CLOSING THE NET ON SUB-STANDARD SHIPS AND · PDF fileinternational conventions and codes governing ... Paris MoU already in existence ... Understanding on PSC , 2000 Riyadh Memorandum

at Nigerian Chamber of Shipping Workshop onQUALITY SHIPPING: CLASSIFICATION AND

STATUTORY SURVEYSOct , 2011

Mfon Ekong UsoroSecretary GeneralAbuja MoU

CLOSING THE NET ON SUB-STANDARD SHIPS AND THEIR OWNERS - ROLE OF PORT STATE CONTROL

CONTENT

10/19/2011AbujaMoU-SG2

West and Central Africa Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Abuja MoU).

Evolution of Effective PSC Procedures by Regional PSC MoUs – Risk Based Assessment.

Risk Based Assessment - Interface with Classification Societies and Recognized Organizations in eradication of Sub-standard shipping.

Abuja MoU Database - Automating Inspection Submission and Processing of Reports.

What is Abuja MoU?


Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the West and Central African Region.

Abuja MoU is one of the 10 Regional MoUs in the world established pursuant to IMO Resolution A.682(17) of 1991.

Operates under a Cooperative Agreement with the IMO.

What is Abuja MoU?


Abuja MoU established on 22nd October 1999 in Abuja by a Memorandum of Understanding signed by Maritime Authorities of countries on the Atlantic Coast of Africa.

Regime covers 22 countries Mauritania to South Africa.

16 out of the 22 countries have signed the MoU.11 countries have completed the procedures for acceptance and have become full members.

Member States


Angola

Benin

Cameroon

Cape Verde

Republic of Congo

Cote D’Iviore

Equatorial Guinea

Gabon

Ghana

Liberia

Sierra Leone

Namibia

Senegal

Nigeria

Mauritania

South Africa

The Gambia

Togo

Republic of Guinea

Sao Tome & Principe

Guinea Bissau

D R Congo

Mission of Abuja MoU


Abuja MoU's mission is to develop a system ofharmonized port State control inspectionprocedure for the region aimed at the reductionand eventual elimination of substandardshipping, prevention of marine pollution andimprovement of the living and workingconditions of seafarers aboard ships.

Substandard Ship


A substandard ship:Defective in design and construction.Neglect its maintenance and repair.Prolong its working life past the age for scrapping.Manned by poorly trained personnel.Maintains unacceptable safety standards.

A primary driver for this delinquency is financial/inadequate regulation and enforcement.

Impact of Sub-Standard Shipping


Substandard ships - a leading cause of Marine Accidents; and

The risks of substandard shipping impacts 3 major areas of concern:Threat to Human Life.Risk to the Marine Environment. Risk to Cargo.

Financial and asset related risks - limited to the ship owner with varying extents of liability for the accidents plus insurance.

Undermines IMO’s initiative of “Safer Seas and Cleaner Oceans”.

HIGH PROFILE ACCIDENTS: EXAMPLES


1967Torrey Canyon119,000t of oiloff the Coast of Cornwall, England.

1978 Amoco Cadiz227.000t of oil off the Coast of Brittany, France.

1987Herald of Free Enterprise loss of 193 lives off the Coast of Belgium.

1999Erika20,000t of oil off Biscay, French Coast

1989Exxon Valdez10.8M gallons of crude oil off Alaskan Coast. N. America

TRADITIONAL PSC – HOW EFFECTIVE?


Scope and magnitude of high profile accidents in 70’s and 90’s evidence that PSC was not effective.

Erika 1999 – maintenance (rust corrosion), age of vessel.

Herald of Free Enterprise 1987- design, construction; inadequate communication between ship and shore.

Exxon Valdez - drunken captain.

Amico Cadiz 1978 – failure of steering system.

Torrey Canyon 1967 - lever kept in wrong position caused the helmsman to lose control of the ship.


