Annex 2 – Check/Monitoring Sheet for the Process of Amendments to the Convention and Related Mandatory Instruments (Proposal/Development)

Part I – Submitter of proposal (refer to section 3.2.1.1) ^footnote

1 Submitted by (Document Number and submitter)

2 Meeting session

3 Date (date of submission)

Part II – Details of proposed amendment(s) or new mandatory instrument (refer to sections 3.2.1.1 and 3.2.1.2) ^footnote

1 High-level action plan

2 Planned output

3 Recommended type of amendments(MSC.1/Circ.1481) (delete as appropriate)

Four-year cycle of entry into force
exceptional circumstance

4 Instruments intended for amendment (SOLAS, LSA Code, etc.) or developed (new code, new version of a code, etc.)

5 Intended application (scope, size, type, tonnage/length restriction, service (International/non-international), activity, etc.)

6 Application to new/existing ships

7 Proposed coordinating sub-committee

8 Anticipated supporting sub-committees

9 Time scale for completion

10 Expected date(s) for entry into force and implementation/application

11 Any relevant decision taken or instruction given by the Committee

Part III – Process monitoring to be completed during the work process at the sub-committee and checked as part of the final approval process by the Committee (Refer to section 3.2.1.3) ^footnote

1	The sub-committee, at an initial engagement, has allocated sufficient time for technical research and discussion before the target completion date, especially on issues needing to be addressed by more than one sub-committee and for which the timing of relevant sub-committees meetings and exchanges of the result of consideration needed to be carefully examined.
2	The scope of application agreed at the proposal stage was not changed without the approval of the Committee.
3	The technical base document/draft amendment addresses the proposal's issue(s) through the suggested instrument(s); where it does not, the sub-committee offers the Committee an alternative method of addressing the problem raised by the proposal.
4	Due attention has been paid to the Interim guidelines for the systematic application of the grandfather clauses (MSC/Circ.765-MEPC/Circ.315).
5	All references have been examined against the text that will be valid if the proposed amendment enters into force.
6	The location of the insertion or modified text is correct for the text that will be valid when the proposed text enters into force on a four-year cycle of entry into force, as other relevant amendments adopted might enter into force on the same date.
7	There are no inconsistencies in respect of scope of application between the technical regulation and the application statement contained in regulation 1 or 2 of the relevant chapter, and application is specifically addressed for existing and/or new ships, as necessary.
8	Where a new term has been introduced into a regulation and a clear definition is necessary, the definition is given in the article of the Convention or at the beginning of the chapter.
9	Where any of the terms "fitted", "provided", "installed" or "installation" are used, consideration has been given to clarifying the intended meaning of the term.
10	All necessary related and consequential amendments to other existing instruments, including non-mandatory instruments, in particular to the forms of certificates and records of equipment required in the instrument being amended, have been examined and included as part of the proposed amendment(s).
11	The forms of certificates and records of equipment have been harmonized, where appropriate, between the Convention and its Protocols.
12	It is confirmed that the amendment is being made to a currently valid text and that no other bodies are concurrently proposing changes to the same text.
13	All entry-into-force criteria (building contract, keel laying and delivery) have been considered and addressed.
14	Other impacts of the implementation of the proposed/approved amendment have been fully analysed, including consequential amendments to the "application" and "definition" regulations of the chapter.
15	The amendments presented for adoption clearly indicate changes made with respect to the original text, so as to facilitate their consideration.
16	For amendments to mandatory instruments, the relationship between the Convention and the related instrument has been observed and addressed, as appropriate.
17	The related record format has been completed or updated, as appropriate.

Guidance Notes for Completing the Check/Monitoring Sheet

Part I – Submitter of proposal

This part should be completed by the submitter of a proposed new amendment, to the fullest extent possible.

The original proposal for amendment(s) should be sponsored by, at least, a Contracting Government to the Convention. The Contracting Government (or in the case of a number of Contracting Governments, a nominated lead Contracting Government) should complete part I.

Part II – Details of proposed amendment(s) or of the proposed new mandatory instrument

This part should be completed by the submitter of a proposed new amendment, to the fullest extent possible.

Details of the proposal should be complete and as detailed as possible. If the proposal is related to a casualty, a full explanation of the factors involved or the safety analysis should be appended to the proposal, especially, when the submitter considers a case of "exceptional circumstance", as per MSC.1/Circ.1481. Consideration of the size of the affected fleet or number of affected mariners, or both, should form part of the justification of the proposal.

Part III – Process monitoring to be completed during the work process at the sub-committee and checked as part of the final approval process by the Committee

This part should be completed by the drafting/working group that prepared the draft text.

This checklist should be completed to the fullest extent possible at each stage of the regulatory project process. Each time the regulatory project receives a set of terms of reference for a correspondence group, working group or drafting group, the Chairman or the Secretariat should review the checklist with the group at the completion of that group's report.

Each process means:

Initial engagement at the sub-committee (items 1 – 2)
During the discussion at the sub-committee (items 3 – 6)
Finalization stage at the sub-committee (items 7 – 16)

The concept is to create a tracking mechanism, by a complete synopsis record of the regulatory process, to assure those delegations unable to participate in the work of working/drafting groups due to personnel and/or time constraints, that the strictures of the process method are complied with in accordance with the dictates of the Committee.