,17(5&$5*23RUW 6WDWH &RQWUROA guide for ships involved in the dry bulk tradesINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DRY CARGO SHIPOWNERSnd2 Floor, 4 London Wall Buildings, Blomfield St., London, EC2M 5NTPhone: +44 (0)20 7638 3989 Fax: +44 (0)20 7638 3943 E-mail: info@ Web Site:
While this guide has been developed using the best informationcurrently available, it is intended purely as guidance and is to be used atthe user’s own risk. No responsibility is accepted by INTERCARGO orby any person, firm, corporation or organisation who or which has beenin any way concerned with the furnishing of information or data, thecompilation, publication or authorised translation, supply or the sale ofthis guide, for the accuracy of any information or advice given herein orfor any omission here from or for any consequences whatsoeverresulting directly or indirectly from compliance with or adoption ofguidance contained herein.' INTERCARGO 2000
&RQWHQWV)RUHZRUG%DFNJURXQG Regulatory Controls on Shipping.................................................................5Development of Port State Control..............................................................67KH 6HOHFWLRQ RI 6KLSV IRU ,QVSHFWLRQ Inspection Rates..........................................................................................11Targeting......................................................................................................12Expanded Inspections................................................................................15Concentrated Inspection Campaigns........................................................15Overriding Factors.......................................................................................157KH ,QVSHFWLRQ 3URFHVV Preparing for an Inspection.........................................................................22The Port State Control Officer....................................................................22Initial Inspection...........................................................................................23Clear Grounds.............................................................................................25More Detailed Inspections..........................................................................25Suspension of an Inspection......................................................................26Reporting Inspection Results.....................................................................26'HILFLHQFLHV DQG WKH 'HWHQWLRQ RI 6KLSV Deficiencies.................................................................................................35Detention Orders.........................................................................................36Banning Orders...........................................................................................38&KHFNOLVWV ,QVSHFWLRQ 5HSRUWLQJ )RUP
/LVW RI 7DEOHVTable 1 Geographical overview of the port State control regions.................................9Table 2Contact details of the regional port State control Secretariats......................10Table 3 Diagram showing the selection process.........................................................17Table 4 USCG Boarding Priority Matrix.......................................................................18Table 5Expanded inspection of a bulk carrier............................................................19Table 6 Guidance notes for an expanded inspection of a bulk carrier.......................20Table 7 Diagram showing the inspection process.......................................................27Table 8 General Procedural Guidelines for PSCOs....................................................28Table 9 Details of the certificates and documents to be carried.................................29Table 10 The initial inspection.........................................................................................32Table 11 Examples of clear grounds..............................................................................34Table 12 Diagram showing what happens if deficiencies are found............................39Table 13 Examples of detainable deficiencies...............................................................40
)RUHZRUGPort States have had the right to check that visiting foreign ships met the required internationalsafety and pollution prevention standards for many years. Over the last twenty years or so, ratherthan approaching the task individually, port States have developed regional agreements and nowmuch of the world is State control and the impact it is having on ships, is growing. Port States in their regionalgroupings are becoming more organised and professional in their approach to ship investigations,and when detentions occur, ships are named and shamed in public. Ships and shippingcompanies with a history of detentions will begin to find it difficult to trade guide, supported by diagrams, checklists and other aide-mØmoire, attempts to describe portState control practice as it stands today. Advice is given on how to manage an inspection, and onwhat to do when things go wrong. Specific information is also given into the areas of a ship thatare likely to be inspected when its condition, its structural integrity or the operational competence ofits crew is checked. Port State control practice continues to vary port-by-port. This Guide focuseson the more onerous practices that exist. An Inspection Reporting Form has been included at theend of this guide for members to States have, and continue to make an increasing investment in resources, computer-basedsystems and training in support of their efforts. In the coming years, the controls imposed on shipsby port States are not therefore likely to diminish. Fewer, not more inspections for well-run shipsthrough the elimination of duplicated and unnecessary inspections would, nevertheless, be anhonourable goal to aim would like to see more consistency in the way inspections are carried out,improvements in the targeting of ships, better regional co-operation and exchange of informationand the implementation of a common deficiency coding system for all port State control regions touse. Ships with a clean record should be able to move freely between port State control regionswithout the threat of undue repeat inspections. Ships that have cleared outstanding deficienciesshould have their records immediately cleared. The main aim of port State control should be toeliminate substandard shipping and to that end port State control as a means to achieve that, canbe 2000
Section %$&.*5281'Regulatory Controls on Shipping7KH LQWHUQDWLRQDO IUDPHZRUNThe United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 (UNCLOS) establishesthe general rights and obligations of the flag State. Within the United Nations twospecialised agencies deal with maritime affairs, the International MaritimeOrganization (IMO) () and the International Labour Organization (ILO)(), and they have a responsibility for devising and developing conventionsand guidelines under which ships can be regulated. In general, matters concerningsafety at sea, pollution prevention and the training of seafarers are dealt with by IMO,whereas the ILO deals with matters concerning working and living conditions at IMO and ILO set the international regulatory framework for ships, each memberState bears the responsibility for enforcing the international conventions it has ratifiedon the ships flying its UROH RI WKH IODJ 6WDWHThe international conventions developed by IMO form the main framework of safety,training and pollution prevention regulation, with SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, TonnageMeasurement and Load Line conventions being the key regulations. These aresupported by classification rules that largely focus on the structure of the ship,including the materials used in its construction, the size of scantlings and essentialengineering systems like the main engine. Classification and conventionrequirements can be inter-related. The issuing of Load Line and Cargo Ship SafetyConstruction certificates would require, for example, the ship to be built andmaintained to class that convention standards and classification rules have been met isgenerally provided by the presence on board of valid certificates. To ensure that aship meets and then subsequently maintains convention standards, a flag Stateneeds to have in place arrangements for ensuring that its ships are periodicallysurveyed and re-certified. This responsibility applies regardless of whether a flag Statecarries out its own surveys using its own surveyors or authorises a RecognisedOrganisation (RO) to conduct surveys and issue international certificates on its behalf.
The member societies of the International Association of Classification Societies(IACS) () meet the minimum standards required of an RO. In manycases therefore, it would be a class surveyor who undertakes all the certification workon board ULJKWV RI D SRUW 6WDWHIn practice, many ships do not regularly call at flag State ports and this can restrict theability of the flag State to effectively police and enforce convention standards on itsships. This encourages some ships to sail in a substandard condition, endangeringother ships, the lives of seafarers as well as the States have certain rights to exercise authority over ships in their waters. Inaddition, a port State has the authority to check that foreign ships visiting its portsmeet all the appropriate convention standards. Indeed, the origins of port Statecontrol can be traced back to the 1929 SOLAS Convention. Convention controlprovisions can now also be found in MARPOL, the Load Line Convention, STCW andthe ILO Convention No. port State can, however, only apply those conventions which have entered intoforce, and which it has implemented for its own ships. Ships that fly the flag of a Statethat has not ratified a convention, or are below convention size would not, however,be exempt from inspection because the principle of no more favourable treatmentwould be State may also enact its own domestic laws and impose additional national rulesand regulations on foreign ships entering its waters. The United States, for example,has enacted the Oil Pollution Act, 1990 (OPA 90).The existence of convention control provisions and national rules, coupled with thegeneral desire of port States to ensure that visiting ships are safe and unlikely topollute their waters, forms the background to port State of Port State Control7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI UHJLRQDO SRUW 6WDWH FRQWURO DJUHHPHQWVIn Europe the increased interest in the growing number of foreign flag ships calling atits ports led eight North Sea States agreeing to exchange information on foreign shipsin 1978. This was superseded in January 1982 when 14 European States agreed toestablish a harmonised system of control resulting in the signing of the ParisMemorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Port State Control, now often and simplyreferred to as the Paris MOU .
Since that date, the number of States in the Paris MOU has grown. This has mainlybeen due to the increase in the number of member States of the European Union(EU), and that EU Directive 95/21/EC now places a legal requirement on all EUmember States to carry out port State control inspections. Canada to the west andthe Russian Federation to the east also participate as members of the Paris the Far East, another large regional grouping of States exists. This is known as theAsia-Pacific or Tokyo MOU and while it also includes the participation of Canada andthe Russian Federation, it largely involves western Asia-Pacific rim States andstretches from China in the north to Australia and New Zealand in the Asia-Pacific (Tokyo) MOU came into being in the early 1990 s some ten yearsafter the Paris MOU was formed. About the same time the South American States,along with Mexico and Cuba, formed the Vina del Mar (Latin American) end of the 1990 s has also seen the establishment of regional MOUs in theCaribbean, the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean. The Indian Ocean MOU, a regionalgrouping of States stretching westwards from India to South Africa, also includesAustralia. The West and Central African (Abuja) MOU has also recently beenestablished with a Secretariat based in Nigeria, as has the Black Sea MOU. ItsSecretariat is to be based in Istanbul, Turkey. The member States of both MOUsremain to be finalised. A further MOU is planned to cover the Arabian Gulf United States has, however, chosen to remain outside of any regional MOUsgrouping. Under the US Port State Control Program, it undertakes control measureson a unilateral 1 provides a geographical overview of the port state control regions withestablished Secretariats. It lists the member States that are currently signatories andcan therefore be considered port State control active. Table 2 provides the contactdetails of the UXOHV WKDW JRYHUQ SRUW 6WDWH FRQWURO DFWLYLWLHVIn November 1995, IMO adopted resolution (19) Procedures for port Statecontrol. The resolution was amended in 1999 by resolution (21) and will nodoubt be further amended in the future. The Procedures are intended to providebasic guidance on how port State control inspections should be conducted and how toidentify deficiencies in a ship, its equipment, or its crew, with the purpose of ensuringthat convention control provisions are consistently applied across the world from portto Procedures are not mandatory and only offer guidance to port States, albeitguidance that has been developed and agreed internationally. While port Stateregions should use the Procedures when exercising port State control, in practicevariations in the way the Procedures are interpreted exist.