Development of Regional Memorandum of

Understanding (MoUs) on Port State Control

International Community Response


International community committed to :Create a safety regime to prevent marine

accidents.Eliminate or reduce identified risks.Goals cannot be achieved by nations acting alone

due to nature of the trade and terrain.Development and adoption of an international

marine safety management regime under the IMO.

DYNAMICS OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY RESPONSE

13

UNCLOS,SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, SAR, Load Lines, London Convention,Safe Containers,Tonnage, COLREGS, OPRC, FUND, LLMC, Salvage, ISM Code, IMDG CodeIBC Code, HSC Code,INF Code, ………BUNKER 2001BWM CONVENTIONAFS CONVENTION

• Freedom of the Seas - 15th century doctrine protected the rights of all States to use their vessels to harvest the ocean’s resources; and

• limited claims of sovereignty to a nation’s territorial waters and their own vessels.

• States had very limited jurisdiction over foreign flagged vessels navigating through a State’s territorial seas.

•Negotiations of UNCLOS (1973 to 1982) to develop a better universal system.

DYNAMICS OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY RESPONSE

14

UNCLOS, SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, SAR, Load Lines, London Convention,Safe Containers,Tonnage, COLREGS, OPRC, FUND, LLMC, Salvage, ISM Code, IMDG CodeIBC Code, HSC Code,INF Code, ………BUNKER 2001BWM CONVENTIONAFS CONVENTION

• nations expressly empowered to enforce conventions/codes on foreign vessels visiting their harbours.

• take administrative measures against substandard ships in their harbours –Art 219.

•UNCLOS Arts. 25 (2), 216 and 218 empowered nations to enforce port State control.

What Is Port State Control?


Port state control is the inspection of foreignships visiting the port of another country. Thepurpose of the inspection is to determine thecompliance level of the ships with relevantinternational conventions and codes governingmaritime safety, marine pollution and the livingand working conditions of seafarers on boardships.

What Is Port State Control?


The primary responsibility of ensuring compliance with these international instruments rests with flag administrations.

Port State inspections complements the efforts of flag State in compelling compliance of ships and encouraging effective implementation by flag States.

PSC is the safety net when owners, class societies, insurers and flag states fail to do their job - so there are huge expectations for PSC to work and serious consequences when it fails.

Traditional Model of PSC


Vessels were subject to PS inspections at every port without regard to outcomes of previous (similar) inspections or of time between consecutive visits or countries in the same voyage/region.

PS inspection information not shared between countries.

Inspection reports not released globally to hold flags, owners or class societies publicly accountable.

Vessels subjected to varying inspection procedures from country to country.

Different training standards for PSCOs in each country.

Global Response


IMO members adopted Resolution A.682(17) in 1991, which promoted regional co-operation (collaboration & co-ordination) on the control of ships and discharges from ships.

Urged Governments to conclude regional agreements on the application of port State control measures in cooperation with the IMO.

Paris MoU already in existence (1982) -contributed to preventing the operation of substandard ships in that region.

Amendment of SOLAS 1974 by 1978 and 1988 Protocols.

PSC Procedure - Instruments


International and Regional InstrumentsIMO Res A.787 (19) 1995 as amended by Res

A.882 (21), 1999;ILO Guidelines for PSCOs under Maritime

Labour Convention 1976;Memorandum of Understanding of Abuja MoU;Abuja MoU Port State Control Procedure Manual ◙

DomesticNational laws and guidelines.

Paris Memorandum of Understanding , 1982

Viña del Mar or Latin-America Agreement, 1992

Caribbean Memorandum ofUnderstanding on PSC, 1996

Mediterranean Memorandum of Understanding on PSC, 1997

ORDER OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PSC REGIMES


Tokyo Memorandum of Understanding on PSC, 1993

Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding on PSC, 1998

West &Central Africa Memorandum ofUnderstanding on PSC, 1999

Black Sea Memorandum of Understanding on PSC , 2000

Riyadh Memorandum of Understanding on PSC in the Gulf Region, 2004

United States Coast Guard(USCG)

Reduced Detention Rates


• chart shows reduction in detentions rate in 2 regions withefficient PSC - harmonization. Detentions reduces becausewhen there is no hiding place, shipowners improve theircompliance standards to be allowed to trade in the region.

