Port State Control

> PSC background and organization 1 > PSC background and organization

Background Purpose Inspection Authority – The rights of a port State Development of Port State Control

Purpose & Inspections Purpose Inspections To establish a “safety net” in order to catch and eliminate substandard ships Inspections on foreign ships in national ports condition of ship and its equipment manning and ships operations undertaken on the basis of initiative of local Port State flag request information from anyone with interest in safety of the ship, crew, passengers and protection of marine environment

Authority – The rights of a port State Port States have rights to exercise authority over ships in their waters National law based on relevant Conventions in force Boarding & Inspection Remedial action Possible detention Provisions SOLAS, MARPOL, LL, IGC, IBC, STCW, Tonnage, ILO Additional national rules and regulations Example: the Oil Pollution Act, 1990 (OPA 90) adopted by the United States

Development of Port State Control Organisation of Port States National Organisation : U.S.Coast Guard Regional Memoranda of Understanding (“MOU”) in other areas exchange of information monitoring substandard ships uniform training PSCOs

Development of Port State Control Regional Port State organisations: Europe and the North Atlantic (Paris MOU) Latin America (Acuerdo de Viña del Mar) Asia and the Pacific (Tokyo MOU) Caribbean (Caribbean MOU) the Mediterranean (Mediterranean MOU) the Indian Ocean (Indian Ocean MOU) West and Central Africa (Abuja MOU) the Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU)

Development of Port State Control Paris MOU

Development of Port State Control Latin America MOU (Viña del Mar)

Development of Port State Control Tokyo MOU

Development of Port State Control Caribbean MOU

Development of Port State Control Mediterranean MOU

Development of Port State Control Indian Ocean MOU

Development of Port State Control Abuja MOU

Development of Port State Control Black Sea MOU

2 > Role of PSC

General Relevant instruments Selection of ships The PSC inspection process Banning of ships Publication Black and Grey Lists of flags

Relevant Instruments Conventions: National rules and regulations Load Line 1966 / SOLAS 1974 / MARPOL 73/78 STCW 78 / COLREG 72 / Tonnage 69 / ILO 147 National rules and regulations PSC applies relevant instruments applicable in “its” State No more favourable treatment for ships of non-parties to conventions ships below convention size

Selection of ships Priority inspections Ships reported by pilots, port authorities or another State Ships reported by another PSC authority as having outstanding deficiencies Failure to report information to relevant authority on dangerous/ polluting cargo’s Operational concerns about the ship Collision, grounding on the way to the port Alleged pollution violation Erratic or unsafe manoeuvring or operated to pose danger to persons, property or environment Ships suspended/ withdrawn from class for safety reasons Target factor

Target factor Inspections by target factor – Relevant factors Owner / Operator Charterer Flag Ship's type and age Class-related detentions rate above average Non IACS or non EU recognised class society History of PSC inspections in MOU Ships visiting a port State region for the first time After an absence of at least 6 months Target factor > 50, mandatory inspection if last inspection > 1 month

The PSC inspection process Initial inspection: First impression Documentation check Walk around Clear grounds for more detailed inspection Evidence that the ship, its equipment or its crew do not correspond to the requirements of relevant conventions Master or crewmembers not familiar with essential shipboard operational procedures More detailed inspections In-depth inspection covering the ship's construction, equipment, manning, living and working conditions

The PSC inspection process – Expanded inspections Applicable for following ships: oil tankers > 3000 gross tonnage and > 15 years bulk carriers > 12 years passenger ships > 15 years gas and chemical carriers > 10 years Inspection frequency once a year In between expanded inspections a normal inspection is possible

The PSC inspection process Ship selected for inspection Ship selected for inspection General Inspections

Banning of ships Ships proceeding to sea without complying with PSC conditions detained ships ships with suspended hazardous operations All ships not calling into the indicated repair yard Gas carriers, chemical tankers, bulk carriers, oil tankers and passenger ships after the 2nd detention in 3 years if it is in the “very high risk” or “high risk” category on the Black List after the 3rd detention in 2 years if it is in a lower risk category on the Black List

Banning of ships Paris MOU website: List of banned ships

Publication Monthly lists of inspected/detained ships Annual report black-grey and white list statistics

Publication Black and grey list MOU Paris MOU Tokyo

> Performance of Class Societies 3 > Performance of Class Societies

General Responsibility criteria and performance Appeal procedure Follow-up actions