For example, if convention control provisions were strictly interpreted, a routine orgeneral inspection would be limited to a check on the validity of the ship’s certificates,except in cases where the condition of the ship was in doubt. It is, nevertheless, oftenargued that the presence of certificates is only evidence of, and not conformation ofconvention standards being met. For this reason, some Port State Control Officers(PSCOs) are likely to want to inspect more than just the ship s certificates whileundertaking routine port State control inspections.
7DEOH *HRJUDSKLFDO RYHUYLHZ RI WKH SRUW 6WDWH FRQWURO UHJLRQVParis MOUBelgiumCanadaCroatiaDenmarkFinlandFranceAsia-PacificGermanyMediterranean(Tokyo) MOUGreeceMOUAustraliaIcelandAlgeriaCanadaIrelandCyprusChinaItalyEgyptFijiNetherlandsIsraelHong KongNorwayJordanIndonesiaPolandLebanonJapanPortugalMaltaRep. of KoreaRussian FederationMoroccoMalaysiaSpainTunisiaNew ZealandSwedenTurkeyPapua New GuineaUKPhilippinesRussian FederationSingaporeThailandUnited States Port StateVanuatuControl ProgramVietnamUSACaribbean MOUAntigua and BarbudaIndian Ocean MOUArubaAustraliaBahamasEritreaVina Del Mar (LatinBarbadosIndiaAmerican) AgreementBermudaMaldivesCaArgentinayman IslandsMauritiusBoliviaCubaSouth AfricaGBrazilrenadaSri LankaChileGuyanaSudanColumbiaJamaicaTanzaniaMonCubatserratEcuadorNetherlands AntillesTrinidad & TobagoMexicoPanamaPeruUruguayVenezuela
7DEOH &RQWDFW GHWDLOV RI WKH UHJLRQDO SRUW 6WDWH FRQWURO 6HFUHWDULDWVParis MOUAsia-Pacific (Tokyo) MOUParis MOU SecretariatTokyo MOU . Box 20904Tomoecho Annex Building 6F2500 EX The Hague3-8-26 Toranomon, Minato-kuNetherlandsTokyo 105-0001JapanTel: +31 70 351 1508Tel: +81 3 3433 0621Fax: +31 70 351 1599Fax: +81 3 3433 0624E-mail: office@-mail: @: : Del Mar (Latin American) AgreementUS Port State Control ProgramVina del Mar Agreement SecretariatUSCG Headquarters Port State ControlPrefectura Naval ArgentinaBranch, Commandant (G-MOC-4)Av. Eduardo Madero 2352100 Second Street, Buenos AiresWashington DC 20593-0001ArgentinaUSATel: +54 11 4318 7433Tel: + 1 202 267 2451Fax: +54 11 4318 7547Fax: + 1 202 267 0506E-mail: ciala@-mail: psix@: : MOUMediterranean MOUSecretariat Caribbean MOUMediterranean PSC SecretariatMinistry of International Transport27 Admiral Hamza Pasha StreetAdriana s ComplexRoushdyWarrens, St. MichaelAlexandriaBarbadosEgyptTel: + 1 246 425 0034 / 0072Tel: + 20 3 542 7949Fax: + 1 246 425 0101Fax: + 20 3 546 6360E-mail: caribbeanmou@-mail: medmou@ Ocean MOUIndian Ocean MOU SecretariatHead Land, SadaVasco da GamaGoa 403 804IndiaTel: +91 832 520931Fax: +91 832 520045E-mail: iomou@
Section 7+( 6(/(&7,21 2) 6+,36 )25,163(&7,21A port State control authority undertakes inspections to satisfy itself that the foreignships visiting its ports meet the required international standards laid down in theconventions, and to check on the actual condition of specific ships whose ability tomeet those standards is in States however recognise that inspecting all foreign ships would be bothimpractical due to the resources it would take, and unnecessary since not all ships aresubstandard. The general approach taken by regional port States authorities is to setoverall percentage inspection rates to ensure that a minimum number of ships areinspected, and to use targeting factors to focus inspection effort on those ships mostlikely to be substandard. In addition, ships of a certain age and type are specificallyselected for the purpose of conducting expanded inspections, and concentratedinspection campaigns are conducted to check on special matters or areas of help port States identify suitable ships for inspection, port arrival listings, shippingschedules and ship position reports are monitored. Central regional databases suchas the SIRENAC and APCIS databases managed by the Paris and Tokyo MOUsrespectively are also used by port States to access data on ships, including reports ofprevious inspections. While such databases only hold information and inspectionreports on ships that have undergone an inspection within any one region,international databases also now exist where port State control information from allthe regions is consolidated and () is one such database. The European Commission anda number of quality-minded maritime administrations (France, Japan, Singapore,Spain, the UK and the US) established EQUASIS in RatesThese are decided regionally and are designed to ensure that a minimum number ofdifferent foreign ships are inspected each year. Because some ports or States havemore PSCOs than others, the inspection rate will often vary port-to-port. However anannual inspection rate, normally expressed in percentage terms, is set for the wholeregion. The Paris MOU, for example, currently has an annual inspection rate of 25%.
Selection based purely on numbers can not, of course, differentiate between goodand substandard ships. Port States are now starting to consider weighting shipinspection rates according to the target factor assigned to the ships they with a high target factor would count as more than one inspection (say ) whereas a ship with a lower factor would count as less than one (say ). By focusing on the selection of ships with high target factors, theagreed inspection rate for the region can be achieved by visiting less ships, and resultin the resources of the port State being focused more efficiently, to the benefit of well-run ships.,QVSHFWLRQ HIIRUWV RI PHPEHUV FRPSDUHG WR WDUJHW 60%Target199950%40%30%20%10%0% [Source:1999 Annual Report of the Paris MOU]TargetingCertain selection criteria such as the ship s flag, age and type, are believed to directlyinfluence how well a ship is likely to be operated and in what condition a ship is likelyto be found. By allocating points to each criteria a scoring system can be employedand a ship can be assigned a targeting factor. The Paris MOU, for example, assignsan overall targeting factor to ships, whereas the US Coast Guard (USCG) hasdeveloped a boarding priority matrix for the purpose of calculating a targeting -to-date information on the targeting factors used by the various port State regionsis widely published, including on their respective web sites. Refer to Table 4, at the United KingdomSwedenSpainRussian FederationPortugalPolandNorwayNetherlandsItalyIrelandGreeceGermanyFranceFinlandDenmarkCroatiaCanadaBelgium
end of this section, for a copy of the USCG Boarding Priority Matrix published in its1999 Annual RSHUDWRUThe USCG, in particular, target owner / operators of ships with a bad detention Shipowners List is updated regularly and published on its web site.&KDUWHUHUThere are also moves to identify publicly the charterers of ships that have beendetained. As more information is collated concerning charterers then that criteria mayalso become a regular factor used in the targeting of ships.)ODJThree-year rolling average tables of above average detentions are published annuallyby the main port State regions. Ships of flag States whose detention ratios exceedaverage detention ratios for all flag States can expect to be especially targeted, as canships from the flag States that have not ratified the main conventions. In some cases,the port State control Authority might consider the fact that a ship was registered to atargeted flag State as clear grounds for proceeding directly, on boarding, with a moredetailed inspection of the ship./LVW RI 7DUJHWHG )ODJ 6WDWHV )ODJ 6WDWH'HWHQWLRQ 5DWLR)ODJ 6WDWH'HWHQWLRQ 5DWLRAntigua & %%%%Saint Vincent and %%%%%%%%%%Note:The USCG identified the above flag State Administrations as having a detention ratio higher than the overall averageand were associated with more than one detention in 1999. The detention ratios are based on data from the previous threeyears (1997, 1998 and 1999). The 3-year overall average for the 2000 evaluation was %, down from % in 1999.[Source:The USCG 1999 Port State Control Report]
&ODVVLILFDWLRQ VRFLHW\Class-related detention figures for each classification society are also comparedagainst the average figure. Ships classed with a society that has a poor detentionratio would be most affected, as would ships classed by a society that was not amember society of IACS.+LVWRU\Ships visiting a port State region for the first time or after an absence of at least 6months would be likely to receive particular attention, as would ships with outstandingdeficiencies and a record of detentions. A ship that has been specifically permitted tosail to another port to rectify deficiencies would also be targeted should it not arrive atthat appropriate port within an agreed or reasonable period of W\SH DQG DJHThese criterion generally follow those used to decide whether or not a ship is of a typeor age to justify it undergoing an expanded inspection. In general, tankers (oil, gasand chemical), bulk carriers and passenger ships are the ones likely to be targeted forsuch inspections. Any ship over 10 years old should also expect to be \SH RI 6KLS ,QVSHFWHG General dry cargo ship33%refrigerated cargo carrier4%passenger ship/ferry1%other types4%oil tanker/combinationroro/container/vehicle 7%17%gas carrier2%chemical tanker4%bulk carrier28% [Source:1999 Annual Report on Port State Control in the Tokyo MOU]
Expanded InspectionsOil and chemical tankers, gas carriers, passenger ship and bulk carriers are oftenrecognised as types of ships that should be subject to specific regular, usually 12month inspections. The PSCO would use the initial inspection to verify the age andtype of ship, as this information would be contained on the ship s certificates. Withrespect to bulk carriers, those over 12 years old can be expected to have to undergoannual expanded inspections by some but, currently, not all port items that would be considered as part of an expanded inspection are listed inTable 5. Accompanying the item list are guidance notes based upon those forPSCOs to use when undertaking an expanded inspection of a bulk carrier see Table6. Both tables follow this the condition of the hold and hull structure during the expanded inspection give riseto concern, the PSCO is expected to consult with the ship s flag State / classificationsociety with a view to deciding whether or not a more detailed survey should Inspection CampaignsConcentrated inspection campaigns have been a particular feature of the Paris MOUin recent years, and are also now starting to be conducted by the Tokyo MOU. Theyfocus on specific areas where high levels of deficiencies have been encountered byPSCOs, or where new convention requirements have recently entered into force. TheParis MOU has so far always announced its campaigns well in advance, both in thepress and on its web campaigns have typically been concentrated over periods of about 3 months andrecent campaigns have centred on the oil record book , living and working conditionson ships , the implementation of the ISM code for phase-one ships , bulk carriersafety and oil tankers older than 15 years . Campaigns regarding cargo securingmanuals and the implementation of the ISM code for phase-two ships are expectedto FactorsIrrespective of targeting factors, campaigns and the like, there are a number ofcircumstances or overriding factors that would take a ship to the top of the inspectionlist and would result in the PSCO proceeding directly to a more detailed inspection ofthe ship.