Risk of Inefficient PSC Regime


Efficiency in other PSC regimes drives away substandard ships from the region’s seas; which results in

Concentration of substandard ships in the regions with non-performing PSC regime with less stringent inspections; with no harmonization and collaboration.

Risk of Inefficient PSC Regime


Higher incidents of marine accidents (loss of life and property);

Damage to environment;

Increase in insurance premiums;

High freight rates;

Difficulty in getting classed;

Inadequate qualified maritime manpower;

Underdeveloped auxiliary shipping services e.g. ship repair yards, maritime training institutions etc.

RISK BASED ASSESSMENTPSC Interface with ROs & CS in

Eradication of Sub-Standard Shipping

EVOLUTION OF EFFECTIVE PORT STATE CONTROL PROCEDURES BY

REGIONAL PSC MOUs


Risk Base Targeting System


Emergence of a PSC system which focused inspections on vessels “most likely” to be deficient while “rewarding” complying vessels with less inspections and long intervals between inspections.

PSC Regimes concentrate inspection efforts by selecting target ships, automatic shortlists of high-risk ships for inspections.

This system also provides the empirical data to support policy to ban consistently delinquent vessels from a region. reward compliant ships and shipping companies. minimize undue delay and detention of ships.

Risk Based Inspection Targeting Procedure

10/19/2011 AbujaMoU-SG26

Target

22Allocate

Resource

33

Inspect 44Foreign Ship Call11

Record

55

Regional PSC Information System

66

AMIS

VH, H, MEDIUM, LOW RISK

Using PSI data from Information

system

Deficiencies

Detention

Inspection Report

Submit, Validate

AMIS

SHIP ENTRANCE

Analysis and

Summary of data,

Generate Reports

SHIPPING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE SHIP OWNER

CLASS SOCIETIES/ROs


Triangle of Compliance

Recognized Organizations/Class Societies


Owner

Flag StateTriangle of Compliance

Port State Control

Risk Based Targeting Procedure


The targeting matrix considers performance trend of:

FLAG with respect to: Ratification of relevant conventions.

Enforcement of compliance through flag state control.

Average detention of flag’s ships.

Performance in IMO Voluntary Audit Scheme

White, grey or black list

Age of ship.

Risk Based Targeting Procedure


Type of ship.

ROs and Classification Societies Performance Inspections and detention history

RO related deficiencies and detentions

Ship’s performance Deficiency/Detention) in previous PSC inspections – Historical factors

Company Performance (fleet/ISM deficiencies) Deficiency index

Detention index


TABLE 3: INSPECTION DATA BY CLASSIFICATION SOCIETYClassification Society Abbreviati

on Number

of Inspectio

ns

No of Ships with

Defects

No. of Ships

Detained

Detention %

American Bureau of Shipping ABS 273 23Bureau Veritas BV 241 13 1 0.01China Classification Society CCS 58 3Croatia Register of Ship CRS 5China Corp. Register of Ship CCRS 11 1Det Norske Veritas DNV 239 12 1 0.01Indian Register of Ship IRS 7 2Isthmus Bureau of Shipping IBS 4 2 1 25International Maritime Bureau IMB 2International Naval Surveys Bureau INSB 4 4International Register of Ships IS 3 3 2 66.67Global Marine Bureau GMB 2 2 1 50Germanischer Lloyds GL 331 13 1 0.01Korea Classification Society KCS 9Korean Register of Ship KRS 20 3Lloyds Register of Ships LR 199 20

