Introduction

The responsibilities to ensure that vessels comply with the provisions of the relevant
regulations rest
upon the owners, masters, the Flag states and the Classification societies.
Unfortunately, some flag States, for various reasons, fail to fulfil their internationally-agreed
commitments
and consequently some vessels are sailing the world’ seas in unsafe condition, threatening
the lives of
all those on board as well as the marine environment.
Port Stare Control is a system of harmonized inspection-procedures designed to target sub-
standard
vessels with the main objective being their eventual elimination.
This process was swiftly accelerated by an impressive shipping accident.
In March 1978 the grounding of the supertanker “Amoco Cadiz” off the coast of Brittany
(France) resulted
in a massive oil spill, causing a strong political and public outcry in Europe, calling for more
stringent regulations with regard to the safety of shipping.
This pressure resulted in a more comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding signed in
Paris in 1982
(known as Paris MOU) which covered:
 Safety of life at sea;
 Prevention of pollution by vessels;
 Living and working conditions on board ships.

Basic principle of PSC

 The prime responsibility for the compliance with the requirements laid down in the
international
 maritime conventions lies with the shipowner/operator; responsibility for ensuring
such compliance
remains with the flag State;
 The member- countries agree to inspect a given percentage of their estimated
number of individual
foreign merchant vessels entering their ports;
 As a general rule, ships will not be inspected within six months of a previous
inspection in a MOU port,
unless there are “clear grounds” for inspection (see “Selection of ships for
inspections”);
 All possible efforts are made to avoid unduly detaining or delaying a vessel;
 Inspections are generally unannounced.

Legal background
The international maritime conventions mentioned in the previous section, referred to as the
“relevant instruments”, are as follows:
 International Convention on Load Lines 1996, as amended, its 1998 protocol,
(LOADLINES 66/88);
 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) 1974, its Protocol
of 1978,
as amended, and the Protocol of 1998, (SOLAS 74/78/88);
  International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as
modified by the
Protocol of 1978, as amended (MARPOL 73/78);
 International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watch
keeping for Seafarers 1978,
as amended (STCW 78);
 Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collision at Sea 1972,
as amended (COLREG 72);
 International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships 1969 (TONNAGE
1969),
 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (ILO Convention No.
147).

Boarding procedures
Port State Control is carried out by a Port State Control Officer (PSCO). The PSCO is a
properly qualified person,
authorised to carry out Port Stare Control inspections in accordance with MOU regulations
by the maritime
authority of the port State and acts under its responsibility.
All PSCOs carry an identity card, issued by their maritime authorities.
PSC Inspector will board a vessel without announcement and check primarily the ship’s
documents
for completeness and validity.
If there are any grounds to believe that the ship is substantially not in compliance with the
International Conventions, the inspectors will carry out an “expanded inspection” of the
ship’s condition
and the required equipment.
The master will receive an official inspection report consisting of Form A and B.
Form A lists the vessel’s details and the validity of the relevant certificates. Form B shows
the
list of “deficiencies” found, together with the action code which describe a time frame for
rectification for
each deficiency.
If there are “clear grounds” that the vessel represents a hazard to safety and/or to
environment,
the PSCO has the right to detain the ship in port until the respective deficiencies have been
rectified
and resurveyed. The PSC authority will either resurvey by its own inspectors or ask for a
survey report
from the Classification surveyor to verify the rectification.

Selection of vessels for inspection

Every day a number of ships will be selected for a port State control inspection. To facilitate
such selection,
a computer database is consulted by PSCOs for data on ships particulars and for the reports
of
previous inspections.
Ships to be considered for priority inspections are:
  Ships that have been reported by pilots or port authorities of having deficiencies
which may jeopardize
their safe operation;
 Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, which have failed to report all relevant
information to the
Authority of the port and coastal State;
 Ships that have been the subject of a report or notification by another Authority;
 Ships that have been the subject of a report by the master, a crew member, or any
person with
a legitimate interest in the safe operation, shipboard living and working conditions
or the prevention
of pollution;
 Ships that have been:
- involved in a collision, grounding or stranding, on their way to the port,
- accused of an illegal violation of the provisions on discharge of harmful substances,
manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner whereby routing measures, adopted
by the IMO, or
safe navigation practices and procedures have not been followed,
- operated in such a way as to pose a danger to persons, property or the
environment;
 Ships, which have been suspended from their Classification society for safety
reasons during the preceding
six months.
As far as complaints received from masters or crew members, the PSC authority receiving
such complaints has the
obligation not to disclose the source of information. In this way, masters or crew members
will not face
the risk of reprisal.