6KLSV WKDW KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHGShips that have been reported by a pilot, port authority or another State can expect tobe directly targeted. Other complaints could similarly result in the ship beingspecifically targeted. While a complaint could originate from the ship, or any otherperson or organisation with a legitimate but external interest in the ship, the PSCO isnot required to reveal his source and has no legal obligation to do UHSRUWHG DV KDYLQJ RXWVWDQGLQJ GHILFLHQFLHVWhere a PSCO has allowed the ship to sail on condition that deficiencies are rectifiedwithin a period of time, usually 14 days, this stipulation will be recorded in the regionalport State database to be followed up in another port.:KHUH RSHUDWLRQDO FRQFHUQV DERXW D VKLS H[LVWOperational incidents that could give rise to an inspection include:• collision, grounding or stranding on the way to the port:• an alleged pollution violation;• erratic or unsafe manoeuvring, particularly around routeing measures orwhere safe navigation practices and procedures have not been followed;• failure to comply with reporting procedures; or• the emission of a false alert that was not followed by proper VXVSHQGHG IURP FODVVShips that have been suspended or withdrawn from their class for safety reasons inthe previous 6 months could expect to be inspected.
7DEOH 'LDJUDP VKRZLQJ WKH VHOHFWLRQ SURFHVV&ULWHULD IRUVHOHFWLQJ D6KLS*HQHUDO6SHFLILF,QVSHFWLRQV,QVSHFWLRQVTargetingExpandedInspecConcentratedOverridingtionFactorsRaInstespectionsInspectionFactorsCampaignsFlagHAgeistoryShipSuspendedOwner/Reportedfrom classOperatorChartererClassShip TypeOutstandingOperationaldeconcernficiensciesexistInitial InspectionMore Detailed Inspection[see Section 3][see Section 3]
7DEOH 86&* %RDUGLQJ 3ULRULW\ 0DWUL[2:1(5)/$*&/$66+,6725<6+,3 7<3(5 Points7 PointsPriority 15 Points Each1 Point>10 arrivals with detentionratio more than 4 timesLthe average OR <10isted owner orDetention within theOil or chemicalListed Flag Stateoperatoraprevious 12 and involved withrat least one detention inthe previous 3 Points1 Point Each>10 arrivals with aO1 Pointther operationaldetention ratio between 3control within theGas carrier& 4 times the 12 months3 Points1 Point Each>10 arrivals w2 Pointsith aCasualty within thedetention ratio between 2Bulk freighter overprevious 12 months.& 310 years the Point>10 arriva1 Point Eachls with adetention ratio betweenViolation w1 Pointithin thepreviouthe average and twice thes 12 Points>10 arrivals1 Point Each2 Points with adetention ratio below theNot boarded withinCarrying low valueaverage OR <10 arrivalsthe previous 6commodities in no detentions in themonthsprevious 3 \0DWUL[ SRLQWV5HVWULFWLRQV ULVNI17 or morePort entry may be restricted until ship is inspectedII7 to 16Cargo operations may be restricted until ship is inspectedNo operational restrictions imposed, ship will most likely be examinedIII4 to 6at the berthIV3 or fewerShip is a low risk, and will probably not be boarded[Source:The USCG 1999 Port State Control Report]
7DEOH ([SDQGHG LQVSHFWLRQ RI D EXON FDUULHU1Black-out and start of emergency generator, inspection of emergency lighting2Operation of emergency fire pump with two (2) fire hoses connected to the fire main line3Operation of bilge pumps4Closing of watertight doors5Lowering of one seaside lifeboat to the water6Test of remote emergency stop for boilers, ventilation systems and fuel pumps7Testing of steering gear including auxiliary steering gear8Inspection of emergency source of power to radio installations9Inspection and, to the extent possible, test of engine room separator10On deck: corrosion of deck machinery foundations corrosion / waste of weather-tight doors and closing devices cracks in deck plates corrosion of pipes and ventilators cracking at bulwark stay cracking at hatch coaming bracket toes deformation and/or corrosion of hatch covers buckling of cross decks between hatches11In the holds: in the side shell plating - cracks / leaks in welds or plating, distortion of plating at the connection of bulkhead plating to the side shell punctured, cracked, heavily indented or buckledplating, corrosion and wastage at the connection of side shell frames and end brackets to the shell and the hopperside / topside tankplating cracks, corrosion and wastage, excessively deformed or detached frames or brackets12Access to cargo holds13Check of the Survey Report File to identify possible suspect areas requiring inspection[The following items are likely to be specifically checked as part of anexpanded inspection for a bulk carrier by a PSCO from the Paris MOU]
7DEOH *XLGDQFH QRWHV IRU DQ H[SDQGHG LQVSHFWLRQ RI D EXON FDUULHU1The initial check of the Survey Report File by the PSCO might identify possible suspect areas requiringinspection. IMO resolution (18) requires a specific survey programme that includes access arrangements,and the requirements for close-up survey and thickness measurements. The Survey report File held on boardshould therefore consist of: reports of structural surveys; condition evaluation reports; thickness measurement reports; and survey planning documentation containing: main particulars of ship, plans of tanks and holds; list of tanks and holds and their usage, corrosion protection, condition of coating and corrosion risk intanks; and design risk of impression of hull maintenance and the general state on deck, the condition of items such as ladders,hatches, air pipes, guard rails and deck machinery and any visible evidence of previously effected repairs couldinfluence the PSCOs decision as to what extent any examination of the hull structure should PSCO is likely to pay special attention to areas of high stress and bending moments: immediately forward of the engine room bulkhead; over the midships half-length; and #1 hold side shell framing and top and bottom connections in the panting attention is also likely to be given to areas where fracturing, cracking, distortion or excessive wastagecan occur. Further, the watertight integrity of hatches and closures is particularly important on ore carriers withno reserve defects are: cracking at hatch corners and coamings; plate panel buckling of cross deck strips; cracking at the intersection of the inner bottom and hopper plating; grab and bulldozer damage to the main frames lower brackets; grab damage to the inner bottom plating, hopper and lower stool plating; cracking at main frame bracket toes; general and localised corrosion of main frames and brackets; cracking at fore and aft extremities of the topside tank structures; corrosion within topside tanks; and general corrosion and cracking of transverse seawater ballast tanks represent one of the most likely problem areas. Any inspection could beexpected to consider the following aspects: the paint condition in coated ballast tanks and the condition of the anodes. In ballast tanks rates ofcorrosion of the order 1mm per year may be encountered, depending on whether tanks are coated orprotected by anodes. In some ships only the ullage space is coated with the remainder protected byanodes, and this can result in corrosion on uncoated structures which remain wet during empty periods; in tanks used for ballast, which may be subject to variable depths of seawater, such as the forepeak tank, itwould often be the case that there is little wastage top and bottom, but significant wastage over centralregions. The PSCO can be expected to pay particular attention in the forepeak to longitudinal stiffenersand brackets where the collision bulkhead adjoins the shell plating; longitudinal shell stiffeners in dedicated ballast tanks, particularly in areas adjacent to bulkheads and webframes; and underdeck longitudinals in ballast tanks. Wastage would usually be most severe close to the might result in the fillet welds attaching longitudinals to the deck being wasted leading to thedetachment of longitudinals and the consequential bulking of deck a fracture, which has not been caused by contact damage, is found by the PSCO in the main hullstructure on one side of a ship, he can be expected to examine the corresponding structure on the opposite sideto see if a similar failure has occurred. Fractures of this nature are of concern especially where corrosion isassociated with the failure and might have been a contributing relevant, the PSCO might also check that the necessary calculations have been made to ensure bending andshear stresses are maintained within maximum limits during both cargo operations and the ensuing would be especially important where high-density cargoes are carried or where the loading / ballastingarrangement is of a different configuration to that described in the ship s loading manual.
