Port State Control - 2014

August 2014
Port State Control Annual Report

[English]
Photographs of Deficiencies identified during

Port State Control
Life Saving
Inappropriate resetting of on-load

release gear
Poor condition of lifeboat hull
Broken safety belt
Damaged lifeboat seat
Fire Safety
Cracked fire door
Noncombustible compound missing

on A-class bulkhead
Unacceptable hold-back hook for

A-class fire door
MARPOL
Oily inside of discharge pipe
Oily water separator clogged
Machinery Space
Oily and dirty engine room
Oily lagging of F.O. piping
Load Line
Holed ventilator top
Wasted hatch cover securing

device
Gap of hatch cover side cleat
Others
Heavily wasted on-deck piping
Wasted mooring line
ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control
Foreword
This annual Port State Control (PSC) report summarizes deficiencies identified by PSC
inspections carried out in various countries around the world. This report is prepared with
the objective of building awareness of the present state of PSC as well as to improve future
maintenance and inspections, and also Safety Management System is compiled into the
following Chapters.
Chapter 1: Status of Implementation and Recent Developments in PSC Worldwide
Chapter 2: Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships registered to ClassNK
Chapter 3: Statistics & Analysis of ISM Deficiencies raised to NKSMC Ships
Chapter 4: Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU and Paris MOU
Port State Control has been found to be a very effective tool in reducing the number of
substandard ships as well as improving maritime safety and pollution prevention. There
has been a significant increase in PSC activity worldwide in concert with a number of
amendments to relevant international conventions.
In order to carry out the effective implementation of PSC provisions, many countries have
already signed and accepted a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for regional
cooperation in PSC for many regions, and have established a centralized computerized
database system and/or a harmonized approach.
PSC inspection procedures have been improved to cover not only a ships hardware or
documents, but also the operational requirements of the relevant conventions or shipboard
maintenance under the ISM Code.
In light of this background, ClassNK is working hard to increase the transparency of
information related to PSC issues and to make it even more difficult for substandard ships
to survive in the market place.
August 2014
Note: Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information presented in this report.
However, as information is collected from a variety of sources, ClassNK cannot be held responsible
for any erroneous data, judgements or conclusions that may appear in this report, in cases were the
information available should prove to have been incomplete or incorrect in any respect.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Status of Implementation and Recent Developments in PSC Worldwide
1.1 Amendments to the relevant conventions
1.1.1 Electronic Chart Display and Information System 1
1.1.2 Plans and procedures for recovery of persons from the water 1
1.1.3 Means of recharging breathing apparatus 2
1.1.4 Fire-fighters communication 2
1.1.5 Types of fire-fighters outfits 2
1.2 Recent global developments
1.2.1 MOUs around the world
(1) European and North Atlantic region (Paris MOU) 3
(2) Asia-Pacific region (Tokyo MOU) 4
(3) Latin-American region (Via del Mar or Latin-America Agreement) 5
(4) Caribbean region (Caribbean MOU) 5
(5) Mediterranean region (Mediterranean MOU) 5
(6) Indian Ocean region (Indian Ocean MOU) 5
(7) Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU) 6
(8) West and Central Africa region (Abuja MOU) 6
(9) Arab States of the Gulf (Riyadh MOU) 6
1.2.2 Port State Control in the United States (USCG) 6
1.2.3 Equasis 7
1.3 Measures adopted by ClassNK
1.3.1 Treatment of the Deficiencies Identified by Port State Control Inspections
(1) Cooperative assistance with Port States and treatment of the deficiencies 7
(2) Treatment of inspection reports by PSC officers 8
1.3.2 Minimizing the number of detained ships in order to reduce substandard ships
(1) Special training at several in-house meetings 8
(2) Meetings and informal gatherings with ship owners 8
1.3.3 Visits to Port States 9
Chapter 2
Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships Registered to ClassNK
2.1 General 10
2.2 Data on Detentions
2.2.1 Detentions by Flag State 10
2.2.2 Detentions by ship type 12
2.2.3 Detentions by ships age 13
2.2.4 Detentions by ship size (Gross Tonnage) 14
2.2.5 Detentions by Port State 15
2.3 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies
2.3.1 Detainable Deficiencies per Category 16
2.3.2 Frequently Reported Deficiencies 17
2.4 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies by Port State
2.4.1 China 23
2.4.2 Australia 24
2.4.3 Japan 24
2.4.4 U.S.A. 25
2.4.5 India 25
2.4.6 Republic of Korea 25
2.4.7 Indonesia 26
2.4.8 Canada 26
2.4.9 Russian Federation 26
2.4.10 Italy 27
2.4.11 Netherlands 27
Chapter 3
Statistics & Analysis of ISM Deficiencies raised to NKSMC Ships
3.1 Statistics of ISM deficiency cases

3.1.1 Total number and average rate 28
3.1.2 Statistics of NKSMC Ships and ISM Deficiencies 28
3.1.2.1 Per Property of ship 28
3.1.2.2 Per Factors related to Company 33
3.1.2.3 Per Port State 36
3. 2 Analysis of ISM Deficiencies
3.2.1 Number of ISM deficiencies sorted by relevant ISM Code requirement 37
3.2.2 ISM Deficiencies and Detentions per Port State 38
3.2.3 ISM Deficiencies and PSC Action Code 39
Appendix: Sample of PSC inspection reports 43
Chapter 4
Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU and Paris MOU
4.1 Tokyo MOU

4.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities 52
4.1.2 Black List of Flag States 53
4.1.3 Detentions by Recognized Organization 54
4.1.4 Deficiencies by Category 55
4.2 Paris MOU
4.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities 56
4.2.2 Black List of Flag States 57
4.2.3 Deficiencies by Category 58
4.2.4 Recognized Organization Performance Table 59
Chapter 1
Status of Implementation and Recent Developments
in PSC Worldwide
1.1 Amendments to the relevant conventions
Major amendments to international conventions and to the relevant regulations that
came into effect from 2012 through 2014 are summarized below.
1.1.1 Electronic Chart Display and Information System (SOLAS V/19)
Entry into force: 1 July 2012
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0907]

Paragraphs 2.1.4 and 2.10, 2.11 relating to the Electronic Chart Display and
Information System (ECDIS) were revised and newly added to SOLAS Chapter V/19.
An Electronic Chart Display and Information System (ECDIS) and back-up
arrangement will be phased in from 1 July 2012.
Passenger ship
(i) Passenger ship constructed on or after 1 July 2012, not later than the initial
safety equipment survey.
(ii) Passenger ship constructed before 1 July 2012, not later than the first safety
equipment survey on or after 1 July 2014.
Tanker
(i) Tanker constructed on or after 1 July 2012, not later than the initial safety
equipment survey.
(ii) Tanker constructed before 1 July 2012, not later than the first safety
equipment survey on or after 1 July 2015.
Cargo ship other than tanker
(i) Cargo ship, of 10,000GT and upwards constructed on or after 1 July 2013, not
later than the initial safety equipment survey.
(ii) Cargo ship, of 3,000GT and upward but less than 10,000GT constructed on or
after 1 July 2014, not later than the initial safety equipment survey.
(iii) Cargo ship, of 50,000GT and upward constructed before 1 July 2013, not later
than the first safety equipment survey on or after 1 July 2016
(iv) Cargo ship, of 20,000GT and upward but less than 50,000GT constructed
before 1 July 2013, not later than the first safety equipment survey on or after
1 July 2017.
(v) Cargo ship, of 10,000GT and upward but less than 20,000GT constructed
before 1 July 2013, not later than the first safety equipment survey on or after
1 July 2018.
Ship constructed under the conditions of above (1)(ii), (2)(ii), (3)(iii), (iv) and (v),
but delivered after the applicable due date, not later than initial safety equipment
survey.
1.1.2 Plans and procedures for recovery of persons from the water (SOLAS III/17-1)
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0985]
SOLAS chapter III was amended to add new regulation 17-1 and this new regulation
states that "Plans and procedures for recovery of persons from the water" shall be
provided for all ships engaged in international voyage (all passenger ships other than
ro-ro passenger ships and cargo ships of not less than 500 tons).
Application:
1
1) New ships constructed (keel-laid) on or after 1 July 2014: Classification survey

at new building stage
2) Existing ships (ships constructed before 1 July 2014): By the first periodical or
renewal safety equipment survey of the ship, whichever comes first after 1 July
2014
1.1.3 Means of recharging breathing apparatus (SOLAS II-2/15.2.2.6)
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0947 & 0990]
SOLAS regulation II-2/15 was amended to add new paragraph 2.2.6 and this new
paragraph states that an onboard means of recharging breathing apparatus used
during drills or a suitable number of spare cylinders shall be carried on board to
replace those used.
Application:
2) Existing ships (ships constructed before 1 July 2014): By 1 July 2014
1.1.4 Fire-fighters communication (SOLAS II-2/10.10.4)

SOLAS regulation II-2/10 was amended to add new paragraph 10.4. This new
paragraph states that a minimum of two two-way portable radiotelephone apparatus
for each fire party for fire-fighters communication shall be carried on board and
those two-way portable radiotelephone apparatus shall be intrinsically safe or of an
explosion-proof type.
Application:
2) Existing ships (ships constructed before 1 July 2014): By the first survey after 1
July 2018
1.1.5 Types of fire-fighters outfits (Amendments to SOLAS II-2/1 & 10.1)

SOLAS II-2/1 & 10.1 were amended and due to these amendments, compressed air
breathing apparatus shall be fitted with an audible alarm and a visual or other
device which will alert the user before the volume of the air in the cylinder has been
reduced to no less than 200 l.
Application:
1) New ships constructed (keel-laid) on or after 1 July 2014: Classification survey at
new building stage
2) Existing ships (ships constructed before 1 July 2014): By 1 July 2019
New amendments to conventions are also introduced on the ClassNK Website in the
section, IMO International Convention Calendar. (http://www.classnk.or.jp)
1.2 Recent global developments

1.2.1 MOUs around the world
In order to carry out PSC effectively, a recommendation concerning regional
co-operation in the control of ships and discharges was adopted as a resolution by the
IMO. In July 1982, fourteen European countries signed the Paris Memorandum of
Understanding on Port State Control (Paris MOU), and today many countries have
signed and accepted similar MOUs around the world. Currently, nine MOUs exist
around the world and their respective activities in terms of implementing PSC are
described below.
European and North Atlantic region
Asia-Pacific region
Latin American region
Caribbean region
Mediterranean region
Indian Ocean region
Black Sea region
West and Central Africa region
Arab States of the Gulf
Paris MOU
Tokyo MOU
Via del Mar
Caribbean MOU
Mediterranean MOU
Indian Ocean MOU
Black Sea MOU
Abuja MOU
Riyadh MOU
(http://www.parismou.org/)
(http://www.tokyo-mou.org/)
(http://www.acuerdolatino.int.ar/)
(http://www.caribbeanmou.org/)
(http://www.medmou.org/)
(http://www.iomou.org/)
(http://www.bsmou.org/)
(http://www.abujamou.org/)
http://www.riyadhmou.org/
(1) European and North Atlantic region (Paris MOU)

1) Activity
Established: 1 July 1982
Members: Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian
Federation, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom
-1 The Paris MOU consists of 27 participating maritime Administrations and covers
the waters of the European coastal States and the North Atlantic basin from
North America to Europe. The Paris MOU states that their aim is to eliminate
the operation of sub-standard ships through a harmonized system of port State
control.
-2 Press releases have announced the recent activities of the Paris MOU as follows.
Press release dated 14 October 2013
The Paris MOU announced that seven (7) ships were detained for MLC-related
deficiencies during the first month since entry into force of MLC2006 and this
corresponded to 10% of the total number of detentions (68) in the Paris MoU
area in this period.
Press release dated 17 February 2014
The Paris MOU announced the preliminary results of the Concentrated
Inspection Campaign (CIC) on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery, which was
conducted from 1 September to 30 November 2013.
- 68 ships (41% of all detentions) were detained over the 3 month period as
a direct result of the CIC for deficiencies related to propulsion and
auxiliary machinery.
- More than half (54%) of all CIC-topic related detentions involved ships of
20 years or more.
Press release dated 16 June 2014
- The Paris MOU announced new targeting lists Paris MOU which take effect
from 1 July 2014.
3
2) New Inspection Regime (NIR)