ABUJA MoU 2010 ANNUAL REPORT


TABLE 3: INSPECTION DATA BY CLASSIFICATION SOCIETYClassification Society Abbreviati

on Number of Inspections

No of Ships with

Defects

No. of Ships

Detained

Detention %

Polski Register Statkow PRS 7 1Panama Maritime Documentation Services PMDS 1Panama Register Corporation PRC 7 4Registro Italiano Navale RINA 65 2Russian Maritime Register of Shipping RMRS 70 23 1 0.05Nippon Kaiji Kyokai NKK 242 33 3 0.02Organisation of Maritime Classification OMCS 1 1Vietnamese Register of Shipping VRS 5 1Intermaritime Certification Services SA ICS 1Universal Shipping Bureau USB 1Turkish Loyds TL 2 1Turkish Maritime Association TMA 1 1Ukranian Registry UR 1 1Others Others 25 10TOTAL 1837 179 11 0.01%









Recognized organization* Inspections Detentions Low /Medium Limit

Medium/High Limit

Excess Factor

Performance level

Register of Shipping (Albania) RSA 238 18 9 1 4.02 Very lowInternational Register of Shipping (USA)

IS 1,469 71 39 20 2.97

Bulgarski Koraben Registar BKR 355 20 12 2 2.82Universal Shipping Bureau USB 161 8 7 0 1.60 LowPanama Maritime Documentation Services

PMDS 179 7 7 0 0.98

Shipping Register of Ukraine SRU 664 19 20 7 0.94Korea Classification Society (Korea, DPR)

KCS 62 3 4 0 0.88

Isthmus Bureau of Shipping (Panama)

IBS 412 9 13 3 0.57

Panama Register Corporation PRC 188 3 7 0 0.40China Corporation Register of Shipping

CCRS 85 1 4 0 0.37 Medium

International Naval Surveys Bureau (Greece)

INSB 1,053 17 29 13 0.25

RINAVE Portuguesa RP 73 0 4 0 0.20Hellenic Register of Shipping (Greece)

HRS 866 13 25 10 0.20

Croatian Register of Shipping CRS 299 3 10 1 0.17Indian Register of Shipping IRS 183 1 7 0 0.13INCLAMAR (Cyprus) INC 203 1 8 0 0.10

Recognized Organization Performance table (2007- 2009) Valid 1st July 2010 (PMoU)


Recognized organization* Inspections Detentions Low /Medium Limit

Medium/High Limit

Excess Factor

Performance level

Polski Rejestr Statkow PRS 996 5 28 12 -0.91Korean Register of Shipping (Korea, Rep. of)

KRS 800 3 23 9 -0.98

China Classification Society CCS 982 3 27 12 -1.25Russian Maritime Register of Shipping

RMRS 7,518 43 171 130 -1.29

Nippon KaijiKyokai NKK 6,783 26 155 116 -1.51Lloyd's Register (UK) LR 15,423 50 338 279 -1.62 HighTurkish Lloyd TL 1,598 3 42 22 -1.63Bureau Veritas (France) BV 13,219 38 291 237 -1.66Det Norske Veritas DNCV 13,739 24 302 247 -1.79Germanischer Lloyd GL 16,215 29 354 294 -1.79American Bureau of Shipping (USA) ABS 5,837 7 135 99 -1.84Registro Italiano Navale RINA 3,240 2 78 51 -1.89

Recognized Organization Performance table (2007- 2009) Valid 1st July 2010 - PMoU

In this table only Recognized Organizations that had more than 60 inspections are taken into account. The formula used is identical to the one used for the Black Grey and White list. However, the values for P and Q are adjusted to P=0.02 and Q=0.01 *Where a country is shown after a Recognized Organization this indicates its location and not necessarily any connection with the maritime administration of that country.