Section 7+( ,163(&7,21 352&(66All port State control visits to a ship should start with the PSCO conducting an initialinspection, unless overriding factors exist to allow the PSCO to proceed directly to amore detailed inspection. If during that initial inspection the PSCO finds evidence of amajor problem with the ship, its crew or its operation, the PSCO would have cleargrounds for proceeding to a more detailed inspection of the ship with a view toestablishing its real condition. The existence of a concentrated inspection campaignor an expanded inspection programme would also effectively result in the PSCOundertaking a level of inspection, over and above that required of an initial may be identified at any stage of the inspection process, and a detentionorder might follow.,QVSHFWLRQ LQWHUYDOIf a ship has had a port State inspection within the last 6 months and was reported ashaving no outstanding deficiencies . inspection recorded using Report Form A, theship should be exempted from further inspection unless there are special reasons thatwarrant another inspection. In practice, evidence indicates that ships are often re-inspected at intervals of less than 6 months, particularly when a ship moves betweenport State regions.$FFLGHQWDO GDPDJH SULRU WR SRUW HQWU\It is important that the master, at the earliest opportunity, reports to the flag State orthe classification society responsible for issuing the ships certificates, any accidentaldamage to the ship while on route to the port. It is also important that the master orshipowner, prior to entering port, submits a report to the port State stating thecircumstances of the accident and the nature of the damage suffered, if grounds fordetention are to be avoided. Plans for appropriate remedial action should also be putinto place, and the port State notified once the remedial action has been completed.&KDUJLQJ IRU LQVSHFWLRQVThe port State should not charge the ship for any general inspection. Port Statecharges can however be expected if the ship invites a port State to undertake aninspection, or if the ship is detained and the PSCO has to return to the ship for a re-
inspection. To avoid unnecessary charges, the ship should therefore ensure that alldeficiencies are properly rectified before requesting a re-inspection. Charges mightalso be incurred if a PSCO attends the ship because of the presence of overridingfactors. This is because the triggering action implies that doubts about the ship existcausing an inspection to be necessary.&RQWDFWLQJ WKH IODJ 6WDWH FODVVLILFDWLRQ VRFLHW\A ship might wish to contact its flag State / classification society for support during aninspection, particularly if the ship was detained or an inspection was suspended bythe PSCO. In order to prepare for such an event, it might be prudent for the masterto know under which circumstances a surveyor should be called in and for a list ofcontact addresses to be for an InspectionBecause inspections are unannounced it is difficult for a ship to make any specialpreparations for an inspection, except in cases where one could be anticipated. Aship should therefore be ready to face an inspection at any port, at any Port State Control OfficerThe PSCO should be an experienced person qualified as a flag State surveyor andable to communicate with the master and key crewmembers in English. He need not,however, have sailed as master or chief engineer or have had any seagoingexperience. He should have no commercial interest in the port, the ship or beemployed by or on behalf of a classification society. Should he lack the necessaryexpertise in some area of inspection an expert in that field could assist PSCO is issued with an identity card as evidence of his authority to carry outinspections. All PSCOs should also carry a copy of the General ProceduralGuidelines for PSCOs from IMO resolution (19) for ready reference whencarrying out inspections. Table 8, at the end of this section, reproduces theseguidelines.'HDOLQJ ZLWK WKH 36&2It is probably best assumed that the PSCO is fully qualified, well-trained and familiarwith ships although of course this may not always be the case. The master shouldselect a room for the initial meeting that is quiet, comfortable and have all thecertificates and documentation readily available. The reports of previous port state
inspections should also be at hand. All questions asked by the PSCO should beresponded to in an honest and straightforward the PSCO is ready to make an inspection of the ship, a senior andknowledgeable officer should be assigned to accompany him. That person should befamiliar with the ship and have the necessary keys with him so ensuring that readyaccess to all spaces is possible. If a spare crewmember or a cadet is available, hisattendance is also recommended. If things need immediate attention or assistanceneeds to be called, that person can attend to such matters and the flow of theinspection can remain officer should be vigilant and not afraid to point out and immediately rectifydiscrepancies that appear during the inspection, rather than risk the PSCO identifyingthe discrepancies himself. Being able to fix things on the spot is an indication of beingwell organised. Even if something does not work or needs adjusting but can not befixed immediately, move on and let the PSCO return later. This could save a secondvisit to the , it must be remembered that the master always has the right to query thedirection that an inspection is taking should he believe that the inspection couldinterfere with the safety of the crew or indeed cause crew fatigue. Unreasonablerequests for drills while the ship is cargo handling or bunkering should always Inspection)LUVW LPSUHVVLRQVBefore boarding the PSCO is likely to walk along the quay and look at the generalcondition of the ship, the state of the mooring lines and whether or not the draught andload line marks are present and readable. The condition of the paintwork, signs ofcorrosion, tank leakage or unrepaired damage would give the PSCO an immediateimpression of the standard of maintenance on on board, the PSCO can check the condition of the gangway and how well itis rigged and secured. Being able to walk on board and wander around freely anduncontested, apart from indicating lax deck operations would also give the PSCO theopportunity to take a good and unsupervised look around the ship. If cargo operationsare underway, he may then have an opportunity to judge the managerial competenceof those running the ship, by the apparent level of organisation on deck. On the wayto the masters office the PSCO may, subject to where the gangway was rigged, havefurther opportunity to look at the onboard mooring arrangements and parts of theaccommodation space.
&HUWLILFDWH FKHFNSubject to favourable first impressions, the initial inspection should largely be limited tochecking the ship s certificates and manning arrangements. A more detailedinspection would require clear grounds to be present. It is however becomingcommon practice for the PSCO to also want to walk around the ship with the aim ofattempting to assess the overall condition of the ship and to check that the shipactually conforms to the conditions required by the certificates issued to the PSCO does not already know, he would first ask the age and size of the ship todetermine which certificates were applicable to the ship, before checking them toensure that they were all on board, up to date and correctly endorsed. Deficienciesrelated to overdue statutory surveys are common. Certificates issued by non-recognised organisations might also attract particular principle of no more favourable treatment would be applied to ships that fly theflag of States that have not ratified a convention, or are below convention size. Thismight mean that a ship was not carrying all the certificates required under theconventions relevant to the port State region. Absence of certificates should not, initself, however constitute reason to detain a ship, as long as the ship was insubstantial compliance with the provisions of the relevant conventions. A close examination of the Oil and Garbage Record Books and the ship s ISMcertificates can be expected at this stage. A ship holding interim ISM certificatesshould expect a particularly close examination and an attempt might be made to verifythat the ship has a functioning safety management system. In the absence of validISM certification, the ship may have a banning order placed on PSCO can also be expected to look specifically at the manning arrangements onboard. The numbers and composition of the crew would need to conform to the SafeManning certificate carried. The master should be aware that the port State has theright to query the manning arrangements of any ship with its flag State, and ask forconfirmation from the flag State that the ship can sail as manned. Failure of the flagState to confirm can result in the ship being detained. The PSCO should accept theflag State’s manning level unless it is clearly unsafe or does not meet the crew and their certificates, the STCW Code requires that the originalcopies of certificates and endorsements be carried on board at all times. Photocopieswould not be acceptable. The PSCO might wish to check that individualcrewmembers actually have their certificates with them. Medical certificates may alsobe checked at this the end of this section, Table 9 contains details of the certificates and documentsthat dry bulk cargo ships need to carry.
´:DON DURXQGµ WR FKHFN RQ WKH RYHUDOO FRQGLWLRQ RI WKH VKLSDuring the walk around, if the PSCO starts off finding little wrong, the inspection islikely to be concluded fairly rapidly. A check on the internal structure of the ship wouldnot normally be undertaken, the PSCO being more likely to rely instead on visualsigns to see if equipment is being regularly used and in the davits or rusted harbour pins could, for example, indicate that the lifeboathad not been recently lowered and this might conflict with statements in logbooksconcerning the carrying out of boat drills. Discrepancies of this nature couldencourage the PSCO to believe that clear grounds existed and ask for a drill to beconducted. This would in turn provide opportunities for the PSCO to communicatewith crewmembers and to see how well the crewmembers communicate PSCO would also be likely to check on the living and working conditions on boardwith a view to verifying that the ship conformed to the standards laid down in the , Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) the end of the section, Table 10 contains a brief aide-mØmoire that lists those areasthat a PSCO can be expected to want to see during an initial GroundsClear grounds for proceeding to a more detailed inspection exists if, during the initialinspection the PSCO found evidence that:• the ship, its equipment, or its crew did not appear to correspondsubstantially with the requirements of the relevant conventions; or• the master or crewmembers were not familiar with the essential shipboardoperational procedures that related to the safety of the ship or the PSCO believes that a more detailed inspection is justified he is required toinform the master giving reasons for his decision. At the end of the section, Table 11lists examples of what might constitute clear grounds. The checklists contained inSection 5 focus specifically on essential shipboard Detailed InspectionsA more detailed inspection is an in-depth inspection covering the ship’s construction,equipment, manning, living and working conditions and compliance with on-boardoperational procedures. The purpose of a more detailed inspection of the ship is to
establish its real condition where doubts exist. It may be prompted by overridingfactors or because clear grounds were identified during the initial or an expandedinspection of the nature and extent of the inspection required would determine how many PSCOswere needed to attend the ship for the inspection. Inspections can involve more thanone at first instance the inspection should focus only on the areas of originalconcern, it is often expanded to check that essential shipboard operations are capableof being properly carried out by inspection should not unnecessarily delay or impose undue physical demands onthe ship that could jeopardise safety. While the master would be entitled to queryexcessive inspection demands, particularly those that could interfere with the runningof his ship, it is recommended that the master always remains positive and co-operative in his dealings with the of an InspectionIn exceptional circumstances, where the overall condition of a ship, its equipment orthe working or living conditions of the crew were found to be obviously substandard,the PSCO may suspend an inspection. In such cases, the port State should notify theflag State of the suspension without delay. The suspension would continue until thedeficiencies identified by the PSCO have been rectified, as Inspection ResultsFollowing a port State control inspection, the PSCO should provide the master with areport giving the results of the inspection, detailing any action to be taken. It will beeither Report Form A , if no deficiencies are found, or Report Form B wheredeficiencies exist. If a ship is detained, this will be recorded on both forms. All reportsshould be retained on board for at least two years and be kept readily available forexamination by a PSCO at subsequent a ship inspection, the results are recorded in the central database of the portState region to which it is a member. The SIRENAC database, for example, recordsthe results of ship inspections of the member States of the Paris MOU. This allowsinformation about ships to be shared between all member States. Information is alsodisseminated through international databases such as EQUASIS, web sites and in theshipping press.
