MSC 75, with a view to adoption by the Maritime Security Conference in December 2002 (paragraph 5.64.4 and annex 1);

　

.28 to consider the draft guidance measures to prevent terrorism and other unlawful acts against ships, passengers and crews on board ships, port personnel, ports and port facilities, as set out in MSC 75/ISWG/WP.3, annex, and refer them to the Working Group on Maritime Security for further revision (paragraph 5.76.2 and annex 2);

　

.29 to consider and approve the work plan and time frame for further work and to take appropriate action thereon (paragraph 6.4 and annex 3); and

　

.30 to consider comments received by LEG 84 on the question of "ownership and control of the ship" (paragraph 5.74 and annex 4).