3.1.1 The Maritime Safety Committee requested
the Sub-Committee on Stability and Load Lines and on Fishing Vessels
Safety (SLF), to develop a range of intact stability requirements
to cover all ship types for eventual incorporation into the 1974 SOLAS
Convention. At the thirty-third session of the Sub-Committee (SLF
33), the Working Group on Intact Stability (IS) considered this matter
and foresaw the procedural problems that would arise by incorporating
a wide range of stability criteria covering different ship types into
the Convention, and also recognized that these criteria could not
be developed in a short time. The group recommended that, alternatively,
consideration should be given to developing a comprehensive code to
incorporate the then existing stability requirements contained in
all IMO recommendations and codes for various types of ships. Criteria
for additional ship types could be added later as each ship type was
considered and a criterion developed. The group also suggested that
the 1974 SOLAS Convention should either: include a basic stability
standard and refer to the Code for varying ship types or, alternatively,
it should only refer to the Code. The proposed Code could be divided
into two parts: part A, containing mandatory requirements; and part
B, containing recommendatory requirements. Development of the proposed
Code was given priority [IMO 1988].
3.1.2 In considering the proposal by the above
group, SLF 33 agreed that the development of a stability code for
all ships covered by IMO instruments (IS Code)
would be of value, so that the generally accepted and special stability
requirements for all types of ships’ forms would be contained
in a single publication for ease of reference. This was thought to
be important because stability requirements were dissipated amongst
various documents which made their use by designers and authorities
difficult [IMO 1988a]. The SLF Sub-Committee emphasized that the Code
should contain instructions on operational procedures as well as technical
design characteristics. This course of action was approved by the
Maritime Safety Committee at its fifty-seventh session.
3.1.3 The collation of the stability requirements
contained in various IMO instruments and the preparation of the first
draft of the Code was undertaken by Poland and submitted to IMO [IMO
1990]. This formed the basis for the development of the Code which
was to include the following groups of requirements as proposed by
Poland [Kobylinski 1989]:
3.1.4 This framework was eventually adopted by
SLF 35, which also agreed that the Code should have recommendatory
status. The final draft of the Code was agreed by SLF 37 and subsequently
adopted by resolution A.749(18) [IMO
1993]. It was subsequently amended in 1998 by resolution
MSC.75(69). The Code was considered to be a “living”
document under constant review, into which all new requirements developed
by IMO would be incorporated.