Port State Control an update on IMOs work (2000). Article by Mrs. Heike Hoppe

By Dr. Heike Hoppe
Technical Officer, Maritime Safety Division, IMO

Port State Control (PSC) is the inspection of foreign ships in national ports for the purpose of verifying that the condition of the ship and its equipment comply with the requirements of international conventions and that the ship is manned and operated in compliance with applicable international laws. The primary responsibility for ensuring that a ship maintains a standard at least equivalent to that specified in international conventions rests with the flag State and if all flag States performed their duties satisfactorily there would be no need for port State control. Unfortunately this is not the case as evidenced by the many marine accidents around the world - hence the need for additional control.

The authority for exercising PSC is the national law based on relevant conventions. It is therefore necessary for a port State to be Party to those conventions and to have promulgated the necessary legislation before exercising PSC. In accordance with the provisions of the applicable conventions, Parties may conduct inspections of foreign ships in their ports through Port State Control Officers (PSCOs).

Such inspections may be undertaken on the basis of:

the initiative of the Party;
the request of, or on the basis of, information regarding a ship provided by another Party; or
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.
Whereas Parties may entrust surveys and inspections of ships entitled to fly their own flag either to surveyors nominated for this purpose or to recognized organizations, they should be aware that under the applicable 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. The authorization of these PSCOs may be a general grant of authority or may be specific on a case-by-case basis.

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.


Provisions for port State control

IMO conventions place the responsibility for technically and environmentally safe ships primarily on the flag State. However, it is recognized that a port State can make a useful contribution to these aims and many conventions, therefore, contain provisions that permit port State control. These include:

SOLAS 74, regulation I/19, regulation IX/6 and regulation XI/4;
LOADLINES 66, article 21;
MARPOL 73/78, articles 5 & 6, regulation 8A of Annex 1, regulation 15 of Annex II, regulation 8 of Annex III and regulation 8 of annex V;
STCW 78, article X and regulation I/4;
TONNAGE 69, article 12.


International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 1974 (SOLAS 74)

The SOLAS Convention is the basic international instrument dealing with matters of maritime safety. The main objective is to specify minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of ships, compatible with their safety.

Flag States are responsible for ensuring that ships under their flag comply with its requirements, and a number of certificates are prescribed in the Convention as proof that this has been done.

Control provisions also allow Contracting Governments to inspect ships of other Contracting States if there are clear grounds for believing that the ship and its equipment do not substantially comply with the requirements of the Convention. The SOLAS Convention is kept up-to-date through amendments which are adopted at regular intervals. It contains the following chapters:


Chapter I: General provisions
Chapter II-1: Construction – Structure, subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations
Chapter II-2: Construction - Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction
Chapter III: Life-saving appliances and arrangements
Chapter IV: Radiocommunications
Chapter V: Safety of navigation
Chapter VI: Carriage of cargoes
Chapter VII: Carriage of dangerous goods
Chapter VIII: Nuclear ships
Chapter IX: Management for the safe operation of ships
Chapter X: Safety measures for high-speed craft
Chapter XI: Special measures to enhance maritime safety
Chapter XII: Additional safety measures for bulk carriers.


Application

The Convention applies to all passenger ships irrespective of size and all cargo ships of 500 GT and over when engaged in international voyages, unless expressly provided otherwise in relevant chapters of the Convention. In general SOLAS does not apply to: ships of war and troopships; cargo ships of less than 500GT; ships not propelled by mechanical means; wooden ships of primitive build; pleasure yachts not engaged in trade; fishing vessels.


Control regulations

The control procedures laid down in regulation 19 of SOLAS chapter I are primarily designed to enable PSCOs to ensure that foreign ships calling at their ports possess valid certificates. In most cases, possession of valid certificates is sufficient proof that the ship concerned complies with Convention requirements. The PSCO is empowered to take further action if there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship or of its equipment does not correspond substantially with the particulars of any of the certificates.

The officer can take steps to ensure that the ship does not sail until it can do so without endangering passengers, the crew or the ship itself. If action of this type is taken, the flag State must be informed of the circumstances and the facts must also be reported to IMO.

Regulation 6 of chapter IX relates to PSC on operational requirements with regard to the ISM Code, in particular the proper functioning of the ship’s Safety Management System.

PSC on operational requirements in general is described in regulation 4 of chapter XI.


