Port State Control A/W - UK P&I Members Area

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PARIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING(PARIS MOU)ICELANDNORWAYSWEDENFINLANDR U S S I A N F E D E R A T I O NC A N A D AUNITED KINGDOMDENMARKNETH.IRELANDPOLANDBEL. GERMANYPORTUGALFRANCESPAINITALYCROATIAGREECEThe information contained in the following section provides anoutline of Port State Control procedures under the ParisMemorandum of Understanding, the “Paris MOU”.MEMBER STATESThe current member states of the Paris MOU region are:OUTLINE STRUCTUREThe executive body of the Paris MOU is the Port State ControlCommittee. This is composed of the representatives of the 18participating maritime authorities and meets once a year, or atshorter intervals if necessary.Representatives of the European Commission, theBelgiumCanadaCroatiaDenmarkFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceIrelandItalyNetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalRussian FederationSpainSwedenUnited Kingdom of GreatBritain & Northern IrelandInternational Maritime Organisation (IMO) and the InternationalLabour Organisation (ILO) participate as observers in themeetings of the Port State Control Committee, as dorepresentatives of co-operating maritime authorities and otherregional agreements (eg., the Tokyo MOU).BASIC PRINCIPLESThe Paris MOU maintain that the prime responsibility forcompliance with the requirements laid down in theinternational maritime conventions lies with theIn 1996 the Maritime Authority of Iceland was granted thestatus of “Co-operating Maritime Authority” and it isanticipated that this status should allow Iceland to achieveaccess as a full member of the Paris MOU in due course.shipowner/operator and the responsibility for ensuring suchcompliance remains with the flag state. Port State Control isseen as a safety net, as the language of the recitals indicates:“Mindful that the principal responsibility for the effectiveapplication of standards laid down in international instrumentsrests upon the authorities of the state whose flag a ship isentitled to fly”, but “recognising nevertheless that effective8
action by port states is required to prevent the operation of substandardships...” but “convinced of the necessity for these...of an improved and harmonised system of Port State Control”.Directive is enshrined in the Memorandum, and whilst theDirective provisions are not obligatory to non EU members, thefact that they too have to fulfil these obligations if they are toconform to the Paris MOU means that there is in effect aTHE CONVENTIONSInternationally accepted conventions are monitored duringPort State Control inspections. These conventions are called‘relevant’ instruments in the Memorandum and are:significant raising of inspection standards within all of thosecountries who are participating members of the Paris MOU.Consequently, the scope and application of Port StateControl is extended by the provision of EC Directive 95/21/EC.For example, the Directive:●●●●International Convention on Load Lines 1966, as amended,and its 1988 Protocol, (LOADLINES 66/88)International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea(SOLAS), 1974, its Protocol of 1978, as amended, and theProtocol of 1988, (SOLAS 74/78/88)International Convention for the Prevention of Pollutionfrom Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978, asamended (MARPOL 73/78)International Convention on Standards of Training,Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers 1978, asamended (STCW 78)i. gives Member States the power to inspect and detainships anchored off a port or an offshore installation,although most inspections continue to be carried out onships alongside. It requires that, as a minimum, theinspector checks all relevant certificates and documentsand satisfies himself as to the overall condition of the shipincluding the engine room and crew accommodation.ii. permits the targeting of certain categories of ship. TheParis MOU now includes general ship selection criteria whichenable the inspectors to choose and review certain shipswith a view to “priority inspection” (see later comments).●●Convention on the International Regulations for PreventingCollisions at Sea 1972, as amended (COLREG 72)International Convention on Tonnage Measurements ofShips 1969 (TONNAGE 1969)INSPECTIONS THROUGHOUT THE REGION1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996NUMBER OF SHIPS INSPECTED 9842 10101 10455 11252 10694 10563 10256NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS 13955 14379 14783 17294 16964 16381 16070Source: Annual Report and Accounts, the Paris Memorandum of Understanding 1996● Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976(ILO Convention 147)Since its inception date, the Paris MOU has been amendedseveral times to accommodate new safety and marineenvironmental requirements stemming from the IMO, as wellas other important developments such as the EC Directivereferenced below.iii. provides that where there are “clear grounds” for adetailed inspection of some ships, the Authorities mustensure that an “expanded inspection” is carried out, (seelater comments).The Paris MOU has recently established an Advisory Boardwhich, among other things, co-ordinates the legal relationshipbetween the EU Directive and the Paris MOU.EU DEVELOPMENTSTARGET RATE FOR INSPECTIONOn 1 July 1996 the EU Council Directive 95/21/EC on PortState Control entered into effect and made Port StateControl mandatory in those states who are members of theEuropean Union.During 1996 the Paris Port State Control Committeecompleted the necessary amendments in order to bring theParis MOU in line with the EU Directive. Countries who aremembers of the European Union are consequently obliged togive effect to the Paris MOU, by virtue of the fact that theUnder the Paris MOU Member States have agreed to inspect25% of the estimated number of individual foreign merchantships which enter their ports.“Each authority will achieve, within a period of three years fromthe coming into effect of the Memorandum, an annual total ofinspections corresponding to 25% of the estimated number ofindividual foreign merchant ships, which entered the ports of itsstate during a recent representative period of 12 months.”SECTION 1.3 OF PARIS MEMORANDUM9
Page 1 and 2: Port State ControlA guide for Membe
Page 3 and 4: PORT STATE CONTROLINTRODUCTIONTHE G
Page 5 and 6: The Caribbean MOU and the Mediterra
Page 7 and 8: The Asia Pacific Memorandum on Port
Page 9: PORT STATE CONTROLOUTLINE OF EACH P
Page 13 and 14: ●●verification that the numbers
Page 15 and 16: 5. the emission of false distress a
Page 17 and 18: COST/GUARANTEE FOR COSTS/APPEAL PRO
Page 19 and 20: OUTLINE STRUCTURETARGET RATE FOR IN
Page 21 and 22: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS CARRIED OUT
Page 23 and 24: proceed to another port, as determi
Page 25 and 26: “to implement an efficient harmon
Page 27 and 28: This interrelationship between flag
Page 29 and 30: COMPARISON OF INSPECTIONSDEFICIENCI
Page 31 and 32: egarded as a proactive one and the
Page 33 and 34: FLAG STATESOWNER/OPERATOR LIST●Th
Page 35 and 36: ●Serious wastage or other structu
Page 37 and 38: AREAS UNDER THE IBC CODEmaintained
Page 39 and 40: and pollution prevention, are subst
Page 41 and 42: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND BIBLIOGRAPHYOu

Port State Control A/W - UK P&I Members Area

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?