Concentrated campaigns

[Leo]

Paris MOU: Concentrated inspection campaign on ISM compliance concluded-Full Presentation to take place in May in AthensFriday, 29.02.2008, 12:23am (GMT)
The 27 Maritime Authorities (EU Members plus Canada, Croatia, Iceland, Norway and the Russian Federation) of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control conducted a concentrated inspection campaign focussing on compliance with the ISM code - 5 years after its global implementation on board ships.
In practice the concentrated inspection campaign meant that during almost every port State control inspection within the Paris MOU region, the safety management system was verified in more detail for compliance with the international standards. Port State Control Officers verified that the safety management system (SMS) on board was not a ''paper exercise'' but that the master was ''fully conversant'' with the SMS and ship's personnel were able to ''communicate effectively'' in the execution of their duties related to the SMS.
The previous ISM campaigns in 1998 and 2002 were mainly carried out to verify if a SMS was established on board. This campaign focussed on the effective implementation of the SMS on board.
In the period from 1 September to 30 November a total of 5427 inspections were carried out within the Paris MoU on 5120 ships. Several ships were inspected more than once.
A matter of serious concern is that 1 out of 5 inspections showed ISM deficiencies (non-conformities), corresponding with 1031 inspections. In total 1868 ISM non-conformities were recorded during the inspections.
176 inspections resulted in a detention where one or more major non-conformities (MNCs) were found. Most commonly found MNCs were issued against ''effective maintenance of the ship and equipment'', ''emergency preparedness'' and ''reports of non-conformities and accident occurrences''. All three are key areas with regard to the safety of the ship and its crew.
With regard to the performance of flag States the average detention rate during the campaign was 5.4%. The worst performing ships, with a detention rate of 16,2% (which is three times the average) or higher, were flying the flag of: Albania, Comoros, Cook Islands, DPR Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, St Vincent and the Grenadines and Syrian Arab Republic.
The best performing ships, with a detention rate of 0%, were flying the flag of: Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bermuda, China, Denmark, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, India, Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, Isle of Man, Philippines, Spain, Thailand, and United States of America.
Although some serious problems were encountered in general it can be said that the CIC shows that the ISM system is starting to work onboard ships. Both ship-owners and crews on board understand the system and implement it. The Paris MoU will keep monitoring the implementation of the management systems to ensure the ISM requirements are complied with.
The complete report will be presented to the Port State Control Committee during their meeting in May in Athens.
This campaign was carried out in co-operation with the Tokyo MoU. Other Memoranda on Port State Control have also carried out an inspection campaign during this period.

Source: Paris MOU

υ/γ: Επειδή την προηγούμενη φορά έβαλα κάτι παρόμοιο στο security, ας το δεί κάποιος moderator και ας το βάλει στην σωστή θέση. Ευχαριστώ

[Petros]

Ship alert ! Australia Port State inspection

20.02.08
Unfortunately, they do not seem to be included in many vessels’ SMS framework of requirements. Under the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, ship operators have an obligation to identify equipment where sudden operational failure could cause hazardous situations and take steps to minimize this likelihood. Accommodation ladders clearly fall into this category.

It is reasonable and obligatory of course to include the accommodation ladders in the maintenance system which should be followed thoroughly. However the description of the above extract from the ISM code refers to the critical equipment (if I remember correct of course). Is the accommodation ladder considered 'critical equipment'? In that way anything that is used on board could be identified as critical and require apart from usual maintenance procedures (which some times if done in a correct manner are enough to ensure safety), further risk assessment measures and additional certification procedures.

[Leo]

............Is the accommodation ladder considered 'critical equipment'? In that way anything that is used on board could be identified as critical and require apart from usual maintenance procedures (which some times if done in a correct manner are enough to ensure safety), further risk assessment measures and additional certification procedures.

You are very correct and i fully agree with you but it is also important to keep in mind that AMSA is THE Authority! If they have announced a focus inspection in this area they will not paly games. Should they identify that you do not comply simply they " detain " the ship...

[Petros]

Of course the authorities of each country interpete each code differently and in their own 'interest' and perspective. You cannot blame them totally if their sole purpose is to reduce accidents and protect human life as much as they can. However, the question is whether it is always the sole purpose of each authority to reduce accidents. Some could argue that countries have extra income from unjustifiable and huge fines imposed on ships (not necessarily Australia of course). I have also heard the exaggerated (???) opinion that all these safety and security codes were created, so that specific countries can control the shipping industry in they way that they desire.

This specific phrase: 'ship operators have an obligation to identify equipment where sudden operational failure could cause hazardous situations and take steps to minimize this likelihood.' can be interpeted very broadly and in many ways. If you characterize a specific equipment or tool as 'critical' there are many implications that will arise in terms of surveys, certification, additional paperwork etc.

[Leo]

Concentrated Inspection Campaigns
05.05.08

Each year the Paris Memorandum of understanding on Port State Control (Paris MoU) carries out a Concentrated Inspection Campaign where Port State Control Officers concentrate on a specific topic.
In 2007 Port State Control inspections focused on the effective implementation of the Safety Management System (SMS) on board. A total of 5,427 ships were inspected by the Paris MoU in this Concentrated Inspection Campaign. In general, the campaign showed that the ISM system was functioning on ships. However, many of the inspections revealed ISM deficiencies. One hundred and seventy-six of the inspections resulted in a detention where one or more major non-conformities were found.
The Paris MoU will will continue to monitor the implementation of the SMS to ensure that the requirements contained in the ISM Code are complied with.
For 2008, the Paris MoU has planned a Concentrated Inspection Campaign that will focus on Navigation SOLAS chapter V inter alia charts, shipborne navigational systems and equipment. The campaign will include voyage data recorders (VDR), automated identification systems (AIS) and electronic chart display and information systems (ECDIS).
Please study and be familiarised as required.

