20200617̲表紙̲PSCANR̲2020̲英̲明るさ調整5.pdf 1 2020/06/17 17:40:30

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

*Non-ClassNK
vessels can also
be inputtedH ow
w tto r e gist e r
All ship managers /owners may use the service regardless of whether their vessel is of the ClassNK
fleet. Please refer to our PSC Intelligence website for details.
(http: //www.classnk.or. jp /hp /ja /activities /portal /psc-Intelligence.html)

Photographs of Deficiencies identified during
Port State Control
Fire Safety

Deteriorated insulation

Missing compound

Missing doorknob

Missing fire door packing

Fire Safety

Heavy leakage from fire hydrant

Heavy leakage from fire hose

Gap

Inappropriate adjustment of damper

Heavy corrosion/hole on CO2 line

Life Saving Appliances

Broken mask

Inappropriate reset ofon-load release gear

Inappropriate painter securing

Deteriorated grab line

Load Line

Missing rubber seat for air pipe head

Improper LL marks

Holed ventilator

Missing butterfly nut

Machinery Space

Dirty pressure gauge

Oil leakage

MARPOL

Holed oil coaming

A huge amount of garbage

Others

Partly broken mooring rope

Missing toilet

Broken wire drum

Broken fairleader

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Foreword
This Annual Report on Port State Control (PSC) summarizes deficiencies identified during PSC
inspections carried out in various countries around the world. This report is prepared with the objective ofbuilding awareness with the present state of PSC and thereby improving future onboard maintenance andinspections, and as well as Safety Management System.
The report consists of the following Chapters.
“Chapter 1”: Status of Implementation and Recent Developments in PSC Worldwide“Chapter 2”: Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships Registered with ClassNK“Chapter 3”: Statistical Analysis of NK SMC Ships Detained by PSC (ISM Code)“Chapter 4”: Statistical Analysis of NK MLC Ships Detained by PSC (MLC, 2006)“Chapter 5”: Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU, Paris MoU and USCGPort State Control has been recognized to be a very direct and effective means to reduce the number ofsubstandard ships as well as to improve safety of ships at sea and to prevent marine pollution. The activityof PSC worldwide has significantly been strengthened along with the increasing number of amendments
to the relevant international Conventions.
Further to the above, in order to carry out the effective implementation of port state responsibilities, many
countries have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for regional cooperation between local
PSCs, and have agreed to establish a centralized digitized database system and/or a harmonized approach.
The scope of PSC inspection has been extended from the hardware aspect of the ship to the software
aspect such as onboard maintenance or operational procedures ever since the ISM Code was adopted andapplied to all ships and is still expanding as more new concept of regulations has been introduced by the
adoption of Tier 3 regulation of NOx and SOx, Ship Recycling Convention (the Hong Kong Convention),IMO DCS (EU MRV), etc.
In line with the above progress of PSC, ClassNK has been working hard and will work harder to increase
the transparency of information related to PSC and to eliminate substandard vessels.
Further, the spread of COVID-19 has impacted on business operations throughout the industry. In
response to the spread of COVID-19, ClassNK has been making every effort to provide support to all
those who may miss due dates for surveys/audits due to force majeure.
June 2020

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 tohave been incomplete or incorrect in any respect.

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Status of Implementation and Recent Developments in PSC Worldwide ····················1
1.1 Amendments to the relevant conventions ······························································· 1
1.1.1 Data collection system for fuel oil consumption of ships ········································ 1
1.1.2 EU Regulation on Ship Recycling ·································································· 1
1.1.3 2020 global cap of sulphur content in fuel oils ···················································· 2
1.1.4 Maintenance for lifeboats etc. ······································································· 2
1.1.5 Electronic record books ·············································································· 2
1.2 Recent global developments ·············································································· 3
1.2.1 MOUs around the world·············································································· 3(1) European and North Atlantic region (Paris MoU) ············································· 3(2) Asia-Pacific region (Tokyo MOU) ······························································ 4(3) Latin-American region (Latin American Agreement) ········································ 4(4) Caribbean region (Caribbean MOU) ···························································· 4(5) Mediterranean region (Mediterranean MoU) ··················································· 4(6) Indian Ocean region (Indian Ocean MOU) ····················································· 5(7) Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU) ····························································· 5(8) West and Central Africa region (Abuja MoU)·················································· 5(9) Arab States of the Gulf (Riyadh MoU)·························································· 5
1.2.2 Port State Control in the United States (USCG) ··················································· 6
1.3 Measures adopted by ClassNK ··········································································· 7
1.3.1 Handling of the Deficiencies Identified by PSC Inspections ···································· 7(1) Cooperative assistance with PSC and treatment of the deficiencies ························· 7(2) Treatment of inspection reports by PSC officers ··············································· 7
1.3.2 Minimizing the number of detained ships in order to reduce substandard ships ·············· 7(1) Special training at several in-house meetings ·················································· 7(2) Meetings and informal gatherings with management companies ···························· 7
1.3.3 Visits to PSC authorities ·············································································· 9

Chapter 2
Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships Registered with ClassNK ····························· 10
2.1 General ·····································································································10
2.2 Data on Detentions ························································································10
2.2.1 Detentions per Flag State ············································································10
2.2.2 Detentions per Ship Type············································································122.2.3 Detentions per Ship’s Age ···········································································13
2.2.4 Detentions per Ship Size (Gross Tonnage) ························································14
2.2.5 Detentions per PSC Country ········································································15
2.2.6 Detentions per MOUs and USCG ··································································16
2.3 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies ····································································17
2.3.1
Detainable Deficiencies per Category····························································172.3.2Frequently Reported Deficiencies ································································18
2.4 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies per PSC Country ···············································24
2.4.10 China ·································································································24
2.4.20 Australia ·····························································································25

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.302.4.402.4.502.4.602.4.702.4.802.4.902.4.102.4.11
2.4.12

Russia ································································································25
Indonesia ·····························································································26
U.S.A. ································································································26
Japan ·································································································27
Turkey ································································································27
United Kingdom ····················································································28
Italy ···································································································28
Canada ·······························································································29
Belgium ······························································································29
Republic of Korea ··················································································29

Chapter 3
Statistical Analysis of NK SMC Ships Detained by PSC (ISM Code) ······················ 30
3.1 General ····································································································30
3.2 Statistics of Detentions of NK SMC Ships ·····························································30
3.3 Analysis of ISM Detainable Deficiencies ······························································32
3.3.1 China···································································································33
3.3.2 Australia ·······························································································34
3.3.3 Russia ··································································································35

Chapter 4
Statistical Analysis of NK MLC Ships Detained by PSC (MLC, 2006) ····················· 36
4.1 General ·····································································································36
4.2 Statistics of Detentions of NK MLC Ships ·····························································36
4.3 Analysis of MLC Detainable Deficiencies ·····························································37

Chapter 5
Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU, Paris MoU and USCG ··································· 40
5.1 Tokyo MOU ································································································41
5.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities ·················································41
5.1.2 Black List of Flag States ············································································42
5.1.3 Recognized Organization Performance ····························································42
5.1.4 Deficiencies per Category ···········································································43
5.2 Paris MoU ··································································································44
5.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities ·················································44
5.2.2 Black List of Flag States ············································································45
5.2.3 Recognized Organization Performance ····························································45
5.3 USCG ·······································································································46
5.3.1 USCG Statistics ······················································································46
5.3.2 Targeted Flag States (Safety) ·······································································46
5.3.3 Recognized Organization Performance (Safety) ·················································47