-1 Classification of the Ship Risk Profile
A Ship Risk Profile is based on the flag, Recognized Organization and company
performance, the number of deficiencies and detentions recorded for the ship,
past inspection records of the ship, as well as the ships age and ship type.
The Ship Risk Profile classifies ships into Low Risk Ships (LRS), Standard Risk
Ships (SRS), and High Risk Ships (HRS).
The time window is set according to the Ship Risk Profile as follows:
- HRS: between 5-6 months after the last inspection
- SRS: between 10-12 months after the last inspection
- LRS: between 24-36 months after the last inspection
-2 Banned Ships
The banning criteria for the first and second ban have been amended as follows:
- If the ship flies a black listed flag, it will be banned after more than 3 detentions
in the last 36 months
- If the ship flies a grey listed flag, it will be banned after more than 3 detentions
in the last 24 months
Any subsequent detention after the 2nd banning will lead to a ban, regardless of
the flag of the ship.
-3 Reporting obligations
The ETA72 (a 72 hour pre-arrival) notification requirement has been widened to
include all ships with a HRS profile as well as all bulk carriers, chemical tankers,
gas carriers, oil tankers, and passenger ships 12 years of age or older subject to
an expanded inspection.
Further, all ships are required to notify their ETA24 (a 24 hour pre-arrival), ATA
(the actual time of arrival), and ATD (the actual time of departure).
(2) Asia-Pacific region (Tokyo MOU)
1) Activity
Established: 1 December 1993
Members: Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Fiji, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan,
Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea,
Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, Vanuatu, and
Vietnam
-1 The main objectives of the Memorandum have been announced as follows:
1. to establish an effective Port State control regime in the Asia-Pacific region
through the co-operation of its members and the harmonization of their
activities,
2. to eliminate substandard shipping so as to promote maritime safety,
3. to protect the marine environment, and
4. to safeguard working and living conditions onboard ships.
-2 Press releases announced the activities of the Tokyo MOU as follows.
Press release dated 1 November 2013
The Tokyo MOU announced that the 24th meeting of the PSC Committee of the
Tokyo MOU was held in Tokyo, Japan from 28 to 31 October 2013.
- The Tokyo MOU celebrated its 20 years anniversary during this meeting
and the relevant forum was organized.
- The Committee approved the arrangements for the CIC on STCW Hours of
Rest that will be carried out from 1 September to 30 November 2014 with
the Paris MOU jointly.
4
- The 25th meeting of the PSC Committee will be held in New Zealand in
November 2014.
Press release dated 1 April 2014
The Tokyo MOU announced the preliminary results of the Concentrated
Inspection Campaign (CIC) on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery, which was
conducted from 1 September to 30 November 2013.
- A total of 282 detentions were recorded during the CIC inspections, among
which 72 or 25.5% of them were detained as a direct result of the CIC.
- A detailed analysis of the results of the CIC will be considered by the PSC
Committee in November 2014, after which a full report will be submitted to
the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
2) New Inspection Regime (NIR)
The NIR will enter into force from 1 January 2014.
A Ship Risk Profile is based on the flag, Recognized Organization and company
performance, the number of deficiencies and detentions recorded for the ship, past
inspection records of the ship, as well as the ships age and ship type.
The Ship Risk Profile classifies ships into Low Risk Ships (LRS), Standard Risk
Ships (SRS), and High Risk Ships (HRS).
The time window is set according to the Ship Risk Profile as follows:
- LRS: 9 to 18 months after the last inspection
- SRS: 5 to 8 months after the last inspection
- HRS: 2 to 4 months after the last inspection
(3) Latin-American region (Via del Mar or Latin-America Agreement)
Established: 5 November 1992
Members: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela
(4) Caribbean region (Caribbean MOU)
Established: 9 February 1996
Members: Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Cayman Islands,
Cuba, Curacao, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Netherlands Antilles, St. Kitts
and Nevis, Suriname, and Trinidad & Tobago
(5) Mediterranean region (Mediterranean MOU)
Established: 11 July 1997
Members: Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia,
and Turkey
(6) Indian Ocean region (Indian Ocean MOU)
Established: 5 June 1998
Members: Australia, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Eritrea, France (La Reunion Island), India,
Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa,
Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sultanate of Oman, Tanzania, Union of Comoros and
Yemen
-1 In 2013, the Indian Ocean MOU carried out a Concentrated Inspection Campaign
(CIC) on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery from 1 September to 30 November
2013 in line with the CIC carried out by the Tokyo MOU and the Paris MoU.
-2 According to Annual Report 2013 of the Indian Ocean MOU, a total of 5,320
inspections were carried out and 376 vessels were detained in 2013.
5
(7) Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU)

Established: 7 April 2000
Members: Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey, and Ukraine
-1 In 2013, the Black Sea MOU carried out a Concentrated Inspection Campaign
(CIC) on Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery from 1 September to 30 November
2013 in line with the CIC carried out by the Tokyo MOU and the Paris MoU.
-2 The 15th meeting of the PSC Committee of the Black Sea MOU was held in
Constanta, Romania from 8 to 10 April 2014.
-3 According to Annual Report 2013 of the Black Sea MOU, a total of 5,080
inspections were carried out and 169 vessels were detained in 2013.
-4 CIC on STCW Hours of Rest is scheduled to be carried out from 1 September to 30
November 2014.
(8) West and Central Africa region (Abuja MOU)
Established: 22 October 1999
Members: Angola, Benin, Cote dIvoire, Gabon, Ghana, Nigeria, Republic of Congo,
Republic of Guinea, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South
AfricaThe Gambia and Togo
(9) Arab States of the Gulf (Riyadh MOU)
Established: 30 June 2004
Members: The Kingdom of Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,
The Sultanate of Oman, and United Arab Emirates
1.2.2 Port State Control in the United States (USCG)
1) Activity
Although the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is not a member of any MOU, it is
an observer at a number of MOUs, and undertakes effective PSC in cooperation
with other MOUs.
In the 1970's, the U.S. Coast Guard increased its emphasis on the examination of
foreign vessels. Although this emphasis was primarily driven by requirements to
ensure compliance with the then new U.S. pollution prevention and navigation
safety regulations, boarding officers also exercised Port State authority when
instances of non-compliance with SOLAS and MARPOL were noted.
In 1994, the U.S. introduced risk-management methodologies into the Port State
Control program in order to allocate limited inspection resources to where they
could do the most good, by identifying those ships, ship owners, classification
societies and Flag Administrations that were most often found lacking in meeting
their international Convention responsibilities.
On 1 January 2001, the USCG implemented an initiative to identify high-quality
ships, called Qualship 21, quality shipping for the 21st century. This program has
since proven to be very effective in recognizing well operated and maintained ships
of good quality and continues in use today.
2) PSC Safety Targeting Matrix
The USCG uses the Port State Control Safety and Environmental Protection
Compliance Targeting Matrix which enables the Coast Guard to rationally and
systematically determine the probable risk posed by non-U.S. ships calling at U.S.
ports. The matrix is used to decide which ships Port State Control Officers should
examine on any given day, in any given port. The numerical score, along with other
performance based factors, determines a ship's priority for examination. (reference:
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cgcvc/)
6
3) Banning of foreign vessels

All foreign flagged vessels operating in U.S. waters are required to be maintained in
compliance with U.S. regulations, international conventions and other required
standards. However, when a vessel has been repeatedly detained by the USCG
(totaling three detentions within a twelve month period) and it is determined that
failure to effectively implement the SMS onboard may be a contributing factor for
the substandard conditions that led to the detentions, the USCG Headquarters
(USCG-HQ) will issue a Letter of Denial prohibiting the ship from further entering
any U.S. port until such time as certain actions have been taken to rectify the
situation. However, even if a vessel has less than three detentions in twelve
months, a Letter of Denial may be issued to any vessel which, in the option of the
USCG;
1. may pose a significant risk to the safety of the vessel, crew or the marine
environment; or
2. has a history of accidents, pollution incidents, or serious repair problems which
creates reason to believe that such a vessel may be unsafe or create a threat to
the marine environment; or
3. has discharged oil or other hazardous material in violation of any law of the
United States or in a manner or quantities inconsistent with the provisions of
any treaty to which the United States is a party.
1.2.3 Equasis
Equasis is a unique database that collects safety-related information on the worlds
merchant fleet from both public and private sources and makes it easily accessible on
the Internet (http://www.equasis.org/). It displays information from public authorities
(Port State inspection and detention information from the three participating PSC
regions, i.e. the Paris MOU, Tokyo MOU, and USCG) and industry players (such as
information on class, insurance, participation in industry inspection schemes, and
quality organizations), all free of charge.
1.3 Measures adopted by ClassNK
1.3.1 Handling of the Deficiencies Identified by Port State Control Inspections
(1) Cooperative assistance with Port States and treatment of deficiencies
When surveyors of the Society are notified of the detention of a ship classed with
ClassNK, the Society actively co-operates with the reporting PSC Authority in a
number of ways. The more direct of these steps include the following.
- Surveyors liaise with port state control authorities to ensure that they are called in
as soon as appropriate when deficiencies related to class and/or statutory matters
are identified.
- Surveyors liaise with PSC officers to ensure uniformity of interpretation of class
and statutory requirements.
- Surveyors provide PSC officers with background information, extracts from reports
pertinent to the inspection, and details of outstanding recommendations of class
and statutory items whenever so requested by the port state.
- Attending surveyors examine not only the condition of the deficiencies identified by
the PSC officers but also the general condition of the hull, machinery and
equipment of the subject ship to the extent of an annual survey, carefully
considering the seriousness of any deficiencies when they attend ships that have
been subject to an intervention action by the port state.
7
(2) Treatment of inspection reports by PSC officers

When a surveyor receives an inspection report from a port state authority, the report
is sent to the ClassNK Head Office. The report is immediately examined by
experienced staff to identify the causes of the deficiencies. This examination is carried
out for all ships for which such reports are received, and the results are circulated to
all sections concerned, including all members of the board of directors, as necessary.
The results are also reflected a ClassNK PSC database that has been developed for
the purpose of providing surveyors with PSC related information electronically. The
results of this examination are also submitted to the Flag State Administration of the
ship, as required. Further, visits may also be made to the ship owner or manager,
when deemed appropriate, to advise them of the relevant deficiencies noted and to
encourage them to more proactively improve the routine maintenance of their ships
and take other measures as necessary to ensure the highest levels of safe and
environmentally friendly operation. In cases where the deficiencies pointed out by the
port state authority are determined to be related to previous surveys conducted by
surveyors of the Society, those surveys are treated as a non-conforming service, and
appropriate corrective and preventive actions are taken in accordance with the
ClassNK quality system.
1.3.2 Minimizing the number of detained ships in order to reduce substandard ships
(1) Special training at several in-house meetings
Special training on PSC related issues is conducted at several meetings held regularly
for general managers and managers, to ensure that surveyors carry out full and
effective surveys with an uncompromising attitude towards ensuring the quality and
safety of the ships classed with the Society.
Special re-training is also carried out under the supervision of the Head Office and
regional managers, as needed, for those surveyors who have conducted any surveys
determined to be a non-conforming service under the quality system of the Society.
(2) Meetings and informal gatherings with ship owners
(a) Visiting Management Companies
When a ship classed with ClassNK is detained by a Port State, if deemed necessary,
a senior surveyor or manager of the Society visits the owner or the company
managing the ship to discuss what steps can be taken to improve the routine
maintenance of the ships in their fleet, so as to prevent both a recurrence of the
deficiencies noted and the occurrence of similar problems in the future.
(b) Meetings and seminars
PSC related issues are regularly discussed at informal gatherings and technical
committee meetings held with ship owners. At such times, explanations are given
and documents presented, with emphasis placed on the importance of proactively
ensuring the proper maintenance of ships and education of crew in order to prevent
the detention of ships.
(c) Publications
The ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control is distributed to all registered
shipowners and operators in the ClassNK fleet. A checklist entitled Good
Maintenance on board Ships has also been prepared in electronic format, which
can be used by the ships crew for quick and easy inspection of a ship before
entering port.
8
1.3.3 Visits to Port States

Personnel from the ClassNK Head Office as well as local survey offices are assigned to
visit the headquarters or offices of various Port States with the aim of introducing
ClassNK and exchanging views on matters of mutual concern. In 2013, the ClassNK
Head Office visited the following Port States for the above-mentioned purpose.
Australia
China
India
Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA)

Maritime Safety Administration (MSA)
Indian Maritime Administration
Chapter 2
Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships Registered to ClassNK
2.1 General
The data in this chapter, on ships detained due to deficiencies identified during PSC
inspections, is based on the following sources:
(1) Notifications from Port States issued in accordance with IMO Resolution
A.1052(27) Procedure for Port State Control, and
(2) Publications related to detained ships issued by the USCG, the Paris MOU, and
the Tokyo MOU.
From January to December 2013, 447 PSC detentions were reported relating to 411
ships classed by NK. This included cases of detention for reasons not related to class or
to NK itself. The total number of NK-registered ships (500 GT or over) was 7,620 at
the end of December 2013. Therefore, the 411 ships detained represent about 5.4% of
the total number of ships in the NK fleet. Further, detention ratio
(Detentions/Registered number in 2013) of the NK fleet in 2013 is about 5.9%.
2.2 Data on Detentions
2.2.1 Detentions by Flag State
Table 2.2.1 Detentions by Flag State (NK)
Flag State
Panama
Liberia
Marshall Islands
Malta
Singapore
Hong Kong
Indonesia
Thailand
Bahamas
Turkey
St. Vincent *
Cook Islands
Cyprus
Japan
Philippines
Others
Total
Number of
Registered Ships
(500GT or over)
Number of
Detentions
2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

3,048 3,160 3,160
246
258
249
299
349
396
26
17
36
249
307
343
18
19
21
181
184
200
18
16
21
610
649
691
21
21
17
422
435
458
18
17
14
108
160
170
4
4
9
72
72
67
8
10
8
131
134
144
14
9
7
58
68
69
7
3
7
27
25
22
8
8
6
3
9
21
1
3
6
86
85
86
7
6
5
810
840
860
0
3
5
99
89
87
4
8
5
31
35
31
6,914 7,319 7,620
431
437
447
Detention Ratio (%)