International Convention on Load Lines 1966 (LL 66)

The Convention establishes limitations on the draught to which a ship on international voyages may be loaded in the form of freeboards which should ensure adequate stability and avoid excessive stress on the ship's hull as a result of overloading. It also deals with external weathertight and watertight integrity and provisions are made for determining the freeboard of tankers by subdivision and damage stability calculations.

The regulations take into account the potential hazards present in different zones and different seasons. The technical annex contains several additional safety measures concerning doors, freeing ports, hatchways and other items. The main purpose of these measures is to ensure the watertight integrity of ships' hulls below the freeboard deck.

All assigned load lines must be marked amidships on each side of the ship, together with the deck line. Ships intended for the carriage of timber deck cargo are assigned a smaller freeboard as the deck cargo provides protection against the impact of waves.


Application

The Convention applies to all ships engaged in international voyages, except: ships of war; new ships of less than 24 m (79 feet) in length; existing ships of less than 150 tons gross; pleasure yachts not engaged in trade; fishing vessels.


Control regulations

According to article 21 of the Convention ships holding a certificate issued under article 16 or 17 are subject, when in a port of another Contracting Government, to control by officers duly authorized by such Governments.


International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78)

The MARPOL Convention covers all the technical aspects of pollution from ships, except the disposal of waste into the sea by dumping, and applies to ships of all types, although it does not apply to pollution arising out of the exploration and exploitation of sea-bed mineral resources. The Convention has two Protocols dealing respectively with reports on incidents involving harmful substances and arbitration and six Annexes which contain regulations for the prevention of various forms of pollution:


Annex I: Prevention of pollution by oil
Annex II: Control of pollution by noxious liquid substances in bulk
Annex III: Prevention of pollution by harmful substances carried by sea in packaged form
Annex IV: Prevention of pollution by sewage from ships (not yet in force)
Annex V: Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships
Annex VI: Prevention of air pollution from ships (not yet in force)


Application

The Convention applies to ships of all types including fixed or floating platforms operating in the marine environment, except war ships, naval auxiliary or other ships owned or operated by a State and used only on government non-commercial service.


Control regulation

Article 5 authorizes Parties to verify the existence of valid certificates while the ship is in a port or off-shore terminal under the jurisdiction of that Party. Article 6 allows for inspections to verify whether a ship has discharged any harmful substances in violation of the Convention.

There are four regulations in different annexes authorizing Parties to control operational requirements, e.g. regulation 8A of Annex I regarding ship board procedures relating to the prevention of pollution by oil; regulation 15 of Annex II regarding procedures relating to the prevention of pollution by noxious liquid substances; regulation 8 of Annex III regarding procedures relating to the prevention of pollution by harmful substances; and regulation 8 of Annex V regarding procedures relating to the prevention of pollution by garbage.


International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW 78)

The Convention establishes basic requirements on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers on an international level. It contains extensive certification and qualification requirements including syllabuses and sea time for senior officers in charge of watches in the deck, engine and radio departments and for ratings forming part of the watch. All such seafarers are required to have a certificate, endorsed in a uniform manner.

The Convention also specifies basic principles to be observed in keeping deck and engine watches and special requirements for personnel on oil, chemical and liquefied gas tankers.


Application

The Convention applies to seafarers serving on board seagoing ships, except for those serving on board: war ships; fishing vessels; pleasure yachts not engaged in trade; and wooden ships of primitive build.


Control regulation

Article X contains the control regulation, stating the right of the PSCO to verify that all seafarers serving on board who are required by the Convention to be certificated hold the appropriate certificates.


International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 (TONNAGE 69)

The Convention establishes uniform principles and rules with respect to the determination of the tonnage of ships engaged in international voyages.


Application

The Convention applies to all ships engaged in international voyages, except ships of war; and ships of less than 24 m (79 feet) in length.


Control regulation

Article 12 contains provisions for the verification of the Tonnage Certificate. Although the Convention is not a "safety convention" as such, the tonnage is important to determine which conventions apply to a specific ship. The latest revision of resolution A.787(19) on Procedures for Port State Control added guidelines for PSC under the Tonnage Convention to the Procedures.


Provisions in ILO instruments

If a port State exercises port State control based on International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 147, "Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976", guidance on the conduct of such control inspections is given in ILO publication "Inspection of Labour Conditions on board Ships: Guidelines for Procedure".