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

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 effectfrom 2018 through 2020 are summarized as below.
1.1.1 Data collection system for fuel oil consumption of ships
Entry into force: 1 March 2018
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-1139, 1187, 1198]
Data collection system for fuel oil consumption of ships (IMO DCS) is applied to ships of 5,000
gross tonnage and above, for which the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) is
required to be retained on board. IMO DCS requires the companies to the followings in accordancewith methodology included in the SEEMP Part II.
A) To collect each ship's fuel consumption data and relevant parameters from the calendar year
2019B) To aggregate the collected data, and report to the Administration or RO within three(3) months
after the end of each calendar yearC) In the event of the transfer of a ship from one Administration to another and/or a change fromone Company to another, to aggregate the collected data, and report to the Administration or RO
on the day of completion of the transfer or the change or as close as practical theretoD) To provide Statement of Compliance (SOC) onboard the vessel
Further, EU regulation on monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions (EUMRV) is also applied to ships of 5,000 gross tonnage and above, which arrive at or depart fromports under the jurisdiction of an EU member state. EU MRV requires the companies to develop the
Monitoring Plan and submit the Emmision Report to the RO accredited by the national accreditationbody in EU, and provide a Document of Compliance (DOC) onboard the vessel.
A ship which has not carried out any EEA-related voyages during a whole reporting period(calendar year X) will not be required to have a DOC of specific reporting period (year X) on board,when calling at EEA ports between 30 June of year X+1 and 29 June of year X+2.
Meanwhile, it was reported that the reason for not having DOC might be confirmed from port
authority when calling at ports under the jufisdiction of an EU member state. Therefore, it isrecommended to be prepared to show past voyage record.
（FAQ of EU MRV: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping_en#tab-0-3）
1.1.2 EU Regulation on Ship Recycling
Entry into force: 30 December 2013
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-1170, 1185]
Development of inventory of hazardous materials (IHM) is required for EU flagged ships andnon-EU flagged ships by the following date. In addition, ship owners have to ensure that EU
flagged ships to be recycled only at the recycling facilities included in the EU List, which list ship
recycling facilities authorized in acoordance with the Regulation.

1

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control[Deadline for development and having on board of an IHM]
(1) EU flagged new ships: The date of delivary (the building contract on/after 31 December 2018)(2) EU flagged existing ships: 31 December 2020 (If a ship is to be recycled before 31 December
2020, IHM shall be prepared prior to recycling)(3) Non-EU flagged ships: 31 December 2020
For EU flagged ships, two hazardous materials (PFOS and HBCDD) are added to Hong Kong
Convention. Among them, PFOS is compulsory to EU flagged existing ship (EU flagged new ships
is prohibited to provide PFOS). Therefore, even if IHM complied with Hong Kong Convention isprovided onboard the EU flagged existing ship, checking of PFOS is additionaly required to comply
with the EU regulation.
1.1.3 2020 global cap of sulphur content in fuel oils
Entry into force: 1 January 2020
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-1192]
In order to reduce emissions of Sulphur Oxides (SOx) and Particulate Matter (PM) from ships, thelimit of the sulphur content of any fuel oil used on board ships was tightened to 0.50% m/m outside
emission control areas (ECAs) from 1 January 2020. In case any equivalent means as long as the
reduction method is evaluated as to be equivalent to the required reduction of SOx are not installed
onboard, the loading of non-compliant fuel oil is prohibited except for non-availabillity ofcompliant fuel oil.
1.1.4 Maintenance for lifeboats etc.
Entry into force: 1 January 2020
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-1183]
On or after 1 January 2020, thorough examinations, operational tests, overhaul and repair of the
lifeboat etc. are to be conducted by certified personnel of either the manufacturer or an authorized
service provider. In addition, personnel for the work is to be certified in accordance with IMOResolution MSC.402(96) for each make and type of the equipment to be worked on.
1.1.5 Electronic record books
Entry into force: 1 October 2020
[Refer to ClassNK Technical Information TEC-1192]
MARPOL Convention requires that ships are to be provided with several record books for the
purpose of management of pollution prevention. On or after 1 October 2020, approval of theelectronic record books will be needed for these record books in accordance with Guidelines for theuse of electronic record books under MARPOL if the electronic record books are used in spite ofpaper ones.

New amendments to conventions are also introduced on the ClassNK Website in the section, ‘IMO
International Convention Calendar’.
(http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/imo_conv_schedule/)2ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

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 controlof 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), andtoday 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 ：Paris MoU
Asia-Pacific region：Tokyo MOU
Latin American region：Latin American Agreement
Caribbean region：Caribbean MOU
Mediterranean region：Mediterranean MoU
Indian Ocean region：Indian Ocean MOUBlack Sea region：Black Sea MOU
West and Central Africa region：Abuja MoU
Arab States of the Gulf
：Riyadh MoU(http://www.parismou.org/)(http://www.tokyo-mou.org/)(http://www.acuerdolatino.int.ar/)(http://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)
Established: 1 July 1982
Members: Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands,
Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom-1. The Paris MoU consists of 27 participating maritime Administrations and covers the watersof 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 PSC.
-2. Press releases have announced the recent activities of the Paris MoU as follows.
Press release dated 22 May 2019
- The Committee discussed the issue of access to PSC data by third parties and agreed thiswould require further consideration at the next Committee meeting.
- Decisions were taken on a new methodology to calculate flag state performance based on
the average detention rate and recognised organization (RO) fleet performance based on
detainable deficiencies.
Press release dated 17 June 2019
- The Paris MoU announced new performance lists for flag and Recognized Organizations.
These lists will take effect from 1 July 2019.
Press release dated 26 March and 28 May 2020
- Temporary guidance for Member Authorities during the COVID-19 crisis has beendeveloped.
Press release dated 16 June 2020
- The CIC on “Stability in general” scheduled to be held from September to November
2020 have been decided to postpone to 2021.