(= Detentions /
Registered Number
in each year)
2011 2012 2013
8.1
8.2
7.9
8.7
4.9
9.1
7.2
6.2
6.1
9.9
8.7 10.5
3.4
3.2
2.5
4.3
3.9
3.1
3.7
2.5
5.3
11.1 13.9 11.9
10.7
6.7
4.9
12.1
4.4 10.1
29.6 32.0 27.8
33.3 33.3 28.6
8.1
7.1
5.8
0
0.4
0.6
4.0
9.0
5.7
6.2
6.0
5.9
* Refers to St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The same applies in all subsequent tables or figures.
10
300.0
258
246 249
Detentions
250.0
2011
2012
200.0
2013
150.0
100.0
50.0
26
36
17
181921
212117
181621
18 17
14
14 9
7
8 10 8
8 8
7 3 7
313531
6
1 3 6
7 6 5
0 3 5
4 8 5
Pa
n
am
a
ar
Li
sh
be
al
l I ria
sl
am
ds
M
a
Si
ng lta
ap
H
on ore
g
K
In ong
do
ne
Th sia
ai
la
Ba nd
ha
m
a
Tu s
St
r
. V ke y
in
c
C
oo en
t
k
Is *
la
nd
C s
yp
ru
s
Ja
Ph pa
n
ili
pp
in
es
O
th
er
s
0.0
4 4 9
Flag State
Fig 2.2.1-1 Detention by Flag (NK)
35.0
29.6
33.3 33.3
27.8
2011
28.6
25.0
2012
20.0
2013
15.0
10.0
5.0
13.9
8.1 8.2 7.9
8.7 9.1
4.9
9.9
7.2
6.26.1
8.7
11.1
10.5
3.4 3.2 2.5
4.3
3.9
12.1
11.9 10.7
10.1
8.17.1
6.7
3.1
3.7
2.5
5.3
4.9
4.4
0.0
9
5.8
5.7
0 0.40.6
Pa
n
am
a
M
Li
ar
be
sh
ria
al
lI
sl
am
ds
M
al
Si
ng ta
ap
or
H
e
on
g
K
on
In
do g
ne
s
T h ia
ai
la
Ba nd
ha
m
as
Tu
rk
St
ey
.V
in
c
C
oo ent
*
k
Is
la
nd
s
C
yp
ru
s
Ja
Ph pan
ili
pp
in
es
Detention Ratio (%)
30.0
32
Flag State
Fig 2.2.1-2 Detention Ratio by Flag (NK)
Of those Flag State Administrations with ten (10) or more NK classed ships, the
following Administrations were identified as having a detention ratio higher than 10%
in 2013: Malta, Thailand, Turkey, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Cook Islands.
11
2.2.2 Detentions by ship type

Table 2.2.2 Detentions by Ship Type (NK)
Number of
Detention Ratio (%)
Registered
Number of Detentions (= Detentions / Registered
Ship Type
Ships in 2013
Number in each year)
(500GT or
2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
over)
Bulk Carrier
3,180
216
246
7.2
7.2
7.7
209
General Cargo
766
100
80
14.3
13.6
10.4
93
Container Carrier
594
38
35
5.3
6.5
5.9
31
Chip Carrier
128
9
6
8.5
6.5
4.7
13
Cement Carrier
105
0
1
1.0
0
1.0
1
Ro-Ro Ship
44
6
6
9.8
12.8
13.6
9
Reefer Carrier
142
18
18
8.6
12.1
12.7
15
Vehicles Carrier
352
10
14
2.3
2.8
4.0
8
Oil Tanker
752
6
10
1.4
0.8
1.3
10
Oil/Chemical Tanker
672
27
22
5.0
4.2
3.4
31
Gas Carrier
365
6
6
2.5
1.7
1.6
9
Others
520
1
3
1.0
0.2
0.6
2
Total
7,620
437
447
431
A detention ratio of General cargo ships, Ro-Ro ships, and Reefer carriers was more
than 10% and they were identified as having a higher detention ratio than other ship
types noted. (Detention ratio was determined by dividing the number of detentions by
the number of ships of each respective ship type in the NK fleet.)
250
200
2011
2012
2013
246
209 216
150
100
93 100
80
50
0
31 27
38 35
13
15
18 18
10 14
10
22
10
en
er
al
C
ar
C
on
go
ta
in
er
C
ar
ri e
r
C
hi
p
C
ar
rie
C
r
em
en
tC
ar
ri e
r
R
oR
o
Sh
ip
R
ee
fe
rC
ar
Ve
rie
r
hi
cl
es
C
ar
rie
r
O
il
Ta
O
il/
nk
Ch
er
em
ic
al
Ta
nk
er
G
as
C
ar
rie
r
31
th
er
s
Bu
lk
C
ar
rie
r
Detentions
300
Fig. 2.2.2-1Detentions by Ship Type (NK)

13.6
12.8
10.4
12.1
2011
12.7
2012
9.8
8.5
7.7
6.5
5.3
5.9
8.6
2013
6.5
5
4.7
4
2.3
1
2.8
0.8
1.3
Bu
lk
1.7 1.6
en
er
al
C
ar
C
go
on
ta
in
er
C
ar
ri e
r
C
hi
p
C
ar
rie
C
r
em
en
tC
ar
ri e
r
R
oR
o
Sh
ip
R
ee
fe
rC
ar
rie
Ve
r
hi
cl
es
C
ar
rie
r
O
il
Ta
O
il/
nk
Ch
er
em
ic
al
Ta
nk
er
G
as
C
ar
rie
r
3.4
2.5
1.4
4.2
Fig. 2.2.2-2 Detention Ratio by Ship Type (%)

12
th
er
s
7.2 7.2
13.6
14.3
C
ar
rie
r
Detention Ratio(%)
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0.2
0.6
2.2.3 Detentions by ships age

Table 2.2.3 Detentions by Ships Age (NK)
Detention Ratio (%)
Number of
Registered
Ships in 2013
(500GT or over) 2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
Ships age
Up to 5 years old
3,055
71
67
57
2.6
2.2
1.9
Over 5 and up to 10
1,663
68
78
116
5.3
5.4
7.0
Over 10 and up to 15
1,105
94
86
77
7.7
7.4
7.0
1,050
88
98
101
10.5
10.4
9.6
404
41
35
43
10.7
9.2
10.6
Over 25
343
69
73
53
16.5
18.8
15.5
7,620
431
437
447
Detentions
Total
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
116
94
71
67
57
68
78
86
88
77
2011
98 101
69
41
Up to 5
Over 5 and
up to 10
35
53
43
Over 10 and Over 15 and Over 20 and

up to 15
up to 20
up to 25
2012
73
2013
Over 25
Detention Ratio (%)
Fig. 2.2.3-1Detentions by Ship's Age (NK)
18.8
20.0
16.5
15.0
10.5 10.4
10.0
5.0
5.3 5.4
7.7 7.4
9.6
10.7
9.2
15.5
2013
2.6 2.2
1.9
0.0
Up to 5
Over 5 and
up to 10
Over 10 and Over 15 and Over 20 and

up to 15
up to 20
up to 25
Fig. 2.2.3-2 Detention Ratio by Ship's Age (NK)
13
2011
2012
10.6
Over 25
2.2.4 Detentions by ship size Gross Tonnage)

Table 2.2.4 Detentions by Ship Size Gross Tonnage) (NK)
Detention Ratio (%)
Number of
Registered
Gross Ton (x 1,000)
Ships in 2013
(500GT or over) 2011 2012 2013
2011
2012
2013
Up to 10
2,586
164
147
137
6.6
5.8
5.3
1,273
89
97
100
7.4
7.8
7.9
910
63
64
55
8.1
7.4
6.0
1,051
61
68
76
6.7
6.9
7.2
592
28
26
20
5.5
4.6
3.4
331
7
8
16
2.6
2.6
4.8
213
7
9
14
3.5
4.3
6.6
Over 80
664
12
18
29
2.1
2.8
4.4
7,620
Detentions
Total
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
431
437
447
164
147
137
2011
89
2012
97 100
63 64
61 68
55
76
2013
28 26
20
Up to 10
16
12 18
14
7 9
Over 60
Over 50
Over 30 Over 40
Over 20
Over 10
and up to and up to and up to and up to and up to and up to
80
60
50
40
30
20
29
Over 80
x 1,000 GT
Fig.2.2.4-1 Detentions by Gross Tonnage (NK)
9.0
Detention Ratio (%)
8.0
7.0
6.0
7.4
7.8 7.9
6.6
5.8
8.1
7.4
6.7 6.9
7.2
2011
6.6
2012
5.5
5.3
4.8
4.6
5.0
4.0
3.5
3.4
2.8
2.6 2.6
3.0
4.4
4.3
2.1
2.0
1.0
0.0
Up to 10
Over 10
and up to
20
Over 20
and up to
30
Over 30
and up to
40
Over 40
and up to
50
Over 50
and up to
60
Over 60
and up to
80
Over 80
x 1,000 GT
Fig. 2.2.4-2 Detention Ratio by Gross Tonnage (NK)

14
2013
2.2.5 Detentions by Port State

China
Table 2.2.5
Detentions by Port State (NK)
Port State
China
120
117
79
77
83
Australia
2011 2012 2013
27
31
Japan
117
120
141
Australia
83
77
79
Japan
40
31
27
U.S.A.(*1)
21
18
27
India
26
32
20
Indonesia
15
15
Canada
23
24
14
Russian Federation
10
Italy
12
14
Netherlands
Italy
Netherlands
United Kingdom
6
6
6
United Kingdom
France
6
2
4
France
Iran
5
6
5
Iran
Egypt
Brazil
Brazil
Viet Nam
Viet Nam
Chile
4
4
4
Chile
Singapore
Singapore
New Zealand
New Zealand
Turkey
Republic of Korea
Indonesia
Canada
Russian Federation
U.S.A.(*1)
Spain
10
11
Slovenia
Gibraltar
2
1
0
0
3
3
Gibraltar
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
40
431
27
437
30
447
(*1) Including Puerto Rico
26
32
15
15
14
40
27
20
Republic of Korea
Turkey
Others
Total
18
21
India
Egypt
141
24
23
10
14
12
2
5
7
8
9
2013
2012
2011
5
6
5
7
8
9
4
6
4
2
1
4
5
Spain
Slovenia
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
11
10
Fig. 2.2.5 D etenti ons by Port Sta te ( N K )
Detentions by members of the Tokyo MOU made approximately two thirds of the total
number of ships detained in 2013.
15
2.3 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies

2.3.1 Detainable Deficiencies per Category
In 2013, a total of 1,169 detainable deficiencies were reported relating to 447 detentions,
i.e., deficiencies which were serious enough to jeopardise the ships seaworthiness,
safety of the crew onboard, or to present an unreasonable threat of harm to the
environment and therefore warranted the detention of the ship. The deficiencies are
categorized as shown in Figure 2.3.1 and categories in this figure are based on those of
the Tokyo MOU. Deficiencies related to fire safety and life-saving appliances combined
accounted for about one-third of the total in 2013.
FIRE SAFETY
195
LIFESAVING APPLIANCES
215
219
166
125
155
123
118
109
EMERGENCY SYSTEMS
119
ISM
SAFETY OF NAVIGATION
94
65
69
52
POLLUTION PREVENTION - MARPOL ANNEX

WATER / WEATHERTIGHT CONDITIONS
65
39
50
47
45
43
RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
CERTIFICATE AND DOCUMENTATION -SHIP CERTIFICATE
20
29
81
52
35
PROPULSION AND AUXILIARY MACHINERY
65
131
134
2013
2012
61
36
2011
31
34
32
STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS
25
CERTIFICATE AND DOCUMENTATION -CREW CERTIFICATE
21
32
24
20
25
WORKING AND LIVING CONDITIONS - WORKING CONDITIONS

22
4
3
21
22
35
18
10
15

ISPS
18
WORKING AND LIVING CONDITIONS - LIVING CONDITIONS
12
12
12
CERTIFICATE AND DOCUMENTATION -DOCUMENTS
11
12
18
OTHER
11
10
16
8
ALARMS
14
15
5
2
5
CARGO OPERATIONS INCLUDING EQUIPMENT
Fig. 2.3.1 Deficiencies per Category (NK)

16
50
100
150
Deficiencies
200
250
2.3.2 Frequently Reported Deficiencies

Figure 2.3.2 shows those items of detainable deficiencies that were reported frequently,
in conjunction with the actual detention of ships in the NK fleet. Lifeboats, emergency
fire pumps, and fire-dampers continue to be the major items where most detainable
deficiencies were found. The items reported from 2011 to 2013 are explained in detail
in paragraphs (1) to (15) below.
Lifeboats
68
53
Emergency Fire Pump
52
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
33
15
32
15
Charts
23
20
19
22
Maintenance of the ship and equipment
31
21
21
Development of plans for shipboard operations
20
Oil filtering equipment

Ventilators, air pipes, casings
Launching arrangements for survival craft
18
Sewage treatment plan
2013
17
16
2012
24
17
2011
16
5
6
15
Fire detection
14
14
MF/HF radio installation
14
18
16
14
10
14
13
14
Operational readiness of lifesaving appliances
13
Means of control (opening, pumps ventilation, etc)
15
41
34
14
Fire fighting equipment and appliances
24
11
Fire prevention
Covers (hatchway-, portable-, tarpaulins, etc.)
26
19
Propulsion main engine
42
19
12
33
26
15
ISM
Embarkation arrangements survival craft
57
38
36
37
Fire-dampers
Emergency souce of power- Emergency Generator
78
52
23
19
13
10
20
30
40
Deficiencies
Fig. 2.3.2 Deficiencies reported Frequentry (NK)
17
50
60
70
80
(1) Fire Safety

