 History

 Need for port state inspections

 Key elements and basic principle
 What is substandard ship.
 Maritime regulations with articles covered by
PSC
 Who carries out port state inspections and
boarding procedure
 Types of inspections.
 Selection of vessels for Inspection and criteria
to prioritize.
 Complaints received from master and crew
 Inspection procedure
 Clear grounds for more detailed inspection.
 Deficiencies, detention and rectification.
 Criteria for detention of vessel.
 Guidelines for PSC inspectors to decide for
detention
 Detainable deficiencies.
 Action Codes
 Regional co operation and agreements.
 Information exchange
 Certificate issued by other countries
 Inspection of ships below convention size
 Goal and future of PSC
 Technical assistance by IMO
 The responsibilities to ensure that vessels
comply with the provisions of the relevant
regulations rest upon the owners, masters, the
Flag states and the Classification societies.

 Unfortunately, some flag States, for various

reasons, fail to fulfil their internationally-agreed
commitments and consequently some vessels are
sailing the world’ seas in unsafe condition,
threatening the lives of all those on board as well
as the marine environment.
 In some cases flag state may not be able to
arrange surveyor/breakdowns between surveys.
 To avoid substandard ships continue sailing
due to lack of inspections by flag state,
operators not taking care to mainatin the
standards,Port state control inspections have
come in to picture.

 Port Stare Control is a system of harmonized

inspection-procedures designed to target
sub-standard vessels with the main objective
being their eventual elimination.
 Earlier there was a system where eight European
countries had joined to gather to share information
about the ships coming to their ports to identify
substandard ships.
 This process was swiftly accelerated by an impressive
shipping accident In March 1978 the grounding of
the supertanker “Amoco Cadiz” off the coast of
Brittany (France) resulted in a massive oil spill,

 This pressure resulted in a more comprehensive

Memorandum of Understanding signed in Paris in
1982 (known as Paris MOU) which covered:
◦ Safety of life at sea;
◦ Prevention of pollution by vessels;
◦ Living and working conditions on board ships
 PORT STATE CONTROL
Why this Need For
Control

1. To complement Flag state implementation

2. Vessels do not call at Flag state regularly
3. Difficult to appoint inspectors or
recognized organizations at foreign port

8
4. Breakdown of equipment in-between
surveys may occur.
5. Prevent operation of sub-standard ships
while avoiding competition between ports
6. Contribute towards :
a) increased level of safety (SOLAS)
b) protection of marine environment
c) improved living conditions
9
 Ensuring Compliance with International
regulations with regards to safety, marine
Pollution and threat to working environments.

 Detaining substandard ships until their

deficiencies are rectified and Eventual elimination
of substandard ships.

 The idea is to inspect a given percentage of

estimated number of individual foreign merchant
vessels entering their ports; ( Normal annual
figure 25 %)
 Application of targeting system when determining the
selection of vessel for checking so that well run ships are
not necessarily harassed while the substandrad ships are
checked.

 As a general rule, ships will not be inspected within six

months of a previous inspection in a MOU port, unless
there are “clear grounds” for inspection . There are some
ships which must be inspected depending upon their age
and type.

 All possible efforts are made to avoid unduly detaining or

delaying a vessel;

 Inspections are generally unannounced.

 WHAT IS A
SUBSTANDARD SHIP

 ‘Substandard’ is defined in IMO Resolution

A.787(19) as being ‘substantially below the
standards required’ but is interpreted to
widely varying degrees from one organisation
to another.

12
 They also know that substandard ships don’t
just happen !

It is a commercial decision by someone

somewhere or negligence by operators

13
 International Convention on Load Lines 1996, as
amended, its 1998 protocol, (LOADLINES 66/88);

 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea

(SOLAS) 1974, its Protocol of 1978, as amemded and the
Protocol of 1998, (SOLAS 74/78/88);

 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution

from Ships, 1973, as modified by the potocol of 1978, as
amended (MARPOL 73/78);

 International Convention on Standards of Training,

Certification and Watch keeping for Seafarers 1978, as
amended (STCW 78);
 Convention on the International Regulations
for Preventing Collision at Sea 1972, as
amended (COLREG 72);

 International Convention on Tonnage

Measurement of Ships 1969 (TONNAGE
1969),

 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards)