On the basis of their professional judgement, PSCOs should determine whether clearly hazardous condition on board warrant detaining a ship until any deficiencies are corrected, or whether to allow it to sail with certain deficiencies which are not clearly hazardous to the safety of the ship or to the safety and health of the crew. In the first case, the port State authorities should, as soon as possible, notify the flag State through its nearest maritime, consular or diplomatic representative of the action taken and, if possible, have such a representative present.


Ships of non-Parties

Port State control is based on the principle that the port State recognizes international certificates issued by or on behalf of the flag State. It must be understood that such recognition is a privilege extended only to Parties to conventions. Non-Parties may not issue these certificates although Administrations of non-Party States may issue, or authorize the issuance of, a certificate of compliance with the relevant provisions of conventions.

The ratification of conventions is a continual process and port States must keep themselves informed as to which countries have become Parties to the various conventions. This information is issued by the IMO Secretariat by means of circulars (and a status of conventions table is also available on the IMO web site at www.imo.org).

A number of conventions (e.g. SOLAS Protocol 78, Article II (3); MARPOL 73/78, article 5(4) and STCW 78, article X(5)) stipulate that no more favourable treatment is to be given to the ships of countries which are not Party to the relevant Convention.

If the ship or crew has some form of certification other than that required by a convention, the PSCO may take the form and content of this documentation into account in the evaluation of that ship. The conditions of and on such a ship and its equipment, the certification of the crew and the flag State's minimum manning standard should be compatible with the aims of the provisions of the conventions; otherwise, the ship should be subject to such restrictions as are necessary to obtain a comparable level of safety and protection of the marine environment.


Ships below convention size

Most maritime conventions have progressive limits of application for each category of size of ships. These may be related to tonnage, length or other ship parameters, and also, in certain conventions, to the age of the vessel and the trading area. Such limits of application involve not only certificates, but also ships and their equipment; in other words, in some cases no certificate is required while in other cases a ship is exempted from design or equipment requirements.

This does not alter the fact that such ships should only be permitted to sail if safe and environmentally friendly. It is usual for such ships to comply with the requirements of the flag State, which may not be known to the PSCO - who must therefore use his/her discretion in judging those ships; possibly assisted in this by some form of certification issued by the flag State or on its behalf.

If a relevant instrument is not applicable to a specific ship, the PSCO’s task will be to assess whether the ship is of an acceptable standard in regard to safety, health or the environment. In making that assessment the PSCO will take due account of such factors as the length and nature of the intended voyage or service, the size and type of the ship, the equipment provided and the nature of the cargo.

In the case of deficiencies which are considered hazardous to safety, health or the environment the PSCO will take action, which may include detention as may be necessary, to ensure that the deficiency is rectified or that the ship, if allowed to proceed to another port, does not present a clear hazard to safety, health or the environment.

To assist Governments in the regulation of ships below convention size, several regional Codes for the safety of small ships have been developed over the last few years, some through technical co-operation assistance from IMO, like the Asia-Pacific Small Ship Regulations and a similar set of rules for the South Pacific Island Countries. In the Caribbean, the Caribbean Cargo Ship Safety Code was developed, with IMO taking active part in its preparation. This development is continuing with IMO actively promoting the preparation of regional rules, taking account of specific regional ship types.


Equivalents

Most conventions allow for Administrations to approve equivalents to convention requirements. Administrations doing so are requested to communicate the particulars to IMO, which in turn circulates those particulars to other Parties to the convention under which the equivalence was granted.


Amendments to Procedures for port State control (Resolution A.787(19))

Since its twelfth session in 1981, the IMO Assembly has adopted various resolutions and circulars relating to PSC. A.787(19) Procedures for port State control, adopted by the 19th Assembly in November 1995 amalgamated and harmonized the resolutions and circulars adopted by then.

The 21st Assembly in November 1999 adopted resolution A.882(21) Amendments to the Procedures for Port State Control (resolution A.787(19)), updating the 1995 resolution.

The amendments include a new section on port State control relating to the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, which entered into force on 1 July 1998.


Regional co-operation on port state control

While national port State control alone will already enhance the safety of ships and the protection of the marine environment, only a regional approach will ensure that sub-standard ships and sub-standard operators have fewer places left to hide.

Unless a regional approach is adopted, operators will just divert their ships to ports in the region where no or less stringent PSC inspections are conducted. This may seriously hamper the economical situation of the ports of those countries that do conduct proper inspections. To remedy this and to generally improve the effectiveness of inspections, many regions of the world have already or are beginning to enter into regional agreements on PSC.