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Fire Safety) are
shown in Table 2.3.2-(1) below.
Table 2.3.2-(1) Fire Safety
Item
11 12 13
Fire-dampers
Fixed fire extinguishing system
Fire prevention
Noted Deficiencies
Wasted and holed fire-dampers
37 36 38
Operation failure of fire-dampers
Corroded and holed CO2 lines
15 26 33
Operation failure of fire extinguishing systems
Deteriorated non-combustible materials for cable
17 14 18
penetrations in A-class divisions
14 18 15 Inoperable fire detection units
Fire detection
Fire fighting equipment and
appliances
Quick closing valves, Remote
control devices
Jacketed piping system for high
pressure fuel lines
15 19 13 Inoperable quick closing valves
Fire pumps and its pipes
12 17 12 Wasted and holed fire main line
Ventilation
12 11 11
Doors within main vertical zone
12 10 11 Malfunction of self-closing devices
8 10 14 Wasted and holed fire hoses
14 8 12 Operation failure of F.O. leakage alarm
Corroded and holed ventilator casings

Malfunction of mechanical ventilators
(2) Life Saving Appliances

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Life Saving
Appliances are shown in Table 2.3.2-(2) below.
Item
Lifeboats
Table 2.3.2-(2) Life Saving Appliances

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Lifeboat engine not started
68 52 78 Poor maintenance of rechargeable batteries
Inadequate resetting of on-load release gears
Launching and recovery

arrangements for survival craft
Operational readiness of
lifesaving appliances
Embarkation arrangements of
Rescue boats
11 9 19 Corroded boat falls

23 14 13
Inoperable / Inadequate resetting of on-load

release gear
0 2 13 Embarkation ladder heavily corroded and broken

10 8 7 Rescue boat engine not started
18
(3) Emergency Systems

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Emergency Systems
are shown in Table 2.3.2-(3) below.
Table 2.3.2-(3) Emergency Systems
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Item
Emergency Fire Pump and its

pipes
Emergency source of powerEmergency Generator
52 57 53 Inoperable and unable to pressure the fire main

0 15 32 Emergency generator unable to start
14 21 11 Fire drill failed
Fire drills
8 8 10 Abandon ship drill failed
Abandon ship drills
(4) ISM Related Deficiencies

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of ISM Related
Deficiencies are shown in Table 2.3.2-(4) below.
Item
Table 2.3.2-(4) ISM Related Deficiencies

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
ISM
Maintenance of ship and
equipment
Development of plans for
shipboard operations
Resources and personnel
4 15 33 Implementation of SMS failed generally

42 31 22
Inadequate implementation of SMS by crew

Inadequate maintenance of ships equipment
26 21 21 Charts management not followed SMS

Ships crew not familiar with operation of ships
15 22 12 equipment
(5) Safety of Navigation

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Safety of
Navigation are shown in Table 2.3.2-(5) below.
Table 2.3.2-(5) Safety of Navigation
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Navigation charts not updated
19 20 23 Navigation charts for intended voyage not
Charts
available
Defective VDR / S-VDR
9 13 12
Voyage date recorder(VDR)
Alarm panel showing system error
Nautical publications (tide table, list of lights, list
7 5 10
Nautical publications
of radio signals, etc.) not updated
Inoperable navigation lights
7 4 7
Lights, shapes, sound -signals
Navigation lights not supplied by batteries
Gyro compass
3 3 5 Not Operable
19
(6) MARPOL Annex I

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of MARPOL Annex I
Item
(Oily-Water Separating
Equipment)
15PPM alarm arrangements
Control of discharge of oil
Oil discharge monitoring and
control system
Table 2.3.2-(6) MARPOL Annex I

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Inoperable oily water separator
Inoperable bilge pump
41 24 20 Oily water inside overboard discharging line
Ships crew not familiar with operation of oil
filtering equipment
10 9 12 Failure of 15PPM alarm
Unapproved by-pass line fitting on oil filtering
3 2 5 equipment
Inoperable automatic stopping device
3 5 4 Defective automatic stopping device
(7) Water/ Weathertight conditions

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Water/ Weathertight
conditions are shown in Table 2.3.2-(7) below.
Table 2.3.2-(7) Water/ Weathertight conditions
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Wasted/Holed ventilators and air pipes
34 12 19 Damaged float of air pipe heads
Ventilators ,air pipes , casings
Damaged closing devices
Wasted / Holed hatch covers
9 6 14 Wasted hatch cover cleats
Hatch covers
Deteriorated rubber packing
Wasted / Holed hatch covers
8 4 5
Cargo and other hatchways
Wasted / cracked hatch coamings
Doors
9 5 3 Doors not closed tightly
(8) Propulsion and auxiliary machinery

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Propulsion and
auxiliary machinery are shown in Table 2.3.2-(8) below.
Table 2.3.2-(8) Propulsion and auxiliary machinery
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Defective oil mist detectors
6 5 16
Leakage of cooling water
Auxiliary engine
15 12 12 Inoperable Auxiliary engines
Other (machinery)
11 11 9
Operation of machinery
Safety valve of auxiliary boiler seized

Oil leakage around auxiliary engines
Ships Crew not familiar with simulation test of
8 5 7
over-speed trip of M/E
20
(9) Radio Communications

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Radio
Communications are shown in the Table 2.3.2-(9) below.
Table 2.3.2-(9) Radio Communications
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Defective MF/HF radio apparatus
14 16 14 Not operable by DC power
22 12 10 GMDSS reserve source of energy failed
Reserve source of energy
1 0 3 Ships officer not familiar with operation of NBDP
Operation / maintenance
(10) Ship Certificate

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Ship Certificate are
shown in the Table 2.3.2-(10) below.
Table 2.3.2-(10) Ship Certificate
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Certificate expired
1
4
6
Cargo Ship Safety Equipment
The original certificate not onboard
Mandatory annual survey overdue
Certificate expired
1 1 5 The original certificate not onboard
Cargo Ship Safety Radio
Periodical survey overdue
Certificate expired
1 2 4
Load Lines
3 1 3
EIAPP
Technical files not onboard
(11) Structural Conditions
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Structural
Conditions are shown in Table 2.3.2-(11) below.
Item
Table 2.3.2-(11) Structural Conditions

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Electric equipment in general
3 1 5 Low insulation alarm malfunction
(12) Crew Certificate

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Crew Certificate
Item
Certificates for master and
officers
Table 2.3.2-(12) Crew Certificate

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Missing of endorsement on STCW certificates
6 14 12 by flag state
Valid certificates expired
21
(13) Working Conditions

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of Working Conditions
Table 2.3.2-(13) Working Conditions
Item
11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
Dirty and oily engine room due to oil leakage etc.
10 14 23
Cleanliness of engine room
A large quantity of oily bilge in engine room
(14) MARPOL Annex V
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of MARPOL Annex V
Item
Table 2.3.2-(14) MARPOL Annex V

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
9 17 24 Inadequate entry in Garbage Record Book
Garbage
(15) MARPOL Annex IV

Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of MARPOL Annex IV
Item
Sewage treatment plant
Table 2.3.2-(15) MARPOL Annex IV

11 12 13
Noted Deficiencies
17 24 16 Not operable
22
2.4 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies by Port State

Most frequent detainable deficiencies per port state are shown in Tables 2.4.1 to 2.4.11
according to number of detentions reported from 2011 to 2013.
2.4.1
China
Table 2.4.1 China
Category of Deficiency
Fire Safety
Lifesaving Appliances
Emergency Systems
Water/Weathertight conditions
MARPOL Annex I
ISM
MARPOL Annex V
Radio Communications
Ships Certificates and Documents
Safety of Navigation
Dangerous goods
Structural Conditions
MARPOL Annex VI
MARPOL Annex IV
Crew Certificates and Documents
2011 2012 2013

69
88
67
46
44
58
34
33
42
19
11
24
25
17
19
16
24
18
0
1
17
22
9
15
6
9
15
5
11
14
3
1
12
6
9
9
4
2
8
5
12
7
4
7
7
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
Lifeboats
29
19
36
Emergency Fire Pump and its pipes
15
24
22
Ventilators, air pipes, casings
13
5
14
19
10
11
Fire-dampers
8
14
11
Emergency source of power-Emergency Generator
0
3
11
Embarkation arrangements survival craft
0
2
11
Fire prevention
9
8
10
Quick closing valves
8
10
8
Ventilation
5
3
7
Certificates for master and officers
0
5
7
10
6
6
Jacketed high pressure lines
6
6
6
Incinerator
2
0
6
Charts
1
4
6
1
2
6
Means of escape
0
3
6
Garbage
0
1
6
A total of 352 detainable deficiencies relating to 141 detentions were noted in 2013.
(2.5 detainable deficiencies/detention)
23
2.4.2
Australia
Table 2.4.2 Australia
ISM
Fire Safety
Emergency Systems
MARPOL Annex IV
2011 2012 2013

45
36
24
16
19
28
19
16
14
6
6
14
6
9
10
10
4
8
6
8
6
8
7
2
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
Development of plans for shipboard operations
20
17
14
Operational readiness of lifesaving appliances
22
13
11
5
3
9
Fire-dampers
10
7
6
Sewage treatment plant
6
7
6
4
3
5
2
2
5
0
1
5
Other(ISM)
0
1
4
0
0
4
2.4.3
Japan
Table 2.4.3 Japan
ISM
Fire Safety
Emergency Systems
Crew Certificates and Documents
Other
Alarms
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013

9
11
10
15
11
9
17
14
7
9
5
7
2
3
4
2
0
3
6
2
2
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
2011 2012 2013

Fire drills
8
11
6
6
6
6
Lifeboats
2
2
5
1
0
4
24
2.4.4
U.S.A.
Table 2.4.4 U.S.A.
Fire safety
ISPS
ISM
MARPOL Annex VI
2011 2012 2013

7
7
15
2
0
12
10
4
4
0
0
3
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
0
0
10
Access control to ship
2
0
5
Other(Maritime security)
0
0
4
Electric equipment in general
0
1
2
Sulphur oxides
0
0
2
Ship security officer
0
0
2
2.4.5
India
Table 2.4.5 India
Emergency Systems
Fire Safety
2011 2012 2013

31
8
18
5
13
13
23
16
9
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
1
10
8
Lifeboats
5
4
5
Nautical publication
4
1
5
Voyage data recorder(VDR) / S-VDR
7
2
4
Safe means of access Deck/Hold/Tank, etc.
0
0
4
2.4.6
Republic of Korea
Table 2.4.6 Republic of Korea
Fire safety
ISM
2011 2012 2013

4
8
9
3
5
9
2
5
9
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
0
0
5
2
4
4
Lifeboats
1
2
3
25
2.4.7
Indonesia
Table 2.4.7 Indonesia

Fire Safety
MARPOL Annex I
ISM
2011 2012 2013

19
17
11
7
12
5
2
6
5
2
6
4
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013

Fire-dampers
4
5
4
Lifeboats
1
3
3
Fire detection
0
2
3
2.4.8
Canada
Table 2.4.8 Canada

Emergency Systems
Minimum requirements for seafarers
Pollution prevention
2011 2012 2013

0
2
6
0
0
4
0
0
3
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
0
0
4
0
2
2
2.4.9
Russian Federation
Table 2.4.9 Russian Federation
Fire Safety
2011 2012 2013

5
4
8
2
3
6
1
6
5
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013
Lifeboats
4
4
6
Fire detection
0
2
2
Magnetic compass
0
1
2
Voyage date recorder(VDR) / S-VDR
0
1
2
26
2.4.10
Italy
Table 2.4.10 Italy

Fire Safety
ISM
2011 2012 2013

0
0
15
2
0
13
4
1
12
3
1
8
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013

ISM
1
1
6
Charts
0
0
6
0
0
4
Auxiliary engine
0
0
4
2.4.11
Netherlands
Table 2.4.11 Netherlands

Fire Safety
Emergency Systems
Type of Deficiency
2011 2012 2013

3
4
7
3
0
7
2
0
5
2011 2012 2013

ISM
0
1
3
Lifeboats
2
1
2
Fire-dampers
2
0
2
0
0
2
27
Chapter 3
Statistics & Analysis of ISM Deficiencies raised to NKSMC Ships
This chapter is constructed based on the analysis result of Port State Control Inspection
Reports which were collected in 2013.
The contents of the records are available as Monthly PSC Information in Safety
Management Systems (ISM)on ClassNK web-site http://www.classnk.or.jp/.
In this chapter, definition of the terms is as follows:
NKSMC ship
: Ship holding an International Safety Management Certificate issued by
NKDOC company
ISM deficiency
:
:
ISM deficiency case :

ISM deficiency rate* :
ClassNK
Company holding a Document of Compliance issued by ClassNK
Deficiency with safety management system related to the requirement
of ISM Code
Case where any ISM deficiency was recorded in PSC inspection report
Percentage of ISM deficiency cases to the whole NKSMC ships or a
group of NKSMC ships in consideration
* Defining ISM deficiency rate as percentage of ISM deficiency cases to NKSMC

ships that subjected to a PSC inspection is more meaningful. However, as the total
number of such NKSMC ships is unknown, the total number of the whole or a group of
NKSMC ships was used instead.
3. 1
Statistics of ISM deficiency cases
3.1.1 Total number and average rate