PSC inspection procedures

A port State control inspection on board will normally start with verification of the following
certificates
and documents, in accordance with the provisions of the just mentioned “relevant
instrument”:
 Oil record book, part 1 and 2(if relevant);
 Record of construction and equipment;
 International tonnage certificate (1969);
 Minimum safe manning document;
 Certificates of competency;
 International certificates of fitness for the carriage of liquefied gas in bulk or
dangerous chemical in bulk (if relevant)
 Medical certificates (see ILO Convention 73);
 Stability information;
 Cargo record book (if relevant);
 Safety management certificate and copy of the document of compliance
(issued in accordance with ISM Code);
 High speed craft safety certificate and permit to operate;
 If appropriate, class certificates as to the ship’s hull strength an machinery
installations;
 Survey reports files in case of bulk carriers or oil tankers;
  Muster list, fire control plan, and for passenger ships, a damage control plan, a
decision support system for the master;
 Ship’s log book with respect to the records of tests and drills and the log for records
of inspection and maintenance of
life-saving appliances;
 Reports of previous PSC inspections;
 Cargo securing manual (if relevant)
 Loading and unloading plan for bulk carriers;
 Garbage record book.

In addition, the PSCO conducts a general inspection of several areas on board to verify that
the conditions
of the ship complies with those required by the various certificates. If valid certificates or
documents are
not on board, or if there are “clear grounds” to believe that a ship, its equipment or its crew
does
not substantially meet the requirements of a relevant conventions, a “more detailed
inspection” will be carried out.
If the ship is found to comply, the PSCO will issue a “clean inspection report” (Form A) to
the master of
the ship. Next, the data of the ship and the inspection result will be recorded on the central
computer database.

Grounds for a more detailed inspection

“Clear grounds” for a more detailed inspection are:
 Vessels whose statutory certificates on the vessel’s construction or equipment,
issued in accordance with the
conventions, and the classification certificates have been issued by an organization
which is not recognized by the
authority;
 Ships that have deficiencies to be rectified in the next port;
 Ships that have deficiencies to be rectified within 14 days;
 Ships flying the flag of a non-Party to a relevant instrument;
 Ships that are in a category for which “expanded inspection” has been decided, i.e.:
oil tankers older than 20 years,
bull carriers older than 12 years, gas and chemical carriers older than 10 years, and
passenger ships;
 During examination of the certificates and documents inaccuracies have been
revealed or the documents have
not been properly kept updated;
 Indications that the crew members are unable to communicate with each other, or
that the ship is unable to
communicate with shore- based authorities;
 Evidence of cargo and other operations not being conducted safely or in accordance
with IMO guidelines;
 Failure of the master of an oil tanker to produce the record of the oil discharge
monitoring and control system for the
last ballast voyage;
 Absence of an up to date muster list, or crew members not aware of their duties in
the event of fire or an order to
abandon ship;
  The emissions of false alerts not followed by proper cancellation procedures;
 The absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the conventions;
 Evidence from the PSCO’s general impression and observations that serious hull and
structural deterioration or
deficiencies exit that may jeopardize the structural, watertight or weather tight
integrity of the vessel;
 Excessively unsanitary conditions on board the vessel;
 Information or evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential
shipboard operation relating to
the safety of vessels or the prevention of pollution, or that such operations have not
been carried out.

