Chapter 2 - Port State Inspections
Clasification Society 2024 - Version 9.40
Statutory Documents - IMO Publications and Documents - Resolutions - Assembly - IMO Resolution A.1155(32) – Procedures for Port State Control, 2021 – (Adopted on 15 December 2021) - Annex – Procedures for Port State Control, 2021 - Chapter 2 - Port State Inspections

Chapter 2 - Port State Inspections

 2.1 GENERAL

2.1.1 In accordance with the provisions of the relevant conventions, Parties may conduct inspections by PSCOs of foreign ships in their ports.

2.1.2 Such inspections may be undertaken:

  • .1 on the initiative of the Party;

  • .2 at the request of, or on the basis of information regarding a ship provided by, another Party; or

  • .3 on the basis of information regarding a ship provided by a member of the crew, a professional body, an association, a trade union or any other individual with an interest in the safety of the ship, its crew and passengers, or the protection of the marine environment.

2.1.3 Whereas Parties may entrust surveys and inspections of ships entitled to fly their own flag either to inspectors nominated for this purpose or to ROs, they should be aware that, under the relevant conventions, foreign ships are subject to port State control, including boarding, inspection, remedial action and possible detention, only by officers duly authorized by the port State. This authorization of PSCOs may be a general grant of authority or may be specific on a case-by-case basis.

2.1.4 All possible efforts should be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed. If a ship is unduly detained or delayed, it should be entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered.

2.2 INITIAL INSPECTIONS

2.2.1 In the pursuance of control procedures under the relevant conventions, which, for instance, may arise from information given to a port State regarding a ship, a PSCO may proceed to the ship and, before boarding, gain, from its appearance in the water, an impression of its standard of maintenance from such items as the condition of its paintwork, corrosion or pitting or unrepaired damage.

2.2.2 At the earliest possible opportunity, the PSCO should ascertain the type of ship, year of build and size of the ship for the purpose of determining which provisions of the conventions are applicable.

2.2.3 On boarding and introduction to the master or the responsible ship's officer, the PSCO should examine the ship's relevant certificates and documents required by the relevant conventions, as listed in appendix 12, part A. PSCOs should note the following:

  • .1 certificates may be in hard copy or electronic form;

  • .2 where the ship relies upon electronic certificates:

    • .1 the certificates and website used to access them should conform with the Guidelines for the use of electronic certificates (FAL.5/Circ.39/Rev.2 and Corr.1);

    • .2 specific verification instructions are to be available on the ship; and

    • .3 viewing such certificates on a computer is considered as meeting the requirement that certificates be "on board";

  • .3 when examining International Tonnage Certificates, the PSCO should be guided by appendix 10; and

  • .4 when examining certificates or documentary evidence of seafarers issued in accordance with STCW 1978, the PSCO should be guided by appendix 11; the list of certificates or documentary evidence required under STCW 1978 is also found in table B-I/2 of the STCW Code.

2.2.4 After the certificate and document check, the PSCO should check the overall condition of the ship, including its equipment, navigational bridge, forecastle, cargo holds/areas, engine-room and pilot transfer arrangements and verify that any outstanding deficiency from the previous PSC inspection has been rectified.

2.2.5 If the certificates required by the relevant conventions are valid and the PSCO's general impression and visual observations on board confirm a good standard of maintenance, the PSCO should generally confine the inspection to reported or observed deficiencies, if any.

2.2.6 In pursuance of control procedures under chapter IX of SOLAS 1974 in relation to the International Safety Management Code (ISM Code), the PSCO should utilize the guidelines in appendix 8.

2.2.7 If, however, the PSCO from general impressions or observations on board has clear grounds for believing that the ship, its equipment or its crew do not substantially meet the requirements, taking into account paragraph 1.2.6, the PSCO should proceed to a more detailed inspection, taking into consideration sections 2.4 and 2.5. In forming such an impression, the PSCO should utilize the guidelines in relevant appendices.

2.3 GENERAL PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR PSCOs

2.3.1 The PSCO should observe the Code of good practice for port State control officers (MSC-MEPC.4/Circ.2), as shown in appendix 1, use professional judgement in carrying out all duties and consider consulting others as deemed appropriate.

2.3.2 When boarding a ship, the PSCO should present to the master or to the representative of the owner, if requested to do so, the PSCO identity card. This card should be accepted as documented evidence that the PSCO in question is duly authorized by the Administration to carry out port State control inspections.

2.3.3 If the PSCO has clear grounds for carrying out a more detailed inspection, the master should be immediately informed of these grounds and advised that, if so desired, the master may contact the Administration or, as appropriate, the RO responsible for issuing the certificate and invite their presence on board.

2.3.4 In the case that an inspection is initiated based on a report or complaint, especially if it is from a crew member, the source of the information should not be disclosed.

2.3.5 When exercising control, all possible efforts should be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed. It should be borne in mind that the main purpose of port State control is to prevent a substandard ship proceeding to sea. The PSCO should exercise professional judgement to determine whether to detain a ship until the deficiencies are corrected or to allow it to sail with certain deficiencies, having regard to the particular circumstances of the intended voyage.