The total number of ISM deficiency cases and the average ISM deficiency rates in the
past 4 years are shown in Table 3.1.1.1. Since year 2010, the rate has been on the
increase to 5.2% in year 2013.
Table 3.1.1.1 Total number and rate of ISM deficiency cases
Year
ISM
deficiency
cases
(A)
NKSMC
ships
total No.
B
ISM
deficiency
rate
A/B
2010
169
4212
4.0
2011
202
4505
4.5
2012
237
4677
5.1
2013
251
4868
5.2
3.1.2 Statistics of NKSMC Ships and ISM Deficiencies

3.1.2.1 Per Property of Ship
(a) Per Type of Ship
ISM deficiency rate per type of ship is shown in Table 3.1.2.1 (a) and Figure 3.1.2.1(a).
The ISM deficiency rate of bulk carrier decreased 1.1% in 2013.
The ISM deficiency rate of the other cargo ship and oil tanker decreased 0.3% in 2013,
respectively.
The ISM deficiency rate of chemical tanker decreased to the level of 2011.
The ISM deficiency rate of Gas carrier has been decreased to one-fifth of 2012.
28
There has been no report of ISM deficiency of passenger & MODU since 2010.
Table 3.1.2.1 (a)
ISM deficiency rate per type of ship
No. of ISM
No. of
deficiency NKSMC
cases
ships
Type of ship
ISM deficiency rate A/B
2013
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
Bulk carrier
119
2062
4.2
5.3
4.7
5.8
Other cargo ship
114
1783
4.8
5.1
6.7
6.4
Oil tanker
15
759
2.3
2.0
2.3
2.0
Chemical tanker**
27
8.3
3.8
12.0
3.7
Gas carrier
232
1.8
2.6
4.5
0.9
Passenger & MODU
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
251
4868
4.0
4.5
5.1
5.2
(A)
Including oil/chemical tankers.
(B)
** Excluding oil/chemical tanker.
ISM deficiency rate (%)
14.0
2010
12.0
2011
10.0
2012
8.0
2013
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Bulk carrier
Other cargo ship
Figure 3.1.2.1 (a)
Oil tanker
Chemical tanker
Gas carrier
ISM deficiency rate per type of ship
29
Passenger
& MODU
(b) Per Age of ship

The numbers of ISM deficiency cases per age of ships in recent four years are shown in
Table 3.1.2.1 (b) together with the number of NKSMC ships. Figure 3.1.2.1 (b)-1 shows
ISM deficiency rates. Figure 3.1.2.1(b)-2 shows ISM deficiency rate per type and age of
ship in 2013.
Generally, the ships age and ISM deficiency rate are correlated. In 2013, the group of
the age 20-24 shows the highest rate, that is the same tendency in 2012.
In 2013, Bulk Carrier of Age 20-24 shows a significantly higher deficiency rate than
those of other ship types.
Table 3.1.2.1 (b)
No. of ISM deficiency cases A
Age
ISM deficiency rate (A/B) (%)
No. of NKSMC ships B
2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
2011
2012
2013
0-4
31
52
46
47
1671
1803
1865
1849
5-9
32
37
50
70
940
1064
1211
1391
10 - 14
39
47
44
38
773
744
670
652
15 - 19
27
39
56
53
381
463
529
602
20 - 24
16
16
24
26
210
218
193
204
25 -
24
11
17
17
237
213
209
170
169
202
237
251
4212
4505
4677
4868
Total
14.0
2010
12.0
2011
2012
10.0
2013
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
04
59
Figure
No. of ISM deficiency cases per age of ship
3.1.2.1 (b) -1
10 14
15 19
20 24
25
ISM deficiency rate per age of ship
35.0
30.0
Bulk carrier
25.0
Other cargo ship
20.0
Oil tanker
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
04
59
10 14
15 19
20 24
25
Figure 3.1.2.1 (b) -2 ISM deficiency rate (%) per ship type and age of ship
30
(c) Per Gross Tonnage of ship

The numbers of ISM deficiency cases per ships gross-tonnage in recent four years are
shown in Table 3.1.2.1(c) together with the number of NKSMC ships. Figure 1.2.1(c)
shows ISM deficiency rate.
The ISM deficiency rate of ships with GT less than 10,000, 20,000-30,000 and
60,000-80,000 has decreased in 2013 but other groups are increased.
Table 3.1.2.1 (c)
GT
x 1,000
No. of ISM deficiency cases per ships GT
No. of ISM deficiency cases A

2010
2011
2012
2013
2010
- 10
62
67
90
70
10 - 20
31
43
46
20 - 30
18
24
30 - 40
24
40 - 50
No. NKSMC ships (B)

2011
2012
2013
1134
1106
1083
1096
62
757
815
804
850
31
31
474
515
567
605
34
31
38
578
672
695
731
17
14
22
389
438
491
508
50 - 60
10
12
222
241
275
302
60 - 80
169
171
176
175
80 -
14
10
11
14
489
547
586
601
169
202
237
251
4212
4505
4677
4868
Total
9.0
2010
8.0
2011
7.0
2012
6.0
2013
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0 10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50 60
60 80
80
GT ( x 1,000)
Figure
3.1.2.1 (c)
ISM deficiency rate per Ships GT
31
(d) Per Nationality of ship

ISM deficiency rate per nationality of ship from 2010 to 2013 is shown in Table 3.1.2.1
(d) together with the numbers of ISM deficiency cases.
ISM deficiency rate of Panamanian ships is increasing gradually since 2010.
ISM deficiency rate of Liberian increased in 2013.
ISM deficiency rate of Japanese, Bahamas and Singaporean decreased in 2013.
Table
Flag
St. Kitts and
Nevis
Philippines
Turkey
Thailand
Greece
Antigua and
Barbuda
Malta
Liberia
Panama
H.K. (China)
Marshall Islands
Cyprus
Bahamas
Singapore
Vanuatu
Japan
Malaysia
St. Vincent and
the Grenadines
Cook Islands
Total/Average
3.1.2.1 (d)
ISM deficiency rate per Nationality of ship
2010
No.
Rate
0.0
0
No.
0
2011
Rate
0.0
2012
No.
Rate
0
0.0
2013
No.
Rate
1
100.0
3
5
5
0
0
6.8
6.9
9.4
0.0
0.0
4
4
5
0
0
9.1
5.3
8.8
0.0
0.0
4
1
5
0
1
8.5
1.2
7.8
0.0
11.1
5
9
7
2
1
11.9
11.0
10.0
9.1
7.7
8
4
97
9
7
4
2
15
3
4
2
1
6.5
2.1
4.1
3.9
5.0
6.9
1.8
3.1
6.5
2.3
6.1
7.1
7
11
126
9
9
3
1
16
2
3
1
1
5.8
5.1
5.1
3.6
4.6
4.7
0.9
3.1
4.2
1.6
2.6
9.1
8
7
143
13
9
1
5
21
5
9
3
1
6.7
3.1
5.6
5.0
3.7
1.7
4.2
4.0
11.1
4.4
7.9
12.5
9
14
151
14
13
3
4
14
1
3
0
0
6.6
6.2
5.8
4.9
4.7
4.6
3.5
2.5
2.1
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
169
4.0
202
32
4.5
237
5.1
251
5.2
3.1.2.2
Per Factors related to Company
Note: The analysis presented in this section covers only NKSMC ships under the
management of NKDOC Companies.
(a) Per Number of Ships under management by Company
ISM deficiency rate per number of ships under a Company are shown in Table 3.1.2.2 (a)
together with ISM deficiency rate.
The group of 1-5 ships shows the highest ISM deficiency rate 7.5%. There shows a
tendency - more ships, lower deficiency rate.
However, the ISM deficiency rate of the group of 41-50 ships shows 5.9%, that is an
exception of the above tendency.
Table 3.1.2.2(a) ISM deficiency rate per No. of ships under management of Company
No. of
No. of
ISM
No. of ships
No. of
ISM deficiency NKSMC ships
deficiency
under
Companies
cases
rate
management
(A)
(B)
(A/B)
1-5
445
76
1020
7.5
6 - 10
97
42
736
5.7
11 - 15
47
37
617
6.0
16 - 20
29
17
521
3.3
21 - 30
25
29
605
4.8
31 - 40
12
15
433
3.5
41 - 50
24
407
5.9
51 -
11
529
2.1
670
251
4868
5.2
Total
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
1 5
6 10
11 15
16 20
21 30
31 40
41 50
51
No. of ships under management of Company
Figure 3.1.2.2(a)
ISM deficiency rate per No. of ships under management of Company
33
(b) Per Country/Region where Company is located

ISM deficiency rate per country/region where Company is located is shown in Table
3.1.2.2 (b) (together with the numbers of ISM deficiency cases) and in Figure 3.1.2.2 (b).
The average ISM deficiency rate of ships under the management of Companies
located in Turkey, Greece, Korea and Hong Kong have increased from 7.7% (2012) to
9.4%, from 4.7 % to 8.4 %, from 6.4% to 7.2%, 2.7% to 3.3%, respectively.
In Taiwan and mainland China, the rate have decreased from 12.3(2012) to 9.4%,
from 6.5 to 4.2, respectively.
Table 3.1.2.2(b) ISM deficiency rate per country/region in which company are located
Country/Region
No. of
Companies
No. of
ISM deficiency
cases
(A)
1
No. of
NKSMC ships
(B)
Norway
Netherlands
21
Turkey
54
18
191
Taiwan
18
19
202
U. A. E.
11
Thailand
79
110
30
359
Philippines
29
17
232
Korea
36
11
152
14
Japan
182
96
1833
China
58
190
55
H.K. (China)
16
11
334
Singapore
71
24
878
(Others)
64
307
670
251
4868
Greece
Canada
Germany
Total
34
10
ISM deficiency
rate
(A/B)
2012
2013
10.0
0.0
6.3
7.7
12.3
0.0
8.6
4.7
7.1
6.4
0.0
5.5
6.5
0.0
2.7
9.5
9.4
9.4
9.1
8.9
8.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
5.2
4.2
3.6
3.3
2.9
2.7
2.3
5.1
5.2
1.0
12.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
Figure 3.1.2.2 (b) Deficiency rate per country/region in which company are located
35
Singapore
H.K. (China)
Germany
China
Japan
Canada
Korea
Philippines
Greece
Thailand
U. A. E.
Taiwan
Turkey
Netherlands
0.0
Norway
10.0
3.1.2.3 Per Port State

The number of ISM deficiency cases per port state is shown in Table 3.1.2.3.
The number of ISM deficiency cases in Japan, USA, Korea and Netherland has
decreased in 2013.
The number of ISM deficiency cases in China, Indonesia, India, Germany and Russia
were similar to the ones in 2012.
In the Paris MOU region, there shows a tendency of increasing. The number of ISM
deficiency cases in Italy, UK, Spain, France and Canada has increased in 2013.
Authority
Australia
China
Japan
U.S.A.
Korea
Italy
Indonesia
U.K.
Spain
France
India
Germany
Netherlands
Russia
Canada
New Zealand
Singapore
Belgium
Poland
Gibraltar
Brazil
Chile
Bulgaria
Argentina
Greece
H.K. (China)
Viet Nam
Turkey
(Others)
Total
Table 3.1.2.3 ISM deficiency case per Port State

No. of ISM deficiency cases
2010
2011
2012
50
63
53
15
17
38
26
36
34
11
22
23
6
5
15
3
4
3
2
8
9
5
7
5
6
6
4
7
4
2
1
5
7
2
1
5
2
3
7
3
2
5
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
5
4
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
4
1
2
2
0
1
0
4
1
4
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
3
0
1
0
0
12
8
7
169
202
237
36
2013
55
37
29
20
12
11
8
8
7
7
6
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
7
251
3.2
Analysis of ISM Deficiencies
3.2.1 Number of ISM deficiencies sorted by relevant ISM Code requirement
The total number of ISM deficiencies recorded in PSC reports from 2010 to 2013 and the
numbers sorted by the relevant ISM Code requirements (Section No.) are shown in
Table 3.2.1.
Table 3.2.1 No. of ISM deficiencies sorted by relevant ISM Code requirement
ISM Code requirements (Section No.)
Year
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 99*
2010
14
12
26
46
23
10
87
11
244
2011
10
12
25
44
28
11
86
17
24
271
2012
10
10
56
76
26
17
96
12
325
2013
11
27
75
19
93
19
30
303
Note 1) Where PSCO did not specify ISM Code Section No. relevant to the ISM deficiency, ClassNK
estimated it as far as possible.
2) 99* : Ones which did not or could not specify the relevant ISM Code Section No..
Section
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Requirements for
General (1.2.3 Compliance with mandatory rules, etc.)
Safety and environmental protection policy
Company responsibilities and authority
Designated persons
Masters responsibility and authority
Shipboard operations
Emergency preparedness
Reports and analysis of non-conformities, accidents and hazardous
occurrences
Documentation
Company verification, review and evaluation
Certification and periodical verification
In 2013, in 251 cases, some ISM deficiencies were pointed out. The number of cases
was increased comparing with the number in 2012 (237 cases). On the other hand,
total number of ISM deficiencies was decreased from 325 (2012) to 303. The average
number of ISM deficiencies per ISM deficiency case was decreased to 1.21 (cf. 1.37 in
2012).
ISM deficiencies related to Section 10 Maintenance of the ship and equipment has
been showing the highest percentage (abt. 30%).
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to Section 6 Resources and personnel
decreased from 17.2% to 8.9% and that of Section 7 Shipboard operations slightly
increased from 23.4% to 24.7%.
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to Section 8 Emergency preparedness
decreased form 8.0% to 6.3%.
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to Section 9 Reports and analysis of
non-conformities, accidents and hazardous occurrences decreased from 5.2% to 2.0%.
For Section 11 Documentation and 12 Company verification, review and evaluation
the ratio were increased from 3.7% to 6.3% and 2.2% to 3.0%, respectively. Also, the
ration of ISM deficiencies which could not specify the relevant Section Number was
increased from 1.2% to 9.9%.
37
3.2.2 ISM Deficiencies and Detentions per Port State

