INTERTANKO Technical Seminar Mumbai 19th September 2005 Port State Control Related Issues
-
Upload
lisandra-church -
Category
Documents
-
view
43 -
download
0
description
Transcript of INTERTANKO Technical Seminar Mumbai 19th September 2005 Port State Control Related Issues
INTERTANKO Technical Seminar Mumbai 19th September 2005
Port State Control Related Issues
Capt Howard N. Snaith. Master Mariner. M.N.I. Director, Marine, Ports, Terminals, Chemical &
Environmental
INTERTANKO Goals for PSC: Harmonised standards and training of inspectors
Common, Global, Sub-Standard Targeting Systems
Consistency regarding Clear Grounds for Detention
Standard Global Independent Detention appeals procedures.
Development of rewards / incentives for the Good Owners
Close out of Deficiencies
Operational Issues in relation to PSC
More needs to be done to ensure harmonised standards Greater sharing of inspection records would be beneficial It is an imperative that the integrity of PSC is maintained Better targeting would result from additional analysis of PSC
records Important lessons can be learned by analysing PSC
performance INTERTANKO is committed to working with PSC
Ideas to ensure Integrity of the System:
Regular and open dialogue between responsible owners Industry associations and PSC officials
Development of ”best practices” within PSC regimes
Appropriate mechansims for confidential feedback to INTERTANKO
Reports back to IMO of PSC performance
We have However Enjoyed some Excellent Success to date in achieving our Goals
Paris MoU Review Board
• Subsequent to INTERTANKO’s meeting with the Paris MoU Advisory Board - during 2001
• We raised our concerns regarding the lack of an independent review process in the case where an owner feels his vessel has been detained
unjustly.• After several Trials by the Paris MoU this
process came into effect • AND has proved successful in enabling some
detention records to be cleaned
TOKYO MOU Detention Review Board
INTERTANKO and its ‘Round Table’ colleagues wrote to the Tokyo MoU proposing that a similar, (To the Paris MoU) independent detention review board
be created within the Tokyo MoU, we are very pleased to announce that The Tokyo MoU have now instigated such a process and issued guidelines on their
website http://www.tokyo-mou.org/ .
Whilst the findings of the Tokyo MoU Detention Review Panel are not binding, they may provide justification for the detaining port State to amend its inspection
data already inserted in the APCIS system. The recommendation of the Panel can not be used as a ground for claiming a
financial compensation. But it allows for an independent vehicle for a detention review.
A full overview of the procedures are available on the Tokyo MoU web site http://www.tokyo-mou.org/
We are very grateful to the Tokyo MoU for taking our views and proposals onboard.
Mediterranean MoU Review Board
•Subsequent to our meeting & presentation to The Mediterranean MoU Board, we are pleased to advise that
the Med’ MoU has indicated that it proposes to instigate an independent detention review process (similar to that
practised by the Paris MoU). • INTERTANKO will be invited to future meetings of the
Med MoU to continue to build up our relationship.
EQUASIS & WWW.Q88.com
• INTERTANKO has revised Questionnaire 88 to take into account new information and regular questions that have now become current by Brokers, based partly on legislative changes over the years.
• INTERTANKO expects to issue further revised editions in the future to ensure that this questionnaire remains up-to-date and continues to be seen as an industry standard.
The revised version of the Questionnaire 88 is a culmination of suggestions from charterers,
brokers and owners who felt the original questionnaire lacked certain essential
information relevant to today’s shipping markets
Questionnaire 88 - Revised
An important aspect within the revision is a question pertaining to CAS, (Condition
Assessment Scheme), which asks if the vessel has a statement of compliance issued under the
provisions of the Condition Assessment Scheme as relevant to MARPOL.
INTERTANKO believes that this will be of immense value to port state control officers
and other industry bodies.
Links Between EQUASIS & Q88.com
Links between EQUASIS and Q88.com are now in place.
This means that for those owners who have completed and submitted a Questionnaire 88 form,
the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) information contained within the questionnaire is now
directly available on the EQUASIS web site. In addition, links are in place on the EQUASIS web
site that enable access to the fully completed questionnaire 88 form via the Q88.com web site.
INTERTANKO Standard Inspection Feedback Forms
An essential Feedback Systemfor Continual Improvement
Port State Control Inspections
A Comparison between
2003 - 2004
Q1. Did the Inspector observe all safety precautions?
97
3
96
40
20
4060
80
100
120
Yes No
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q2. Did the inspector discuss any deficiencies?
35
6
59
36
8
56
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q3. Did the inspector change his opinion due to discussions of the deficiencies?
12
26
62
14
26
60
0
1020
3040
5060
70
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q4. Did the inspector leave a copy of the report onboard?
64
36
62
38
0
1020
3040
5060
70
Yes No
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q5. Did the inspector make any written or verbal observations?
64
36
62
38
0
1020
3040
5060
70
Yes No
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q6. Did the inspector act in an objective manner?
87
121
86
13
10
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q7. If the vessel was detained was the master advised of his right to appeal?
5 6
89
6 8
86
0
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q8. Did any observation reflect the condition of the vessel?
59
34
7
56
38
6
010
2030
4050
6070
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Q9. Safety/Efficiency of cargo handling operation effected by the manner in which the inspection was
conducted?
25
74
1
21
77
20
20
40
60
80
100
Yes No N/A
2003
2004
Port State Control Inspection
Which part(s) of the Ship was focused upon:- 2003 2004
Deck 73 77
FFA 63 63
Engine 68 70
Accommodation 57 64
Certification 90 91
FFA/LSA 62 65
ESP/Class 47 50
Structural 30 31
Cargo Gear 35 35
SMS Record 58 59
LSA 65 63
Records 54 53
Bridge 74 77
Port State Control Inspection
Port State Control Inspection
Q10. Which part(s) of the ship was focused upon:-
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2003
2004
Dec
k
FF
A
En
gin
e
Acc
om
mo
dat
ion
Cer
tifi
cati
on
FF
A/L
SA
ES
P/C
lass
Str
uct
ura
l
Car
go
Gea
r
SM
S R
eco
rd
LS
A
Rec
ord
s
Bri
dg
e
Thank You