Performances of Classification Societies Criteria for the responsibility assessment of the classification societies: “Class related detentions” Deficiencies which warrant detentions covered by a CS survey or where CS has issued certification Accidental damage will not be class related Serious wastage will be listed as a CS responsibility Outdated equipment will not be associated, unless outdated at the time of last survey Expired statutory certificates will not be associated with CS Time limit of 90 days generally placed on equipment deficiencies, unless it is apparent that the deficiency existed at the time of last survey ISM deficiencies shall be class related only when the CS has issued the DOC or SMC and the deficiency existed at the last audit conducted by the CS

Performances of Classification Societies

Performances of Classification Societies

Performances of Classification Societies Europe – Directive 94/57/EC Regime of sanctions against the Recognized Organization (RO) in case of insufficient safety performances: Fines Suspension of the recognition Withdrawal of the recognition

Performances of Classification Societies IACS Definition of a number of Common Performance Indicators (CPIs) – Among these indicators, three are related to PSC: CPI 1: Members to be included on the Paris MOU and USCG high performance lists CPI 2: IACS and Member’s Paris, Tokyo MoU and USCG “Class related” detentions as a % of inspections CPI 3: IACS and Member’s Paris, Tokyo MoU and USCG total detentions as a % of inspections Annual results reviewed by the IACS Advisory Committee and the IACS Council annual Quality Management Review

Appeal Procedure Appeal against class-related decisions Generally through the central PSC organization of the Country, Except in France and Italy: local Preferable to appeal right on the spot, to the PSC Officer himself Easier as long as the detention is not recorded into the PSC database: after, this involves the hierarchy and heavier administrative burden Must be documented BUT ABOVE ALL: THOROUGH SURVEYS IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH RULES AND REGULATIONS IS THE BEST PREVENTION AGAINST CLASS RELATED DETENTIONS

Appeal Procedure Attitude in case of Class related detention: Advise immediately SSOM + PSC Coordinator Think APPEAL: does it look possible or not ? (number and magnitude of class related deficiencies, date of last surveys?) Collect on board any possible documentation which could help to support an appeal action. Get from the master a statement that the equipment was in operating order at the time of the class survey. THIS WORKS! Cooperate with the PSC on the deficiencies, whilst discussing the appeal. If not accepted, tell him that the society reserves its right of appeal. MIND: Your own survey report will be part of the appeal file: no negative comment on the condition of the vessel. Just report the remedial actions to satisfy the PSC deficiencies, and take the advice from your SSOM and colleagues!

Follow-up actions - KPI COOPERATION WITH AUTHORITIES – RELATIONSHIP 200 18

Follow-up actions – Neptune

Follow-up actions – Neptune COOPERATION WITH AUTHORITIES – RELATIONSHIP

Follow-up actions – Neptune COOPERATION WITH AUTHORITIES – RELATIONSHIP

Follow-up actions – Neptune COOPERATION WITH AUTHORITIES – FOLLOW-UP

> Detainable deficiencies 4 > Detainable deficiencies

Examples of detainable deficiencies Under SOLAS: Failure of the main propulsion, electrical, pumping and steering system Poor cleanliness of engine room Absence, insufficient capacity or poor condition of LSA equipment Absence, non-compliance or poor condition of FFE, ventilation valves, fire dampers and quick closing devices Absence, non-compliance or poor condition of navigation lights, shapes and sound signals Absence of corrected nautical charts and publications Absence or failure of mandatory navigation systems and equipment Number, composition or certification of crew not corresponding to safe manning certificate Serious deficiency of crews operational competence

Examples of detainable deficiencies Under LOAD LINES: Significant areas of damage or corrosion affecting seaworthiness Insufficient stability or ability to calculate stability conditions Absence or poor condition of hull closing devices Overloading Under MARPOL: Absence, poor condition or failure of oily-water filtering equipment, oil discharge monitoring and control systems and alarms Remaining capacity of slop and/or sludge tank insufficient for intended voyage Absence of oil record book

Examples of detainable deficiencies Under STCW: Lack of or insufficient crewmember certificates/endorsements Inadequate navigational or engineering watch arrangements/personnel Crewmember competency not adequate for the duties assigned for the safety of the ship and the prevention of pollution Under ILO Conventions: Insufficient food or potable water for next voyage Excessively unsanitary conditions onboard No heating in accommodation if ship operating in low temperature areas Excessive garbage, blocked passageways

Most frequent deficiencies MOU Paris MOU Tokyo Main categories of deficiencies

Most frequent deficiencies MOU Paris MOU Tokyo Safety related deficiencies