In the first instance, such an agreement covers the exchange of information about ships, their records and the results of inspections carried out. This information is important as it enables subsequent ports of call to target only ships that have not been recently inspected. In general, ships inspected within the previous 6 months are not re-inspected unless there are clear grounds to do so.

Another reason for co-operating with other ports in the region is to ensure that identified sub-standard ships are effectively monitored. This applies especially to ships that have been allowed to sail with certain minor deficiencies on the condition that these are rectified in the next port of call. Such ships can only be monitored by a constant exchange of information between ports.

The most important benefit from co-operation, however, is ensuring that port State inspections are carried out in a uniform manner in all countries, and ultimately regions, and that similar standards are applied with regards to the detention of ships and the training standards of PSCOs. To achieve this it is common practice of many existing agreements to conduct joint seminars for PSCOs in order to harmonize procedures.

Existing regional agreements on port state control

At present there are seven regional PSC agreements in operation:

the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Paris MOU), adopted in Paris (France) on 1 July 1982;
the Acuerdo de Viña del Mar (Viña del Mar or Latin-America Agreement), signed in Viña del Mar (Chile) on 5 November 1992;
the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the Asia-Pacific Region (Tokyo MOU), signed in Tokyo (Japan) on 2 December 1993;
the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the Caribbean Region (Caribbean MOU), signed in Christchurch (Barbados) on 9 February 1996;
the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the Mediterranean Region (Mediterranean MOU), signed in Valletta (Malta) on 11 July 1997;
the Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Indian Ocean MOU), signed in Pretoria (South Africa) on 5 June 1998; and
the Memorandum of Understanding for the West and Central African Region (Abuja MOU), signed in Abuja (Nigeria) on 22 October 1999.
(See comparative table and map pages xx-xx).


Regional agreements under development

Two further regional agreements are currently under development, one for the Persian Gulf region and the other for the Black Sea area.


Persian Gulf region

A first draft of a regional PSC agreement for the ROPME (Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment) Sea Area and the complementary training programmes for its implementation was discussed in July 1999 in Manama, Bahrain, at a meeting organized by the Marine Emergency Mutual Aid Centre (MEMAC) Bahrain, in co-operation with the GCC (Gulf Co-operation Council) and IMO.

The meeting was attended by delegates from Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, with UNEP/ROWA (Regional Office for West Africa) as observers.

A second meeting (venue and date not yet fixed) is expected to see the signature of an MOU on PSC and also to decide on the location of the Secretariat and Information Centre.


Black Sea Region

A first preparatory meeting for the establishment of a port State control system in the Black Sea Region took place in Varna, Bulgaria, from 14 to 17 September 1999, attended by delegates from Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, the Russian Federation, Turkey and the Ukraine. The meeting was jointly organized and financed by IMO and the Danish Environment Protection Agency (DEPA).

The meeting agreed a draft Memorandum of Understanding and a related draft training programme was considered.

The Memorandum is expected to be finalized, adopted and signed in Istanbul, Turkey in April 2000.


Technical assistance by IMO

In November 1991, IMO's 17th Assembly adopted resolution A.682(17) Regional Co-operation in the Control of Ships and Discharges, which was aimed at the eradication of sub-standard ships and proposed the establishment of port State control regimes around the world, following the pattern adopted by the European region through the Paris MOU in 1982.

The resolution invited the authorities participating in the Paris MOU and any other countries participating in port State control to assist, wherever possible, in the conclusion of regional agreements elsewhere in the world and to study matters of inter-regional co-operation with a view to compatibility of information systems and exchange of port State control information.

Since then, IMO has been very actively engaged in assisting Member States in their efforts to eradicate substandard shipping and has co-operated in the preparation and conclusion of various regional PSC agreements over the last few years. It is now hoped that this process can be taken further by encouraging these regional systems to effectively implement the terms of the agreements, co-operate among themselves and, in particular, to formalize the transfer of information.

The need for support from within and outside the regions is evident, especially for the newly established PSC agreements, in which the majority of members are developing countries. From within the regions, the active participation of all members is crucial in the implementation of the agreements. From outside the regions, support is required on the one hand from other well established and functioning regional agreements by way of providing expertise and general guidance and on the other hand, from donors to provide financing for the conduct of training courses for inspectors.

IMO has developed a global project to assist regional PSC agreements in the harmonization of their operations, the development of their human resources capabilities and in the co-operation and exchange of information among each other. As experience is gained through implementation and interaction between agreements on a range of common problems, over time enhanced global co-operation will take place.