7DEOH 'LDJUDP VKRZLQJ WKH LQVSHFWLRQ SURFHVV6KLS VHOHFWHGIRU ,QVSHFWLRQ*HQHUDO6SHFLILF,QVSHFWLRQV,QVSHFWLRQVInitialConcentratedExpandedOverridingInspectionInspectionInspectionFactorsCampaignFirstCertificate Walkimpressionscheckaround YesClearMore Detailed InspectionGroundsNoNoEnd ofDeficienciesinspectionfoundForm A ReportYesForm B Report[see Section 4]
7DEOH *HQHUDO 3URFHGXUDO *XLGHOLQHV IRU 36& The PSCO should use professional judgement in carrying out all duties, and consider consulting others asdeemed When boarding a ship, the PSCO should present to the master or to the representative of the owner, ifrequested to do so, the PSCO identity card. This card should be accepted as documentary evidence that the PSCO inquestion is duly authorised by the Administration to carry out port State control If the PSCO has clear grounds for carrying out a more detailed inspection, the master should be immediatelyinformed of these grounds and advised that, if so desired, the master may contact the Administration or, asappropriate, the recognised organisation responsible for issuing the certificate and invite their presence on In the case that an inspection is initiated based on a report or complaint, especially if it is from a crewmember,the source of the information should not be When exercising control, all possible efforts should be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or should be borne in mind that the main purpose of port state control is to prevent a ship proceeding to sea if it isunsafe or presents an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment. The PSCO should exerciseprofessional judgement to determine whether to detain a ship until the deficiencies are corrected or to allow it to sailwith certain deficiencies, having regard to the particular circumstance of the intended It should be recognised that all equipment is subject to failure and spares or replacement parts may not bereadily available. In such cases, undue delay should not be caused if, in the opinion of the PSCO, safe alternativearrangements have been Where the grounds for detention are the result of accidental damage suffered on the ship s voyage to a port, nodetention order should be issued provided that:.1 due account has been given to the Convention requirements regarding notification to the flag StateAdministration, the nominated surveyor or the recognised organisation for issuing the relevant certificate;.2 prior to entering a port, the master or company has submitted to the port state authority details on thecircumstances of the accident and the damage suffered and information about the required notification of the flagState Administration;.3 appropriate remedial action, to the satisfaction of the port State authority, is being taken by the ship; the port State authority has ensured, having been notified of the completion of the remedial action, thatdeficiencies that were clearly hazardous to safety, health or environment have been Since detention of a ship is a serious matter involving many issues, it may be in the best interest of the PSCO toact with other interested parties. For example, the officer may request the owner s representatives to provideproposals for correcting the situation. The PSCO may also consider co-operating with the flag State Administration srepresentatives or recognised organisation responsible for issuing the relevant certificates, and consulting themregarding their acceptance of the owner s proposals and their possible additional requirements. Without limiting thePSCOs discretion in any way, the involvement of other parties could result in a safer ship, avoid subsequentarguments relating to the circumstances of the detention, and prove advantageous in the case of litigation involving undue delay . Where deficiencies cannot be remedied at the port of inspection, the PSCO may allow the ship to proceed toanother port, subject to any appropriate conditions determined. In such circumstances, the PSCO should ensure thatthe competent authority of the next port of call and the flag State are Detention reports to the flag state should be in sufficient detail for an assessment to be made of the severity ofthe deficiencies giving rise to the The company or its representative has a right of appeal against a detention taken by the Authority of a portState. The appeal should not cause the detention to be suspended. The PSCO should properly inform the master ofthe right of To ensure consistent enforcement of port state control requirements, PSCOs should carry an extract of (General Procedural Guidelines for PSCOs) for ready reference when carrying out any port state control inspections.[Extract from IMO resolution (19), as amended]
7DEOH 'HWDLOV RI WKH FHUWLILFDWHV DQG GRFXPHQWV WR EH FDUULHG$SSOLFDEOH WR $// VKLSV 1&HUWLILFDWH RI 5HJLVWU\27RQQDJH &HUWLILFDWHIssued to every ship above 24 metres in length and 150 GT, the gross tonnage (GT) and net tonnage (NT)of which has been determined in accordance with the convention. It should be noted that the GT of a shipmay for certain ships, be determined in accordance with national rules. A statement to that effect shouldbe included on the certificate, and as a footnote in the relevant SOLAS, STCW and MARPOL certificatesheld by the ship [Tonnage Measurement Convention 1969, art. 7]3,QWHUQDWLRQDO /RDG /LQH &HUWLILFDWHIssued to every ship above 24 metres in length and/or 150 GT, which has been surveyed and marked inaccordance with the Convention. The certificate is valid for five years. A booklet "Particulars ofConditions of Assignment" is issued with the certificate, detailing the conditions under which the freeboardis assigned. It forms an integral part of the certificate. There is also an International Load LineExemption Certificate that is issued to a ship granted an exemption under the Load Line Conventionprovisions [Load Line (LL) Convention 1966, art. 16 / LL Protocol 1988, art. 18]4,QWDFW 6WDELOLW\ %RRNOHWIssued to every passenger ship regardless of size and all cargo ships above 24 metres. The master mustbe supplied with a Stability Booklet containing such information as is necessary to enable him, by rapidand simple processes, to obtain accurate guidance as to the stability of the ship under varying conditionsof service [SOLAS 1974, reg. II-1/22 & II-1/25-8 / LL Protocol 1988, reg. 10]5&DUJR 6HFXULQJ 0DQXDOAll cargoes (other than solid and liquid bulk cargoes) should be loaded, stowed and secured inaccordance with the Manual. All types of ships engaged in the carriage of all cargoes other than solid andliquid bulk cargoes should therefore carry the Manual. It may not therefore be carried. [SOLAS 1974, VII/6 & MSC/]6,QWHUQDWLRQDO 2LO 3ROOXWLRQ 3UHYHQWLRQ &HUWLILFDWH ,233 Issued to all dry cargo ships over 400 GT which are engaged on voyages to ports under the jurisdiction ofother Parties to MARPOL 73/78. The IOPP certificate is valid for five years. The certificate issupplemented by a Record of Construction and Equipment for Ships other than Oil Tankers (FormA) [MARPOL 73/78, Annex I, reg. 4]72LO 5HFRUG %RRNOil Record Book, Part I (Machinery space operations) - For every dry cargo ship over 400 GT otherthan an oil tanker [MARPOL 73/78, Annex I, reg. 20]86KLSERDUG 2LO 3ROOXWLRQ (PHUJHQF\ 3ODQ 623(3 Required to be carried on every dry cargo ship over 400 GT and be approved by the flag State [MARPOL73/78, Annex I, reg. 26]9*DUEDJH 0DQDJHPHQW 3ODQAnnex V deals with regulations for the prevention of pollution by garbage from ships. Issued to all drycargo ships above 400 GT. The Plan must be in accordance with the IMO Guidelines and written in theworking language of the crew. Each ship with a Plan must also keep a Garbage Record Book. Placardsnotifying the crew of disposal requirements need to be displayed [MARPOL 73/78, Annex V, reg. 9]10,QWHUQDWLRQDO 6HZDJH 3ROOXWLRQ 3UHYHQWLRQ &HUWLILFDWHAnnex IV deals with regulations for the prevention of pollution by sewage from ships. Issued to MARPOLships above 200 GT and those certified to carry more than 10 persons, IF the flag state has implementedMARPOL Annex IV in advance of its entry into force. It may not therefore be carried. [MARPOL, AnnexIV, reg. 4]
110LQLPXP 6DIH 0DQQLQJ &HUWLILFDWHIssued to all ships. Valid until amended. [SOLAS 1974 (1989 amendments), reg. V/13b]12&HUWLILFDWHV IRU PDVWHUV RIILFHUV RU UDWLQJVCertificates of Competency - Seafarers must carry appropriate original national certificates of competenceendorsed by the State that issued the certificate attesting that it meets international STCW State Recognition Endorsements - For those seafarers serving on ships of a flag that is different tothat of the State that issued the certificate of competency, a flag State recognition endorsement should becarried by the seafarer. The recognition endorsement must be obtained within 3 months of a seafarerjoining a ship. Documentary evidence that the recognition endorsement has been applied for by theseafarer should be carried. Ship Type Endorsements - Certificates must be fully endorsed for service onparticular types of ships, in particular passenger ships and tankers. There is a transitional period that willlast until February 2002 for converting from STCW 1978 to STCW 1995, notably in respect of Flag StateRecognition Endorsements [STCW 1995, art. VI, reg. I/2 / STCW Code, section A-I/2]13&HUWLILFDWHV RI PHGLFDO ILWQHVVA medical fitness certificate to be issued at least once every 2 years, although equivalent arrangementsmay apply in some States. Medical information and records of vaccination and revaccination should becarried [ILO Convention No. 73]14'RFXPHQW RI &RPSOLDQFH '2& 6DIHW\ 0DQDJHPHQW &HUWLILFDWH 60& Required under the ISM Code for all ships above 500 GT. Issued to the Company following an initialverification of compliance with the ISM Code provision. Valid for five years [SOLAS 1974, reg. IX/4]155DGLR 6WDWLRQ /LFHQFHIssued to the shipowner and valid for four years. It is the shipowner that is licensed to operate the ship sradio station [ITU Regulations]16)LUH FRQWURO SODQ DQG 0XVWHU OLVWAll ships must carry and permanently display general arrangement plans showing fire control stations, firesections, extinguishing arrangements / appliances etc. This information may be provided in the form of abooklet, one copy to each officer. An additional set of plans should be permanently stored outside of thedeckhouse for shore side firefighting personnel. All ships must carry and display in conspicuous placesthroughout the ship up to date muster lists, including on the bridge, and in the engine room and crewaccommodation spaces [SOLAS 1974, reg. II-2/20, III/8]17'DPDJH FRQWURO ERRNOHWVThere shall be permanently exhibited, plans clearly showing the boundaries of the watertightcompartments for each deck and hold, the openings therein with the means of closure and position of anycontrols thereof, and the arrangements for the correction of any list due to flooding. Booklets containingthe aforementioned information shall be made available to the officers of the ship [SOLAS 1974, reg. II-1/25, 6, 7 & 8]186KLS·V /RJERRNEvery ship must keep records of tests and drills, and records of inspection / maintenance of lifesavingappliances and equipment, and such records are likely to be checked by the PSCO [SOLAS 1974, &HUWLILFDWH +XOO DQG 0DFKLQHU\ Issued to ships by a classification society and should be carried as long as the ship remains in class203RUW VWDWH FRQWURO UHSRUWV