3

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(2) Asia-Pacific region (Tokyo MOU)
Established: 1 December 1993
Members: Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Fiji, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea,
Malaysia, Marshall Islands, New Zealand, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru,
Philippines, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, Vanuatu, Viet Nam-1. The main objectives of the Memorandum have been announced
1. to establish an effective Port State Control regime in the Asia-Pacific region through theco-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 21 October 2019
- The Tokyo MOU announced that the 30th meeting of the PSC Committee of the Tokyo
MOU was held in Majuro, Marshall Islands through 14 to 17 October 2019.
- The Committee unanimously agreed to accept Panama as the 21th member Authority.
- The Committee decided to conduct the CIC on Stability in General in 2020. By theagreement with the Paris MOU, the Committee confirmed to carry out a joint CIC on
STCW in 2021 and Fire Safety System in 2022.
- The 31th meeting of the PSC Committee will be held in Republic of Korea in November
2020.
Press release dated 2 March 2020
- The Tokyo MOU announced the preliminary results of the Concentrated Inspection
Campaign (CIC) on Emergency Systems and Procedures, which was conducted from 1
September to 30 November 2019.
- During the course of the campaign Authorities carried out a total of 7,174 inspections oftarget ships. Of this quantity, 55 ships were detained as a result of deficiencies foundduring the CIC.
Press release dated 12 March and 10 April 2020
- Temporary guidance for Member Authorities during the COVID-19 crisis has beendeveloped.
Press release dated 16 June 2020
- The CIC on “Stability in general” scheduled to be held from September to November
2020 have been decided to postpone to 2021.
(3) Latin-American region (Latin American Agreement)
Established: 5 November 1992
Members: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras,
Mexico, Panama, Peru, Republic of Dominica, Uruguay, and Venezuela(4) Caribbean region (Caribbean MOU)
Established: 9 February 1996
Members: Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bermuda, the Cayman
Islands, Cuba, Curacao, France, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, the Netherlands, St. Kitts
and Nevis, St. Lusia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad andTobago(5) Mediterranean region (Mediterranean MoU)
Established: 11 July 1997
Members: Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, and Turkey
4ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(6) Indian Ocean region (Indian Ocean MOU)
Established: 5 June 1998
Members: Australia, Bangladesh, Comoros, Eritrea, France (La Reunion), India, Iran, Kenya,
Maldives, Mauritius, Madagascar, Mozambique, Myanmar, Seychelles, South Africa,
Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sultanate of Oman, Tanzania, and Yemen-1. According to Annual Report 2019 of the Indian Ocean MOU, a total of 5,943 inspections
were carried out and 232 vessels were detained in 2019.
-2. The Indian Ocean MOU announced the preliminary results of the Concentrated Inspection
Campaign (CIC) on Emergency System and Procedures, which was conducted from 1
September to 30 November 2019. During the course of the campaign Authorities carried out atotal of 1,274 inspections of target ships. Of this quantity, 9 ships were detained as a result of
deficiencies found during the CIC.
-3. CIC on Stability in General is scheduled to be carried out in 2020.
-4. Temporary guidance for Member Authorities during the COVID-19 crisis has beendeveloped.
(7) Black Sea region (Black Sea MOU)
Established: 7 April 2000
Members: Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, the Russian Federation, Turkey, and Ukraine-1. According to Annual Report 2019 of the Black Sea MOU, a total of 6,036 inspections werecarried out and 212 vessels were detained in 2019.
-2. The Black Sea MOU announced the results of the Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC)
on Emergency System and Procedures, which was conducted from 1 September to 30
November 2019. During the course of the campaign Authorities carried out a total of 1,175
inspections of target ships. Of this quantity, 17 ships were detained as a result of deficiencies
found during the CIC.
-3. CIC on Stability in General is scheduled to be carried out in 2020.
(8) West and Central Africa region (Abuja MoU)
Established: 22 October 1999
Members: Angola, Benin, Cape Verde, Republic of Congo, Cote D’Ivoire, Gabon, The Gambia,
Ghana, Republic of Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe,
Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, and Togo
-1. According to Annual Report 2019 of the Abuja MoU, a total of 2,695 inspections werecarried out and 21 vessels were detained in 2019.
-2. The Abuja MOU announced the results of the Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC) on
Emergency Systems and Procedures, which was conducted from 1 September to 30
November 2019. During the course of the campaign Authorities carried out a total of 430
inspections of target ships. Of this quantity, 1 non-conformity was recorded as a result of
deficiencies found during the CIC.
(9) Arab States of the Gulf (Riyadh MoU)
Established: 30 June 2004
Members: Kingdom of Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, State of Kuwait, State of Qatar, Stateof United Arab Emirates, and Sultanate of Oman

5

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

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 anumber of MOUs, and undertakes effective PSC in cooperation with other MOUs. In the 1970's, theU.S. Coast Guard increased its emphasis on the examination of foreign vessels. Although thisemphasis 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 Stateauthority when instances of non-compliance with SOLAS and MARPOL were noted. In 1994, theU.S. introduced risk-management methodologies into the Port State Control program in order toallocate 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 foundlacking 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 forthe 21st century. This program has since proven to be very effective in recognizing well operated andmaintained ships of good quality and continues in use today. Further, on 1 July 2017, in addition to
QUALSHIP 21, the program of E-ZERO (Zero Environmental Deficiencies or Violations) began.
E-ZERO designation has been assigned with exemplary vessels that have consistently adhered toenvironmental compliance.
(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, alongwith other performance based factors, determines a ship's priority for examination.
(Reference: http://www.uscg.mil)(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 optionof 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 tobelieve 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 amanner or quantities inconsistent with the provisions of any treaty to which the United States isa party.

6

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

1.3 Measures adopted by ClassNK
1.3.1 Handling of the Deficiencies Identified by PSC Inspections(1) Cooperative assistance with PSC and treatment of deficiencies
When surveyors of the Society are notified of the detention of a ship classed with ClassNK, theSociety actively co-operates with the reporting PSC in a number of ways. The more direct of thesesteps include the following.
- Surveyors liaise with PSC 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 wheneverso requested by the PSC.
- Attending surveyors examine not only the condition of the deficiencies identified by the PSC
officers but also expand the scope of the survey for the general condition of the hull, machineryand equipment, or carry out the general examination to the extent of an annual survey if necessary,carefully considering the seriousness of any deficiencies when they attend ships that have been
subject to an intervention action by the PSC.
(2) Treatment of inspection reports by PSC officers
When a surveyor receives an inspection report from PSC, the report is sent to the ClassNK Head
Office. The report is immediately examined by the experienced staff to identify the causes of the
deficiencies. This examination is carried out for all ships for which such reports are received, and theresults are circulated to all sections concerned, as necessary. The results are also reflected in 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 management company
or others, when deemed appropriate, to advise them of the relevant deficiencies noted and toencourage them to more proactively improve the routine maintenance of their ships and take othermeasures as necessary to ensure the highest levels of safe and environmentally friendly operation.
In cases where the deficiencies pointed out by the PSC 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 meetingsSpecial training on PSC related issues is conducted at several meetings held regularly for generalmanagers and managers, to ensure that surveyors carry out full and effective surveys with anuncompromising attitude towards ensuring the quality and safety of the ships classed with theSociety.
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 management companies(a) Visiting Management Companies
When a ship classed with ClassNK is detained by PSC, if deemed necessary, a senior surveyor or
manager of the Society visits 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 ofthe deficiencies noted and the occurrence of similar problems in the future.
7

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(b) Meetings and seminars
PSC related issues are regularly discussed at informal gatherings and technical committee
meetings held with management companies. At such times, explanations are given and documents
presented, with emphasis placed on the importance of proactively ensuring the proper maintenanceof ships and education of crew in order to prevent the detention of ships.
(c) Software
Mobile application “ARRIVAL CHECKLIST for PSC” and software “PrimeShip-PSC
Intelligence” have been prepared in order to support an improvement of PSC performance and ship
management system.
i) ARRIVAL CHECKLIST for PSC (http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/info_service/psc/)
It is the preparatory checklist mobile app to help minimize the risk of PSC detentions anddeficiencies.
[Main Fanctions]- The items frequently pointed out by PSCO can be checked in each area onboard- Check results can be input the system along with notes and photos- Check results can be forwarded to company easily- The statistics and tencency of detentions in major ports can be confirmed- Checklists and statistics are updated automatically as neededii) PrimeShip-PSC Intelligence (http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/activities/portal/psc-intelligence.html)
This system provides users with various functions to help improve fleet PSC performance andship management systems.
[Main Fanctions]- Easy visual checking of a trend in the number of detentions and deficiencies at each port orcountry on world-map with frequent deficiency examples- Output 1) PSC checklists for each port or country based on the trend and 2) a summary reportfor PSC performance of managing ships- Analysis on the trend of deficiencies recorded on managing ships on a real-time basis throughthe managing company’s input of PSC reports- Easy registration for ships using a data link with NK-SHIPS(d) Publications
The “ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control” and a checklist entitled “Good Maintenanceon board Ships which can be used by the ship’s crew for quick and easy inspection of a ship before
entering port are distributed to all registered management companies or others in the ClassNK
fleet and also posted on NK website as below. (http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/en/info_service/psc/)“Monthly PSC Information”, which indicates the cases of PSC inspection including detainable
deficiency or ISM related deficiency, was also posted on the same page, however, as of 1 April
2019, all monthly PSC information downloads have been no longer available. Beginning on 1
April 2019, past and current monthly PSC information can be downloaded from “PrimeShip-PSC
Intelligence”.
Twenty “ClassNK PSC Bulletin” were sent to Company managed ClassNK fleet as of June 2020
by e-mail. This bulletin provides timely information on particularly notable deficiencies pointedout during PSC inspections of NK classed ships, and will be continuously served to managementcompanies.

8ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

1.3.3 Visits to PSC authorities
Deginated persons from the ClassNK Head Office as well as local survey offices are assigned to visit
the headquarters or offices of various PSC authorities with the aim of introducing ClassNK andexchanging views on matters of mutual concern. In 2019, persons from the ClassNK Head Officevisited the following PSC authorities for the above-mentioned purpose.
- Australia- China- U.S.A.
- Indonesia- Russia

Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA)Maritime Safety Administration (MSA)
United States Coast Guard (USCG)
The Indonesia Maritime Authority
Black Sea Maritime Ports Administration

9

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Chapter 2
Statistical Analysis of Detained Ships Registered with ClassNK
2.1 General
The data in this chapter, on ships detained due to deficiencies identified during PSC inspections, isbased 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 2019, 394 PSC detentions were reported relating to 371 ships classed by
NK. This included cases of detention for reasons not related to class or to NK itself. The total numberof NK-registered ships (500 GT or over) was 8,501 at the end of December 2019. Therefore, the 371
ships detained represent about 4.4 % of the total number of ships in the NK fleet. Further, detention
ratio (Detentions/Registered number in 2019) of the NK fleet in 2019 is about 4.6%.
2.2 Data on Detentions
2.2.1 Detentions per Flag StateCountry

PanamaLiberia
Marshall Islands
Malta
Hong Kong, China
Singapore
BelizeBahamasViet Nam
Thailand
CyprusJapan
Indonesia
Malaysia
Cayman Islands
Others
Total

Table 2.2.1 Detentions per Flag State
Number of
Detention Ratio (%)
Registered Ships
Number of(= Detentions /in 2019
Detentions
Registered Number(500GT or over)in each year)2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019
3,119 3,053 3,058 222
183
211
7.1
6.0
6.9
564
601
663
27
33
42
4.8
5.5
6.3
576
606
679
31
31
28
5.4
5.1
4.1
210
188
179
20
16
13
9.5
8.5
7.3
449
439
422
12
15
12
2.7
3.4
2.8
758
707
719
12
12
11
1.6
1.7
1.5
46
49
52
19
8
8
41.3 16.3 15.4
157
158
169
9
3
7
5.7
1.9
4.1
90
89
90
2
5
7
2.2
5.6
7.8
79
78
75
6
3
5
7.6
3.8
6.7
82
73
68
7
11
5
8.5
15.1 7.4
952
965
983
1
4
4
0.1
0.4
0.4
181
205
224
2
4
3
1.1
2.0
1.3
272
268
256
0
0
1
0.0
0.0
0.4
56
59
57
1
0
1
1.8
0.0
1.8
854
827
807
64
56
36
4.7
6.2
4.5
8,445 8,365 8,501 426
384
394
5.0
4.6
4.6

10

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

250
222
211

2017
2018

No. of Detentions

200
183

2019
150

100
64
56

50

42

36
31 31 28

27 33

20

16 13

12 15 1219
12 12 11

8 8

9

3

7

7
2 5

6 3 5

11

7

5

1 4 4

2 4 3

0 0 1

1 0 1

Othe
rs

Caym
an Is
lands

Mala
ysia

Indo
nesia

Cypr
u

Japa
n

s

and

Nam

Hong

Viet

Thail

Beliz
e

Baha
mas

Kong
,

Sing
apor
e

Chin
a

Malta

hall I
sland
s
Mars

Pana
ma

Liber
ia

0

Fig. 2.2.1-1 No. of Detentions per Flag

41.3

20.0

2017
2018

16.3
15.1

15.0

2019
9.5

10.0

8.5

7.4

6.7

5.7

6.3

6.2
5.6

5.1

4.7
4.1
2.7

3.8

3.4
2.8
1.9

1.6 1.7 1.5

2.2

2.0
1.1

s
Cypr
u

and
Thail

Nam
Viet

Baha
mas

Beliz
e

Sing
apor
e

Hong

Kong
,

Chin
a

Malta

hall I
sland
s
Mars

Liber
ia

Japa
n

0.1

0.0

5.0 0.4

Fig 2.2.1-2 Detention Ratio per Flag (%)

11

1.8

1.3
0.0 0.0

0.4

1.8
0.0

Othe
rs

4.1

Caym
an Is
lands

5.4

4.8

Mala
ysia

5.5

7.6

esia

6.9
6.0

5.0

8.5
7.8

7.3

Indon

7.1

Pana
ma

Detention Ratio (%)

15.4

4.5

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.2 Detentions per Ship Type
Table 2.2.2 Detentions per Ship Type
Detention Ratio (%)
Number ofRegistered Ships Number of Detentions (= Detentions / Registered
Ship Type
Number in each year)
in 2019(500GT or over) 2017 2018 2019
2017
2018
2019
Bulk Carrier
3,826
252
228
239
6.7
6.1
6.2
General Cargo
689
102
74
65
12.6
10.6
9.4
Container Carrier
605
17
29
30
2.8
4.8
5.0
Chip Carrier
118
4
4
3
3.4
3.4
2.5
Cement
125
2
1
1
1.6
0.8
0.8
Ro-Ro
103
2
2
5
7.1
2.1
4.9
Reefer Carrier
109
9
12
6
7.7
10.4
5.5
Vehicle Carreir
337
5
9
11
1.5
2.6
3.3
Oil Tanker
707
10
4
7
1.3
0.6
1.0
Oil/Chemical Tanker
766
14
15
21
2.0
2.1
2.7
Gas Carrier
401
7
3
3
1.7
0.8
0.7
Others
715
2
3
3
0.3
0.4
0.4
Total
8,501
426
384
394
Among the dry cargo ships with the large numbers, a detention ratio of General cargo ships was
identified as having a higher detention ratio than other ship types noted. (‘Detention ratio’ wasdetermined by dividing the number of detentions by the number of ships of each respective ship type in
the NK fleet.)300

