By Tokyo MOU Secretariat - iritokyo.co.jpiritokyo.co.jp/documents/tokyomou2014nov25.pdf · Below...
Transcript of By Tokyo MOU Secretariat - iritokyo.co.jpiritokyo.co.jp/documents/tokyomou2014nov25.pdf · Below...
By Tokyo MOU Secretariat
INTRODUCTION OFTOKYO MOU
YOU can find/get most of information/material/PSC datafrom our web‐site on internet: www.tokyo‐mou.org/
Organization Inspection & Detention Publications About Tokyo MOU FAQ Annual Report Text of the MOU On‐line detention list Press ReleaseOrganizational chart PSC database Deficiency codes Authorities’ addresses NIR What’s newOn‐line query form Under‐performing ships Code of Good Practice Appeal procedures Links to other site Detention review
Criteria for RO responsibility
Tokyo MOU Web‐site
Our visionTo eliminate substandard shipping in the Asia‐Pacific region.Our missionTo promote the effective implementation, and the universal and uniform application, of relevant IMO/ILO instruments on ships operating in the region.Our commitmentTokyo MOU strives to: develop and maintain effective and efficient PSC system in
the region; enhance status and performance of the MOU; promote joint initiatives and co‐operation with other
regional PSC regimes; and improve transparency, communication and relationship with
the industry.
Australia
Canada
Chile
China
Fiji
Hong Kong, China
Indonesia
Japan
Korea, Rep. of
Malaysia
New Zealand
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Russian Federation
Singapore
Thailand
Vanuatu
VietnamMarshall Islands
Peru
Co-operating Member
Solomon Islands
ILO, IMO Paris MOU, I-O MOU , Acuerdo Viña del Mar, Black Sea MOU
USAMacao, China
Korea, DPR
Observer
MEMBERSHIP
PSC Database
Tokyo MOU New Inspection Regime (NIR) – cont.Tokyo MOU New Inspection Regime (NIR)
Parameters
Ship Risk ProfileHigh Risk Ship (HRS)
(When sum of weighting points >=4)Standard Risk Ship
(SRS)Low Risk Ship (LRS)
Criteria Weighting points Criteria Criteria
Type of Ship
Chemical tanker,Gas Carrier,Oil tanker,
Bulk carrier,Passenger ship
2
Neither LRSnor
HRS
-
Age of Ship All types > 12y 1 -
FlagBGW-list1) Black 1 WhiteVIMSAS2) - - Yes
Recognized Organization
RO of Tokyo MOU3) - - Yes
Performance4) LowVery Low
1 High
Company performance5) LowVery Low
2 High
Deficiencies
Number of deficiencies recorded in each inspection within previous 36 months
How many inspections were
there which recorded over 5
deficiencies?
No. of inspectionswhich recorded over 5
deficiencies
All inspections have 5 or less deficiencies (at
least one inspection within previous 36
months)
Detentions
Number of Detention within previous 36 months
3 or more detentions 1 No detention
Ship Risk Profile Time Window since previous inspection
Low Risk Ships 9 to 18 monthsStandard Risk Ships 5 to 8 monthsHigh Risk Ships 2 to 4 months
Months 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
HRS
PII PI
SRS
PII PI
LRS
PII PI
Priority I (PI): The ship should be inspected, time window for which has been closed.Priority II (PII): The ship could be inspected, which is within the time window.No Priority: Authority will seek to avoid inspecting the ship.Overriding priority: Regardless of NIR, ships referred to in 3.3.2 of the MOU will be inspected.
Tokyo MOU New Inspection Regime (NIR) – cont.
Tokyo MOU New Inspection Regime (NIR) – cont.Deficiency Index Deficiency ratio per inspection
Above average > 1 above Tokyo MOU average
Average Tokyo MOU average +/- 1Below average > 1 below Tokyo MOU average
Detention Index Detention ratioAbove average > 1% above Tokyo MOU averageAverage Tokyo MOU average +/- 1%Below average > 1% below Tokyo MOU average
Detention Index Deficiency Index Company PerformanceAbove average Above average Very LowAbove average Average
LowAbove average Below averageAverage Above averageBelow average Above averageAverage Average
MediumAverage Below averageBelow average AverageBelow average Below average High
No. of ISM deficiencies*5 + No. of non-ISM deficiencies*1
Deficiency ratio = ---------------------------------------------
No. of inspections
No. of detentionsDetention ratio = ----------------------------
No. of inspections
Measures on Under‐performing Ships
Criteria: Ships detained 3 or more times during previous 12 months.