$GGLWLRQDO FHUWLILFDWHV WR EH FDUULHG E\ GU\ EXON FDUJR VKLSV 21&DUJR 6KLS 6DIHW\ &RQVWUXFWLRQ &HUWLILFDWH
Issued after survey of a cargo ship of over 500 GT that satisfies the requirements for cargo ships, set out inSOLAS regulation I/10, and complies with the applicable requirements of chapters II-1 and II-2, other thanthose relating to fire extinguishing appliances and fire control plans. The certificate is issued by the flagstate and is valid for five years [SOLAS 1974, reg. I/12 / SOLAS Protocol 1988, reg. I/12]22&DUJR 6KLS 6DIHW\ (TXLSPHQW &HUWLILFDWH
Issued after survey of a cargo ship of over 500 GT that complies with the relevant requirements of chaptersII-1, II-2 and III and any other relevant requirements of SOLAS. A Record of Equipment (Form E)supplements the Certificate and should be permanently attached. Issued by the flag state and is valid fortwo years [SOLAS 1974, reg. I/12 / SOLAS Protocol 1988, reg. I/12]23&DUJR 6KLS 6DIHW\ 5DGLR &HUWLILFDWH
Issued after survey of a cargo ship of over 300 GT fitted with a radio installation. Issued by an organisationapproved by the flag State and valid for one year. A Record of Equipment (Form R) supplements theCertificate and should be permanently attached [SOLAS 1974, reg. I/12]*A certificate called a Cargo Ship Safety Certificate may be issued after survey to a cargo ship whichcomplies with the relevant requirements of chapters II-1, II-2, III, IV & V, as an alternative to the aboveindividual cargo ship safety certificates [SOLAS Protocol 1988, reg. I/12]24([HPSWLRQ &HUWLILFDWHFor ships granted an exemption under the SOLAS provisions and issued in addition to the Cargo ShipSafety Certificates [SOLAS 1974, reg. I/12]25%XON FDUULHU ERRNOHWApplies to all ships carrying bulk cargoes other than grain, although for ships below 500 GT, the flag Statemay allow alternative measures. The booklet shall include information on stability, ballasting rates /capacities, maximum tank top loadings, loading instructions etc [SOLAS 1974, reg. VI/7]26'RFXPHQW RI &RPSOLDQFH ZLWK WKH 6SHFLDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU 6KLSV &DUU\LQJ'DQJHURXV *RRGVThe document is evidence of compliance with the construction and equipment requirements of theRegulation. Issued by the flag State. The period of validity should not exceed 5 years and should not beextended beyond the expiry date of the Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate held on board [SOLAS1974, reg. II-2/]27'DQJHURXV *RRGV 0DQLIHVW RU 6WRZDJH 3ODQThis is a requirement for ships carrying dangerous goods. It is a special list or manifest that sets out, inaccordance with the classification in SOLAS reg. VII/2, the dangerous goods on board and their detailed stowage plan which identifies by class and sets out the location of all dangerous goods on boardmay be used in place of such special list or manifest. A copy of one of these documents shall be madeavailable before departure to the person/organisation designated by the port State authorities [SOLAS1974, reg. VII/5 & MARPOL 73/78, Annex III, ]28'RFXPHQW RI $XWKRULVDWLRQ IRU WKH &DUULDJH RI *UDLQCertifies that a ship loaded with grain complies with the regulations of the International Code for the SafeCarriage of Grain in Bulk. The document shall accompany or be incorporated into the Grain loadingmanual and include information on stability information [SOLAS 1974, reg. VI/9]296XUYH\ UHSRUW ILOHEvery bulk carrier of more than 150 metres in length must have a complete survey report file consisting of:reports of structural surveys; condition evaluation report; thickness measurements reports; and surveyplanning document and supporting documents: main structural plans of holds and ballast tanks; previousrepair history; cargo and ballast history; and inspections by ship s personnel [SOLAS 1974 reg. XI/2]
7DEOH 7KH LQLWLDO LQVSHFWLRQFirst impressions (on boarding):External condition of the: hull freeboard marks accommodation ladder mooring arrangementsCertificate check (in the master s cabin):As regards the general status of certificates / documentation - verify: missing or expired not translated or posted up, as required discrepancies outdated or unsigned endorsements uncertified copies of original certificates inconsistencies or omissions in record books certificates issued by non-recognised organisationsAs regards safe manning verify: compliant manning levels minimum rest periods appliedAs regard crew certification verify: presence of original and valid certificates English translation medical certificates minimum age requirement complied withAs regards the ISM code check: crewmembers are familiar with the Company Safety and environmental protection policy the Safety management system documentation is readily available status of interim certificates the ship type is covered in the DOC Walk around (to check on the overall condition of the ship):PSCO would be likely to verify the general condition of:Exposed decks: deck plating bulwark and stays guard rail hatch coamings and covers piping and vents presence of improper temporary repairs presence of recent welding / hot work presence of liquid seepage sCargo handling gear: cargo gear and additional equipment cargo securing devicesNavigation and radiocommunication equipment: navigational equipment management of voyage charts / publications hand-over procedures for watch and control of ship bridge visibility record of steering gear tests / drills radio installation and equipment reserve radio batteries record of operation and maintenance fire detection and alarm systems
Lifesaving appliances (LSA): Lifeboats, rescue boats and liferafts launching arrangements personal lifesaving appliances record of periodic inspections and testing / drills management of emergency plans and instructions consistency of mustering practice with that in the PlanFire fighting arrangements (FFA): fire doors means of escape fire pumps fire main, hydrants and hoses fire extinguishers record of periodic inspections and testing / drills management of fire control plan and instructionsMachinery spaces: main and auxiliary engines piping, pumps and valves electrical generators cables, terminations and joint arrangements lighting cleanliness of spaces emergency escape routesPollution prevention arrangements: oily-water separator and associated equipment SOPEP garbage arrangementsLiving and working conditions: condition and sufficiency of food and potable water supply arrangements and cleanliness of food stores, galley, pantries, refrigerated chambers and messrooms sanitary arrangements, including condition of doors, flooring and drainage operation and maintenance of ventilation, lighting, heating and water supply medical facilities, including medicines and equipment record of accommodation inspections availability of personal protective equipment
7DEOH ([DPSOHV RI FOHDU JURXQGV1Evidence of inaccuracies in the certificates and other documentation during their examination,including evidence that the oil record book has not been properly kept and absent or inaccurateISM Code certification, where appropriate2Indications that crewmembers are not able to communicate adequately with each other3Evidence of shipboard operations, such as cargo work, are not being conducted safelyand in accordance with IMO guidelines4Absence of an up-to-date muster list, fire control plan and a damage control plan, andevidence that crewmembers are not aware of their fire fighting and abandon ship duties5The absence of, or serious deficiencies in, the principal safety and pollution preventionequipment or arrangements required by conventions6Excessively unsanitary conditions on board the ship7Evidence that serious hull or structural deterioration or deficiencies exist that may place at risk thestructural, watertight or weathertight integrity of the ship. The absence on board of the survey reportfile, where appropriate, or the failure to keep the file up to date may also constitute clear grounds8Evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential shipboard operations relating to thesafety of the ship or the prevention of pollution, or that such operations have not beencarried out9Evidence that the ship s log books, manual etc are not properly, or are falsely maintained
Section '(),&,(1&,(6 $1' 7+( '(7(17,21 2)6+,36DeficienciesA deficiency exists when a condition is found on a ship that is not in compliance withthe requirements of a convention. When deficiencies are found the nature of thedeficiency and the corresponding action to be taken by the ship is recorded on the Report Form B . The number and nature of the deficiencies found by the PSCOdetermine the corrective action that the ship needs to take and whether or not the shipis to be is important that the master fully understands what the deficiencies are, and therectification measures that the ship needs to take. This is particularly important whenthe deficiencies are sufficient to lead to a detention order being placed on the , at this point in time, the master should also be informed of the ship’s right ofappeal against the order. Any misunderstandings could unnecessarily delay the shipin port. The master must check that the deficiency details entered on Form B arecorrect, and seek clarification from the PSCO, where the deficiencies relate to a statutory survey item, the master is advised to callin a classification surveyor because the classification society is authorised to deal withsuch items on behalf of the flag State.&RUUHFWLYH DFWLRQV ZLWKLQ D VSHFLILHG WLPH SHULRGThere are three basic options available to the PSCO to take:1. Require the rectification of deficiencies before the ship sails the PSCO maydecide to return to the ship to check that the deficiencies have been correctlyrectified;