No. of Detentions

252

2017
2018
2019

228 239

250
200
150

102

100

74 65

50

17 29 30

4

4

3

2

1

2

1

2

9 12 6

5

5

9 11

10 4

7

14 15

21

7

3

3

2

3

3

O

O

th
er
s

il
Ta
il/
nk
Ch
er
em
ic
al
Ta
nk
er
G
as
C
ar
rie
r

ei
r
C

Ve
hi
cl
e

ee
fe
rC

ar
r

ar
r

ie
r

o
oR

O

C

R

R

em
en
t
C

en
er
al
C

G

Bu
lk

C

ar
rie
r

ar
on
go
ta
in
er
C
ar
ri e
r
C
hi
p
C
ar
ri e
r

0

Fig. 2.2.2-1 No. of Detentions per Ship Type
12.6

12.0
10.0

10.6

2017

10.4
9.4

2018
7.7

8.0
6.0

2019

7.1
6.7

6.1 6.2
4.8

4.0
2.0

2.8

4.9

5

5.5

3.4 3.4

3.3
2.5

2.6

2.1

1.6

1.5

0.8 0.8

2

1.3
0.6

2.7
2.1

1.7

1

0.8

0.7

0.3 0.4 0.4

Fig. 2.2.2-2 Detention Ratio per Ship Type (%)
12

th
er
s

ar
on
go
ta
in
er
C
ar
ri e
r
C
hi
p
C
ar
ri e
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
ri e
r
O
il
Ta
O
il/
nk
Ch
er
em
ic
al
Ta
nk
er
G
as
C
ar
rie
r
C

en
er
al
C

G

Bu
lk

C

ar
rie
r

0.0

O

Detention Ratio (%)

14.0

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.3 Detentions per Ship’s Age
Table 2.2.3 Detentions per Ship’s Age
Detention Ratio (%)
Number of
Number of Detentions (= Detentions / Registered
Registered
Ship’s age
Number in each year)
Ships in 2019
(500GT or over) 2017
2018
2019
2017
2018
2019
Up to 5 years old
2,271
37
29
24
1.4
1.2
1.1
Over 5 and up to 10
2,515
104
94
95
4.2
3.7
3.8
Over 10 and up to 15
1,794
104
97
103
7.7
6.3
5.7
Over 15 and up to 20
870
60
56
66
6.2
6.1
7.6
Over 20 and up to 25
716
74
66
76
11.7
10.0
10.6
Over 25
335
47
42
30
15.1
13.1
9.0
Total
8,501
426
384
394
Aged ships tend to increase the detention ratio.

120
104
94

No. of Detentions

100

104
95

103

2017

97

2018
74

80

66
60

60
40

76

2019

66

56

47
42

37
29

30

24

20
0
Up to 5

Over 5 and Over 10 and Over 15 and Over 20 and
up to 10up to 15
up to 20
up to 25

Over 25

Detention Ratio (%)

Fig. 2.2.3-1 No. of Detentions per Ship's Age

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

15.1
13.1
11.7

2017

10.0 10.6
9.0

7.6

7.7 6.3

6.2 6.1

5.7
4.2 3.7 3.8
1.4 1.2 1.1

Up to 5

Over 5 andup 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 per Ship's Age (%)

13

Over 2520182019ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.4 Detentions per Ship Size (Gross Tonnage)
Table 2.2.4 Detentions per Ship Size (Gross Tonnage)
Detention Ratio (%)
Number of
Number of Detentions (= Detentions / Registered
Registered
Gross Ton (x 1,000)
Number in each year)
Ships in 2019
(500GT or over) 2017 2018 2019
2017
2018
2019
Up to 10
2,637
130
98
94
4.8
3.7
3.6
Over 10 and up to 20
1,283
92
87
95
7.2
6.8
7.4
Over 20 and up to 30
1,131
68
69
68
6.3
6.4
6.0
Over 30 and up to 40
1,358
69
69
77
5.2
5.2
5.7
Over 40 and up to 50
822
29
23
23
3.6
2.9
2.8
Over 50 and up to 60
298
7
7
5
2.3
2.4
1.7
Over 60 and up to 80
200
7
3
3
3.4
1.4
1.5
Over 80
772
24
28
29
3.2
3.8
3.8
8,501
426
384
394
Total
A detention ratio of vessels with GT up to 40,000 tends to be higher than that of vessels with GT over
40,000.

140130No. of Detentions

120

2017
98

100

94

92

2018

95
87

2019

77

80

68 69

68

69 69

60
40

29

23

24

23

20

7

7

5

7

3

28

29

3

0
Up to 10

Over 10 and Over 20 and Over 30 and Over 40 and Over 50 and Over 60 and
up to 20
up to 30
up to 40
up to 50
up to 60
up to 80

Over 80x 1,000 GT

Detention Ratio (%)

Fig.2.2.4-1 No. of Detentions per Ship Size (Gross Tonnage)
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

7.4

7.2
6.8

6.3

2017

6.4
6

2018

5.7
5.2 5.2

2019

4.8
3.8 3.8

3.7 3.6

3.6

3.4
3.2

2.9 2.8
2.3 2.4
1.7

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

1.4

1.5Over 60 and
up to 80

Fig. 2.2.4-2 Detention Ratio per Ship Size (Gross Tonnage) (%)
14

Over 80x 1,000 GT

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.5 Detentions per PSC Country
120

China

Table 2.2.5
No. of Detentions per PSC Country
Country
2017 2018 2019
China
92
90
120
57
53
61
Australia
30
49
36
Russia38
19
31
Indonesia
23
25
18
United States*
18
10
12
Japan
9
15
8
Turkey14
67
United Kingdom
7
6
7
Italy
4
4
7
Canada4
11
6
Belgium
14
10
6
Korea
8
6
6
India
1
2
5
Singapore
1
1
5
Saudi Arabia
New Zealand
2
3
4
Ukraine
11
1
4
8
4
3
Romania1
43Poland533Netherlands
4
3
3
Spain
Argentina
2
3
3
7
2
3
Greece223
Ireland
66
53
30
Others
426
384
394
Total
(*) Including Guam, Puerto Rico, and Pago Pago

90
92
61

Australia

53
57
36

Russia49
30
31

Indonesia

19
38
18

United States

24
21
12
10

Japan

18
8

Turkey15976

United Kingdom

14
7
6
7

Italy

7

Canada

4
4

11
4

10

2017

14
6
6
8

India

5

Singapore

2
1

Saudi Arabia

1
1

New Zealand

4
3
2

5

4
1

UkrainePoland

2018
6

Korea

Romania

2019

6

Belgium

11
3
4
8
3
4
1
3
3

Netherlands

5

Spain

3
3
4

Argentina

332

GreeceIreland

3
2
7
3
2
2

No. of Detentions

Fig. 2.2.5 No. of Detentions
per PSC Country
Number of ships detained by China in 2019 dramaticaly increased compared with that of 2018.

15

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.2.6 Detentions per MOUs and USCG
Table 2.2.6 No. of Detentions per MOUs and USCG
Region

2017

2018

2019

Tokyo MOU

238

218

265

Paris MoU

89

65

56

USCG

23

24

18

Others

76

77

55

Total

426

384

394

500
426
400
No. of Detentions

394

384

NK Total

Paris MoU
Tokyo MOU

300
265
238

200
100
0

89

USCG

218

65

23

24

56
18

2017

2018

2019

Fig. 2.2.6 No. of Detentions per MOUs and USCG
Compared with number of 2018, the number of detention at Paris MoU and USCG decreased but the
number of detention at Tokyo MOU increased 22% in 2019.