Measures on under‐performing ships:
List of under‐performing ships is published on the Tokyo MOU web‐site monthly.
Warning letters are issued to the flag State and ISM company of under‐performing ships.
Under‐performing ships would be inspected at each and every port call within the region.
Measures on Under‐performing Ships – cont.Measures on Under‐performing Ships – cont.
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 2012 2013 2014
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total2011 39 37 36 29 32 31 38 44 43 41 39 39 4482012 36 29 31 30 29 23 24 22 27 28 28 26 3332013 27 33 37 30 24 28 32 35 32 30 28 30 3662014 29 31 29 26 19 19 16 20 189
Measures on Under‐performing Ships – cont.
91
77
70
51
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2011 2012 2013 2014
No. of individual ships involved
Measures on Under‐performing Ships – cont.
Type of ship 2011 2012 2013 2014
Bulk carrier 10 8 7 8
Chemical tanker 0 2 3 0
Container ship 0 1 2 1
Gas carrier 3 2 1 1
General cargo/multipurpose ship 67 57 52 38
High speed passenger craft 1 1 0 0
Livestock carrier 1 0 0 0
Oil tanker 1 0 1 0
Refrigerated cargo carrier 3 4 1 1
Ro‐Ro cargo ship 0 1 2 0
Ro‐Ro passenger ship 0 0 0 0
Vehicle carrier 1 0 0 2
Others 4 1 1 0
Total 91 77 70 51
Appeal Procedures
Detention Review
PSC Data/Statistics
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
9.00%
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000 Inspections and Detention (%)
No. of inspections Detention rate
Annual Report
Purpose 2011 – 2015 (revise every 5 years)
Training
General Training Course (GTC) (4 weeks, once/a year)
Specialized Training Course (STC) (1 week, twice/a year)
Expert Mission (EM) (1 ~ 2 weeks, 3 ~ 4 times/a year)
Harmonization PSCO Exchange (EX) (2 weeks, 9 exchanges/a year)
Update of knowledge Seminar (SEM) (4 days, once/a year)
Training Program
Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC)
CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Jul.~Sep. 1998) CIC on GMDSS requirements (Oct.~Dec. 1999) CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Jul.~Sep. 2002) CIC on Bulk Carrier Safety (Sep.~Nov. 2003) CIC on maritime security (Jul.~Sep. 2004) CIC on Operational Requirements (Sep.~Nov. 2005) CIC on MARPOL Annex I (Feb.~Apr. 2006) CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Sep.~Nov. 2007) CIC on Safety of Navigation (Sep.~Nov. 2008) CIC on Lifeboats (Sep.~Nov. 2009) CIC on Harmful Substances (Sep.~Nov. 2010) CIC on Structural Safety & Load Lines (Sep.~Nov. 2011) CIC on FSS Code (Sep.~Nov. 2012) CIC on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery (2013)
CIC on STCW hours of rest (2014) Crew familiarization & Enclosed space entry (2015)
CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Jul.~Sep. 1998) CIC on GMDSS requirements (Oct.~Dec. 1999) CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Jul.~Sep. 2002) CIC on Bulk Carrier Safety (Sep.~Nov. 2003) CIC on maritime security (Jul.~Sep. 2004) CIC on Operational Requirements (Sep.~Nov. 2005) CIC on MARPOL Annex I (Feb.~Apr. 2006) CIC on the ISM Code compliance (Sep.~Nov. 2007) CIC on Safety of Navigation (Sep.~Nov. 2008) CIC on Lifeboats (Sep.~Nov. 2009) CIC on Harmful Substances (Sep.~Nov. 2010) CIC on Structural Safety & Load Lines (Sep.~Nov. 2011) CIC on FSS Code (Sep.~Nov. 2012) CIC on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery (2013)
CIC on STCW hours of rest (2014) Crew familiarization & Enclosed space entry (2015)
Press Release
Our address:Tokyo MOU SecretariatAscend Shimbashi 8F6‐19‐19 ShimbashiMinato‐ku, Tokyo Japan 105‐0004Tel: +81‐3‐3433‐0621Fax: +81‐3‐3433‐0624E‐mail: secretariat@tokyo‐mou.org
Our staff: Secretary Deputy Secretary Technical Officer Projects Officer
Tokyo MOU Secretariat
THANK YOU