annual report on port state control in … of understanding on port state control in the...

ANNUAL REPORT

ONPORT STATE CONTROL

IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

2016

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PORT STATE CONTROL IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

FOREWORD

Annual Report on Port State Control in the Asia-Pacific Region 2016


CONTENTS

page

OVERVIEWGeneral introduction ............................................................................…….. 1

Review of year 2016 .............................................................................…….. 2

The Port State Control Committee ......................................................…….. 3

Technical Working Group (TWG) ……………………………………………… 5

The Third Joint Ministerial Conference ………………………………………. 6

The Asia-Pacific Computerized Information System (APCIS) ...........……. 6

Training and seminars for port State control officers .......................…….. 6

Co-operation with other regional port State control agreements ………... 9

PORT STATE CONTROL UNDER THE TOKYO MOU, 2016Inspections ...........................................................................................……... 12

Detentions ............................................................................................……... 12

Deficiencies ..........................................................................................……... 13

Overview of port State control results 2006-2016 …………………………... 14

ANNEX 1 -- STATUS OF THE RELEVANT INSTRUMENTS .......................….. 21

ANNEX 2 -- PORT STATE INSPECTION STATISTICS ..............................…….. 24

Statistics for 2016 .....................................................................……… 24

Summary of port State inspection data 2014-2016 .......................… 34

ANNEX 3 -- ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE OF THE TOKYO MOU .............. 54

Explanatory Note on the Black-Grey-White Lists ……………………………… 55


LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

pageFigure 1 Inspection percentage ………………………………………………….. 15Figure 2 Inspection per ship risk profile ……………………………………….. 15Figure 3 Port State inspections - contribution by Authorities ……………… 16Figure 4 Type of ship inspected ………………………………………………….. 16Figure 5 Detentions per flag ……………………………………………………… 17Figure 6 Detention per ship type ………………………………………………… 17Figure 7 Deficiencies by main categories ……………………………………… 18Figure 8 Most frequent detainable deficiencies ………………………………. 18Figure 9 No. of inspections ……………………………………………………….. 19Figure 10 Inspection percentage ………………………………………………….. 19Figure 11 No. of inspections with deficiencies …………………………………. 19Figure 12 No. of deficiencies ………………………………………………………. 20Figure 13 No. of detentions …………………………………….…………………... 20Figure 14 Detention percentage ……………………………….…………………... 20Figure 15 Comparison of inspections per ship type …………………………... 40Figure 16 Comparison of detentions per ship type ………………………….… 40Figure 17 Comparison of inspections with deficiencies per ship type …….. 42Figure 18 Comparison of number of deficiencies by main categories …….. 48Figure 19 Comparison of most frequent detainable deficiencies …………… 50

Table 1 Status of the relevant instruments …………………………………… 21Table 1a Status of MARPOL 73/78 ……………………………………………….. 23Table 2 Port State inspections carried out by Authorities …………………. 24Table 2a Port State inspections on maritime security ……………………….. 25Table 3 Port State inspections per ship risk profile ………………………… 26Table 4 Port State inspections per flag ……………………………………….. 27Table 5 Port State inspections per ship type …………………………………. 30Table 6 Port State inspections per recognized organization …….……….. 31Table 7 Deficiencies by categories …………………………………………….. 33Table 8 Black – Grey – White Lists ……………………………………………... 35Table 9 Inspections and detentions per flag …………………………………. 36Table 10 Inspections and detentions per ship type ………………………….. 41Table 11 Inspections with deficiencies per ship type ……………………….. 43Table 12 Inspections and detentions per recognized organization ……….. 44Table 13 Performance of recognized organization …………………………… 46Table 14 Comparison of deficiencies by categories ………………………….. 49Table 15 Comparison of most frequent detainable deficiencies …………… 51Table 16 List of under-performing ships ……………………………………….. 52


1

O V E R V I E W

GENERAL INTRODUCTION


2

REVIEW OF YEAR 2016


3

THE PORT STATE CONTROL COMMITTEE


4


5

TECHICAL WORKING GROUP (TWG)


6

PREPARATION OF THE THIRD JOINT MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE

ASIA-PACIFIC COMPUTERIZEDINFORMATION SYSTEM (APCIS)

TRAINING AND SEMINARS FOR PORT STATE CONTROL OFFICERS


7


8


9

CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER REGIONAL PORT STATE CONTROL AGREEMENTS


10


11


12

PORT STATE CONTROL UNDER THE TOKYO MOU, 2016

INSPECTIONS

DETENTIONS


13

DEFICIENCIES


14

OVERVIEW OF PORT STATE CONTROL RESULTS 2006 – 2016


15

Figure 1: INSPECTION PERCENTAGE

Figure 2: INSPECTION PER SHIP RISK PROFILE


16

Figure 3: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS - CONTRIBUTION BY AUTHORITIES

