Port State Control

Port State Control
1
> PSC background and organization
Background
Purpose
Inspection
Authority The rights of a port State
Development of Port State Control
Port State Control
Purpose & Inspections
Purpose
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
Port State Control
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
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
Port State Control
Regional Port State organisations:
Europe and the North Atlantic (Paris MOU)
Latin America (Acuerdo de Via 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)
Port State Control
Paris MOU
Port State Control
Latin America MOU (Via del Mar)
Port State Control
Tokyo MOU
Port State Control
10
Caribbean MOU
Port State Control
11
Mediterranean MOU
Port State Control
12
Indian Ocean MOU
Port State Control
13
Abuja MOU
Port State Control
14
Black Sea MOU
Port State Control
15
2
> Role of PSC
General
Relevant instruments
Selection of ships
The PSC inspection
process
Banning of ships
Publication
Black and Grey Lists of
flags
Port State Control
17
Relevant Instruments
Conventions:
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
Port State Control
18
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 cargos
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
Port State Control
19
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
Port State Control
20
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
Port State Control
21
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
Port State Control
22
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
Port State Control
24
Banning of ships
Paris MOU website: List of banned ships
Port State Control
25
Publication
Monthly lists of inspected/detained ships
Annual report
black-grey and white list
statistics
Port State Control
26
Publication
Black and grey list

MOU Paris
MOU Tokyo
Port State Control
27
3
> Performance of Class Societies
General
Responsibility criteria and performance
Appeal procedure
Follow-up actions
Port State Control
29
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
Port State Control
30
Port State Control
31
Port State Control
32

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
Port State Control
33
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 Members Paris, Tokyo MoU and USCG Class
related detentions as a % of inspections
CPI 3: IACS and Members 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
Port State Control
34
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
Port State Control
35
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!
Port State Control
36
COOPERATION
WITH AUTHORITIES
Follow-up actions
- KPI
RELATIONSHIP
200
Port State Control
18
37
Follow-up actions Neptune
Port State Control
38
COOPERATION
Follow-up actions
NeptuneWITH AUTHORITIES
RELATIONSHIP
Port State Control
39
COOPERATION
Follow-up actions
RELATIONSHIP
Port State Control
40
COOPERATION
Follow-up actions
FOLLOW-UP
Port State Control
41
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
Port State Control
43
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
Port State Control
44
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
Port State Control
45
Most frequent deficiencies

MOU Paris
MOU Tokyo
Main categories of deficiencies
Port State Control
46
Most frequent deficiencies

MOU Paris
MOU Tokyo
Safety related deficiencies
Port State Control
47

Port State Control

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Port State Control

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Port State Control

Authority The rights of a port State

Development of Port State Control