RO/Class related Deficiency and Detention


A detainable deficiency is associated with the R/O if it is: (i) a serious structural deficiency including corrosion, wastage,

cracking and buckling unless it is clear that the deficiency has occurred since the last survey conducted by the R/O or

(ii) a serious deficiency in equipment or non-structural fittings (such as fire main, air pipes, cargo hatches, rails, masts etc.) AND it is less than 90 days since the last survey conducted by the R/O or

(iii) a serious deficiency in equipment or non-structural fittings which clearly would have existed at the time of the last survey or

(iv) a serious deficiency associated with out-of-date equipment which was out-of-date at the time of the last survey or

RO/Class related Deficiency and Detention


(v) missing approval or endorsement of Plans and Manuals if required to comply with the provisions for issuance of statutory certificates which existed at the time of the last survey or

(vi) a major non-conformity where there is clear evidence of a lack of effective and systematic implementation of a requirement of the ISM Code

AND there is clear evidence that it existed at the last audit conducted by the R/O. It may also include operational drills and operational control and there is clear supporting evidence of failure.

AUTOMATED PORT STATE INSPECTION REPORTING AND DATA PROCESSING


Schema of Automation Plan


Manually fill the harmonized standard inspection Report Forms

Scan all Manual Inspection Reports –DAILY

Email Reports to secretariatDAILY manual entry of data

by the secretariat or direct entry by PSCOs as applicable.

Data stored in server at Secretariat and online.

Extracted data is analyzed , reports generated and circulated to members, posted on the web.

1

23

4

5

6

Risk Based Inspection Targeting Procedure

10/19/2011 AbujaMoU-SG42

Target

22Allocate

Resource

33

Inspect 44Foreign Ship Call11

Record

55

Regional PSC Information System

66

AMIS

VH, H, MEDIUM, LOW RISK

Using PSI data from Information

system

Deficiencies

Detention

Inspection Report

Submit, Validate

AMIS

SHIP ENTRANCE

Analysis and

Summary of data,

Generate Reports

Operating Risk-Based Targeting System


Data entered into Abuja MoU Database – storage of accumulated data in a central database/website

accessible to authorised persons. development of harmonized port state procedures; compilation and production of PSC history of ships evaluation of company performance; evaluation of overall flag performance etc; evaluation of overall class and RO performance; preparation of a targeting matrix using the accumulated data as

input. regular feedback to MARADS. facilitates regional coordination and collaboration through

information sharing.

Information System SchemaDATA STORAGE,ANALYSIS & REPORT•Inspection Details•Vessel Details•Status of Certificates•Deficiencies Detected•Class/ROs•RO/Class related deficiencies•Details of Port•Details of PSCO•Detention Details•Codes•Notifications

SUPPORT DATA•Details of PSCOs.•Detailed Contacts of MARADs.

3rd PARTY DATA•All vessels of the world•All ports of the world•Contact details of all ROs•Contact details of all Regional MoUs.

BUSINESS APPLICATIONS•Rules for determining high risk vessels.•Access control for PSCOs•Rules for editing submitted reports•Rules for updating outcomes of Appeals•Rules for Data Exchange

REPORTING AND FEEDBACK•18 Annual Report Formats (14)•Specialised Report /Search Engine for Stakeholders.

MONITORING•PSCO Chat room•Auto notification of Next Port of Call of a Deficient vessel•etc

Abuja Mou Technical Working Groups


Harmonization and Production of Abuja MoU PSC Inspection Manual;

Review of Code of Good Practice for PSCOs;

Domestic Rules and Regulations for compliance/implementation of MoU obligations;

Revision/Amendment of the MoU;

Port State Control Appeal Process.

Charge to MARADS


Evaluate the global performance of an RO or Classification Societies considered for delegated authority to conduct survey and issue statutory certificates on behalf of your administration.

Regular assessment and evaluation of the performance levels of the ROs or CS;.

Note that the performance of your RO or CS impacts on the score of your Marad;

Regular assessment of shipping company on compliance with ISM Code etc;

Establish standard training and qualifications for PSCOs; Proper supervision and annual assessment of PSCOs through

professional exams; Better remuneration for your PSCOs.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Mfon Ekong UsoroSecretary General

Abuja MoU


CLOSING THE NET ON SUB-STANDARD SHIPS AND · PDF fileinternational conventions and codes governing ... Paris MoU already in existence ... Understanding on PSC , 2000 Riyadh Memorandum

Documents