Figure 4: TYPE OF SHIP INSPECTED

Total inspections: 31,678


17

Figure 5: DETENTIONS PER FLAG

Figure 6: DETENTION PER SHIP TYPE

Flags


18

Figure 7: DEFICIENCIES BY MAIN CATEGORIES

Figure 8: MOST FREQUENT DETAINABLE DEFICIENCIES


19

OVERVIEW OF PORT STATE CONTROL RESULTS 2006 - 2016

Figure 9: NO. OF INSPECTIONS

Figure 10: INSPECTION PERCENTAGE

Figure 11: NO. OF INSPECTIONS WITH DEFICIENCIES


20

Figure 12: NO. OF DEFICIENCIES

Figure 13: NO. OF DETENTIONS

Figure 14: DETENTION PERCENTAGE


21

STATUS OF THE RELEVANT INSTRUMENTS

ANNEX 1

Table 1: STATUS OF THE RELEVANT INSTRUMENTS

Authority LOAD LINES

66

LOAD LINES

PROT 88

SOLAS74

SOLASPROT

78

SOLASPROT

88

MARPOL73/78


22

Authority STCW78

COLREG72

TONNAGE69

ILO147**

MLC 2006***

AFS2001

CLC PROT92


23

Table 1a: STATUS OF MARPOL 73/78

Authority Annexes I & II Annex III Annex IV Annex V Annex VI


24

ANNEX 2

PORT STATE INSPECTION STATISTICS

STATISTICS FOR 2016

Table 2: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS CARRIED OUT BY AUTHORITIES

Aut

horit

y

No.

of i

ndiv

idua

l sh

ips

insp

ecte

d(a

)

No.

of i

nitia

l and

fo

llow

-up

insp

ectio

ns(b

+c)

No.

of i

nitia

l in

spec

tions

(b)

No.

of f

ollo

w-u

p in

spec

tions

(c)

No.

of

insp

ectio

ns w

ith

defic

ienc

ies

(d)

No.

of

defic

ienc

ies

1)

(e)

No.

of

dete

ntio

ns 1)

(f)

No.

of i

ndiv

idua

l sh

ips

visi

ted

2)

(g)

Insp

ectio

n ra

te

(a/g

%)

Det

entio

n pe

rcen

tage

(f/

b%)

Total 17,503 42,079 31,678 10,401 18,943 81,271 1,090 Regional24,744

Regional71%

Regional3.44%


25

Table 2a: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS ON MARITIME SECURITY

Aut

horit

y

No.

of

insp

ectio

ns

No.

of

insp

ectio

ns

with

sec

urity

re

late

d de

ficie

ncie

s

No.

of s

ecur

ity

rela

ted

defic

ienc

ies

No.

of s

ecur

ity

rela

ted

dete

ntio

ns

Det

entio

n pe

rcen

tage

(%

)

Total 31,678 1,387 1,624 23 Regional0.07%


26

Table 3: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS PER SHIP RISK PROFILE

Authority Ship Risk Profile (SRP)Total No. of inspectionsHRS SRS LRS SRP

Unknown

Total 9,969 13,095 8,553 61 31,678


27

Table 4: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS PER FLAG

FlagNo. of

inspectionsNo. of

inspectionswith

deficiencies

No. of deficiencies

No. of detentions

Detention percentage

%


28

FlagNo. of

inspectionsNo. of

inspectionswith

deficiencies

No. of deficiencies

No. of detentions


%


29

FlagNo. of

inspectionsNo. of

inspectionswith

deficiencies

No. of deficiencies

No. of detentions


%

Total 31,678 18,943 81,271 1,090 Regional3.44


30

Table 5: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS PER SHIP TYPE

Type of shipNo. of

inspectionsNo. of

inspectionswith

deficiencies

No. of deficiencies

No. of detentions


%

Total 31,678 18,943 81,271 1,090 3.44


31

Table 6: PORT STATE INSPECTIONS PER RECOGNIZED ORGANIZATION

Recognized organization (RO)

No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

No.

of o

vera

ll de

tent

ions

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns

Det

entio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

RO

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

Perc

enta

ge o

f R

O re

spon

sibl

ede

tent

ions

%


32


No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

No.