The following activities are planned:

a three-day workshop at IMO Headquarters for the Secretaries and Directors of Information Centres of existing port State control agreements (up to a maximum of 18 participants), aimed at sharing common problems and experiences and assisting in harmonizing and co-ordinating PSC practices and identifying technical assistance and priorities. (mid-2000).
promotion of targeted advisory missions to members of newly established regional agreements, preferably by experts seconded from members of other PSC agreements;
a further seminar/workshop for Secretaries, Deputy Secretaries, Information Centre Directors and Deputy Directors (technicians) of newly established regional agreements (up to a maximum of 36 participants) to provide another opportunity to share common experiences, update information and discuss the progress regarding harmonization and co-ordination of PSC practices;
IMO participation in regional PSC Committee meetings.


PSC - the future

The establishment of worldwide regional port State control is only a beginning.

The prospect of global port State control, with exchange of information and harmonization of procedures and training, has even more exciting implications. As more and more statistics and data are gathered and exchanged by the different PSC Secretariats, this will result in a huge increase in knowledge about sub-standard shipping.

This knowledge is not only useful in itself, it will also provide the maritime community with the opportunity to better analyse the causes of incidents and casualties and ascertain, more accurately than ever before, how they can be prevented from occurring again.

Armed with the information made available as a result of regional co-operation in PSC we can work towards a change of attitude within the shipping industry, where a long tradition of secrecy has too often resulted in problems being hidden and ignored rather than revealed and solved.

The development of port State control gives us a chance to challenge that culture and replace secrecy with transparency and openness.

IMO recognizes that the task ahead will be arduous and although efforts to improve flag State performance remain a top priority, effective regional agreements, including harmonized inspection and detention procedures, internationally approved qualifications of surveyors/inspectors and transparency through increased information within regions and inter-regionally will eventually impact upon both flag and port State responsibilities.

The process already set in motion to increase regional controls and to strive for improved and effective implementation by flag States themselves is the only way forward.


PORT STATE CONTROL AGREEMENTS: COMPARATIVE TABLE


Paris MOU


Acuerdo de Viña del Mar


Members


18

Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom


12

Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela


Observers


Japan, United States, IMO, ILO, Tokyo MOU, Iceland


IMO, CEPAL


Target inspection rate


25 % annual inspection rate per country


15 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


Relevant instruments


LL 1966 and LL PROT 1988

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978, 1988

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

TONNAGE 69

ILO Convention No. 147


LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972


Special attention


- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods which have failed to report relevant information

- ships which have been subject of a report or notification by another authority

- ships which have been subject of a report by the master, a crew member, etc.

- ships which have been suspended from class during the preceding 6 months


- passenger ships, ro-ro ships, bulk carriers

- ships which may present a special hazard

- ships which have had several recent deficiencies


Amendments


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


Information Centre


Centre Administratif des Affaires Maritimes (CAAM), Saint-Malo, France


Centro de Información del Acuerdo Latinoamericano(CIALA), Prefectura Naval Argentina, Buenos Aires


Committee


a representative of each of the authorities and the EC Commission


a representative of each of the authorities


Secretariat


The Hague, The Netherlands
Mr. R.W.J. Schiferli
Secretary of the Paris MOU
Nieuwe Uitleg 1
2514 BP the Hague,
The Netherlands
Tel: 31 70 351 1509
Fax: 31 70 351 1599


Buenos Aires, Argentina
Mr. Juan Jose Beltritti
Prefecto Mayor
Viña del Mar Agreement Secretariat
Prefectura Naval Argentina
Buenos Aires
Tel:54 1 318 7455
Fax:54 1 318 7547


Signed


1 July 1982


5 November 1992


Official languages


English, French


Spanish, Portuguese

Tokyo MOU


Caribbean MOU


Members


18 Australia, Canada, China, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines,* Russian Federation, Singapore, Solomon Islds*, Thailand, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Hong Kong (China)


20 Anguilla*, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda*, British Virgin Islds*, Cayman Islds, Dominica*, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Montserrat*, Netherlands Antilles, Saint Kitts & Nevis*, Saint Lucia*, Saint Vincent & the Grenadines*, Suriname*, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islds*


Observers


Brunei, United States, IMO, ILO, ESCAP, Paris MOU, Indian Ocean MOU


IMO, ILO, CARICOM, IACS, Anguilla, Montserrat, Turks and Caicos, Canada, USA, Netherlands, Paris MOU, Viña del Mar, Tokyo MOU


