PORT STATE CONTROL (PSC) INSPECTIONS: THE … · PORT STATE CONTROL (PSC) INSPECTIONS: THE ROLE OF ... Tokyo MoU’s online PSC Database as of 20 April ... PSC DETAINABLE DEFICIENCIES

PORT STATE CONTROL (PSC)

INSPECTIONS: THE ROLE OF

THE FLAG STATE

1

Ship2Shore and IRI/The Marshall Islands Registry Seminar

Genoa, 22 April 2016

Presented by:

Captain Theodore Lalas

Fleet Operations Manager

PSC originates from the 1978 “Hague Memorandum” when

“Amoco Cadiz” ran aground in Brittany, France. An indication was

that the shipowners, Recognized Organizations, and the flag State

administrations had failed to comply with the requirements of the

international maritime conventions.

In 1982, the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was

founded, combining inspection efforts of vessels calling in 14

Western European countries. Today, there are 27 participating

Member Authorities.

The Tokyo MoU was formed in Tokyo on 1 December 1993 and

came into effect on 1 April 1994. Currently, the MoU has 20 full

Members.

The MoU’s main objective is to establish an effective PSC regime

through cooperation of its members, harmonization of the

members’ activities, to eliminate substandard shipping, to promote

maritime safety, to protect the marine environment, and to

safeguard seafarers working and living conditions onboard ships.

PSC HISTORY

2

To reach the main objectives, the MoUs, apart from PSC

inspections, conduct Concentrated Inspection Campaigns (CICs)

to identify compliance, interpretation, understanding, and

effectiveness of old and new requirements.

Paris and Tokyo MoUs reaching out to joint CICs for certain topics

/periods as agreed upon while other MoUs consequently follow this

process too.

PSC HISTORY (continued)

3

International Maritime Organization Procedures for Port State

Control, 2011 (Resolution A.1052(27)), adopted on 30 November

2011.

1.7 Definitions:

1.7.3 Deficiency: A condition found not to be in compliance

with the requirements of the relevant convention.

1.7.4 Detention: Intervention action taken by the port State

when the condition of the ship or its crew does not correspond

substantially with the applicable conventions to ensure that the

ship will not sail until it can proceed to sea without presenting a

danger to the ship or persons on board, or without presenting

an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment,

whether or not such action will affect the normal schedule of

the departure of the ship.

PSC HISTORY (continued)

4

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

Eliminate the operation of

substandard ships

Uniformity

Interpretation by different

members / inspectors

Monitoring tool

Performance indicator

Inspection efforts in the

past against risk based

inspection

Public information

Costs

5

FRIEND OR FOE

FRIEND:

Uniform approach / unified

interpretation

Monitoring tool and

performance indicator

Risk based

FOE (enemy):

Individual approach

Public information

Costs

6

Flag’s mission (high

standards, quality ships)

Take responsibility

Exchange information

Communicate at different

levels

Challenge / reason

Brief ship crew /

familiarization

WHAT DOES THE FLAG STATE DO?

7

Professional approach

Similar goals

Information

Communication

Supporting evidence

Workable

“Wild cards”

Owners and flag can work with PSC

Are the majority of PSC inspections carried out beneficial?

CONCLUSION

8

PSC

MoU DATA / OUTCOME (ALL FLAGS)

TOKYO MoU DETENTIONS 2015

10

Source: Tokyo MoU’s online PSC Database as of 20 April

2016

PARIS MoU DETENTIONS 2015

11

Source: Paris MoU’s online Inspections Results, Key Performance Indicators as of 20 April 2016

Disclaimer: “Paris MoU and EMSA assume no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions resulting from (or pursuant to) errors or omissions in data

submitted to or retrieved from the system. No part of the information contained in this website may be stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or

by any means without prior authorisation in writing from the owners of the data.”

MEDITERRANEAN MoU DETENTIONS 2015

12

Source: Mediterranean MoU’s Inspection Database as of 20 April 2016

TOP DEFICIENCIES CAUSING DETENTIONS

13

Indian Ocean MoU

2012 2013 2014

Safety of

Navigation 15.79% 15.78% 15.58%

Fire Safety 15.08% 14.87% 14.68%

Life-saving

Appliances 10.43% 10.54% 10.14%

Work Conditions 7.97% 8.26% 5.43%

Paris MoU

2012 2013 2014

Fire Safety 15.20% 13.57% 13.43%

Safety of

Navigation 13.84% 13.98%

13.

47%

Working Conditions

(International

Labour

Organization 147)

10.29% 9.33% 4.77%

Life-saving

Appliances 8.92% 9.22% 8.73%

Tokyo MoU

2012 2013 2014

Safety of

Navigation

17.

07% 17.08% 15.89%

Fire Safety 20.45% 18.41% 18.60%

Life-saving

Appliances 12.03% 12.08% 11.74%

Load Lines 6.73% 6.19% 6.49% United States Coast Guard (USCG)

2012 2013 2014

Firefighting

Appliances 17% 31% 17%

Marine Pollution 23% 18% 17%

International Safety

Management (ISM) 13% 10% 21%

Propulsion and

Auxiliary Machinery 7% 7% 6%

Mediterranean MoU*

2011 2012 2013

Safety of

Navigation 23.10% 21.66% 20.9%

Stability, Structure,

and Related

Equipment

10.46% - -

Working and Living

Conditions - 15.51% 16.53%

Propulsion and

Auxiliary Machinery 9.72% 8.22% 8.11%

Life-saving

Appliances 7.65% 8.88% 8.43% *2014 Annual Report Not Published

Source: Annual Reports

DETENTIONS BY VESSEL TYPE

14

Indian Ocean MoU

2012 2013 2014

Bulk Carrier 190 185 191

General Cargo /

Multipurpose 94 61 61

Container 38 38 38

Oil Tanker 31 19 13

Chemical Tanker 32 13 10 Tokyo MoU

2012 2013 2014

Bulk Carrier 395 409 370

General Cargo /

Multipurpose 624 574 483

Container 154 135 136

Oil Tanker 41 40 39

Chemical Tanker 53 45 28 USCG

2012 2013 2014

Bulk Carrier 39 53 61

General Dry Cargo 16 12 16

Container 14 19 22

Ro/Ro 13 10 15

Chemical Tanker 7 6 5

Paris MoU

2012 2013 2014

Bulk Carrier 83 115 113

General Cargo /

Multipurpose 368 361 305

Container 47 47 29

Oil Tanker 16 18 19

Ro/Ro 29 22 24 Mediterranean MoU*

2011 2012 2013

Bulk Carrier 41 35 24

General Cargo /

Multipurpose 311 310 183

Container 11 17 12

Oil Tanker 5 0 5

Ro/Ro 6 11 9

Source: Annual Reports

*2014 Annual Report Not Published

REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS

PSC DETAINABLE DEFICIENCIES (BY TYPE)

1Q 2016

15

THANK YOU THANK YOU

www.register-iri.com

16

© C

hris L

ew

is