The number of ISM deficiencies and detentions per relevant ISM Code requirements
and Port State are shown in Table 3.2.2.1. Bracketed numbers mean detentions.
Table 3.2.2.1 No. of ISM deficiencies & detention per Port State & ISM Code requirements
ISM Code requirements (Section No.)
Authority
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 99*
1
2 26 6
2 18
6
4
65
Australia
(2)
(2)
(2)
(23)
(2) (15)
1
5 11 1
15 8
3
44
China
(5) (1)
(1)
(15)
(3) (4) (1)
2
9
7
3
3 10
1
35
Japan
(6)
(8)
(2)
6
3
1
10
3
2
25
U.S.A.
(2)
(2)
5
4
7
2
1
19
Korea
(5) (1)
(7)
(1)
1
8
2
11
Italy
(3)
(3)
1
1
4
3
9
U.K.
(3)
(7)
(4)
1
1
1
3
3
9
Indonesia
(1)
(1)
(3)
(1)
2
4
3
6 14 5
1 25 7
2
17
86
(Others)
6
3
10 2
4
29
4
0 11 9
0
5 27 75 19 6 93 19 9
0 30
303
Total
(0) (3) (0) (0) (0) (16) (25) (5) (0) (32) (4) (2) (0) (10)
(97)
(
): Number of detention
99*: The ISM Code requirement by Section with which the deficiencies were raised was not specified.
The largest number of ISM deficiencies was pointed out by PSC in Australia. The
numbers in China, Japan, U.S.A. and Korea follow it.
Number of detention was the largest in Australia. The numbers in China, Japan, UK
and Korea follow it.
As detainable ISM deficiencies, those related to Section 10 Maintenance of the ship
and equipment shows the largest number 32 and the highest ratio 33.0%.
The ratios of Section 7 Shipboard operations and Section 6 Resources and
personnel are 25.8% and 16.5%, respectively.
38
3.2.3 ISM Deficiencies and PSC Action Code

Number of ISM deficiencies sorted by ISM Code requirements (Section No.) and PSC
Action Code, is shown in Table 3.2.3.1.
Distribution of the same per Action Code is shown in Figure 3.2.3.1.
Table 3.2.3.1 Distribution of ISM deficiencies per ISM Code requirement and PSC Action
11
27
75
19
10
93
11
19
12
13
Unknown3)
G. Total
30
G. Total4)
3
4
1
1
99
Unknown
within 30 days
50
Defic. to be rectified
before back to US port
40
302)
Grounds for detention
within 3 months
1
2
2
1
18
before departure
17
within 14 days
16
next port
Sect.
No.
Total
Defic. rectified
ISM
Code
15
Defic. to be rectified by
10
Others
PSC Action Codes1)
16
12
26
25
12
1
1
6
1
1
52
32
13
11
3
1
303
10
36
133
98
325
51
124
110
10
Notes:
1) The Action Codes are those used under Paris MOU, Tokyo MOU, and USCG as follows.
Action Code 10, 15, 16, 17 and 30 are used under Paris MOU, Tokyo MOU and USCG
Action Code 18 and 99 are used under Paris MOU and Tokyo MOU
Action Code 40 and 50 are used under USCG. (In 2012, USCG abolished40: Rectify
deficiencies within 7 daysand Code No. of70: Rectify deficiencies to next US port
after sailing foreignwas altered into 40.
2) The number of Action Codes 30 includes Action Code 19 Rectify major non conformity
before departure (Only for ISM defective items and always with a detainable deficiency)
used under Paris MOU, Vina Del Mar MOU, etc., not used under Tokyo MOU and USCG.
3) Related ISM Code requirement is not specified.
4) GT, Ground total. The data of 2012 were presented for comparison.
39
140
No. of ISM deficiencies
120
2012
100
2013
80
60
40
20
0
10
15
16
17
18
30
40
50
99
Action Code
Figure 3.2.3.1 Distribution of ISM deficiencies per Action Code
a) General
For the ISM deficiencies found during PSC inspections, Action Code 18: Deficiency to
be rectified within 3 months was applied most frequently (43.9%). Frequency of Code
30: Grounds for detention was 32.8% and that of Code 17: Deficiency to be rectified
before departure was 11.9%.
The number of ISM Deficiencies resulted in 30: Grounds for detention decreased
from 110 (year 2012) to 98. Also, its percentage to the total number decreased from
33.8% (2012) to 32.3%.
In relation to ISM Code requirement, deficiencies with Section 10 Maintenance of
ship and equipment were pointed out most frequently, and it is followed by Section
7 Shipboard operations (was the most frequent in 2012) and Section 6 Resources and
personnel, Section 8 Emergency preparedness, Section 11 Documentation.
The percentage of Section 5 Masters responsibility and authority to the total
number of deficiencies decreased from 3.1% (2012) to 1.7%.
b) ISM Deficiency and its Objective Evidences
ISM Code Section 6 Resources and personnel
The number of ISM deficiencies related to ISM Code Section 6 decreased to the half of
2012 and also its percentage decreased to 8.9%. Frequency of Action Code 30: Ground
for detention to the deficiencies related to this Section increased from 35.7% to 59.3%.
Analysis of typical objective evidences is as follows:
The findings of Crew not familiar with fire drill including the usage of firemans outfit,
Crew cannot start the engine of lifeboat or rescue boat, lack of communication
between crew due to different nationalities of crew, Insufficient skills for smooth
function tests of GMDSS or 15ppm alarm often resulted in 30: Ground for detention,
then ISM related deficiency was additionally pointed out in many cases.
Fire doors tied opened at the entrances of Galley, E/R or other spaces, Crew not
familiar with function tests of fire alarm/ steering gear alarm , Insufficient knowledge
of on-load release mechanism, etc. were also pointed out as one of the objective
evidences of ISM deficiency.
ISM Code Section 7 Shipboard operations
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to ISM Code Section 7 increased from 23.4%
(2012) to 24.8%. Frequency of Action Code 30: Ground for detention to the deficiencies
40
related to this Section decreased from 44.7% to 33.3%.

Obstacles in front of fire hose box or on emergency escape route, Lifeboat etc. not
ready for immediate use, Insufficient skills to operate fixed fire extinguishing system,
Malfunctioned sewage treatment unit, Non-separated plastic or other garbage often
resulted in 30: Ground for detention, then ISM related deficiency was additionally
pointed out in many cases.
Not familiar with the operation of lifeboat and rescue boat, No execution of abandon
ship drill, Insufficient record of crews rest or working hours, Lack of voyage
planning, Chart & nautical publication not updated, Wrong storage condition and
record of garbage, etc. were also pointed out as one of the objective evidences of ISM
deficiency.
ISM Code Section 8 Emergency preparedness

The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to ISM Code Section 8 decreased from 8.0%
(2012) to 6.3%. Frequency of Action Code 30: Ground for detention to the deficiencies
related to this Section increased from 46.2% to 63.2%.
As a result of drills required by PSC Officer, Lack of the skills as duty officer,
Lifeboat cannot be lowered, Improper usage of Firemans outfit, Malfunctioned fire
alarm and its sensors were considered as lack of emergency preparedness and resulted
in 30: Ground for detention, then ISM related deficiency was additionally pointed out
in many cases.
Insufficient knowledge for the use of Lifeboat equipment (radar reflector, search light,
etc.), oily rags or other burnable left near furnaces or heated parts, Insufficient
lighting for embarkation spaces for lifeboats and rescue boats, Crew not knowing the
position of isolation valve on fire main line, Crew not wearing safety shoes, suits and
helmets, Taking too long time to wear firemans outfit, etc. were also pointed out as
one of the objective evidences of ISM deficiency.
ISM Code Section 9
Reports and analysis of non-conformities, accidents and hazardous occurrences
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to ISM Code 9 decreased to 2.0%.
Deficiencies such as Damage or malfunction of equipment, etc., had not been reported
to the company, Company do not respond to the deficiency reported from ship, No
corrective action taken for the deficiency pointed out during the previous PSC
inspection, etc. were pointed out. They were counted as ISM related deficiency itself or
objective evidence of ISM related deficiency case by case.
There found the cases where there was no reporting specified in SOLAS Chapter 1 Part
B Regulation 11 Maintenance of condition after survey (c) to Flag Government,
Classification Society, Port Authority, etc., regarding the deficiencies with steering gear,
generator engine and other important equipment, it was pointed out as ISM related
deficiency.
ISM Code Section 10 Maintenance of the ship and equipment
The percentage of ISM deficiencies related to ISM Code 10 has increased to 30.7%.
Frequency of Action Code 18: Deficiency to be rectified within 3 months were 55.9%
(41.8% in 2012) and Action Code 30: Ground for detention 34.4% (30.2% in 2012), 17:
Deficiency to be rectified before departure 5.4% (17.7% in 2012). That is to say
frequencies of Action Codes 18 & 30 have increased and that of Code 17 have decreased.
For the technical deficiencies which were pointed out as objective evidences of ISM Code
41
Section 10- related deficiency, Action Code 30: Ground for detention or 17: Deficiency
to be rectified before departure were applied.
(a) Hull structure and Hatch cover, etc.
Corroded or fractured hold frames and brackets, Wasted hatch cover packing and
cleat, Wasted or deformed watertight/ weather tight doors
(b) Main & aux. engines, Machinery and Equipment
Oil leaks, Broken pressure gauges, Malfunctioned sewage treatment unit, oil
filtering unit & 15ppm alarm, Windlass/ winch brake lining worn-down, Corroded or
holed sea water piping, Broken self-closing device of FO tank sounding pipe head,
Malfunctioned FO tank quick closing device, Malfunctioned emergency generator
(c) Navigation & Radio Equipment
Malfunctioned VDR, AIS, Echo-sounder, Radar, GMDSS, Magnet compass,
Navigation light. Dropped emergency power source for GMDSS, Overdue or missing
records of VDR annual maintenance
(d) Life Saving Apparatus
Lifeboat- Engine not started (incl. dropped starter battery), damaged hull and
outfitting, missed or expired equipment/ accessory
Launching appliance- No-good condition of on-load release gear, boat falls & hanging
device and davit
Insufficient maintenance of Life buoy, Radar transponder
(e) Fire Safety System
Insufficient maintenance of main & emergency fire pumps, Tied-opened or not selfclosing fire doors, Corroded or holed piping, Insufficient maintenance of fire dampers,
firemans outfit & SCBA, Leaking Hydrant
(f) Ventilators and Air Pipes
Corroded or holed coaming or vent/ pipe head. Corroded or broken closing device.
Examples of PSC inspection report issued in Australia, China, France, India, Indonesia,
Japan, Korea and U.S.A. in 2013 are shown in the Appendix, for introduction of typical
PSC cases where ISM deficiencies were raised with objective evidences i.e, other
deficiencies of ships structure & equipment, crew license, etc.
42
Appendix:
Sample of PSC inspection reports
Samples of reports of PSC inspections carried out in Australia, China, France, India, Indonesia,
Japan, Korea and U.S.A. in 2013 are given in the Appendix below showing the descriptions of
ISM deficiencies together with relevant deficiencies on ship constructions, equipment, etc.
(Abbreviations used in the table) DEF_CD: Deficiency Code, ACT_CD: Action Code
1. AUSTRALIA
CASE DEF_CD
1
05105
05118
04114
DEF_ITEM
Operation of GMDSS
equipment
NATURE_OF_DEFICIENCY
MF/HF Radio Defective.
Unable to demonstrate operation of DSC
test call to coaster radio station with MF/HF
Radio running on GMDSS Reserve Batteries.
Back-up batteries bank for bridge equipment
in deteriorated condition. (electrode plates
cracks/deformed & casing top cracked)
Sailing direction NP34 (2009 5th Edition) for
intended voyage not current edition.
( Indonesia Pilot Vol. II )
Sewage Treatment Plant defective.
Aux. Oil Fired Boiler protective alarm panel
lights mostly defective.
Gyro compass error & standard compass
deviation log not maintained as per STCW
Watch keeping Requirements.
Portable stanchions and lifeline between
accommodation & fwd. work station on main
deck not maintained.
Oily water separator automatic waste oil
discharge arrangement defective.
Proper personal protective equipment
(Goggle and Mask) not provided on board for
cargo dust.
Oil record book not of MARPOL Annex
current edition.
Starboard lifeboat manual bilge pump rubber
diaphragm with many surface crack.
3-way rotary valve for hospital sewage&
drain line to sewage plant stuck open.
Power supply to bridge fire detection system
turned off.
Main engine jacket cooling system shown
signs of external leak below thick paint /
sealant.
Starboard bridge wing rudder angle indicator
glass cracked.
10116
Emergency source of
power - Emergency
Generator
14402
13107
Sewage treatment plan

Other (machinery)
10106
Compass correction log
03103
14104
Railing, gangway, walkway

and means for safe
passage
18412
Personal equipment
01315
Oil record book
11101
Lifeboats
14405
13101
Other (MARPOL Annex

IV)
Operation of Fire
Protection Systems
10119
Rudder angle indicator
14611
Ozone depleting
Records & measures for minimize pollution
substances
from shipboard ozone depleting substance
07123
(HCFC-22) from ref. plant not maintained.
43
ACT_CD
30
17
17
17
30
17
99
17
17
99
17
17
15
17
15
16
15
15109
Maintenance of the ship

and equipment
10111
Charts
04110
Abandon ship drills
06107
Cargo operation
07112
Emergency Escape
Breathing Device and
disposition
Means of escape
Ventilators, air pipes,
casings
Winches and capstans
Fire fighting equipment
and appliances
07120
03108
09229
07110
15106
11102
11101
Lifeboat inventory
Lifeboats
03108

casings
Other (load lines)
03115
07112
07108
03115
11132
17102
Emergency Escape
Breathing Device and
disposition
Readily availability of fire
fighting equipment
Other (load lines)
Maintenance and
inspection
Other (SOLAS
operational)
Ref. to above deficiencies

#1,3,6,7,8,10,11,&16, there are objective
evidence that the company SMS is not
effective.
Out dated Chart AUS235, etc. used for the
voyage to Brisbane; BA Chart 4635 and AUS
Chart 815, 816 not onboard.
Life boat drill not carried out as per SOLAS
requirements. No drill records for life boat
water borned of the last 6 month was found.
Ship/shore safety check list not signed by
terminal representative.
Two air bottles for SCBA pressure low.
18
Gym apparatus in way of Escape route.