Deficiencies, detention and rectification

When deficiencies are found during the inspection, the nature of the deficiencies and the
corresponding action taken are
filled in on the inspection report (see action Code).
In principle, all deficiencies must be rectified before departure of the vessel. It is up to
the professional judgement of
the PSCO to decide that he has to board the ship on a second occasion, to check
personally if all deficiencies have
indeed been rectified.
The following are the main criteria for the detention of a vessel:
 A vessel which is unsafe to proceed to sea will be detained upon the first
inspection, irrespective of the time the
vessel is scheduled to stay in port;
 The deficiencies on a vessel are so serious that they will have to be rectified
before the ship sails.
In case deficiencies are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment, the
maritime authorities will ensure that the
hazards is rectified before the vessel is allowed to proceed to sea.
For this purpose they will either detain the vessel or issue a formal prohibition of a
vessel to continue an operation.
The flag State and the classification society will be notified immediately.
On the conclusion of an inspection, the master of the vessel will be provided with a
document, which will indicate the
results of the inspection and details of any action required to be taken.

Action codes
Each deficiency is commonly given a in a codified form in the inspection report, called “
action code”.
The descriptions of all codes for “action taken” can be found on the reverse side of Form B
of the inspection report.
The action codes most frequently used are:
 10 deficiency rectified
 15 to be rectified at the next port of call;
 16 to be rectified within 14 days;
 17 master instructed to rectify deficiency before departure;
 30 Grounds for detention;
  40 next port of call informed;
 50 Flag State/ Consul informed;
 70 Classification society informed

Regional PSC agreements

In several regions around the world, coastal countries have signed an agreement,
“Memorandum of Understanding on
Port State Control, often abridged “MOU on PSC”.
At present there are the following Regional Agreement on PSC:
 Paris MOU for the European Region signed in 1982, whose members are: Belgium,
Canada, Croatia, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Russian Federation,
Spain, Sweden, U.K.
 The Acuerdo de Viña del Mar(Latin America Agreement), signed in Viña del Mar
(Chile) in 1992, whose members
are: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama,
Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela;
 Tokyo MOU for the Asian Region signed in 1993, whose members are: Australia,
Canada, China, Fiji, Indonesia,
Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papa New Guinea, Philippines,
Russian Federation,
Singapore, Solomon Islands, Thailand, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Hong Kong;
 Caribbean MOU for the Caribbean Region signed in 1996 in Barbados;
 Mediterranean MOU for the Southern Mediterranean Region signed in 1997 in Valletta
and comprising:
Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Malta, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey,
Palestinian Authority;
 Indian Ocean MOU signed in 1998 in Pretoria and comprising: Djibouti, Eritrea,
Ethiopia, India, Iran, Kenya,
Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan,
Tanzania, Yemen;
 West and Central Africa MOU signed in Abuja (Nigeria) in 1999, whose members are:
Benin, Cape Verde, Congo,
Ivory Coast, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria,
Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa,
Togo.

Two more regional agreements are under development:

- Persian Gulf Region, comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and
United Arab Emirates;
- Black Sea Area, comprising Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey,
Ukraine.
In the United States PSC is carried out by US Coast Guard.

Information exchange
Whether deficiencies are found or not, all details from each inspection report are entered in
an advanced central computer
database, which for the Paris MOU region is located in Saint Malo, France.
This database can be accessed by PSC authorities in the Paris MOU region, for consulting
inspection files, inserting
new inspection reports or using the electronic mail facility.
A monthly list of detentions is published on the Paris MOU website. This list contains,
amongst others, the shipname,
the owner, the Classification society and the port and date of detention.
Fast developing databases and internet technology have made it necessary to replace the
information system, SIReNaC F
which has been in operation since 1998.
The new system, operational since January 2003, takes account of amendments in PSC
policy such as targeting
of ships, new inspection procedures and measuring performance of classification societies.
It will make full use of Internet technology and of an ORACLE database architecture. This
will enable PSCO’s to access
the system for interrogation and updating by means of portable PC’s and cellular phones.
It will also provide more accurate descriptions of inspection results and include a range of
new data.