Convention, 1976 (ILO Convention No. 147).
 RESOLUTION A.787(19)
 adopted on 23 November 1995
 International Convention for the Safety of Life at
Sea (SOLAS) 1974, its Protocol of 1978, as
amemded and the Protocol of 1998, (SOLAS
74/78/88);
◦ REGulation I/19 : general provisions and control
◦ Regulation XI/6 : Management of safe operation
of ships /verification
◦ Regulation XI/4 : Special; measures to enhance
maritime safety/PSC on operational requirement
◦ Regulation XI/2 : Special measures to enhance
the Maritime security.
 MARPOL 73/78:
◦ Article 5 : Certificate and special Rules for Inspection of ships
◦ Article 6 : Detection of violence and enforcement of conventions
◦ Annex 1 : regulation 8A: : PSC on operational requirement
◦ Annex II : regulation 15 : PSC on operational requirement
◦ Annex III : Regulation 8 : PSC on operational requirement
◦ Annex V : Regulation 8 : PSC on operational requirement
 LOAD LINES :
◦ Article 21 : Check for ILCC
◦ Limitations on draft to which the ship can be loaded on its
international voyage.
◦ Ensure adequate stability.
◦ Provision to determine free board of tankers
 Tonnage 1969:
◦ Article 12 : verification of Tonnage certificate
 STCW
◦ Article X : Control regulations ( Right of PSCO ) To ensure all seafarers have
appropriate certification )
 ILO Convention 147
◦ Article 4 : gives provision for port state control.
 Port State Control is carried out by a Port State Control Officer (PSCO).

 The PSCO is a properly qualified person, authorised to carry out Port

Stare Control inspections in accordance with MOU regulations by the
maritime authority of the port State and acts under its responsibility.

 All PSCOs carry an identity card, issued by their maritime authorities.

 PSC Inspector will board a vessel without announcement and check

primarily the ships condition,ship’s documents for completeness and
validity.

 If there are any grounds to believe that the ship is substantially not in
compliance with the International Conventions, the inspectors will carry
out an “expanded inspection” of the ship’s condition and the required
equipment
 The master will receive an official inspection report
consisting of Form A and B.
◦ Form A lists the vessel’s details and the validity of the
relevant certificates.
◦ Form B shows the list of “deficiencies” found, together with
the action code which describe a time frame for
rectification for each deficiency.
 If there are “clear grounds” that the vessel represents
a hazard to safety and/or to environment, the PSCO
has the right to detain the ship in port until the
respective deficiencies have been rectified and
resurveyed.
 The PSC authority will either resurvey by its own
inspectors or ask for a survey report from the
Classification surveyor to verify the rectification.
 Arrival of PSCO at Jetty or Quayside

Visual Inspection of condition of Ship Side from Forward

to Aft, above Water Line including Super Structure,
specially, Hull - for dents, damages, pitting, paintwork and
corrosion.

While on way to the Master/Responsible Ship's Officer, with

note the Housekeeping and apparent condition of the
equipment in places.

Introduce to the Master/Responsible Ship's Officer, with

identity card.

22
Check all the Certificates including ISM & GMDSS, for
validity and confirm the year of build and size of the ship.
Decide about applicability of convention provisions.

Take a general walk through of the ship including Deck, and

have a visual check of the condition of all the equipment and
machinery as well as Hatch closing Arrangement, Air pipes
and Vent coamings.

Steps 2,3,4,5 & 6

Satisfactory

IF NOT IF YES
Proceed to a more Report Accordingly.
detailed inspection on
clear grounds.

23
 Initial:
◦ 36 Certificates & Documents (Crew and ship’s condition
including engine room and accommodation meets
international standards)
 Detailed:
◦ In absence of valid certificates / documents or Clear
Ground that ships condition does not meet the
international standards
 Expanded- once a year:
◦ Passenger ships:
◦ Gas and chemical tankers older than 10 years
◦ Bulk carriers, older than 12 years
◦ Oil tankers , 5 years or less from the date of phasing
out in accordance with MARPOL 73/78
 Suspended:
◦ In exceptional circumstances where, as a result of
the initial control and more detailed inspection, the
overall condition of a ship and its equipment, also
taking the crew and its living and working
conditions into account, is found to be sub-
standard, the Authority may suspend an inspection
until the responsible parties have taken the steps
necessary to ensure that the ship complies with the
Requirements of he relevant instruments.
 Every day a number of ships will be selected for a
port State control inspection.
 To facilitate such selection, a computer database is
consulted by PSCOs for data on ships particulars
and for the reports of previous inspections.
 If a ship has been inspected within the MOU’s
region during the previous six months and, on that
occasion, was found to comply, the ship will in
principle be exempted from further inspection,
unless there are clear grounds to warrant further
investigation.
 Ships visiting a port of a State, the Authority
of which is a signatory to the Memorandum,
for the first time or after an absence of 12
months or more.
 In the absence of appropriate data for this
purpose, the Authorities will rely upon the
available data in the information system
and inspect those ships which have not
been registered in that information;
 Ships falling under category of expanded
inspection
 Ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State,
the Authority of which is a signatory to the Memorandum, on
the condition that the deficiencies noted must be rectified
within a specified period, upon expiry of such period;

 Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship’s construction

and equipment, issued in accordance with the relevant
instruments and the classification certificates, have been
issued by an organization which is not recognized by the
Authority;

 Ships which are in a category for which expanded inspection

has been decided.
◦ Ships that have been reported by pilots or port authorities
of having deficiencies which may jeopardize their safe
operation;

◦ Ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods, which have

failed to report all relevant information to the Authority of
the port and coastal State;

◦ Ships that have been the subject of a report or notification

by another Authority;

◦ Ships that have been the subject of a report by the master,

a crew member, or any person with a legitimate interest in
the safe operation, shipboard living and working conditions
or the prevention of pollution;
 Ships that :

 have been involved in a collision, grounding or stranding, on their way

to the port,

 accused of an illegal violation of the provisions on discharge of harmful

substances,

 manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner whereby routing measures,

adopted by the IMO, or safe navigation practices and procedures have
not been followed,

 operated in such a way as to pose a danger to persons, property or the

environment;

 Ships, which have been suspended from their Classification society for
safety reasons during the preceding six months.
 As far as complaints received from masters or crew members,
the PSC authority receiving such complaints has the
obligation not to disclose the source of information.
 In this way, masters or crew members will not face the risk of
reprisal.

 A port State control inspection on board will
normally start with verification of the following
certificates and documents, in accordance with
the provisions of the just mentioned “relevant
instrument”:
 Oil record book, part 1 and 2(if relevant)
 Record of construction and equipment;
 International tonnage certificate (1969);
 Minimum safe manning document;
 Certificates of competency;
 International certificates of fitness for the carriage of
liquefied gas in bulk or dangerous chemical in bulk (if
relevant)
 Medical certificates (see ILO Convention 73);
 Stability information;
 Cargo record book (if relevant);
 Safety management certificate and copy of the
document of compliance (issued in accordance with ISM
Code);
 High speed craft safety certificate and permit to
operate;
 If appropriate, class certificates as to the ship’s hull
strength an machinery installations;
 Survey reports files in case of bulk carriers or oil
tankers;
 Muster list, fire control plan, and for passenger
ships, a damage control plan, a decision support
system for the master;
 Ship’s log book with respect to the records of
tests and drills and the log for records of
inspection and maintenance of life-saving
appliances;
 Reports of previous PSC inspections;
 Cargo securing manual (if relevant)
 Loading and unloading plan for bulk carriers;
 Garbage record book
 In addition, the PSCO conducts a general inspection
of several areas on board to verify that the conditions
of the ship complies with those required by the
various certificates.
 If valid certificates or documents are not on board,
or if there are “clear grounds” to believe that a ship,
its equipment or its crew does not substantially meet
the requirements of a relevant conventions, a “more
detailed inspection” will be carried out.
 If the ship is found to comply, the PSCO will issue a
“clean inspection report” (Form A) to the master of
the ship.
 Next, the data of the ship and the inspection result
will be recorded on the central computer database.
1. Vessels whose statutory certificates on the vessel’s construction or equipment,
issued in accordance with the conventions, and the classification certificates
have been issued by an organization which is not recognized by the authority;

2. Ships that have deficiencies to be rectified in the next port;

3. Ships that have deficiencies to be rectified within 14 days;

4. Ships flying the flag of a non-Party to a relevant instrument;

5. Ships that are in a category for which “expanded inspection” has been decided,
i.e.: oil tankers older than 20 years, bull carriers older than 12 years, gas and
chemical carriers older than 10 years, and passenger ships;

6. During examination of the certificates and documents inaccuracies have been

revealed or the documents have not been properly kept updated
 Indications that the crew members are unable to
communicate with each other, or that the ship is unable to
communicate with shore- based authorities;