APT air pipe defective.
17
17
Mooring lines (Fwd.) on drums.

Hyper- L P water pump set at manual.
17
17
The SMS does not ensure effective

implementation of procedure and
instructions for key shipboard operations.
Stb'd Lifeboat: magnetic compass defective.
Stb'd Lifeboat: primary starting system
defective.
Stb'd Side main deck: rubber packing for
vent flap for stevedore toilet defective.
Forward bosun store: port side bilge valve
defective.
EEBD in E/R workshop with low pressure.
30
17
15
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
SCBA in fire station not readily available.
17
Water in bilges & on deck in conveyor belt

room forward.
Port Lifeboat: passenger's seats damaged.
17
17
Master failed to report defective navigational

equipment to class/port state/flag state
authority.
Port Lifeboat: release gear defective.
30
18
11129
Operational readiness of
15109
All above deficiencies are objective evidence
and equipment
that SMS as implemented on board failed to

ensure that the vessel is effectively
maintained.
44
17
2.CHINA
CASE
4
DEF_CD
10111
15109
15109
11112
15109
DEF_ITEM
Charts
and equipment
and equipment
BA chart No.1604 not updated.

BNWAS not consider as critical equipment
included in maintenance record book.
PV testing for INMARSAT station (included
lRIT 435635010) not carried out from Dec.
10 2012.
Means of testing freefall L/B release system
without launching L/B not provided.
No proper testing means for heat detectors
of fire detectors (located in E/R, galley room
etc.) not proper be periodically tested.
Corrective method for Garbage record book
- Not proceeded properly.
Voyage plan (from Singapore to Dalian) - No
Chief Officer's signature.
Fire drill's record - Not proceeded properly.
Communication equipments in fire drill - Not
checked.
Subsequent procedure of abandoning ship in
fire drill - Not proceeded.
INMARSAT-C - Not tested timely.
Launching arrangements
for survival craft
and equipment
01320
Garbage record book
10127
Voyage or passage plan
04109
04109
Fire drills
Fire drills
04109
Fire drills
05106
INMARSAT ship earth

station
05105
05118
07110
07105
07117
15109
11118
Operation of GMDSS
equipment
Fire fighting equipment
and appliances
Fire doors/openings in
fire-resisting divisions
Jacketed high pressure
lines
and equipment
Lifejackets incl. provision
and disposition
No evidence show duty officers have made a

test for NBDP.
Key crew not familiar with the operation of
NBDP.
Fire hose in engine room aft main engine Exceed 15m.
Self-closing device for the fire door between
engine room and steering gear room - Need
adjusted.
High pressure fuel oil leakage alarm system
for main engine -Malfunction.
Deficiencies mentioned above as evidences
show that operation of SMS on board Failure.
Light for the lifejacket in engine control room
- Malfunctioned.
45
ACT_CD
17
18
18
17
18
99
17
99
99
99
17
17
17
17
17
30
30
17
3. FRANCE
CASE DEF_CD
6
01101
DEF_ITEM
Cargo Ship Safety
Equipment (including
Exemption)
Gyro compass
Evaluation of Crew
Performance (fire drill)
Window for second annual survey expired.
ACT_CD
30
Gyrocompass inoperative. (ISM)

Last fire drill performed the 14th August
2013 (More than 1 month). (ISM)
30
30
15107
Fireman breathing apparatus not ready to
30
07105
11117
15150
Lifebuoys incl. provision

and disposition
Emergency lighting,
batteries and switches
ISM
09127
Cleanliness
10104
07125
04103
4. INDIA
CASE DEF_C
D
7
10130
use (10 minutes to open the bottle).

Self closing device of 2 fire doors in
staircase and 1 between E/R and Steering
Gear room inoperative. (ISM)
MOB Lifebuoys on bridge wings damaged.
(ISM)
Several emergency lights on deck
inoperative. (ISM)
Internal audit and corrective action is
required within 3 months. Deficiencies marks
ISM are objective evidence of the ISM Code.
Galley floor and filters of cooker extraction
hood dirty.
30
17
18
DEF_ITEM
Other (navigation)
17
17
17
17
17
17
11101
Lifeboats
07110
13101
15107
14118
14305
10111

appliances
Other (MARPOL/Annex I)
Other (MARPOL Annex III)
Charts
08111
Other (alarms)
08111
Other (alarms)
03108

casings
AIS/VDR annual performance test is due, as

last annual performance test was done on 11
September 2012.
Life Boat (P&S) Annual servicing test done
on 09/2012.
Portable fire extinguisher last hydro pressure
test record not available.
E/R emergency stop from ECR not tried out.
Damage stability booklet not available.
Garbage record book overwritten.
Oil record book overwritten.
Vessel using Indian chart, no updates
available for BA chart of the same area.
Span gas not available on board for
calibration of portable gas equipment.
Vessel does not have personal gas
measuring equipment.
Air vent rubber packing (Goose neck)
observed damaged.
05111
Satellite EPIRB 406
Performance test and servicing of EPIRB
MHz/1.6 GHz
carried out on 09/2012.
46
ACT_CD
17
17
17
17
17
17
5.INDONESIA
DEF_C
CASE
D
8
DEF_ITEM
ACT_CD
16105
ISPS not conducted properly.
99
10116
NTM not update.
17
05113
Radar transponder
SART can't be detected by radar.
17
10111
Charts
Chart correction not update.
17
10127
Passage plan not recorded properly.
99
05115
Radio log (diary)
GMDSS radio log book not recorded since
99
October 2012.
10106
Compass correction log
Compass correction book not update.
99
10116
IMDG Code old edition.
17
10116
10114
SOLAS consolidated not available on board .

VDR showing error.
17
30
15105
Voyage data recorder
(VDR)/Simplified Voyage
date recorder (S-VDR)
30
11104
Rescue boats
09201
Ventilation (Working
spaces)
Gauges, thermometers, etc.
All deck officers not familiar operating

MF/HF DSC.
Ships identification of rescue boat not visible
from above.
Stb'd E/R ventilation defective.
13103
07105
14608
14608
14104
14104
09208
07117
Incinerator
01134
01308
Incinerator
Protection machinery
Jacketed high pressure
lines
Means of control (opening,
pumps, ventilation, etc.)
Machinery spaces
Machinery spaces
Machinery controls alarm
Machinery spaces
Other (certificates)
Records of rest
09112
Medical equipment
07114
07114
08107
07114
17
30
Exhaust gas temperature indicator on panel

control engine side missing.
Escape trunk fire door hold by wire.
16
Manual instruction operating incinerator

N/A.
Incinerator abnormal.
OWS piping diagram not posted.
OWS solenoid valve not operating normally.
Eye protector grinding machine N/A.
High pressure FO line Emergency generator
engine N/A.
Quick closing valve DO service tank not
ready to use.
17
17
30
17
30
17
17
17
Emergency air tank low level.
17
Engine telegraph indicator light out of order.

Safety valve economizer not fitted properly.
17
17
OWS certificate not available.

Crew work/rest hour period record N/A.
17
99
Alcohol tester not available.
17
47
6. JAPAN
CASE DEF_C
D
9
15106
10127
10111
14503
14503
11117
07123
07101
04110
10
04109
15105
14601
11108
07105
10111
DEF_ITEM

ACT_CD
Non-compliance with mandatory rules &

regulations for the safe operation, new
edition charts were not onboard, voyage plan
was not appropriately planed, be using many
not up to date charts.
Not adequately planed with many not up to
date chart.
Charts
Charts for intended voyage: absence of new
editions charts. (13 sheets)
Garbage management plan
Garbage not separated according to garbage
management plan.
Garbage management plan
Not up-to-date. (not conformed to
MARPOL)
Lifebuoys incl. provision and Lifeline of lifebuoy at boat deck stbd side:
disposition
not no-kinking type.
Operation of Fire
HFO settling tank & service tank: drain
Protection Systems
valves secured open.
Fire prevention structural
Self-closing fire door between E/R and
integrity
steering gear room: kept open by the rope
Abandon ship drills
Crew not familiar with how to put on
immersion suit.
Fire drills
The crew were unable to demonstrate
proficiently in performing a satisfactory fire
drill.
Senior officer were not aware of their tasks,
duties and responsibilities as evident by the
above deficiency.
Technical files and if
Engineer didn't know how to maintain the
applicable, monitoring
engine for main propulsion and auxiliary in
manual
accordance with NOx technical code. This
ship missing Nox technical files.
Inflatable liferafts
Both side liferafts: Not readily transferred for
launching to each side of the ship.
30
Charts
17
Fire doors of stair case: Kept in open

position.
Chart for intended voyage: absence of
corrected navigational charts, the vessel is
using the out dated charts. (W126, W1106)
48
17
30
17
17
16
17
17
17
30
30
17
17
17
7. KOREA
CASE DEF_C
D
11
10118
12
DEF_ITEM
Speed log indicated -3.5kt in Inchon inner
harbor.
BNWAS reset switch located in bridge chart
room not providing proper look out.
17
10130
Speed and distance

indicator
Other (navigation)
07110
Some fire hoses in machinery space more
17
03115
appliances
Other (load lines)
15105
01104
17102
Cargo Ship Safety Radio

(including Exemption)
Other (SOLAS operational)
than 15m.
A cable penetrated ACC. Area between
ACC. Space and open deck.
C/O cannot demonstrate how to operate gas
detector.
SR annual survey overdue.
07122
Fire control plan
15109

and equipment
8. U.S.A.
CASE DEF_C
D
13
07108
14
IMO number inside marking not in

accordance with requirement.
Fire Control Plan not made with IMO
symbols.
In related to deficiency of SR Certificate,
maintenance of ship not satisfactory in view
of ISM code.
DEF_ITEM
Readily availability of fire

fighting equipment
Vessel is required to have Four Fire-Fighting

suits only three are in good working order.
Maintenance records by crew state all fire
suits are good working order.
Vessel had plastic, paper and grease mix
with food waste ready to be discharged
overboard according to ships garbage
management plan containers are not marked
properly, it is also believed that paper food
plastic, has been discharged into the sea.
The ladder for talking Draft reading was
down on the Starboard side for
approximately 3 hours. Excess keys were
located in the engine control room and Crew
specific duties in regards to security were
found posted throughout the Vessel.
Sediment documentation is not being
recorded, discussed bio-fouling, VGP
requirements with Captain, Chief officer and
Chief Engineer.
Expired PYRO Technics, batteries and 4x20L
containers of kerosene were found in various
accommodations spaces. Believe safety
officer has not followed or understands the
basic reasoning behind ISM objective.
Rudder shifts 4 degrees port and stbd while
operating the steering gears at follow up
mode.
14501
Garbage
16105
15101
Safety and environmental

policy
15101
Safety and environmental

policy
13108
Operation of machinery
49
ACT_CD
17
17
18
30
17
16
30
ACT_CD
17
10
10
10
10
17
15
15104
Masters responsibility and

authority
13100
Propulsion and Auxiliary

Machinery
If the vessel's primary steering gear stops

operating properly, the person directing the
movement of the vessel must report it to the
nearest captain of the port.
The following Pipes were patches.
10
17
1. Atmosphere Condenser Pipe

2. M/E F/W Cooler - S/W Outlet Pipe
02110
07111
15109
17100
11133
14104
07106
14201
15106
17100
Beams, frames, floors operational damage

Personal equipment for fire
safety
and equipment
Other
3. #1 Condenser S/W Pipe to Refer