CONCLUSION
The establishment of worldwide regional port State control is only the beginning.
The prospect of global port State control, with exchange of information and harmonization
of procedures and training,
has even more exciting implications.
As more and more statistics and data are gathered and exchanged by the different PSC
Secretariats, that will result in
a huge increase in knowledge about sub-standard shipping.
This knowledge is not only useful in itself, but will also provide the maritime community with
the opportunity to
better analyse the causes of incidents and casualties and ascertain, more accurately than
ever before, how they
can be prevented from occurring again.
Armed with information made available as a result of regional cooperation on PSC, we can
work towards a change in
attitude within the shipping industry, where a long tradition of secrecy has too often
resulted in problems being
hidden and ignored than revealed and solved.
The development of PSC gives us the possibility to change that culture and replace secrecy
with transparency and openness.
Although the efforts to improve flag State performance remain a top priority, effective
regional agreements, including
harmonized inspection and detention procedures, internationally approved qualifications of
inspectors and transparency
through increased information within regions and inter-regionally will play an essential role
for both flag and
Port State responsibilities.

References
The Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Ports State Control, official text
Germanischer Lloyd- Ship Safety Division
Paris MOU publications (PSC at work, Blue Book 2002, Annual report 2002)

What is PSC?
Port State Control at work
It is known that the responsibility for ensuring that ships comply with the provisions of the relevant instruments rests
upon the owners,
masters and the flag States. Some flag States fail to fulfill their commitments contained in agreed international legal
instruments and
subsequently some ships are sailing in an unsafe condition, threatening the lives as well as the marine environment.
Port State control
is a system of harmonized inspection procedures designed to target sub-standards ships with the main objective
being their eventual
elimination.
Co-operation between flag State and Port State
Having recognized that the main responsibility lies with the flag State on the one hand and the inability for a variety
of reasons of
some of flag States to meet, entirely, their obligations under the conventions resulting in the existence of
substandard ships it is
imperative to develop close co-operation between flag States and port States.
It is a fact that the most important largest Registries have become so due to the attraction of ships whose beneficial
ownership belongs
to traditional maritime countries which again, for a variety of reasons have chosen a particular port of regulation as
oppose to
others. It is in the best interest of all to develop effective Flag State/Port State interfaces for the sake of safe
shipping.
Role of the International Organizations
1- International Maritime Organization (IMO)
Several IMO conventions contain regulations that permit Governments to inspect foreign ships that visit their ports
to ensure that they
meet international (mainly IMO) requirements. This involves creating an administration ,a team of surveyors and
inspectors ,
consequently can be expensive. But, by combining with other countries to form regional Port State Control
agreements these costs can
be reduced and the effectiveness of the inspection programme increased. At the same time, the data collected can
help to target flags,
companies and individual ships that have a poor safety record.
The first regional agreement was created in Western Europe in 1982 by means of the Paris Memorandum of
Understanding on Port
State Control.
Since then other regional agreements have been setup in Latin America, Asia and the Pacific, the wider Caribbean,
the Mediterranean
and, most recently west and Central Africa agreement.
The present momentum on the establishment of Port State Control regimes in the various regions of the world stems
from IMO
initiatives at the beginning of this decade when, with a view to eradicating substandard ships the Assembly of the
International
Maritime Origination adopted resolution A.682 (17) “Regional Cooperation in the Control of Ships and Discharges
“, as proposed by
the Secretary General of IMO to promote the establishment of such regimes in the various regions of the world
following the pattern
adopted by the European region through the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (MOU) in
1982.
Having established the above referred to regional PSC capabilities, which of course are operating with various
degrees of success, the
next major initiative now is the establishing of Port State Control in the Indian Ocean region and at the moment
IMO is also in
consultations with the maritime Authorities of countries within the remaining regions not yet subject to specific Port
state Control
agreements. It is envisaged that during the period 1999- 2000 Preparatory Meeting aimed at the establishment of
such agreements will
take place when the above is completed full global coverage through independent, although cooperating, regional
agreements in
various regions of the world will be achieved.
IMO Conventions
The international maritime conventions mentioned in the previous section, referred to as the relevant instruments,
are as follows:
_ International Convention on Load Lines 1966, as amended, and its 1988 Protocol, (LOADLINES 66/88);