 Evidence of cargo and other operations not being

conducted safely or in accordance with IMO guidelines;

 Failure of the master of an oil tanker to produce the record

of the oil discharge monitoring and control system for the
last ballast voyage;

 Absence of an up to date muster list, or crew members not

aware of their duties in the event of fire or an order to
abandon ship;
 The absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the conventions;

 Evidence from the PSCO’s general impression and observations that serious hull
and structural deterioration or deficiencies exit that may jeopardize the
structural, watertight or weather tight integrity of the vessel;

 Excessively unsanitary conditions on board the vessel;

 Information or evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential
shipboard operation relating to the safety of vessels or the prevention of
pollution, or that such operations have not been carried out.

 Emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancelation procedures,

 Receipt of report or complaint containing information that ship seems

substandard
 If PSCO has clear Grounds for detailed
inspection, Master is informed/Advised .
 Master may contact Adminstration as
appropriate, the recognised organization for
issuance of certificates and invite their
presence onboard.
 When deficiencies are found during the inspection,
the nature of the deficiencies and the
corresponding action taken are filled in on the
inspection report (see action Code).
 In principle, all deficiencies must be rectified
before departure of the vessel. It is up to the
professional judgement of the PSCO to decide that
he has to board the ship on a second occasion, to
check personally if all deficiencies have indeed
been rectified
 If deficiencies cannot be remedied in the
port of inspection, the maritime authority
may allow the ship to proceed to another
port, subject to any appropriate conditions
determined by the maritime authority of the
port of departure, with a view to ensuring
that the ship can so proceed without
unreasonable danger to safety, health or
the environment. In this case a follow-up
inspection will normally be carried out in
this respective port.
 The following are the main criteria for the detention of a vessel:

 A vessel which is unsafe to proceed to sea will be detained upon the

first inspection, irrespective of the time the vessel is scheduled to stay
in port;

 The deficiencies on a vessel are so serious that they will have to be

rectified before the ship sails.

 In case deficiencies are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the

environment, the maritime authorities will ensure that the hazards is
rectified before the vessel is allowed to proceed to sea.

 For this purpose they will either detain the vessel or issue a formal
prohibition of a vessel to continue an operation. Master needs to
confirm receipt of this informatioin

 The flag State and the classification society will be notified immediately.
 When a ship has been detained all costs accrued by
the port State to inspect the ship will be charged to
the owner or the operator of the ship or to his
representative in the port State.
 The detention shall not be lifted until full payment
has been made or a sufficient guarantee has been
given for the reimbursement of the costs.
 The owner or the operator of a ship has a right of
appeal against a detention decision taken by the
Port State authority. An appeal will not however
result in the detention being immediately lifted.
 When deciding whether the deficiencies found in a ship are
sufficiently serious to merit detention the PSCO should assess
whether:
 the ship has relevant, valid documentation;
◦ the ship has the crew required in the minimum Safe Manning Document.
◦ During inspection the PSCO should further assess whether the ship and/or
crew, throughout its forthcoming voyage, is able to:
 navigate safely;
 safely handle, carry and monitor the condition of the cargo;
 operate the engine-room safely;
 maintain proper propulsion and steering;
 fight fires effectively in any part of the ship if necessary;
 abandon ship speedily and safely and effect rescue if necessary;
 prevent pollution of the environment;
 maintain adequate stability;
 maintain adequate watertight integrity;
 communicate in distress situations if necessary; and
 provide safe and healthy conditions on board.
 If the result of any of these assessments is negative, taking into
account all deficiencies found, the ship should be strongly
considered for detention.
 A combination of deficiencies of a less serious nature may also
warrant the detention of the ship.
 The lack of valid certificates as required by the relevant
instruments may warrant the detention of ships.
 However, ships flying the flag of States not a Party to a
convention or not having implemented another relevant
instrument, are not entitled to carry the certificates provided for
by the convention or other relevant instrument.
 Therefore, absence of the required certificates should not by
itself constitute a reason to detain these ships; however, in
applying the “no more favourable treatment” clause, substantial
compliance with the provisions and criteria specified in this
document must be required before the ship sails.
 Detainable deficiencies
◦ To assist the PSCO in the use of these guidelines,
there follows a list of deficiencies, grouped under
relevant conventions and/or codes, which are
considered to be of such a serious nature that they
may warrant the detention of the ship involved.
◦ This list is not considered exhaustive but is
intended to give examples
 Areas under the SOLAS Convention
◦ Failure of proper operation of propulsion and other essential
machinery, as well as electrical installations.
◦ Insufficient cleanliness of engine room, excess amount of oily-
water mixture in bilges, insulation of
piping including exhaust pipes in engine room contaminated by
oil, and improper operation of bilge
pumping arrangements.
 Failure of the proper operation of emergency generator, lighting,
batterie s and switches.
 Failure of proper operation of the main and auxiliary steering gear.
 Absence, insufficient capacity or serious deterioration of personal
life-saving appliances, survival craft
 and launching arrangements.
 Contd on Next Slide