Πηγή: BIMCO

[Leo]

Από Infromarine on-line

PARIS MOU ANNOUNCED NEW TARGETING LISTS
Sunday, 07.06.2008, 08:08pm (GMT)

A “hard core” of flag States remain on the “Black List”. Most of the flags that were considered “very high risk” in 2006 have retained this ranking. The poorest performing flags are still Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Bolivia and Albania.

New on the “Black List” is Sierra Leone, in previous years this flag did not have enough inspections. Brazil disappeared from the “Black List” because less than 30 inspections were recorded. Jamaica, Mongolia, Panama and Ukraine moved from the “Grey List” to the “Black List”. Morocco improved the performance from “Black” to “Grey”.
Flags with an average performance are shown on the “Grey List”. Their appearance on this list may act as an incentive to improve and move to the “White List”. At the same time flags at the lower end of the “Grey List” should be careful not to neglect control over their ships and risk ending up on the “Black List” next year.
India, Ireland, the Russian Federation and Vanuatu moved up from “Grey” to “White”. Netherlands Antilles and Saudi Arabia moved down from “White” to “Grey”. Cook Islands is new on the “Grey List”.
The “White List” represents quality flags with a consistently low detention record. France, Bermuda (UK) and China are placed highest in terms of performance.
A flag’s ranking is taken into account when targeting ships for inspection and ships flying flags listed on the “Black list” are liable for banning from the region after multiple detentions.
The Paris MoU also agreed on the performance listing of Recognized Organizations (ROs). These organizations have been delegated with statutory responsibilities by flag States. This table uses the same method of calculation as the flag State table but counts only those detentions, which the Paris MoU considers to be directly related to a statutory survey carried out by the recognized organization.
Det Norske Veritas, Germanischer Lloyd and Registro Italiano Navale are the recognized organizations highest performing ROs.
Korea Classification Society (Korea, DPR), International Register of Shipping (USA) and Shipping Register of Ukraine have shown the lowest performance.
More information can be found in the 2007 Annual Report, which will be released in July 2008.

EPG

Source: Paris M.O.U.

[Leo]

25 August 2008
PARIS AND TOKYO MOU’s ON PORT STATE CONTROL HOLD JOINT CONCENTRATED INSPECTION CAMPAIGN
ON SAFETY OF NAVIGATION – SOLAS Ch. V.
BEGINING 1 SEPTEMBER 2008.

The 43 Maritime Authorities of the Paris and the Tokyo Memoranda on Port State Control (EU Members, the States of the Asia Pacific region, plus Canada, Croatia, Iceland, Norway, and the Russian Federation) will begin a joint concentrated inspection campaign focussing on compliance with SOLAS Chapter V – Safety of Navigation. This inspection campaign will be held for 3 months, ending on 30 November 2008.

In practice the concentrated inspection campaign will mean that during every port State control inspection within the Paris and Tokyo MOU regions, the navigation related equipment and documentation shall be verified in more detail for compliance with SOLAS Chapter V. Port State Control Officers will verify that there is compliance with the carriage requirements for all size of ships and where required also valid statutory certification together with relevant record of equipment, as well as that equipment has type approval and is functioning effectively. Furthermore familiarity of the master and watch-keeping officers with the bridge equipment will be evaluated.

During the campaign Port State Control Officers shall use a list of 12 selected items to verify critical areas for the safety of navigation, some of which are related to:
• Documentation

• Equipment

• Familiarisation
When deficiencies are found, actions by the port State may vary from recording a deficiency and instructing the master to rectify within a certain period to detention of the ship until all deficiencies have been rectified.

In case of detention, the ship could face the risk of further inspections in other Paris and Tokyo MOU ports and publication in the monthly list of detentions issued by the Secretariat of the Paris MOU and Tokyo MOU web page, on line detention list.

All inspections will be inserted in the databases of the Paris and Tokyo MOUs, SIRENAC and APCIS respectively, and will be recorded on an evaluation form. The results of the campaign shall be analysed later this year. Detailed results of the campaign will be discussed during the 42nd meeting of the Paris MOU Port State Control Committee in May 2009 in Iceland and during the 19th Committee meeting of the Tokyo MOU, in 2009, in Papua New Guinea.
For 2009 a joint Paris and Tokyo MOU concentrated inspection campaign has been planned which will focus on Lifeboat Launching Arrangements, including Maintenance and records, Operational safety, On-load releases, Davits and winches, as well as Drills.

Contact

Paris MOU
Tokyo MOU

Mr. Richard W.J. Schiferli
General Secretary
Paris MoU on Port State Control
PO Box 90653
2509 LR The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 (0)70 456 1509
Fax: +31 (0)70 456 1599
E-mail: Richard.Schiferli@parismou.org
Web-site: www.parismou.org
Mr. Mitsutoyo Okada
Secretary
Tokyo MOU Secretariat
Ascend Shimbashi 8F
6-19-19, Shimbashi,
Minato-ku, Tokyo
Japan 105-0004
Tel: +81-3-3433 0621
Fax: +81-3-3433 0624
E-mail: secretariat@tokyo-mou.org
Web-site: www.tokyo-mou.org

[ΕΥΗ]

FOR MORE DETAILS (including the Questionnaire) VISIT THE LINK
http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/tech_inf..._img/T744e.pdf

BST RGDS
E.

[Leo]

Source: UK P&I Club

Concentrated Inspection Campaign - Lifesaving Appliances - Europe/Asia

en635.pdf

[Leo]

Source: UK P&I Club

A reminder on the Mandatory expanded inspection-Europe

en642.pdf