_ International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, its Protocol of 1978, as amended, and the
Protocol of
1988, (SOLAS 74/78/88);
_ International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978, as
amended
(MARPOL 73/78);
_ International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watch keeping for Seafarers 1978, as
amended (STCW
78);
_ Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972, as amended (COLREG 72);
_ International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships 1969 (TONNAGE 1969);
2- International Labour Office (ILO)
_ Inspections on board ships under the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (ILO
Convention No. 147)
relate to:
_ Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138);
_ Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised),1936 (No. 58);
_ Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920 (No. 7);
_ Medical Examination (Seafarers) Convention, 1946 (No. 73);
_ Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134) (Articles 4 and 7);
_ Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92);
_ Food and Catering (Ships’ Crews) Convention, 1946 (No. 68) (Article 5);
_ Officers’ Competency Certificates Convention, 1936 (No. 53) (Articles 3 and 4).
_ All complaints regarding conditions on board will be investigated thoroughly and action will be taken as deemed
necessary
by the PSCO. If necessary, the ship will be detained until appropriate corrective action is taken.
Basic of PSC?
1.General
The prime responsibility for compliance with the requirements laid down in the international maritime conventions
lies with
the shipowner/operator; responsibility for ensuring such compliance remains with the Flag State.
The member-countries in each MOU agreed to inspect a percentage of the estimated number of individual foreign
merchant
ships, which enter their ports.
IMO and ILO conventions provide the basis for inspections under the Paris MOU.
In general ships will not be inspected within six months of a previous inspection in a MOU port, unless there are
clear
grounds for inspection.
All possible efforts are made to avoid unduly detaining or delaying a ship.
Inspections are generally unannounced.
2. Outline of the structure of the PSC MOU's
The executive body of the PSC MOU’s is the Port State Control Committee. It is composed of the representatives of
the participating
maritime authorities and the European Commission. The Port State Control Committee meets once year, or at
shorter intervals if
necessary.
Representatives of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) , the International Labour Organization (ILO) and
the European
Commission participate as observers in the meetings of the Port State Control Committee, as well as representatives
of several
cooperating maritime authorities and other regional agreements on port State control. The Committee deals with
matters of policy,
finance and administration and is assisted by technical bodies established within the organization.
3. Selection of ships for inpsection
Every day a number of ships will be selected for a Port State control inspection throughout the region. To facilitate
such selection, the
MOU’s central computer database, is consulted by PSCOs for data on ships particulars and for the reports of
previous inspections
carried out within the region. If a ship has been inspected within the MOU’s region during the previous six months
and, on that
occasion, was found to comply, the ship will in principle be exempted from further inspection, unless there are clear
grounds to
warrant further investigation.
In selecting ships for inspection the MOU Authorities will give priority to:
Ships visiting a port of a State, the Authority of which is a signatory to the Memorandum, for the first time or after
an
absence of 12 months or more. In the absence of appropriate data for this purpose, the Authorities will rely upon the
available data in the information system and inspect those ships which have not been registered in that information;
Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the three-year rolling average table of above-average detentions and
delays
published in the annual report of the MOU’s;
Ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State, the Authority of which is a signatory to the
Memorandum, on
the condition that the deficiencies noted must be rectified within a specified period, upon expiry of such period;
Ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as having deficiencies which may prejudice their safe
navigation;
Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship’s construction and equipment, issued in accordance with the relevant
instruments and the classification certificates, have been issued by an organization which is not recognized by the
Authority;
Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, which have failed to report all relevant information concerning the
ship’s
particulars, the ship’s movements and concerning the dangerous or polluting goods being carried to the competent
authority
of the port and coastal State;
Ships which are in a category for which expanded inspection has been decided.
Ships which have been suspended from their class for safety reasons in the course of the preceding six months.
4. Who boards a ship to carry out Port State Control?
Port State control is carried out by a Port State Control Officer (PSCO). The PSCO is a properly qualified person,
authorized to carry
out Port State control inspections in accordance with the MOU’s and relevant instruments, by the maritime authority
of the Port State
and acts under its responsibility. All PSCOs carry an identity card, issued by their maritime authorities.
Training seminars for PSCOs are organized to ensure effective and harmonized inspection procedures, which are
followed throughout
the MOU’s regions. These seminars keep PSCOs informed of new technical developments and amendments to the
MOU’s.
5. Types of inspection
Initial:
36 Certificates & Documents (Crew and ship’s condition including engine room and accommodation meets
international standards)
Detailed:
In absence of valid certificates / documents or Clear Ground that ships condition does not meet the international
standards
Expanded- once a year:
Passenger ships:
Gas and chemical tankers older than 10 years
Bulk carriers, older than 12 years
Oil tankers , 5 years or less from the date of phasing out in accordance with MARPOL 73/78
Suspended:
In exceptional circumstances where, as a result of the initial control and more detailed inspection, the overall
condition of a ship and
its equipment, also taking the crew and its living and working conditions into account, is found to be sub-standard,
the Authority may
suspend an inspection until the responsible parties have taken the steps necessary to ensure that the ship complies
with the
requirements of he relevant instruments.
6. Port State Control inspection procedures
A Port State control visit on board a ship will normally start with, as a minimum and to the extent applicable,
examination of the
following documents
1. International Tonnage Certificate (1969);
2. Passenger Ship Safety Certificate;
3. Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate;
4. Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate;
5. Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate;
6. Exemption Certificate;
7. Cargo Ship Safety Certificate;
8. Document of Compliance (SOLAS 74, regulation II-2/54);
9. Dangerous Goods Special List or Manifest, or Detailed Stowage Plan;
10. International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk, or the Certificate of Fitness for
the Carriage
of Liquefied Gases in Bulk, whichever is appropriate;
11. International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk, or the Certificate of Fitness
for the
Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk, whichever is appropriate;
12. International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate;
13. International Pollution Prevention Certificate for the Carriage of Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk;
14. International Load Line Certificate (1966);
15. International Load Line Exemption Certificate;
16. Oil Record Book, parts I and II;
17. Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan;
18. Cargo Record Book;
19. Minimum Safe Manning Document;
20. Certificates of Competency;
21. Medical certificates (see ILO Convention No. 73);
22. Stability information;
23. Safety Management Certificate and copy of Document of Compliance (SOLAS chapter IX);
24. Certificates as to the ship's hull strength and machinery installations issued by the classification society in
question (only to
be required if the ship maintains its class with a classification society);
25. Survey Report Files (in case of bulk carriers or oil tankers in accordance with resolution A.744(18));
26. For Ro-Ro passenger ships, information on the A/A max ratio;
27. Document of authorization for the carriage of grain;
28. Special Purpose Ship Safety Certificate;
29. High-Speed Craft Safety Certificate and Permit to Operate High-Speed Craft;
30. Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Safety Certificate;
31. For oil tankers, the record of oil discharge monitoring and control system for the last ballast voyage;
32. The muster list, fire control plan and damage control plan;
33. Ship's log-book with respect to the records of tests and drills and the log for records of inspection and
maintenance of lifesaving
appliances and arrangements;
34. Procedures and Arrangements Manual (chemical tankers);
35. Cargo Securing Manual,
36. Certificate of Registry or other document of nationality;
37. Garbage Management Plan;
38. Garbage Record Book;
39. Bulk carrier booklet (SOLAS chapter VI regulation 7); and
40. Reports of previous port State control inspections."
In addition the PSCO conducts a general inspection of several areas on board to verify that the overall condition of
the ship (including
the engine room and accommodation, and including hygienic conditions) complies with that required by the various
certificates.
If valid certificates or documents are not on board, or if there are ‘clear grounds’ to believe that the condition of a
ship, its equipment
or its crew does not substantially meet the requirements of a relevant convention, a more detailed inspection will be
carried out.
If the ship is found to comply, the PSCO will issue a ‘clean’ inspection report to the master of the ship. Next, the
data of the
respective ship and the inspection result will be recorded on the MOU’s central computer database.
For the purpose of control on compliance with on board operational requirements, examples of “clear grounds” are,
amongst others,
the following:
A report or notification by another Authority;
A Report or complaint by the master, a crew member, or any person or organization with a legitimate interest in
the safe
operation of the ship, unless the Authority concerned deems the report or complaint to be manifestly unfounded.
The ship has been accused of an alleged violation of the provisions on discharge of harmful substances or
effluents;
The ship has been evolved in a collision, grounding or standing on its way to the port;
The emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancellation procedures;
The ship has been identified as priority case for inspection;
The ship is flying the flag of a non-party to relevant instruments ;
During examination of the certificates and documents, inaccuracies have been revealed or have not been properly
kept or
updated.
Furthermore, control on compliance with on board operational requirements may be included in the control
procedures, particularly if
the PSCO has reason to believe that the crew demonstrates insufficient proficiency in that area.
7. Grounds for a more-detailed inspection
Clear grounds for a more detailed inspection are, amongst others:
a report or notification by another authority;
a report or complaint by the master, a crew member, or any person or organization with a legitimate interest in the
safe
operation of the ship, unless this complaint is clearly deemed to be unfounded;
Other indications of serious deficiencies.
In addition there are requirements for expanded inspections for bulk carriers and tankers above a certain age and for
passenger ships.
With regard to complaints received from masters or crew members the Port State control authority receiving such
complaint has the
obligation not to disclose the source of information. In other words masters or crew members will not face risk of
reprisal.
8. Minimum manning standards
The guiding principle for Port State inspection of the manning of a foreign ship is to establish conformity with the
Flag State’s safe
manning requirements. Where this is in doubt the Flag State will be consulted. Such safe manning requirements
stem from:
several of the relevant instruments;
contents of Minimum Safe Manning Document (IMO Resolution A.481(XII), Annex 1);
Guidelines for the Application of Principles of Safe Manning (IMO Resolution A.481 (XII), Annex 2).
If the extent of the manning deficiency is such as to render the ship clearly unsafe for the intended voyage or
service, the ship will be
detained.
The Port State will contact the Flag State if:
a. The actual number or composition of the crew does not conform to the minimum safe manning document; or
b. If the ship does not carry a minimum safe manning document or equivalent.
If the actual crew number and composition is not brought into accordance with the safe manning document the ship
will probably be
detained. If the Flag State does not respond, this will be considered as a clear ground for a more detailed inspection,
with a strong
likelihood of detention.
9. Deficiencies, detection and rectification
When deficiencies are found during the inspection, the nature of the deficiencies and the corresponding action taken
are filled in on
the inspection report. Some examples of actions taken are: ‘master instructed to rectify deficiency before departure’,
‘ship detained’,
‘flag State informed’, etc.
In principle, all deficiencies must be rectified before departure of the ship. It is up to the professional judgement of
the PSCO to
decide that he has to board the ship on a second occasion to check personally if all deficiencies have indeed been
rectified.
The following are the main criteria for the detention of a ship:
a ship which is unsafe to proceed to sea will be detained upon the first inspection, irrespective of the time the ship
is
scheduled to stay in port;
The deficiencies on a ship are so serious that they will have to be rectified before the ship sails.
In case deficiencies are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment, the maritime authorities will ensure
that the hazard is
rectified before the ship is allowed to proceed to sea and for this purpose they will either detain the vessel or issue a
formal
prohibition of a ship to continue an operation. The Flag State will be notified as soon as possible.
If deficiencies cannot be remedied in the port of inspection, the maritime authority may allow the ship to proceed to
another port,
subject to any appropriate conditions determined by the maritime authority of the port of departure, with a view to
ensuring that the
ship can so proceed without unreasonable danger to safety, health or the environment. In this case a follow-up
inspection will
normally be carried out in this respective port.
In the event of a detention of a ship, the PSCO will note information on the owner or operator of the vessel at the
time of the detention.
The master will be asked to sign to confirm this information.
When a ship has been detained all costs accrued by the port State to inspect the ship will be charged to the owner or
the operator of
the ship or to his representative in the port State.
The detention shall not be lifted until full payment has been made or a sufficient guarantee has been given for the
reimbursement of
the costs.
The owner or the operator of a ship has a right of appeal against a detention decision taken by the Port State
authority. An appeal will
not however result in the detention being immediately lifted.
On the conclusion of an inspection, the master of the ship will be provided with a document, which will indicate the
results of the
inspection and details of any action required to be taken.
10. Information exchange
Whether or not deficiencies are found, all details from each inspection report are entered in an advanced MOU’s
central computer
database. This database can be accessed by all ports in the MOU’s region to consult inspection files, to insert new
inspection reports
or to use the electronic mail facility.
Black sea Indian Ocean Caribbean West Africa Vina del Mar Tokyo Paris Meditteranean