 Absence, non-compliance or substantial deterioration
to the extent that it can not comply with its
 intended use of fire detection system, fire alarms, fire-
fighting equipment, fixed fire-extinguishing
installation, ventilation valves, fire dampers, and quick-
closing devices.
 Absence, substantial deterioration or failure of proper
operation of the cargo deck area fire protection
 on tankers.
 Absence, non-compliance or serious deterioration of
lights, shapes or sound signals.
 Absence or failure of the proper operation of the radio
equipment for distress and safety communication.
 Contd on next slide.
 Absence or failure of the proper operation of navigation
equipment, taking the relevant provisions of SOLAS
regulation V/12(o) into account.

Absence of corrected navigational charts, and/or all other

relevant nautical publications necessary for the intended
voyage, taking into account that electronic charts may be
used as a substitute for the charts.
 Absence of non-sparking exhaust ventilation for cargo
pump rooms.
 Serious deficiency in the operational requirements listed in
3.5.1 to 3.5.69.
 Number, composition or certification of crew not
corresponding with safe manning document
 Areas under the IBC Code
 Transport of a substance not mentioned in the
Certificate of Fitness or missing cargo information.
 Missing or damaged high pressure safety devices.
 Electrical installations not intrinsically safe or not
corresponding to the code requirements.
 Sources of ignition in hazardous locations.
 Contravention of special requirements.
 Exceeding of maximum allowable cargo quantity
per tank.
 Insufficient heat protection for sensitive products.
 Areas under the IGC Code
 Transport of a substance not mentioned in the Certificate of
Fitness or missing cargo information.
 Missing closing devices for accommodations or service spaces.
 Bulkhead not gastight.
 Defective air locks.
 Missing or defective quick-closing valves.
 Missing or defective safety valves.
 Electrical installations not intrinsically safe or not corresponding
to the code requirements.
 Ventilators in cargo area not operable.
 Pressure alarms for cargo tanks not operable.
 Gas detection plant and/or toxic gas detection plant defective.
 Transport of substances to be inhibited without valid inhibitor
certificate.
Areas under the Load Lines Convention
 Significant areas of damage or corrosion, or pitting of
plating and associated stiffening in decks and
 hull effecting seaworthiness or strength to take local
loads, unless properly authorized temporary repairs for a
voyage to a port for permanent repairs have been carried
out.
 A recognized case of insufficient stability.
 The absence of sufficient and reliable information, in an
approved form, which by rapid and simple means, enables
the master to arrange for the loading and ballasting of the
ship in such a way that a safe margin of stability is
maintained at all stages and at varying conditions of the
voyage, and that the creation of any unacceptable stresses
in the ship's structure are avoided.
 Absence, substantial deterioration or
defective closing devices, hatch closing
arrangements and watertight/weathertight
doors.
 Overloading.
 Absence of, or impossibility to read, draught
marks and/or Load Line marks.
 Areas under MARPOL Convention, Annex I
 Absence, serious deterioration or failure of proper operation of
the oily-water filtering equipment, the oil discharge monitoring
and control system or the 15ppm alarm arrangements.
 Remaining capacity of slop and/or sludge tank insufficient for
the intended voyage.
 Oil Record Book not available.
 Unauthorized discharge bypass fitted.
 Areas under the MARPOL Convention, Annex II
 Absence of P and A Manual.
 Cargo is not categorized.
 No Cargo Record Book available.
 Transport of oil-like substances without satisfying the
requirements.
 Unauthorized discharge bypass fitted.
 Areas under the STCW Convention

 Failure of seafarers to hold a certificate, to have an appropriate

certificate, to have a valid dispensation or to provide
documentary proof that an application for an endorsement has
been submitted to the Administration.
 Failure to comply with the applicable safe manning requirements
of the Administration.
 Failure of navigational or engineering watch arrangements to
conform to the requirements specified for the ship by the
Administration.
 Absence in a watch of a person qualified to operate equipment
essential to safe navigation, safety radiocommunications or the
prevention of marine pollution.
 Inability to provide for the first watch at the commencement of a
voyage and for subsequent relieving watches persons who are
sufficiently rested and otherwise fit for duty.
 Areas which may not warrant a detention, but
where, e.g., cargo operations have to be
suspended
◦ Failure of the proper operation (or maintenance) of
inert gas system, cargo related gear or machinery
will be considered sufficient grounds to stop cargo
operation
 On the conclusion of an inspection, the
master of the vessel will be provided with a
document, which will indicate the results of
the inspection and details of any action
required to be taken. As described earlier
 Each deficiency is commonly given a in a codified
form in the inspection report, called “ action code”.
 The descriptions of all codes for “action taken” can
be found on the reverse side of Form B of the
inspection report.
 The action codes most frequently used are:
 10 deficiency rectified
 15 to be rectified at the next port of call;
 16 to be rectified within 14 days;
 17 master instructed to rectify deficiency before
departure;
 30 Grounds for detention;
 40 next port of call informed;
 50 Flag State/ Consul informed;
 70 Classification society informed
 For Port state control to be effective , regional
approach is required. This will ensure that
substandard ships have lesser places to hide.
 Unless this approach is adopted, operators
will divert their ships to regions where no PSC
inspections are conducted.
 Therefore in several regions around the
world, coastal countries have signed an
agreement, “Memorandum of Understanding
on Port State Control, often abridged “MOU
on PSC”.
 At present there are the following Regional Agreement on PSC:

 Paris MOU for the European Region signed in 1982, whose

members are: Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation,Spain, Sweden, U.K.
 The Acuerdo de Viña del Mar(Latin America Agreement), signed
in Viña del Mar (Chile) in 1992, whose members are:
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador,
Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela;

 Tokyo MOU for the Asian Region signed in 1993, whose

members are: Australia, Canada, China, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan,
Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papa New Guinea,
Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Solomon Islands,
Thailand, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Hong Kong;
 Caribbean MOU for the Caribbean Region signed in 1996 in Barbados;

 Mediterranean MOU for the Southern Mediterranean Region signed in 1997 in Valletta
and comprising: Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Malta, Lebanon, Morocco,
Tunisia, Turkey, Palestinian Authority;

 Indian Ocean MOU signed in 1998 in Pretoria and comprising: Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia,
India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Tanzania, Yemen;

 West and Central Africa MOU signed in Abuja (Nigeria) in 1999, whose members are:
Benin, Cape Verde, Congo, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia,
Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Togo.

 Two more regional agreements are under development:
 Persian Gulf Region, comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and
United Arab Emirates;
 - Black Sea Area, comprising Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey,
Ukraine.

 In the United States PSC is carried out by US Coast Guard.

 Memorandum of Understanding
Item Paris MOU Acuerdo de Vina Del Tokyo MOU Carribbiean MOU Mediteranean MOU
Mar
Participating Belgium, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, Canada, Anguilla, Antigua and Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt,
Countries Croatia, Denmark, Chile, Colombia, China, Fiji, Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Israel, Malta, Lebanon*,
and Finland, Germany, Cuba, Ecuador, Indonesia, Japan, Barbados, Bermuda*, British Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey,
Associate Greece, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Republic of Korea, Virgin Island, Cayman Palestinian Authorities*
Members Netherlands, Norway, Uruguay, Venezuela Malaysia, New Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Total no.: 10
Poland, Portugal, Total no.: 11 Zealand, Papa New Guyana, Jamaica, Montserrat,
Russian Federation, Guinea, Philippines, Netherlands Antilles, Saint
Spain, Sweden, United Russian Federation, Kitts & Nevis*, Saint Lucia*,
Kingdom Singapore, Solomon Saint Vincents & the
Total no.: 18 Islands*, Thailand, Grenadines*, Suriname,
Venetau, Viet Nam*, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks
Hong Kong (China) and Caicos Islands
Total no.: 18 Total no.: 20

Observers Japan, Iceland, United IMO, CEPAL United States, IMO, IMO, ILO, CARICOM, IMO, ILO, EC
States, IMO, ILO, ILO, ESCAP, Paris IACS, Canada, USA,
Tokyo MOU, CEPAL MOU Netherlands

Target 25% annual inspection 15% annual inspection 50% annual 15% annual inspection rate 25% annual inspection rate
inspection rate per country within rate per country within inspection rate by the per country within 3 years per country within 3 years
rate 3 years 3 years year 2000 (achieved
in 1996)
Relevant LL 1966 and LL PROT LL 1966 LL 1966 LL 1966 LL 1966
instruments 1988 SOLAS 1974 SOLAS 1974 SOLAS 1974 SOLAS 1974
SOLAS 1974 SOLAS PROT 1978 SOLAS PROT 1978 SOLAS PROT 1978 SOLAS PROT 1978
SOLAS PROT 1978, MARPOL 73/78 MARPOL 73/78 MARPOL 73/78 MARPOL 73/78
1988 STCW 1978 STCW 1978 STCW 1978 STCW 1978
MARPOL 73/78 COLREG 1972 COLREG 1972 COLREG 1972 COLREG 1972
STCW 1978 TONNAGE 69 ILO Convention no. 147 ILO Convention no. 147
COLREG 1972 ILO Convention no.
TONNAGE 69 147
ILO Convention no.147
 Whether or not deficiencies are found, all
details from each inspection report are
entered in an advanced MOU’s central
computer database.
 This database can be accessed by all ports in
the MOU’s region to consult inspection files,
to insert new inspection reports or to use the
electronic mail facility
 A monthly list of detentions is published on
the MOU websites. This list contains,
amongst others, the ship name, the owner,
the Classification society and the port and
date of detention.
 Format of reports : Separate file
 Explain Port State control. What is scope of
Inspections. Enumerate relevant regulations
,articles and Annexes of SOLAS 74, Load line
66, Marpol 73/78 and Tonnage 69 which
concern Port State control.
 With reference to port state control illustrate
following:
◦ Regional cooperation and agreements
◦ Goal of Future PSC
◦ Technical assistance by IMO under resolution Nov
1991 conference
 Explain the jurisdiction of application of PSC and
its control regulations. State salient clauses from
different International conventions that form
basis and focus of PSC.
 During port state control inspection Port state
control officer desires to carry out detailed
inspection of vessel. What are clear grounds for
PSCO to conduct more detailed inspection.
 What provision are kept under PSC towards
◦ Certificate issued by Non – party port states to their
ships
◦ Inspection of ships below convention size
◦ Amendments to procedures for POSC adopted in 1981
 Certificates issued by Non party port states:
◦ If a flag state has not ratified a convention but however
has issued a certificate it does not give freedom to state
to enjoy the standards of convention. PSC will still
exercise its authority to enforce the required standards
of convention. This is called :No more favorable
treatment
 Inspection of ships below convention size:
◦ With ref to above , following implies
◦ Port state control will again exercise “ No More favorable
treatment to ships below convention size and will
exercise authority to make sure ships are as per required
of PSC inspection.
 PSC Amendments 1982 (1981)
◦ In 1978 eight North states of Europe agreed to
exchange information on foreign ships calling their
ports.
◦ This was superseded in 1981 when fourteen
European states agreed to establish harmonized
system of control resulting in signing of Paris MOU
◦ United states has chosen to remain out of any
regional MOU , it has its own Port state control
programme and undertakes control measures on
unilateral basis.
 Goal : already described.
 Future: There is prospect of Global Port state
Control being formed wherein training will
take place word wide and information
exchanged . This will ensure better
implementation and it will be easier to
achieve the goals
 Regional co operation in control of ships
◦ Invited the authorities participating in Paris MOPU and other
countries to participate in Port state control to assist in conclusion
of regional agreements , study matters related to inter regional co
operation with a view to have more exchange of information.
◦ Requested Maritime safety committee marine environmental
protection committee to consider any further action that may be
necessary to assist Member governments in efforts relating to PSC
◦ Invited Governments to consider concluding Regional agreements
on an application made by PSC based on Co operation
◦ Invited Secretary General to secure funds for organization of
regional seminars on matters related to PSC
◦ Endorsed pan of Secretary General to conduct an advisory group
meeting in Jan 1992 for all member states to review and consider
all implications of IMO so that plan could be developed , computer
data base study and possible link with electronic transmission of
mails and documentation was taken in November 1991 and this
was further adopted by assembly.
 Relations with Non governmental
organisations;
◦ Assembly approved grant of consultative status to
following non governmental organizations:
 International bar association IBA.
 International Ocean Institute (IOI)
 Green peace international.