#11 PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE SEA AREAS

-

A Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) is an area that needs special protection through action by IMO because of its significance for recognized ecological or socio-economic or scientific reasons and which may be vulnerable to damage by international maritime activities. The criteria for the identification of particularly sensitive sea areas and the criteria for the designation of special areas are not mutually exclusive. In many cases a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area may be identified within a Special Area and vice versa.

Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas 

Guidelines on designating a "particularly sensitive sea area" (PSSA) are contained in resolution A.982(24) Revised guidelines for the identification and designation of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs). These guidelines include criteria to allow areas to be designated a PSSA if they fulfil a number of criteria, including: ecological criteria, such as unique or rare ecosystem, diversity of the ecosystem or vulnerability to degradation by natural events or human activities; social, cultural and economic criteria, such as significance of the area for recreation or tourism; and scientific and educational criteria, such as biological research or historical value.

The provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) are also relevant.

When an area is approved as a particularly sensitive sea area, specific measures can be used to control the maritime activities in that area, such as routeing measures, strict application of MARPOL discharge and equipment requirements for ships, such as oil tankers; and installation of Vessel Traffic Services (VTS).





List of adopted PSSAs

The following PSSAS have been designated:

  • The Great Barrier Reef, Australia (designated a PSSA in 1990)
  • The Sabana-Camagüey Archipelago in Cuba (1997)
  • Malpelo Island, Colombia (2002)
  • The sea around the Florida Keys, United States (2002)
  • The Wadden Sea, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands (2002)
  • Paracas National Reserve, Peru (2003)
  • Western European Waters (2004)
  • Extension of the existing Great Barrier Reef PSSA to include the Torres Strait (proposed by Australia and Papua New Guinea) (2005)
  • Canary Islands, Spain (2005)
  • The Galapagos Archipelago, Ecuador (2005)
  • The Baltic Sea area, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden (2005)
  • The Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, United States (2007)
  • The Strait of Bonifacio, France and Italy (2011)
  • The Saba Bank, in the North-eastern Caribbean area of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (2012)
  • Extension of Great Barrier Reef and Torres Strait to encompass the south-west part of the Coral Sea (2015)
  • The Jomard Entrance, Papua New Guinea (2016)
  • Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park, the Sulu Sea, Philippines (2017)
  • North-Western Mediterranean Sea (designation agreed in principle by MEPC 79)

A.982(24) Revised guidelines for the identification and designation of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs)

The IMO Assembly in November-December 2005 at its 24th session adopted revised Guidelines for the Identification and Designation of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) (resolution A.982(24)).

A PSSA is an area that needs special protection through action by IMO because of its significance for recognized ecological, socio-economic, or scientific attributes where such attributes may be vulnerable to damage by international shipping activities. An application for PSSA designation should contain a proposal for an associated protective measure or measures aimed at preventing, reducing or eliminating the threat or identified vulnerability. Associated protective measures for PSSAs are limited to actions that are to be, or have been, approved and adopted by IMO, for example, a routeing system such as an area to be avoided.

The guidelines provide advice to IMO Member Governments in the formulation and submission of applications for the designation of PSSAs to ensure that in the process, all interests - those of the coastal State, flag State, and the environmental and shipping communities - are thoroughly considered on the basis of relevant scientific, technical, economic, and environmental information regarding the area at risk of damage from international shipping activities.

The guidelines update resolution A.927(22) Guidelines for the Designation of Special Areas under MARPOL 73/78 and Guidelines for the Identification and Designation of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas.

Ships routeing measures to protect PSSAs

A PSSA can be protected by ships routing measures – such as an area to be avoided: an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all ships, or by certain classes of ships. The IMO Publication Ships' Routeing includes General provisions on ships' routeing, first adopted by IMO in 1973, and subsequently amended over the years, which are aimed at standardizing the design, development, charted presentation and use of routeing measures adopted by IMO.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

#18 10 Main Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Used Onboard Ship

-
Image
  Safety of self and co-workers is the prime priority kept in mind by a professional seafarer while working onboard ship. All shipping companies ensure that their crew follow personal safety procedures and rules for all the operation carried onboard ships. To achieve utmost safety on board ship, the basic step is to make sure that everybody wears their personal protective equipments made for different types of jobs carried out on ship. Following are the basic personal protective equipments (ppe) that are always present onboard a ship to ensure safety of the working crew: Protective Clothing : Protective clothing is a coverall which protects the body of the crew member from hazardous substance like hot oil, water, welding spark etc. It is popularly known as “dangri “or “boiler suit”. Helmet : The most important part of the human body is the head. It needs utmost protection which is provided by a hard plastic helmet on the ship. A chin strap is also provided with the helmet which k...
Read more

#68 MANNED SHIPS ERA TO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CONTROLLED SHIPS ERA (iota-4)

-
Image
 Differences between IT and OT systems Whereas IT systems manage data and support business functions, OT is the hardware and software that directly monitors/controls physical devices and processes and as such are an integral part of the ship and must function independently of the IT systems onboard. The systems can, however, be connected to the IT network for performance monitoring, remote support etc. Such systems are sometimes referred to as belonging to the Industrial Internet of Things (IIOT). There may be important differences between who handles the purchase and management of the OT systems versus IT systems on a ship. IT managers are not usually involved in the purchase of OT systems and may or may not have a thorough understanding of cyber security. The purchase of such systems should involve someone, who knows about the impact on the onboard systems but will most probably only have limited knowledge of software and cyber risk management. IT covers the...
Read more

#41 Maritime Cybersecurity

-
Image
Maritime is one of the oldest industries and lifeblood of the global economy, accounting for the carriage of 90% of world trade. Ships and other vessels may seem like unusual targets for cyberattacks. But with their growing use of industrial control systems (ICS) and satellite communications, hackers have a new playground that’s ripe for attack. In a 2020 Safety at Sea and BIMCO Maritime Cyber Security survey, despite the majority of respondents (77%) viewing cyber-attacks as a high or medium risk to their organizations, few appear to be prepared for the aftermath of such an attack, 64% of respondents said their organization has a business continuity plan in place to follow in the event of a cyber incident, but only 24% claimed it was tested every three months, and only 15% said that it was tested every six to 12 months. Only 42% of respondents said that their organization protects vessels from operational technology (OT) cyber threats, and some respondents went so far as to describe...
Read more