16

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.3 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies
2.3.1 Detainable Deficiencies per Category
In 2019 a total of 1,112 detainable deficiencies were reported relating to 394 detentions, i.e.,
deficiencies which were serious enough to jeopardise the ship’s seaworthiness, safety of the crew
onboard, or to present a threat of harm to the environment and therefore warranted the detention of theship. The deficiencies are categorized as shown in Figure 2.3.1 and categories in this figure are basedon those of the Tokyo MOU. Deficiencies related to fire safety and life-saving appliances combined
accounted for about one-third of the total in 2019.
240
226
234

FIRE SAFETY
158

ISM

112
169
128
133
137

LIFE SAVING APPLIANCES128

EMERGENCY SY STEMS

96
121
71

SAFETY OF NAVIGATIOＮ

87
125
51

WATER/WEATHERTIGHT CONDITIONS

62
87
51

POLLUTION PREVENTION -MARPOL ANNEX I

57
46
49
35
44

POLLUTION PREVENTION -MARPOL ANNEX IV

2019
2018

34

PROPULSION AND AUXILIARY MACHINERY

38
40
28
27

STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS

2017

46
23
20

CERTIFICATE & DOCUMENTATION CREW CERTIFICATES

59
20

CERTIFICATE & DOCUMENTATION SHIP CERTIFICATES

29
30
18

RADIO COMMUNICATIONS

29
16
11

LABOUR CONDITIONS －MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR SEAFARERSLABOUR CONDITIONSLABOUR CONDITIONS－ACCOMMODATIONACCOMMODATION,RECREATIONALFACILITIES,FOOD
AND CATERING15

LABOUR CONDITIONSCONDITIONSPROTECTION,HEALTHLABOUR
PROTECTION,
MEDICAL －HEALTH
CARE SOCIALSECURITY

1312

ALARMS

11
16

38

35

25

35

28

6

POLLUTION PREVENTION -MARPOL ANNEX VI

11
13

WORKING AND LIVING CONDITIONS -WORKING CONDITIONS

11
13
13

POLLUTION PREVENTION -MARPOL ANNEX V

8

24

11
12

11
10
14

CERTIFICATE & DOCUMENTATION DOCUMENTS
6
4
2

ＩＳＰＳ

0

50

100

150

200

No. of Detanable Deficiencies

Fig. 2.3.1 No. of Detainable Deficiencies per Category

17

250

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.3.2 Detainable Deficiencies per Defective item
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, ISM, fire damper continue to be the major
items where most detainable deficiencies were found. The items reported from 2017 to 2019 are
explained in detail in paragraphs (1) to (15) below. (Regarding details of deficiencies related to ISM
and MLC, refer to Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.)

45

Lifeboats

45
51

ISM

38

42
61

40

Fire-dampers

34
26
38

Maintenance of the ship and equipment

21
27
33

Sew age treatment plant

31
28
32

Emergency source of pow er - Emergency Generator

24
25

Fixed fire extinguishing installation

29

18
24
27

Emergency Fire Pump and its pipes

2019

33
31

2018

25

Other (ISM)

20

2017

11
24

Oil filtering equipment

21
15
23
24
24

Fire pumps and its pipes

22
22

Ventilators, air pipes, casings

31

Remote Means of control (opening, pumps, ventilation, etc.)
Remote Means of control
Machinery spaces

22
11
13
20

Fire doors/openings in fire-resisting divisions

38
42

20

Emergency lighting, batteries and sw itches

15
8
20

Shipboard operations

13

16
19
20

Fire detection and alarm system
1617Fire drills

12
23
16
16
14

Rescue boats

16
15

Charts

29

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

No. of Detainable Deficiencies

Fig. 2.3.2 No. of Detainable Deficiencies per Defective item
18

70

80

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(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
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies
Wasted and holed fire-dampers
40
Inoperable fire-dampers

Fire-dampers

26

34

Fixed fire extinguishinginstallation

24

18

29 Wasted and holed CO2 pipes

Fire pumps and its pipes

24

24

23

Malfunction of fire pump(incl. for emergency)
Wasted and holed fire main line

11

22

Inoperable quick closing valve / isolation
valve

38

20

Malfunction of self-closing devices
Poor closing condition of fire door

20

19 Inoperable fire detection units
13

Remote Means of control(opening, pumps, ventilation, 13etc.) Machinery spaces
Fire doors/openings in
42
fire-resisting divisions
Fire detection and alarm16
systemVentilation

11

9

Oil accumulation in engine
room

5

5

Other (fire safety)

11

9

Corroded and holed ventilator casings
Malfunction of mechanical ventilators
Fire hazard due to oil leakage from12
equipment in Engine Room
10 Malfanction of oil level gauge(2) ISM Related Deficiencies
For details of deficiencies, refer to Chapter 3.
(3) Life Saving Appliances
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Life Saving Appliances” are shownin Table 2.3.2-(3) below.
Table 2.3.2-(3) Life Saving Appliances
Item2017 2018 2019

Lifeboats

51

45

Rescue boats

14

16

Embarkation arrangement
11
survival craft
Launching arrangements for10
survival craft
Launching arrangements for13
rescue boats
Operational readiness oflifesaving appliances

47

Noted Deficiencies
Lifeboat engine not started
45 Poor maintenance of rechargeable batteries
Inadequate resetting of on-load release gears
Rescue boat engine not started
16
Poor maintenance of rechargeable batteries
Heavily corroded and broken embarkation
12
ladder8

11 Corroded boat falls

20

8

Inoperative davit (Components seized, etc.)

48Inoperable on-load release gear

19

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(4) Emergency Systems
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Emergency Systems” are shown in
Table 2.3.2-(4) below.
Table 2.3.2-(4) Emergency Systems
Item2017 2018 2019
Noted Deficiencies
Emergency generator unable to start
Emergency source of power 25 24 32
automatically or manually
Emergency Generator
Emergency Fire Pump and its
Inoperable and unable to pressure the fire
31 33 27
pipes
main
Emergency lighting, batteries
Deficient batteries/emergency generator
8
15 20
and switches
Inoperable emergency lighting
23 12 17 Fire drill failed
Fire drills
Abandon ship drill failed
18
4
12
Abandon ship drills
Drill not conductedCrewfamiliarisation
with00
8 Insufficient familiarisation
Emergency Systems(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
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies
Navigation charts not updated
16 Navigation charts for intended voyage notavailable
Nautical publications (tide table, list of lights,
10list of radio signals, etc.) not updated
Defective VDR / S-VDR
10Alarm panel showing “system error”

Charts29

15

Nautical publications

16

16

Voyage data recorder(VDR / S-VDR)

15

13

Electronic charts (ECDIS)

3

7

6

ENC not updated

Echo sounder

3

6

6

Malfanction of echo sounder(6) Water/ Weathertight conditions
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Water/ Weathertight conditions”
are shown in Table 2.3.2-(6) below.
Table 2.3.2-(6) Water/ Weathertight conditions
Item2017 2018 2019

Ventilators, air pipes, casings

31

22

22

Hatch Covers

25

10

10

Doors

5

4

6

Noted Deficiencies
Waster/Holed ventilators and pipes
Damaged float of air pipe heads
Damaged closing devices
Wasted/Holed hatch covers
Wasted hatch cover cleats and its spacers
Deteriorated rubber packing
Doors not closed tightly

20

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(7) MARPOL Annex I
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “MARPOL Annex I” are shown in
Table 2.3.2-(7) below.
Table 2.3.2-(7) MARPOL Annex I
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies
Inoperable oily water separator / bilge pump
24 Oily water inside overboard discharging line
Ship’s crew not familiar with operation

Oil filtering equipment

1521

15 PPM Alarm arrangements

8

15

8

Failure of 15PPM alarm

Oil and oily mixtures frommachinery spaces

8

4

6

Oil spot beneath M/E and A/E(8) MARPOL Annex IV
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “MARPOL Annex IV” are shown in
Table 2.3.2-(8) below.
Table 2.3.2-(8) MARPOL Annex IV
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies

Sewage treatment plant28

31

33 Malfanction of sewage treatment plant

Sewage discharge connection

5

0

5

Directly discharged untreated sewage(9) Propulsion and auxiliary machinery
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Propulsion and auxiliarymachinery” are shown in the Table 2.3.2-(9) below.
Table 2.3.2-(9) Propulsion and auxiliary machinery
Item2017 2018 2019

Auxiliary engine

12

14

Propulsion main engine

12

4

Other (machinery)911

Noted Deficiencies
Inoperable Auxiliary engines
14
Uncleanness due to leakage of oil
Defective oil mist detectors
10 Uncleanness due to leakage of oil andcooling water
4

Malfunction of safety valve(10) Structural Conditions
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Structural Conditions” are shownin Table 2.3.2-(10) below.
Table 2.3.2-(10) Structural Conditions
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies

Steering gear

4

8

9

Alarm failed

Other (Structure condition)

2

1

4

Unapproved templrary repair

Electrical installations ingeneral4

23

Wasted mast light seat21

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(11) Crew Certificate
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Crew Certificate” are shown in
Table 2.3.2-(11) below.
Table 2.3.2-(11) Crew Certificate
Item
Seafarers’ employment
agreement (SEA)

2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies

18

9

8

ExpiredEndorsement by flag State

16

3

3

No endorsement

Certificates for master andofficers

11

42Missing(12) Ship Certificates
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Ship Certificates” are shown in the
Table 2.3.2-(12) below.
Table 2.3.2-(12) Ship Certificates
Item
Cargo Ship Safety
Construction (including
Exemption)2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies

3

4

3

Expired

Other (certificates)

2

4

3

Missing the test certificate

Maritime Labour Certificate

3

2

2

Missing DMLC Part I and II

Minimum Safe Manning
Document

2

1

2Missing(13) Radio Communications
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Radio Communications”are shownin Table 2.3.2-(13) below.
Table 2.3.2-(13) Radio Communications
Item2017 2018 2019

Noted Deficiencies

MF/HF radio installation

11

8

3

Malfunction of radio devices

Facilities for reception ofmarine safety information

2

4

2

Malfanction of NAVTEX printerReserve source of energy

11

3

2

GMDSS reserve source of energy failed

INMARSAT ship earth station

3

2

2

Malfanction of INMARSAT

Performance standards
radio equipment

2

1

2

Malfanction of MF/HF

0

0

2

Malfanction of VHF

VHF radio installation

for

22

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(14) Labour Conditions －Minimum requirements for seafarers
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Labour Conditions －Minimum
requirements for seafarers” are shown in Table 2.3.2-(14) below.
Table 2.3.2-(14) Minimum requirements for seafarers
Item2017 2018 2019

Wages

22

3

Calculation and payment of
wages

9

7

Noted Deficiencies
Non payment
13
Wage reduced without consent
2

Not fully paid wage(15) Labour Conditions-Accommodation, recreational facilities, food and catering
Major types and details of deficiencies noted under the category of “Labour
Conditions-Accommodation, recreational facilities, food and catering ” are shown in Table 2.3.2-(15)below.
Table 2.3.2-(15) Labour Conditions-Accommodation,
recreational facilities, food and cateringItem2017 2018 2019
Noted Deficiencies
Sanitary facilities
Galley, handling room
(maintenance)
Provisions quality andnutritional value

7

7

5

Toilet/bath room defective/dirty

3

2

2

Galley dirty

0

0

2

Rotten foods

23ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4 Analysis of Detainable Deficiencies per PSC Country
Most frequent detainable deficiencies per PSC country are shown in Tables 2.4.1 to 2.4.12 according to
number of detentions reported from 2017 to 2019. (Regarding details of deficiencies related to ISM and
MLC, refer to Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.)
2.4.1 China
Table 2.4.1 China
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire safety
Life saving appliances
Emergency Systems
ISM
Pollution prevention -MARPOL Annex I
Water/Weathertight conditions
Pollution prevention -MARPOL Annex IV
Safety of Navigation
Structural Conditions
Propulsion And Auxiliary Machinery
Pollution Prevention -MARPOL Annex VI
Defective Items

2017 2018 2019
56
46
90
43
37
52
15
24
40
38
25
37
13
21
24
23
18
19
9
12
18
20
13
14
8
4
10
8
3
8
1
3
7
2017 2018 2019
22
17
22
6
14
15

Lifeboats
Oil filtering equipment
Remote Means of control (opening, pumps,
4
7
15
ventilation, etc.) Machinery spaces
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
4
4
14
Sewage treatment plant
6
12
13
Other (ISM)
11
12Fire pumps and its pipes
2
6
11
Maintenance of the ship and equipment
1714
10
Ventilators, air pipes, casings
14
11
10
Emergency Fire Pump and its pipes
511
10
Embarkation arrangement survival craft
84
9
Shipboard operations
3
4
9
Other (fire safety)
1
2
8
A total of 347 detainable deficiencies relating to 120 detentions were noted in 2019.
(2.9 detainable deficiencies/detention)

24ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.2 Australia
Table 2.4.2 Australia
Category of Detainable Deficiency(*)

ISM
Emergency Systems
Life saving appliances
Fire safety
Pollution prevention -MARPOL Annex I
Water/Weathertight conditions

2017 2018 2019
22
14
20
11
13
17
7
11
15
5
11
12
1
7
7
8
7
4

Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Emergency source of power - Emergency Generator
78
11Fire-dampers
4711
Other (ISM)8
68Lifeboats
22
17
6Emergency Fire Pump and its pipes
45
5Emergency preparedness
7
3
5
Operational readiness of lifesaving appliances0
1
5
Shipboard operations
11
5
4(*) In Australia, deficiency relating to Safety of Navigation is not directly judged as
detainable deficiency but as ISM detainable deficiency since it is regarded as ISM
related.
A total of 88 detainable deficiencies relating to 61 detentions were noted in 2019.
(1.3 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.3 Russia
Table 2.4.3 Russia
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire safety
Safety of Navigation
Emergency Systems
ISM
Water/Weathertight Conditions
Life saving appliances

2017 2018 2019
9
25
20
11
23
22
9
17
13
1
15
8
2
5
5
7
15
3

Defective Items
2017 2018 20193
2
8Fire detection and alarm system
237Charts2
11
6Emergency lighting, batteries and switches
5
4
5Emergency Fire Pump and its pipes
125Ventilation
0
13
4
Other (ISM)
2
7
4
Nautical publications
A total of 89 detainable deficiencies relating to 36 detentions were noted in 2019.
(2.5 detainable deficiencies/detention)

25

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.4 Indonesia
Table 2.4.4 Indonesia
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire safety
Pollution prevention -MARPOL AnnexIV
Emergency systems
Life saving appliances
ISM
Pollution prevention -MARPOL AnnexVWater/Weathertight conditions
Defective Items

2017 2018 2019
37
22
16
17
8
12
9
1
10
7
6
8
18
1
6
16
4
4
11
1
4
2017 2018 2019
8
6
11
11
8
10
6
1
6

Fire-dampers
Sewage treatment plant
Safety and environmental policy
Emergency source of power – Emergency
50
5
Generator
Garbage
1
0
4
On board training and instructions
1
0
4
Ventilation
2
0
3
A total of 72 detainable deficiencies relating to 31 detentions were noted in 2019.
(2.3 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.5 U.S.A.
Table 2.4.5 U.S.A.
Category of Detainable Deficiency
ISM
Fire safety
Pollution prevention -MARPOL AnnexⅠ
Life saving appliances
Structural Conditions
Certification and documentation - documents