2.3.6 It should be recognized that all equipment is subject to failure and spares or replacement parts may not be readily available. In such cases, undue delay should not be caused if, in the opinion of the PSCO, safe alternative arrangements have been made.

2.3.7 Where the grounds for detention are the result of accidental damage suffered to a ship, no detention order should be issued, provided that:

  • .1 due account has been given to the convention requirements regarding notification to the flag State Administration, the nominated surveyor or the RO responsible for issuing the relevant certificate;

  • .2 prior to entering a port, the master or company has submitted to the port State authority details of the circumstances of the accident and the damage suffered and information about the required notification of the flag State Administration;

  • .3 appropriate remedial action, to the satisfaction of the port State authority, is being taken by the ship; and

  • .4 the port State authority has ensured, having been notified of the completion of the remedial action, that deficiencies which were clearly hazardous to safety, health or environment have been rectified.

2.3.8 Since detention of a ship is a serious matter involving many issues, it may be in the best interest of the PSCO to act together with other interested parties (see paragraph 4.1.3). For example, the officer may request the owner's representatives to provide proposals for correcting the situation. The PSCO should also consider cooperating with the flag State Administration's representatives or the RO responsible for issuing the relevant certificates, and consulting them regarding their acceptance of the owner's proposals and their possible additional requirements. Without limiting the PSCO's discretion in any way, the involvement of other parties could result in a safer ship, avoid subsequent arguments relating to the circumstances of the detention and prove advantageous in the case of litigation involving "undue delay".

2.3.9 Where deficiencies cannot be remedied at the port of inspection, the PSCO may allow the ship to proceed to another port, subject to any appropriate conditions determined. In such circumstances, the PSCO should ensure that the competent authority of the next port of call and the flag State are notified.

2.3.10 Detention reports to the flag State should be in sufficient detail for an assessment to be made of the severity of the deficiencies giving rise to the detention.

2.3.11 The company or its representative have a right of appeal against a detention taken by the authority of a port State. The appeal should not cause the detention to be suspended. The PSCO should properly inform the master of the right of appeal.

2.3.12 To ensure consistent enforcement of port State control requirements, PSCOs should carry an extract of section 2.3 (General procedural guidelines for PSCOs) for ready reference when carrying out any port State control inspections.

2.3.13 PSCOs should also be familiar with the detailed guidelines given in the appendices to these Procedures.

2.4 CLEAR GROUNDS

2.4.1 When a PSCO inspects a foreign ship which is required to hold a convention certificate, and which is in a port or an offshore terminal under the jurisdiction of the port State, any such inspection should be limited to verifying that there are on board valid certificates and other relevant documentation and the PSCO forming an impression of the overall condition of the ship, its equipment and its crew, unless there are "clear grounds" for believing that the condition of the ship or its equipment does not correspond substantially with the particulars of the certificates.

2.4.2 "Clear grounds" to conduct a more detailed inspection include but are not limited to:

  • .1 the absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the relevant conventions, taking into account paragraph 1.2.6;

  • .2 evidence from a review of the ship's certificates that a certificate or certificates are invalid;

  • .3 evidence that certificates and documents required by the relevant conventions and listed in appendix 12, part A are not on board, incomplete, not maintained or are falsely maintained;

  • .4 evidence from the PSCO's general impressions and observations that serious hull or structural deterioration or deficiencies exist that may place at risk the structural, watertight or weathertight integrity of the ship;

  • .5 evidence from the PSCO's general impressions or observations that serious deficiencies exist in the safety, pollution prevention or navigational equipment;

  • .6 information or evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential shipboard operations relating to the safety of ships or the prevention of pollution, or that such operations have not been carried out;

  • .7 indications that key crew members may not be able to communicate with each other or with other persons on board;

  • .8 the emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancellation procedures; and

  • .9 receipt of a report or complaint containing information that a ship appears to be substandard.

2.5 MORE DETAILED INSPECTIONS

2.5.1 If the ship does not carry valid certificates, or if the PSCO, from general impressions or observations on board, has clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship or its equipment does not correspond substantially with the particulars of the certificates or that the master or crew is not familiar with essential shipboard procedures, a more detailed inspection, as described in this chapter, should be carried out, utilizing relevant appendices.

2.5.2 Support during the more detailed inspection could be found in the documents mentioned in appendix 12, part B, where applicable.

2.5.3 It is not envisaged that all of the equipment and procedures outlined in this chapter would be checked during a single port State control inspection, unless the condition of the ship or the familiarity of the master or crew with essential shipboard procedures necessitates such a detailed inspection. In addition, these procedures are not intended to impose the seafarer certification programme of the port State on a ship entitled to fly the flag of another Party to STCW 1978 or to impose control procedures on foreign ships in excess of those imposed on ships of the port State.

Parent topic: Annex – Procedures for Port State Control, 2021
Copyright 2022 Clasifications Register Group Limited, International Maritime Organization, International Labour Organization or Maritime and Coastguard Agency. All rights reserved. Clasifications Register Group Limited, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively, referred to in this clause as 'Clasifications Register'. Clasifications Register assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any person for any loss, damage or expense caused by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that person has signed a contract with the relevant Clasifications Register entity for the provision of this information or advice and in that case any responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms and conditions set out in that contract.