2. Permit the ship to sail on condition that the deficiencies are rectified at thenext port he would then inform the next port of his decision; or3. Require deficiencies to be rectified within 14 days, or in the case of ISM non-conformity, within 3 months. The PSCO is then likely to report thedeficiencies as being outstanding and, until the endorsement is lifted, theship can expect to be targeted for inspection at subsequent WR VDLOWhen a deficiency needs to be rectified but where proper repair facilities or docks arenot available at the port of inspection, the ship may be allowed to sail to the nearestappropriate repair port. In assessing whether or not a ship is safe to proceed to seaand onto a repair port, the PSCO would consider:• the length and nature of the intended voyage;• the size and type of ship;• the nature of the cargo being carried; and• whether or not the crew were sufficiently is essential that the ship reach the repair port, as instructed. Failure to do so mightresult in a banning order being placed on the ship by the port RI VKLS RSHUDWLRQVIf the deficiencies found make cargo operations unsafe or threaten the marineenvironment, the PSCO might suspend ship operations, such as cargo work orbunkering. The following deficiencies might lead to a suspension:• incomplete oil transfer procedures when bunkering;• incomplete SOPEP arrangements;• incomplete information on the cargo; or• a non-compliant cargo loading OrdersA ship is detained where a PSCO decides that it is unsafe to proceed to sea orbecause the deficiencies are so serious that they need to be rectified before the shipsails. When deficiencies pose no reasonable threat to the environment and do not
seriously affect the safety of the ship or its crew, the ship should not be to Table 13 for examples of detainable detention order can be placed even though the deficiencies could be rectified beforethe scheduled sailing of the ship. A detention order might include an instruction thatthe ship had to remain in a particular place, or move to an anchorage or anotherberth. The order would specify the circumstances that would allow the ship to bereleased from detention. The absence of valid ISM certification might also lead to aship being coming to a decision on detention, particularly when it relates to structural ratherthan operational deficiencies, the PSCO should consider the seaworthiness of theship and not its age and make due allowance for fair wear and tear. If there arequestions about diminution rates of the main structural members, the PSCO would beexpected to contact the flag State / classification society. Damage temporarily buteffectively repaired for a voyage to a port for permanent repairs should not constitutegrounds for detention. Problems with the crew’s accommodation and livingconditions, however, would be treated more port State is obliged to notify the flag State of any detention. The flag State, or aclassification society acting on its behalf, may attend the ship to help resolve theproblem. In this case, the PSCO might agree to the remedial action proposed by thesurveyor and allow him to oversee the repairs. Whatever the arrangement theauthorisation of the repair and cost are for the master / a ship is detained all costs accrued by the port State to re-inspect the shipwould be charged to the ship, and detention orders would not be lifted until the portstate has received payment in ships are widely publicised by port State regions and multiple detentionscould severely impact on a ship’s ability to trade without ULJKW RI DSSHDO DJDLQVW D GHWHQWLRQ RUGHU RU DQ\ XQGXH GHOD\VIn the first instance the master should directly query any detention order with thePSCO before he leaves the ship, should the master feel that the detention order wasunfair. If that fails, the master could make an informal appeal to senior officials withinthe port State control Administration. If that fails, the ship has a formal right of appeal should be made to the detaining port State authority as soon as possibleand the flag State should also be informed of the action. The PSCO is required toinform the master of his right to proceedings would typically be conducted under the national laws of theport state, and laws that may require the serving of notice to proceed to arbitrationwithin a very short period after the order has been placed. The serving of noticewithin 21 days, for example, is not uncommon. An appeal will normally not result inthe detention order being automatically lifted.
Banning OrdersIn general, if a ship leaves an inspection port with deficiencies and is ordered toproceed to a nominated repair port, and either fails to comply with any of theconditions imposed or fails to arrive at that port, a banning order will be imposed onthat the case, for example, of a ship being detained in the absence of valid ISMcertification and the detention order being lifted to elevate port congestion, a banningorder would then be automatically applied and remain in force until that ship coulddemonstrate full ISM banning order would typically apply to all ports within a port State region and wouldremain in force until the shipowner could prove that all deficiencies had been majeure or other overriding safety considerations might however necessitate aport State granting special permission for the ship to enter a specific , in the exercise of port State control, a foreign ship is denied port entry, themaster and the flag State should be provided with reasons for the denial of entry.
7DEOH 'LDJUDP VKRZLQJ ZKDW KDSSHQV LI GHILFLHQFLHV DUH IRXQGOverriding Factor ship may betargeted for re-End ofinspection byinspectionanother port(if satisfactory)State controlYesYes Deficiencieslikely to beNoNoRe-Deficienciesidentified andinspectionrecorded aschecked at theundertakenoutstandingnext inspectionin databasewhen thePSCO checksthe previousreportsFailure toRectify ascomply with anyinstructedconditionsimposedNoYesYesNoArrive atPermitDeficienciesBanningDetentionrepair porttosufficient toOrderordersaildetain shipNoYesRectify asRectify asinstructedinstructed atYesbefore sailingrepair portDeficienciesRe-inspectionstill presentNoEnd ofinspection
7DEOH ([DPSOHV RI GHWDLQDEOH GHILFLHQFLHVUnder SOLAS:• failure of the main propulsion, electrical, pumping and steering systems• poor cleanliness of engine room, excessive amounts of oily-water in the bilges, pipeworkinsulation contaminated by oil• absence, insufficient capacity or poor condition of LSA equipment• absence, non-compliance or poor condition of FFA equipment, ventilation valves, fire dampersand quick closing devices• absence, non-compliance or poor condition of navigation lights, shapes and sound signals• absence or failure of mandatory navigation systems and equipment• absence of corrected nautical charts and publications• absence or failure of radiocommunication systems• number, composition or certification of crew not corresponding to safe manning certificate• serious deficiency of crew’s operational competence (see checklists)Under LOAD LINES:• significant areas of damage or corrosion, or pitting of plating and associated stiffening in decksand hull effecting seaworthiness, unless proper temporary repairs for a voyage to a port forpermanent repairs have been carried out• insufficient stability or ability to calculate stability conditions• absence or poor condition of hull closing devices such as hatchcovers and watertight doors• overloading• absence or inability to read the draught marksUnder MARPOL (Annex I):• absence, poor condition or failure of oily-water filtering equipment, oil discharge monitoring andcontrol systems and alarms• remaining capacity of slop and/or sludge tank insufficient for intended voyage• no oil record bookUnder 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 theprevention of pollution• insufficient rested crewmembers for first watch and relieving watch duties at the commencementof the voyageUnder ILO Conventions:• insufficient food or potable water for next voyage• excessively unsanitary conditions on board• no heating in accommodation if ship operating in low temperature areas• excessive garbage, blocked passageways
Section &+(&./,6760XVWHULQJ1Are crewmembers aware of their duties indicated in the muster list and aware of thelocation where to perform those duties?2Are muster lists exhibited in conspicuous places throughout the ship, including on thebridge, in the engine room and in the crew accommodation space?3Does the muster list show the duties assigned to different crewmembers?4Does the muster list specify which officers are assigned to ensure that LSA and FFAequipment is maintained in good condition and available for immediate use?5Does the muster list specify substitutes for key persons that might become disabled?6Is the format of the muster list approved?7Is the muster list up-to-date and in conformity with the crew list?8Are the duties assigned to crewmembers manning the survival craft (boats or rafts)in accordance by SOLAS chapter III, part B?9Are the persons placed in charge of each survival craft and their substitutes named?10Are the operating instructions for the survival craft satisfactory?&RPPXQLFDWLRQ11Are key persons able to communicate with each other?12Which languages are the working languages used onboard?13Are key persons able to understand each other during inspections or drills?
$EDQGRQ 6KLS 'ULOOV DQG /6$ (TXLSPHQW14Is the correct alarm used for summoning crewmembers to the muster station(s) and are crewmembersfamiliar with that alarm?15During drills, are the survival craft correctly manned and operated by the assigned persons?16Do crewmembers dress suitably for drills and know how to correctly don lifejackets?17Is at least one lifeboat lowered after the necessary preparations, and launched with its assigned crew intothe water at least once every 3 months?18Can crewmembers start and operate the lifeboat engine(s) satisfactorily?19Can crewmembers operate the davits (cranes) used for launching liferafts acceptably?20Are crewmembers familiar with their assigned duties during abandon ship operations?21Have crewmembers in charge of survival craft complete knowledge of the operation and equipment of thecraft?22Can two crewmembers undertake the preparations for embarking and launching survival craft beundertaken in less than 5 minutes?23Does the performance of crewmembers on the drills suggest that the ship could be abandoned in 30minutes?24Is the condition of the survival craft, their contents (food, water etc) and launching arrangements (includingdavits, falls, winches and brakes) satisfactory?25Is the condition of the side lighting, emergency communication means, operating instructions (posters /signs) and embarkation ladder arrangements satisfactory?26Are the liferafts correctly serviced, stowed and connected to the ship by hydrostatic releases?27Is the number and stowage of lifejackets ( including immersion suits and thermal protective aids, whereappropriate) correct, and the number, condition and validity of life-buoys, rockets, smoke signals andSARTs?