Target inspection rate


50 % annual regional inspection rate by the year 2000 (achieved in 1996)


10 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


Relevant instruments


LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

ILO Convention No. 147


LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

ILO Convention No. 147


Special attention


- passenger ships, ro-ro ships, bulk carriers

- ships which may present a special hazard

- ships visiting a port for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the 3-year rolling average table of above-average detentions

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods which have failed to report relevant information


- ships visiting a port for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships whose certificates are not in order

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods which have failed to report relevant information

- ships which have been suspended from class in the preceding 6 months


Amendments


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


Information Centre


Information Centre Vancouver, Canada


Information Centre Curaçao, Netherlands Antilles


Committee


a representative of each of the authorities


a representative of each of the authorities


Secretariat


Tokyo, Japan
Mr. Y. Sasamura
Secretary , Tokyo MOU Secretariat
Tomoecho Annex Building 6F
3-8-26, Toranomon
Minato-Ku, Tokyo
Japan 105
Tel:81 3 3433 0621
Fax:81 3 3433 0624


Barbados, Barbados
Mrs. Valerie Browne
Secretary of the Caribbean MOU
International Transport Division
Herbert House
Fontabelle
St. Michael
Tel 246 430 7507
Fax 246 436 4828


Signed


2 December 1993


9 February 1996


Official languages


English
English

Mediterranean MOU


Indian Ocean MOU


Members


10

Algeria* , Cyprus, Egypt, Israel*, Jordan, Malta, Lebanon, Morocco*, Tunisia, Turkey and the Palestinian Authority*

15

Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Yemen


Observers


IMO, ILO, EC


IMO, ILO, PMAESA


Target inspection rate


15 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


10 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


Relevant instruments
LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

ILO Convention No. 147
LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

TONNAGE 69

ILO Convention No. 147


Special attention


- ships visiting a port of a State, for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships whose certificates are not in order

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods which have failed to report relevant information

- ships which have been suspended from class in the preceding 6 months


- ships visiting a port of a State, for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships whose certificates are not in order

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods which have failed to report relevant information

- ships which have been suspended from class in the preceding 6 months


Amendments


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


Information Centre


Information Centre Casablanca, Morocco


Information Centre Goa, India


Committee


a representative of each of the authorities


a representative of each of the authorities


Secretariat


Alexandria, Egypt
Adm. Hani Hosni
Secretary
Mediterranean PSC Secretariat
27 Admiral Hamza Pasha Street
Roushdy
Alexandria
Tel: 203 544 6538/5446537/5427949
Fax: 203 546 6360


Goa, India
Mr. B. Ganguli
Secretary I.O.M.O.U. Secretariat
Head Land, Sada
Near Antartic Study Centre
Vasco-da-Gama
GOA – 403 804, India
Tel: 00 91 834 519383
Fax: 00 91 834 519383


Signed


11 July 1997


5 June 1998


Official languages


English, French and Arabic


English


Abuja MOU


Black Sea MOU*


Members


16

Benin, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’ Ivoire, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Togo


6

Bulgaria, Georgia, Russian Federation, Turkey, Ukraine


Observers


IMO, ILO, MOWCA, Burkina Faso, Mali


IMO, ILO


Target inspection rate


15 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


15 % annual inspection rate per country within 3 years


Relevant instruments


LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

TONNAGE 69

ILO Convention No. 147


LL 1966

SOLAS 1974

SOLAS PROT 1978

MARPOL 73/78

STCW 1978

COLREG 1972

TONNAGE 69

ILO Convention No. 147


Special attention


- ships visiting a port of a State for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships whose certificates are not in order

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods not reporting all information

- ships suspended from class


- ships visiting a port of a State, for the first time or after an absence of 12 months or more

- ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a State with deficiencies to be rectified

- ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as being deficient

- ships whose certificates are not in order

- ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods not reporting all information

- ships suspended from class

- ships which have been subject of a report or notification by another authority


Amendments


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


will take effect 60 days after acceptance


Information Centre

not yet determined


Committee


a representative of each of the authorities


a representative of each of the authorities


Secretariat


Lagos, Nigeria
Mrs. B.O. Williams
Director Maritime Services Department
Federal Ministry of Transport
Federal Secretariats Complex
Abuja, Nigeria
Tel. 09 523 0879
Fax 09 5233 7051


not yet determined


Signed


22 October 1999


Official languages


English, French


***