of o

vera

ll de

tent

ions

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns

Det

entio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

RO

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

Perc

enta

ge o

f R

O re

spon

sibl

ede

tent

ions

%


33

Table 7: DEFICIENCIES BY CATEGORIES

Nature of deficiencies No. of deficiencies

Total 81,271

Grand total 82,895


34

SUMMARY OF PORT STATE INSPECTION DATA 2014 – 2016

Table 8: BLACK – GREY – WHITE LISTS *

Flag Inspections 2014-2016

Detentions 2014-2016

Black to Grey Limit

Grey to White Limit

Excess Factor

BLACK LIST

GREY LIST

WHITE LIST


35

Flag Inspections 2014-2016

Detentions 2014-2016

Black to Grey Limit

Grey to White Limit

Excess Factor

See explanatory note on page 55. p=7%

z95%=1.645q=3%


36

Table 9: INSPECTIONS AND DETENTIONS PER FLAG

Number of inspections Number of detentions 3-year rolling

average detention

%

Flag2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total


37

Number of inspections Number of detentions 3-year

rolling average

detention%

Flag2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total


38


rolling average

detention%

Flag2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total


39


rolling average

detention%

Flag2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total

Total 30,405 31,407 31,678 93,490 1,203 1,153 1,090 3,446 3.69


40

Figure 15: COMPARISON OF INSPECTIONS PER SHIP TYPE

Figure 16: COMPARISON OF DETENTIONS PER SHIP TYPE


41

Table 10: INSPECTIONS AND DETENTIONS PER SHIP TYPE

Number of inspections Number of detentions Average detention

percentage %

Type of ship2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total

Total 30,405 31,407 31,678 93,490 1,203 1,153 1,090 3,446 3.69


42

Figure 17: COMPARISON OF INSPECTIONS WITH DEFICIENCIES PER SHIP TYPE

(a) Year 2014

(b) Year 2015

(c) Year 2016

(d) 3-year summary


43

Table 11: INSPECTIONS WITH DEFICIENCIES PER SHIP TYPE

Type of ship

Number of inspections Number of inspectionswith deficiencies

3-year average

percentage %2014 2015 2016 Total 2014 2015 2016 Total

Total 30,405 31,407 31,678 93,490 19,029 19,142 18,943 57,114 61.09


44

Table 12: INSPECTIONS AND DETENTIONS PER RECOGNIZED ORGANIZATION


No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

2014

-201

6

No.

of o

vera

ll de

tent

ions

20

14-2

016

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns20

14-2

016

3-ye

ar a

vera

gede

tent

ion

perc

enta

ge%

3-ye

ar a

vera

ge

RO

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

3-ye

ar a

vera

ge

perc

enta

ge o

f R

O re

spon

sibl

ede

tent

ions

%


45


No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

2014

-201

6

No.

of o

vera

ll de

tent

ions

20

14-2

016

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns20

14-2

016

3-ye

ar a

vera

gede

tent

ion

perc

enta

ge%

3-ye

ar a

vera

ge

RO

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

n pe

rcen

tage

%

3-ye

ar a

vera

ge

perc

enta

ge o

f R

O re

spon

sibl

ede

tent

ions

%


46

Table 13: PERFORMANCE OF RECOGNIZED ORGANIZATION


No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

2014

-201

6

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns20

14-2

016

Low

/med

ium

Lim

it

Med

ium

/hig

hLi

mit

Exce

ssfa

ctor

Perf

orm

ance

leve

l

Medium

High


47


No.

of o

vera

ll in

spec

tions

2014

-201

6

No.

of R

O

resp

onsi

ble

dete

ntio

ns20

14-2

016

Low

/med

ium

Lim

it

Med

ium

/hig

hLi

mit

Exce

ssfa

ctor

Perf

orm

ance

leve

l


48

Figure 18: COMPARISON OF NUMBER OF DEFICIENCIES BY MAIN CATEGORIES


49

Table 14: COMPARISON OF DEFICIENCIES BY CATEGORIES

Nature of deficiencyNumber of deficiencies

2014 2015 2016

Total 89,560 83,606 81,271

Grand total 91,175 84,995 82,895


50

Figure 19: COMPARISON OF MOST FREQUENT DETAINABLE DEFICIENCIES


51

Table 15: COMPARISON OF MOST FREQUENT DETAINABLE DEFICIENCIES

No. Most frequent deficienciesYear

2014 2015 2016


52

Table 16: LIST OF UNDER-PERFORMING SHIPS

IMO No. Ship name (at the day of detention)

Flag IMO company No.

No. of times on the list

761005077025168028802841246784269131

84269131

85101281

85101281

860437186314911

86314911

866129087068061

87068061

871848387422408743749880804488196911

88196911

883977088589962

88589962

88593922

88593922

89072548911035902009190368821

90368821

90922141

90922141

90922141

91401901

91401901


53

IMO No. Ship name (at the day of detention)

Flag IMO company No.

No. of times on the list

9168506935705493738022

93738022

937842495170201

95170201

95289523

95289523

95289523

9538490


54

ANNEX 3

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE TOKYO MOU

Observer Organizations:

IMO, ILO, other MOUs

National Port State Control Services

Co-operating Member Authorities

Observer Authorities

Tokyo MOU Secretariat

Asia-Pacific Computerized

Information System (APCIS)

Member Authorities

Port State Control Committee


55

EXPLANATORY NOTE ON THE BLACK – GREY – WHITE LISTS

The Port State Control Committee adopted the same method as used by the Paris MOU for assessment of performance of flags. Compared to the calculation method of previous year, thissystem has the advantage of providing an excess percentage that is significant and also reviewing the number of inspections and detentions over a 3-year period at the same time, based on binomial calculus.

)1(5.0 ppNzpNu greytoblack

)1(5.0 ppNzpNu greytowhite

Number of inspections

Num

ber o

f det

entio

ns


56

TOKYO MOU SECRETARIAT

ADDRESS OF THE SECRETARIAT

Tokyo MOU SecretariatAscend Shimbashi 8F6-19-19 ShimbashiMinato-ku, Tokyo Japan 105-0004 Tel: +81-3-3433-0621Fax: +81-3-3433-0624E-mail: [email protected]

STAFF OF THE SECRETARIAT

annual report on port state control in … of understanding on port state control in the...

Documents