)LUH 'ULOOV DQG ))$ (TXLSPHQW28Do the crewmembers know how to activate the fire alarm?29Do the crewmembers understand the procedure for reporting a fire, once detected, to the bridge and/ordamage control centre?30When the crew alarm is sounded, do the fire fighting parties promptly muster at their stations?31During the course of fighting a simulated fire, do the fire fighting parties correctly bring into action, don andeffectively use all the appropriate equipment?32Do the fire fighting team leaders give effective orders and report adequately to the bridge and/or damagecontrol centre?33Do the medical teams correctly take care of injured persons and handle the stretchers in an acceptablemanner through narrow passageways, doors and stairways?34Do the appropriate crewmembers known how to operate the emergency generator, CO2 room, sprinklerand emergency fire pumps correctly?35Do the appropriate crewmembers understand the operation of manually-operated fire doors, watertightdoors and fire dampers?36Do the following function correctly: fire doors, including their remote operation if appropriate fire dampers and smoke flaps quick-closing remotely operated valves emergency stops of fans and fuel oil pumps fire detection and fire alarm system fixed systems in engine room and cargo spaces (servicing dates) main and emergency fire pumps37Do the fire fighting appliances comply with the fire control plan?'DPDJH DQG )LUH &RQWURO 3ODQV38Are the damage and fire control plans (or booklets) provided?39Are the crewmembers familiar with their duties according to, and information given on the control plans?40Can key persons explain the actions to be taken in various damage conditions?41Are key persons knowledgeable in respect of watertight bulkheads and the openings therein , the meansof closing and the positions of any controls?42Can key persons explain arrangements for the correction of any list due to flooding?43Can key persons explain the effect of trim and stability in case of damage to and the consequentialflooding of a compartment and the countermeasures to be taken?
44Are the fire control plans permanently exhibited, up-to-date, and is one copy readily available in anaccessible position?45Are key persons familiar with the principal structural members forming part of the various fire sections andthe means of access to the different compartments?0DQXDOV DQG ,QVWUXFWLRQV46Do key crewmembers understand manuals, instructions etc. relevant to the safecondition and operation of the ship and its equipment?Is the following information provided in a language understood by the crew and are the crewmembers47aware of the contents and able to respond accordingly to: instructions concerning the maintenance and operation of FFA equipment and installations? instructions to be followed in the event of an emergency? posters and signs illustrating the purpose of controls and the procedures for operating survival craft launching controls? instructions for on board maintenance of LSA equipment? training manuals containing instructions and information on the LSA equipment provided? the shipboard oil pollution emergency plan (SOPEP)? the stability booklet, associated plans and information contained therein?48Are key crewmembers aware of the requirements for maintenance, periodic testing, training, drills andlogbook entries?,60 &RGH49Is there a Company safety and environmental protection policy and are key personnel familiar with it?50Is the safety management documentation and manual readily available onboard?51Is the relevant documentation on the safety management system (SMS) in a working language or alanguage understood by crewmembers?52Can key personnel identify the company responsible for the operation of the ship and does thiscorrespond with the Company named on the ISM certificates?53Can key personnel identify the designated person ?54Are procedures in place for establishing and maintaining contact with shore management in anemergency?55Are there programmes available onboard for drills and exercises to prepare crewmembers for emergencyactions?56Is documentation available to show how new crewmembers have been made familiar with their duties?
57Can the Master provide documented proof of his responsibilities and authority, and allow for, andsit comfortably with, his overriding authority?58Have non-conformities been reported to the Company and has corrective action been taken by theCompany?59Does the ship have a maintenance routine and are records available?%ULGJH DQG 5DGLR 2SHUDWLRQV DQG (TXLSPHQW60Is the OOW familiar with the bridge control and navigational equipment, changing the steering mode fromautomatic to manual and the ship s manoeuvring characteristics?61Does the OOW have knowledge of the location and operation of all safety and navigational equipment,including fire detection and alarm panels?62Is the OOW familiar with collision avoidance procedures, the COLREGS, the radar, ARPA controls andcapable of obtaining acceptable radar picture?63Is the OOW familiar with the procedures applying to the navigation of the ship in all circumstances,including: management of nautical charts and nautical publications bridge procedures, instructions and manuals voyage planning periodic tests and checks of equipment compass error checks preparations for arrival and departure signalling communications emergencies logbook entries64Is the GMDSS radio operator(s) able to use all components of the radio arrangement including its testfunctions?65Is the GMDSS operator(s) able to explain the correct procedures for cancelling a false distress alert?66Is the GMDSS equipment compliant for the sea areas the ship is trading, and if an Exemption certificate isissued, does the ship comply with the special requirements imposed by the exemption?67Does the ship receive Navtex MSI messages?68Are the following satisfactory: EPIRB installation Radar transponder installation Antenna condition Radio batteries
&DUJR 2SHUDWLRQV69Are personnel assigned with specific duties related to the cargo and any cargo handling equipment familiarwith those duties?70Are such personnel familiar with any dangers posed by the cargo or cargo operations?71Are the oxygen analysers and other personal protection devices used during cargo operations in goodworking order?72Are Ship / Shore Safety Checklists used?73Are bending stresses with maximum limits calculated?74Are cargo / ballasting operations carried out in accordance with the Loading / Discharging Plan and cargostowage conditions being observed?75Are the responsible crewmembers familiar with the Cargo Securing Manual and other Codes of Practice,where relevant?76If the Bulk Carrier Booklet has been endorsed with any restrictions on the cargoes that can be carried, arethose restrictions being observed?2SHUDWLRQ RI 0DFKLQHU\77Are key engineering personnel familiar with their duties related to the operation of essential machinery,such as: Emergency and stand-by sources of electrical power Auxiliary steering gear Bilge and fire pumps any other equipment essential in emergency situations78Are such personnel familiar with: the emergency generators actions necessary before the main engine can be started different possibilities of starting the main engine in combination with the source of starting energy procedures when the first attempt to start the main engine fails79Are such personnel familiar with: the stand-by generator engine possibilities of starting the stand-by engine automatically and/or by hand blackout procedures load sharing system80Are such personnel familiar with: which type of auxiliary steering gear system applies to the ship how it is indicated which steering gear unit is in operation what action is needed to bring the auxiliary steering gear into operation
81Are such personnel familiar with: bilge pumps number and location of bilge pumps, including emergency bilge pumps starting procedures for all these bilge pumps appropriate valves to operate most likely causes of failure of bilge pump operation and the possible remedies fire pumps number and location of fire pumps, including emergency fire pump starting procedures for all fire pumps and appropriate valves to open?82Are such personnel familiar with the starting and maintenance of lifeboat / rescue boat engines?83Are such personnel familiar with the local control procedures for those systems which are normallycontrolled from the bridge?84Are such personnel familiar with the maintenance procedure for batteries?85Are such personnel familiar with emergency stops, dampers, fire detection and alarm systems, theoperation of watertight and fire doors?86Are such personnel familiar with the change of control from automatic to manual for cooling water and lubeoil systems for the main and auxiliary engines?%XQNHULQJ 2SHUDWLRQV87Are bunkering transfer procedures posted, available and understood by all relevant personnel?88Are an appropriate number of personnel on duty for bunkering?89Are there means of communication between ship s bunkering personnel and between ship and ashore /barge?90Are there procedures to report and deal with oil discharges?&RQWURO RI 2LO\ 0L[WXUHV IURP 0DFKLQHU\ 6SDFHV91Have all the operational requirements of MARPOL Annex I been met, taking into account: the quantity of oil residues generated the capacity of sludge and bilge water holding tanks the capacity of the oily water separator?92Have all the correct entries been made in the Oil Record Book?93Has the correct use been made of reception facilities, and have any alleged inadequate facilities beennoted and reported by the Master to the flag State?94Are the responsible personnel familiar with the procedures for handling sludge and bilge water?
&RQWURO RI *DUEDJH95Have all the operational requirements of MARPOL Annex V and national legislation been met?96Has the correct use been made of reception facilities, and have any alleged inadequate facilities beennoted and reported by the Master to the flag State?97Are all ship s personnel familiar with the principle of minimising the amount of potential garbage and theshipboard procedures for handling and storing garbage as contained in the Garbage Management Plan?98Are ship s personnel familiar with the disposal and discharge requirements under MARPOL Annex Vinside and outside a special area?99Are they aware of the areas determined as special areas?
INSPECTION REPORTING FORMINTERCARGO has developed this form for ships to report their experiences of port State controlinspections where the performance / practice of the Port State Control Officer (PSCO) has causedconcern to the ship. Confidentiality is assured, unless INTERCARGO is requested to DETAILS (as recorded on "Report Form A" by the PSCO)1 Reporting authority of2 Name of ship11 Place of inspection6 IMO number10 Date of final report7 Gross tonnageINSPECTION PRACTICE / PERFORMANCEInterval between inspections: Less than six months since last "clean" inspection (no recorded deficiencieqs)Timing of the inspection during scheduled port stay: Did the PSCO attend the ship at an unreasonable / unneqcessarily inconvenienttime? . within hours of the ship’s scheduled departure timeCharging policy imposed: Excessive level of chargeqs Unfair application of chargeqsUnreasonable attitude of the PSCO: The PSCO proceeded with a "more detailed inspection" despite the lack of clear groundsq The PSCO required corrective actions not called for by class or convention regulationq The PSCO imposed undue demands on the routine operation of the shipq The actions of the PSCO unnecessarily delayed the shipqIdentification of deficiencies: The PSCO showed poor professional judgemenqt The PSCO exaggerated the severity of the deficiencieqs The nature of the deficiencies identified and the corrective actions needed to clear theqdeficiencies were not clearly explainedDetention order: The opportunity to consult owner, class or flag State was not providedq The detention was unfair / unreasonableq The PSCO gave no information on the right to appeal his decisionqREASONS (please give experiences not listed, or expand on any of the points raised above)Master:Company:RETURN FORM TOPost:INTERCARGO, 4 London Wall Buildings,Blomfield Street, London, EC2M 5NT, UKFax:+ 44 (0)20 7638 3943E-mail:info@
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DRY CARGO SHIPOWNERSnd2 Floor, 4 London Wall Buildings, Blomfield St., London, EC2M 5NTPhone: +44 (0)20 7638 3989 Fax: +44 (0)20 7638 3943 E-mail: info@ Web Site:
