Revoked by A.1138(31)

 

Resolution A.1119(30)

Adopted on 6 December 2017

(Agenda item 9)

 

Corrected by A 30/Res.1119/Corr.1

22 June 2018

 

PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2017

 

THE ASSEMBLY,

 

RECALLING Article 15(j) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization regarding the functions of the Assembly in relation to regulations and guidelines concerning maritime safety and the prevention and control of marine pollution from ships,

 

RECALLING ALSO resolution A.1052(27), by which it adopted the Procedures for port State control, 2011,

 

RECOGNIZING that efforts by port States have greatly contributed to enhanced maritime safety and security, and prevention of marine pollution,

 

RECOGNIZING ALSO the need to update the Procedures to take account of the amendments to IMO instruments which have entered into force or have become effective since the adoption of resolution A.1052(27),

 

HAVING CONSIDERED the recommendations made by the Marine Environment Protection Committee, at its seventieth session, and the Maritime Safety Committee, at its ninety-seventh and ninety-eighth sessions,

 

1          ADOPTS the Procedures for port State control, 2017, as set out in the annex to the present resolution;

 

2          INVITES Governments, when exercising port State control, to implement the aforementioned Procedures;

 

3          REQUESTS the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine Environment Protection Committee to keep the Procedures under review and to amend them as necessary;

 

4          REVOKES resolution A.1052(27).

 

Annex

 

PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2017

 

Contents

 

CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL

 

 1.1    Purpose

 1.2    Application

 1.3    Introduction

 1.4    Provision for port State control

 1.5    Ships of non-Parties

 1.6    Ships below convention size

 1.7    Definitions

 1.8    Professional profile of PSCOs

 1.9    Qualification and training requirements of PSCOs

 

CHAPTER 2 – PORT STATE INSPECTIONS

 

 2.1    General

 2.2    Initial inspections

 2.3    General procedural guidelines for PSCOs

 2.4    Clear grounds

 2.5    More detailed inspections

 

CHAPTER 3 – CONTRAVENTION AND DETENTION

 

 3.1    Identification of a substandard ship

 3.2    Submission of information concerning deficiencies

 3.3    Port State action in response to alleged substandard ships

 3.4    Responsibilities of port State to take remedial action

 3.5    Guidance for the detention of ships

 3.6    Suspension of inspection

 3.7    Procedures for rectification of deficiencies and release

 

CHAPTER 4 – REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

 

 4.1    Port State reporting

 4.2    Flag State reporting

 4.3    Reporting of allegations under MARPOL

 

CHAPTER 5 – REVIEW PROCEDURES

 

 5.1    Report of comments

 

Appendices

 

Appendix 1	Code of Good Practice for port State control officers conducting inspections within the framework of the regional Memoranda of Understanding and Agreement on Port State Control
Appendix 2	Guidelines for the detention of ships
Appendix 3	Guidelines for investigations and inspections carried out under Annex I of MARPOL
Appendix 4	Guidelines for investigations and inspections carried out under Annex II of MARPOL
Appendix 5	Guidelines for discharge requirements under Annexes I and II of MARPOL
Appendix 6	Guidelines for more detailed inspections of ship structural and equipment requirements
Appendix 7	Guidelines for control of operational requirements
Appendix 8	Guidelines for port State control officers on the ISM Code
Appendix 9	Guidelines for port State control related to LRIT
Appendix 10	Guidelines for port State control under the 1969 Tonnage Convention
Appendix 11	Guidelines for port State control officers on certification of seafarers, manning and hours of rest
Appendix 12	List of certificates and documents
Appendix 13	Report of inspection in accordance with IMO port State control procedures
Appendix 14	Report of deficiencies not fully rectified or only provisionally rectified
Appendix 15	Report of action taken to the notifying authority
Appendix 16	Format for the Report of contravention of MARPOL (article 6)
Appendix 17	Comments by flag State on detention report
Appendix 18	List of instruments relevant to port State control procedures

 

CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL

 

1.1       PURPOSE

 

This document is intended to provide basic guidance on the conduct of port State control inspections in support of the control provisions of relevant conventions and parts of the IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III Code) (resolution A.1070(28)) and afford consistency in the conduct of these inspections, the recognition of deficiencies of a ship, its equipment, or its crew, and the application of control procedures.

 

1.2       APPLICATION

 

1.2.1    These Procedures apply to ships falling under the provisions of:

 

.1       the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS 1974);

 

.2       the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS PROT 1988);

 

.3       the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL1966);

 

.4       the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL PROT 1988);

 

.5       the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the 1978 and 1997 Protocols, as amended (MARPOL);

 

.6       the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW 1978);

 

.7       the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 (TONNAGE 1969);

 

.8       the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, 2001 (AFS 2001);

 

.9       the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREG 1972);

 

.10     the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969 (CLC 1969);

 

.11     the Protocol of 1992 to amend the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969 (CLC PROT 1992);

 

.12     the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 (BUNKERS 2001);

 

.13     the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004 (BWM 2004); and

 

.14     the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks, 2007 (NAIROBI WRC 2007),

 

hereafter referred to as the relevant conventions.

 

1.2.2    Ships of non-Parties should be given no more favourable treatment (see section 1.5).

 

1.2.3    For ships below convention size, Parties should apply the procedures in section 1.6.

 

1.2.4    When exercising port State control, Parties should only apply those provisions of the conventions which are in force and which they have accepted.

 

1.2.5    Notwithstanding paragraph 1.2.4, in relation to voluntary early implementation of amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention and related mandatory instruments, Parties should take into account the Guidelines on the voluntary early implementation of amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention and related mandatory instruments (MSC.1/Circ.1565).

 

1.2.6    If a port State exercises control based on:

 

.1       International Labour Organization (ILO) Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), guidance on the conduct of such inspections is given in the ILO publication "Guidelines for port State control officers carrying out inspections under the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006"; or

 

.2       ILO Convention No. 147, Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976, or the Protocol of 1996 to the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976, guidance on the conduct of such inspections is given in the ILO publication "Inspection of labour conditions on board ship: Guide-lines for procedure".

 

1.3       INTRODUCTION

 

1.3.1    Under the provisions of the relevant conventions set out in section 1.2 above, the Administration (i.e. the Government of the flag State) is responsible for promulgating laws and regulations and for taking all other steps which may be necessary to give the relevant conventions full and complete effect so as to ensure that, from the point of view of safety of life and pollution prevention, a ship is fit for the service for which it is intended and seafarers are qualified and fit for their duties.

 

1.3.2    In some cases it may be difficult for the Administration to exercise full and continuous control over some ships entitled to fly the flag of its State, for instance those ships which do not regularly call at a port of the flag State. The problem can be, and has been, partly overcome by appointing inspectors at foreign ports and/or authorizing recognized organizations to act on behalf of the flag State Administration.

 

1.3.3    The following control procedures should be regarded as complementary to national measures taken by Administrations of flag States in their countries and abroad and are intended to provide assistance to flag State Administrations in securing compliance with convention provisions in safeguarding the safety of crew, passengers and ships, and ensuring the prevention of pollution.

 

1.4       PROVISION FOR PORT STATE CONTROL

 

Regulation 19 of chapter I, regulation 6.2 of chapter IX, regulation 4 of chapter XI-1 and regulation 9 of chapter XI-2 of SOLAS 1974, as modified by SOLAS PROT 1988; article 21 of LL 1966, as modified by LL PROT 1988; articles 5 and 6, regulation 11 of Annex I, regulation 16.9 of Annex II, regulation 9 of Annex III, regulation 14 of Annex IV, regulation 9 of Annex V and regulation 10 of Annex VI of MARPOL; article X of STCW 1978; article 12 of TONNAGE 1969, article 11 of AFS 2001 and article 9 of BWM 2004 provide for control procedures to be followed by a Party to a relevant convention with regard to foreign ships visiting their ports. The authorities of port States should make effective use of these provisions for the purposes of identifying deficiencies, if any, in such ships which may render them substandard (see section 3.1) and ensuring that remedial measures are taken.

 

1.5       SHIPS OF NON-PARTIES

 

1.5.1    Article I(3) of SOLAS PROT 1988, article 5(4) of MARPOL, article X(5) of STCW 1978, article 3(3) of AFS 2001 and article 3(3) of BWM 2004 provide that no more favourable treatment is to be given to the ships of countries which are not Party to the relevant Convention. All Parties should, as a matter of principle, apply these Procedures to ships of non-Parties in order to ensure that equivalent surveys and inspections are conducted and an equivalent level of safety and protection of the marine environment is ensured.

 

1.5.2    As ships of non-Parties are not provided with SOLAS, Load Lines, MARPOL, AFS or BWM certificates, as applicable, or the crew members may not hold STCW certificates, the Port State Control Officer (PSCO), taking into account the principles established in these Procedures, should be satisfied that the ship and crew do not present a danger to those on board or an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment. 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 and 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.

 

1.6       SHIPS BELOW CONVENTION SIZE

 

1.6.1    In the exercise of their functions, the PSCOs should be guided by any certificates and other documents issued by or on behalf of the flag State Administration. In such cases, the PSCOs should limit the scope of inspection to the verification of compliance with those certificates and documents.

 

1.6.2    To the extent a relevant instrument is not applicable to a ship below convention size, the PSCO's task should be to assess whether the ship is of an acceptable standard in regard to safety and the environment. In making that assessment, the PSCO should 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.

 

1.7       DEFINITIONS

 

1.7.1    Bulk carrier: While noting the definitions in SOLAS regulations IX/1.6 and XII/1.1 and resolution MSC.277(85), for the purposes of port State control, PSCOs should be guided by the ship's type indicated in the ship's certificates in determining whether a ship is a bulk carrier and recognize that a ship which is not designated as a bulk carrier as the ship type on the ship certificate may carry certain bulk cargo as provided for in the above instruments.

 

1.7.2    Clear grounds: Evidence that the ship, its equipment, or its crew does not correspond substantially with the requirements of the relevant conventions or that the master or crew members are not familiar with essential shipboard procedures relating to the safety of ships or the prevention of pollution. Examples of clear grounds are included in section 2.4.

 

1.7.3    Deficiency: A condition found not to be in compliance with the requirements of the relevant convention.

 

1.7.4    Detention: Intervention action taken by the port State when the condition of the ship or its crew does not correspond substantially with the relevant conventions to ensure that the ship will not sail until it can proceed to sea without presenting a danger to the ship or persons on board, or without presenting an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment, whether or not such action will affect the normal schedule of the departure of the ship.

 

1.7.5    Initial inspection: A visit on board a ship to check both the validity of the relevant certificates and other documents, and the overall condition of the ship, its equipment and its crew (see also section 2.2).

 

1.7.6    More detailed inspection: An inspection conducted when there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship, its equipment or its crew does not correspond substantially to the particulars of the certificates.

 

1.7.7    Port State Control Officer (PSCO): A person duly authorized by the competent authority of a Party to a relevant convention to carry out port State control inspections, and responsible exclusively to that Party.

 

1.7.8    Recognized organization: An organization which meets the relevant conditions set forth in the Code for Recognized Organizations (RO Code) (MSC.349(92) and MEPC.237(65)), and has been assessed and authorized by the flag State Administration in accordance with provisions of the RO Code to provide the necessary statutory services and certification to ships entitled to fly its flag.

 

1.7.9    Stoppage of an operation: Formal prohibition against a ship to continue an operation due to an identified deficiency or deficiencies which, singly or together, render the continuation of such operation hazardous.

 

1.7.10 Substandard ship: A ship whose hull, machinery, equipment or operational safety is substantially below the standards required by the relevant convention or whose crew is not in conformance with the safe manning document.

 

1.7.11 Valid certificates: A certificate that has been issued, electronically or on paper, directly by a Party to a relevant convention or on its behalf by a recognized organization and contains accurate and effective dates meets the provisions of the relevant convention and to which the particulars of the ship, its crew and its equipment correspond.

 

1.8       PROFESSIONAL PROFILE OF PSCOs

 

1.8.1    Port State control should be carried out only by qualified PSCOs who fulfil the qualifications and training specified in section 1.9.

 

1.8.2    When the required professional expertise cannot be provided by the PSCO, the PSCO may be assisted by any person with the required expertise, as acceptable to the port State.

 

1.8.3    The PSCOs and persons assisting them should be free from any commercial, financial, and other pressures and have no commercial interest in the port of inspection, the ships inspected, ship repair facilities or any support services in the port or elsewhere, nor should the PSCOs be employed by or undertake work on behalf of recognized organizations or classification societies.

 

1.8.4    A PSCO should carry a personal document in the form of an identity card issued by the port State and indicating that the PSCO is authorized to carry out the control.

 

1.9       QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF PSCOs

 

1.9.1    The PSCO should be an experienced officer qualified as flag State surveyor.

 

1.9.2    The PSCO should be able to communicate in English with the key crew.

 

1.9.3    Training should be provided for PSCOs to give the necessary knowledge of the provisions of the relevant conventions which are relevant to the conduct of port State control, taking into account the latest IMO Model Courses for port State control.

 

1.9.4    In specifying the qualifications and training requirements for PSCOs, the Administration should take into account, as appropriate, which of the internationally agreed instruments are relevant for the control by the port State and the variety of types of ships which may enter its ports.

 

1.9.5    PSCOs carrying out inspections of operational requirements should be qualified as a master or chief engineer and have appropriate seagoing experience, or have qualifications from an institution recognized by the Administration in a maritime-related field and have specialized training to ensure adequate competence and skill, or be a qualified officer of the Administration with an equivalent level of experience and training, for performing inspections of the relevant operational requirements.

 

1.9.6    Periodic seminars for PSCOs should be held in order to update their knowledge with respect to instruments related to port State control.

 

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 on the basis of:

 

.1       the initiative of the Party;

 

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

 

.3       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 recognized organizations, 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. 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 1969 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    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.

 

2.2.5    In conducting an initial inspection, the PSCO should check both the validity of the relevant certificates and other documents (with reference to appendix 12) required by the relevant conventions and the overall condition of the ship, including its equipment, navigational bridge, decks including forecastle, cargo holds/areas, engine-room and pilot transfer arrangements.

 

2.2.6    In pursuance of control procedures under chapter IX of SOLAS 1974 in relation to the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (ISM Code), the PSCO should utilize the guidelines in appendix 8.

 

2.2.7    If, however, the PSCO from general impression or observations on board has clear grounds for believing that the ship, its equipment or its crew do not substantially meet the requirements, 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 recognized organization 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 ship proceeding to sea if it is unsafe or presents an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment. 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 recognized organization 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