Under deck area in Steering Flat has several
Stiffeners that are bent.
2 of 4 Fireman Outfits were damaged.
Stretcher has a damaged.
Vessel is mixed Gray and Black water

together and maybe killing the bacteria built
up in the MSD.
Other (life saving)
Portside Muster Station in the vicinity of
Survival Craft missing signs for Lifeboat and
Liferaft.
The Oily Water Separator has 4 patches on
various Pipes.
Fire detection
Ship does not have Test Kit for the Heat and
Flame Detectors.
Efficient stripping
A/C Vent is holed, which will allow air to
continue to flow when system is stopped.
Vessel has conflicting Ballast Plans and
SOLAS Training Manuals.
Other
No BIO Fouling Plan onboard vessel.
50
17
17
17
40
10
17
17
17
40
40
Chapter 4
Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU and Paris MOU
Several regional MOUs and Port States publicly announce their PSC data on their
websites and publish Annual Reports every year. Based on these public data available,
this Chapter introduces abstracts of the recent results of detentions by the Tokyo MOU
and the Paris MOU in 2013.
The full text of each respective Annual Report can be obtained from the following
websites.
Tokyo MOU
Paris MOU
http://www.tokyo-mou.org
http://www.parismou.org
51
4.1 Tokyo MOU

In 2013, 31,018 inspections were carried out in the Tokyo MOU region, and 1,395 ships
were detained due to serious deficiencies found onboard.
4.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities
Table 4.1.1 shows the numbers of Port State inspections carried out by each Port State
from 2011 through 2013.
Table 4.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Port Authorities (Tokyo MOU)
Authority
Australia
Canada 1)
Chile
China
Fiji
Hong Kong, China
Indonesia
Japan
Republic of Korea
Malaysia
1)
Marshall Islands
New Zealand
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Russian Federation 2)
Singapore
Thailand
Vanuatu
Vietnam
Total
No. of Inspection
2011
3,002
325
861
7,821
33
746
2,150
5,076
2,070
848
2012
3,179
487
907
8,321
28
743
2,673
5,193
2,350
892
479
476
102
70
1,812 2,004
1,136 1,081
740
779
333
456
0
0
1,093 1,290
No. of Detentions
Detention ratio (%)
2013 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

3,342
275
210
233
9.16
6.61
6.97
416
8
7
9
2.46
1.44
2.16
896
28
16
17
3.25
1.76
1.90
8,078
678
596
659
8.67
7.16
8.16
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
740
25
34
40
3.35
4.58
5.41
2,784
77
67
35
3.58
2.51
1.26
5,365
217
237
199
4.28
4.56
3.71
2,214
126
113
109
6.09
4.81
4.92
898
13
12
17
1.53
1.35
1.89
1
0
0
329
12
16
7
2.51
3.36
2.13
106
3
0
5
2.94
0
4.72
2,128
4
3
4
0.22
0.15
0.19
972
25
28
15
2.20
2.59
1.54
782
29
44
22
3.92
5.65
2.81
499
6
1
3
1.80
0.22
0.06
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,438
36
37
21
3.29
2.87
1.46
28,627 30,929 31,018 1,562 1,421 1,395 5.46% 4.59% 4.50%
1) Data for the Marshall Islands is only for November and December 2013.
2) Data is only for the Pacific ports.
52
4.1.2 Black List of Flag States

Table 4.1.2 shows the Black List of Flag State announced in the Tokyo MOU Annual
Report.
Table 4.1.2 Black List of Flag States (Tokyo MOU)
Flag State
Tanzania
No. of
Inspections
2011-2013
73
Korea, Democratic Peoples Republic
Black to
Grey limit
Black to
Grey limit
9
593
110
52
39
10
764
4,996
408
531
42
36
137
614
126
959
2,290
1,184
131
767
70
79
9
8
18
64
16
86
192
103
6
66
380
38
47
6
6
15
54
14
81
181
98
Papua New Guinea

Sierra Leone
Cambodia
Mongolia
Indonesia
Georgia
Tonga
Bangladesh
Kiribati
St. Kitts & Nevis
Thailand
Vietnam
Belize
No. of
Detentions
2011-2013
18
53
4.1.3 Detentions by Recognized Organizations

Table 4.1.3 and Figure 4.1.3 show the detention data of IACS affiliated Recognized
Organization in the Tokyo MOU Annual Report.
Table 4.1.3 Inspections and Detentions per Recognized Organization (Tokyo MOU) (*1)
RO
No. of
No. of
No. of RO
Recognized
Detention
responsible
Inspections
Detentions
responsible
Organization
ratio (%)
detention
2011-2013
2011-2013
detentions
ratio (%)
ABS
9,118
268
14
2.94
0.15
BV
9,417
418
15
4.44
0.16
CCS
8,126
81
1.00
0.01
DNV
10,524
283
10
2.69
0.10
GL
9,489
432
20
4.55
0.21
KR
8,115
141
1.74
0.01
LR
11,311
361
11
3.19
0.10
NK
28,105
1,005
46
3.58
0.16
RINA
2,239
105
4.69
0.04
RS
1,462
93
6.36
0.14
(*1) According to the Tokyo MOU annual report, in cases where a ships certificates were issued
by more than one recognized organization (RO), the number of inspections would be counted
towards both of organizations, while the number of detentions would be counted only
towards the RO that issued the certificate relating to the detainable deficiency or
deficiencies.
7.00%
Detention
RO responsibility
Detention ratio
6.00%
5.00%
4.00%
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
ABS
BV
CCS
DNV
GL
KR
LR
NK
RINA
RS
4.1.3 Detention Ratio by Recognized Organization (Tokyo MOU)
54
4.1.4 Deficiencies by Category

Figure 4.1.4 shows the number of deficiencies by category for the three years from 2011
through 2013.
17,539
Fire safety measures
20,522
18,114
2013
16,275
17,124
17,435
Safety of navigation
2012
2011
11,507
12,070
Life saving appliances
12,281
5,899
6,753
Load lines
8,139
3,511
3,593
Stability, structure and

related equipment
8,257
3,099
ISM related deficiencies
3,292
3,497
37,433
36,976
Others
35,826
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
Deficiencies
4.1.4 Deficiencies per Category (Tokyo MOU)
55
25,000
30,000
35,000
4.2 Paris MOU

In 2013, 17,687 inspections were carried out in the Paris MOU region, and 668 ships
were detained due to serious deficiencies found onboard.
4.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities
Table 4.2.1 shows the numbers of Port State Inspections carried out by each respective
Port State from 2011 through 2013.
Table 4.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities (Paris MOU)
Authority
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Cyprus
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Malta
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Fed. 1)
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
Total
No. of Inspections
2011
971
552
895
269
127
400
196
316
1,253
1,411
1,015
63
242
1,707
246
185
237
1,604
615
432
448
776
1,039
240
1,794
421
1,604
2012
1,068
567
983
223
103
334
169
283
1,233
1,208
1,164
70
285
1,468
267
173
176
1,531
572
425
424
728
951
199
1,668
493
1,543
No. of Detentions
Detention ratio (%)
2013 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

1,003
11
13
21
1.13
1.22
2.10
536
24
25
20
4.35
4.41
3.70
890
34
27
33
3.80
2.75
3.70
200
12
5
13
4.46
2.24
6.50
100
10
6
8
7.87
5.83
8.00
379
2
4
3
0.50
1.20
0.80
151
1
1
1
0.51
0.59
0.70
294
2
1
3
0.63
0.35
1.00
1,305
38
45
41
3.03
3.65
3.10
1,325
37
46
29
2.62
3.81
2.20
1,027
54
42
49
5.32
3.61
4.80
63
1
0
2
1.59
0.00
3.20
313
14
21
23
5.79
7.37
7.30
1,420
114
110
131
6.68
7.49
9.20
204
1
2
1
0.41
0.75
0.50
160
1
5
4
0.54
2.89
2.50
190
10
12
17
4.22
6.82
8.90
1,496
55
36
57
3.43
2.35
3.80
609
8
11
9
1.30
1.92
1.50
376
12
17
12
2.78
4.00
3.20
400
8
4
9
1.79
0.94
2.30
747
17
16
16
2.19
2.20
2.10
822
24
29
37
2.31
3.05
4.50
185
29
6
12 12.08
3.02
6.50
1,554
122
117
63
6.80
7.01
4.10
398
5
5
3
1.19
1.01
0.80
1,540
42
63
51
2.62
4.08
3.30
19,058 18,308 17,687
688
669
668 3.61% 3.65% 3.78%
1) Only movements to the Russian ports in the Baltic Azov, Caspian and Barents Sea
are included
56
4.2.2 Black List of Flag States

Table 4.2.2 shows the Black List of Flag States announced by the Paris MOU.
Table 4.2.2 Black List of Flag States (Paris MOU)
Inspections
Detentions
Black to
2011-2013
2011-2013
Grey Limit
289
53
Honduras
30
Dominica
103
18
Togo
282
37
Moldova, Republic of
611
73
54
Sierra Leone
355
42
33
Cook Islands
240
29
Comoros
350
37
1,004
87
84
526
47
47
Flag State
Tanzania, United Republic of
St. Vincent and the Grenadines

Cambodia
57
High Risk
Medium to
High Risk
Medium
Risk
28
5
12
27
24
33
4.2.3 Deficiencies by Category

Figure 4.2.3 shows the number of deficiencies by category for the three years from 2011
through 2013.
6861
6816
6528
6657
7488
6591
Fire safety
4579
5067
5252
Working and Living Conditions (ILO147)**: Working Conditions
4526
4393
4782
Life saving appliances

3069
3297
3491
Certificate & Document: Documents

Certificate & Document: Ship Certificate
2754
2856
3046
Propulsion and auxiliary machinery
2710
2442
2951
2202
2216
2808
2184
2029
1952
Emergency Systems
2013
2111
2121
2597
2012
2011
1946
2182
2313
Working and Living Conditions (ILO147)**: Living Conditions
1821
1736
1644
ISM
1301
1476
1704
Radio communications
1060
1127
1318
MARPOL ANNEX I
1013
1005
1101
Certificate & Document: Crew Certificate

MARPOL Annex
889
303
347
MARPOL Annex VI
492
449
358
Alarms
490
398
464
Other
424
570
602
ISPS
401
485
578
Working and Living Conditions (MLC,2006)*: MLC,2006 Title4
0
0
390
MARPOL Annex IV
341
324
253
Cargo operations including equipment
329
319
332
0
0
258
100
98
125
Dangeous goods
0
30
36
MARPOL ANNEX II 29
0
2000
4000
6000
Deficiencies
Fig. 4.2.3 Deficiencies per Category (Paris MOU)

58
8000
10000
12000
4.2.4 Recognized Organization Performance Table

Table 4.2.4 shows the PSC performance of IACS affiliated Recognized Organizations
among those announced by the Paris MOU for the three years from 2011 through 2013.
Table 4.2.4 Recognized Organization Performance Table (Paris MOU)
Recognized
Inspections
Detentions
Medium /
Performance
Organization
2011-2013
2011-2013
High limit
Level
11,405
10
203
ABS
5,323
89
DNV
10,382
184
CCS
746
NK
6,584
18
112
RINA
2,895
45
BV
11,217
35
199
GL
12,850
45
230
KR
825
RS
4,338
18
71
PRS
513
CRS
173
IRS
99
LR
59
High
MEDIUM
Port State Control Annual Report

[English]
ClassNK
Survey Operations Headquarters
4-7, Kioi-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-8567, JAPAN
Tel: +81-3-5226-2027, -2028
Fax: +81-3-5226-2029
E-mail: svd@classnk.or.jp
www.classnk.com
August 2014

Port State Control - 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Port State Control - 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

August 2014

Port State Control Annual Report

Photographs of Deficiencies identified during

Inappropriate resetting of on-load

Poor condition of lifeboat hull

Broken safety belt

Damaged lifeboat seat

Cracked fire door

Noncombustible compound missing

Unacceptable hold-back hook for

Oily water separator clogged

Oily and dirty engine room

Oily lagging of F.O. piping

Holed ventilator top

Wasted hatch cover securing

Gap of hatch cover side cleat

Heavily wasted on-deck piping

Wasted mooring line

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3.1 Statistics of ISM deficiency cases

4.1 Tokyo MOU

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0907]

[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0985]

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

1) New ships constructed (keel-laid) on or after 1 July 2014: Classification survey

[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0947 & 0990]

[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0947 & 0990]

1.1.5 Types of fire-fighters outfits (Amendments to SOLAS II-2/1 & 10.1)

[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-0947 & 0990]

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

1.2 Recent global developments

(1) European and North Atlantic region (Paris MOU)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2) New Inspection Regime (NIR)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

(7) Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3) Banning of foreign vessels

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

(2) Treatment of inspection reports by PSC officers

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

1.3.3 Visits to Port States

Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Detention Ratio (%)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

8.1 8.2 7.9

3.4 3.2 2.5

Detention Ratio (%)

Fig 2.2.1-2 Detention Ratio by Flag (NK)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.2 Detentions by ship type

Fig. 2.2.2-1Detentions by Ship Type (NK)

Fig. 2.2.2-2 Detention Ratio by Ship Type (%)

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.3 Detentions by ships age

Over 10 and Over 15 and Over 20 and

Detention Ratio (%)

Fig. 2.2.3-1Detentions by Ship's Age (NK)