2017 2018 2019
10
6
21
11
11
12
10
2
8
4
6
6
2
2
3
4
1
3

Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Maintenance of the ship and equipment
01
13
Oil accumulation in engine room0
1
3
Oil and oily mixtures from machinery spaces
003
Safety and environmental policy
003
Readily availability of fire fighting equipment
1
2
2
Oil record book4
1
2
Fire pumps and its pipes
2
12
Access control to ship0
1
2
A total of 58 detainable deficiencies relating to 18 detentions were noted in 2019.
(3.2 detainable deficiencies/detention)

26

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.6 Japan
Table 2.4.6 Japan
Category of Detainable Deficiency
2017 2018 2019
Fire safety
52
5Life Saving Appliances
4
0
3
ISM
10
4
3
Emergency Systems
7
6
2
Labour Conditions －Minimum Requirements For002
Seafarers
Water/Weathertight Conditions
0
0
2
Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
1
2
3
Fire drills
642
Lifeboats
1
0
2
Wages
0
0
2
Resources and personnel
10
4
1
A total of 19 detainable deficiencies relating to 12 detentions were noted in 2019.
(1.6 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.7 Turkey
Table 2.4.7 Turkey
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire safety
Life saving appliances
Emergency Systems
Safety of Navigation
Certificate & Documentation Crew CertificatesRadio Communications

2017 2018 2019
2
15
7
5
4
6
3
2
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
3
0
2

Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Emergency lighting, batteries and switches
015
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
0
1
3
Endorsement by flag State
2
2
2
Fire detection and alarm system
022Rescue boats
012
Launching arrangements for survival craft00
2
A total of 27 detainable deficiencies relating to 8 detentions were noted in 2019.
(3.4 detainable deficiencies/detention)

27

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.8 United Kingdom
Table 2.4.8 United Kingdom
Category of Detainable Deficiency
2017 2018 2019
ISM
9
3
6
Fire Safety
553
Safety of Navigation
8
1
3
Emergency Systems
7
1
2Life Saving Appliances
5
1
2
Defective Items

2017 2018 2019
9
3
6

ISM
Emergency source of power – Emergency
2
1
1
Generator
Fire drills
30
1
Charts201Fire pumps and its pipes
101Fire-dampers
001Fire fighting equipment and appliances001
A total of 16 detainable deficiencies relating to 7 detentions were noted in 2019.
(2.3 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.9 Italy
Table 2.4.9 Italy
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire Safety
Emergency Systems
Labour Conditions －Health Protection, Medical
Care ,Social Security
ISM
Certificate & Documentation - Ship Certificates2017 2018 2019
10
11
12
8
5
10
0

1

7

5
0

6
0

6
6

Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Fire doors/openings in fire-resisting divisions
0
0
6
ISM
5
6
6
0
1
4
Cleanliness of engine room3
1
3
Fire drills
1
2
2
Enclosed space entry and rescue drills
0
1
2
Sanitary facilities
Emergency source of power – Emergency
002
Generator002Enhanced survey programme (ESP)002
Records of rest
002
Sewage treatment plant
A total of 68 detainable deficiencies relating to 7 detentions were noted in 2019.
(9.7 detainable deficiencies/detention)

28

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

2.4.10 Canada
Table 2.4.10 Canada
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire Safety
Emergency Systems
ISM
Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery2017 2018 2019
0
0
3
1
1
2
1
0
2
0
0
2

Defective Items

2017 2018 2019
ISM
1
0
2
Propulsion main engine00
2
A total of 12 detainable deficiencies relating to 7 detentions were noted in 2019.
(1.7 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.11 Belgium
Table 2.4.11 Belgium
Category of Detainable Deficiency
Fire Safety
Life Saving Appliances
ISM
Certificate & Documentation - Crew Certificates
Water/Weathertight Conditions
Emergency Systems

2017 2018 2019
1
10
9
1
8
8
4
9
5
1
6
5
3
6
3
0
2
3

Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Seafarer' employment agreement (SEA)
0
6
5
ISM
2
9
5
Launching arrangements for rescue boats
03
3
Evaluation of Crew Performance (fire drill)0
1
2Lifeboats0
1
2
A total of 42 detainable deficiencies relating to 6 detentions were noted in 2019.
(7.0 detainable deficiencies/detention)
2.4.12 Republic of Korea
Table 2.4.12 Republic of Korea
Category of Detainable Deficiency
2017 2018 2019
ISM
6
4
4
Life saving appliances3
2
2Fire safety7
51
Pollution Prevention -MARPOL Annex I
31
1
Defective Items
2017 2018 2019
Shipboard operations2
1
2
Maintenance of the ship and equipment3
1
1Lifeboats2
1
1
Launching arrangements for survival craft
10
1
A total of 8 detainable deficiencies relating to 6 detentions were noted in 2019.
(1.3 detainable deficiencies/detention)

29

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Chapter 3
Statistical Analysis of NK SMC Ships Detained by PSC (ISM Code)
3.1 General
This chapter presents statistical analysis from the viewpoints of ISM Code, on the ships holding Safety
Management Certificate (hereafter, “SMC”) issued by the Society (hereafter, “NK SMC ships”) basedon PSC Inspection Reports NK has obtained.
Table 3.1 shows the registered number of the NK SMC ships. The NK class ships account for 90% of
the NK SMC ships.
Table 3.1 Number of NK SMC Ships (per Class)
Classification
2017
2018
2019
NK class
4,980 90.1% 4,968 90.0% 5,116 90.0%
Other class
550
9.9%
549
10.0%
569
10.0%
Total
5,530
5,517
5,685
3.2 Statistics of Detentions of NK SMC Ships
In 2019, the total number of the detentions of NK SMC ships was 253, which was 4.5% of the all NK
SMC ships, or 5,685(hereafter, “Detention Ratio”).
Tables 3.2.1 and Table 3.2.2 show the number of detentions and the Detention Ratio per flag and ship
type, respectively.
Table 3.2.1 Number of Detentions and Detention Ratio of NK SMC Ships per Flag
2017
2018
2019
Country
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
(II)
(III)
Panama167
2,623 6.4%
131
2,519 5.2%
135
2,548 5.3%
Singapore
6
589
1.0%
11
549
2.0%
8
590
1.4%
Marshall Islands
25
440
5.7%
21
494
4.3%
28
564
5.0%
Hong Kong
10
362
2.8%
14
393
3.6%
13
382
3.4%
Liberia
16
365
4.4%
24
400
6.0%
27
434
6.2%
Japan
1
283
0.4%
3
302
1.0%
4
320
1.3%
Malta
15
179
8.4%
13
163
8.0%
8
151
5.3%
Bahamas
7
109
6.4%
2
110
1.8%
4
116
3.4%
Turkey
3
73
4.1%
0
65
0.0%
1
57
1.8%
Thailand
6
80
7.5%
3
78
3.8%
3
75
4.0%
Cyprus
5
71
7.0%
10
66
15.2%
5
61
8.2%
Malaysia
0
64
0.0%
0
50
0.0%
0
54
0.0%
Other Flag
24
292
8.2%
27
328
8.2%
17
333
5.1%
Total
285
5,530 5.2%
259
5,517 4.7%
253
5,685 4.5%
Note:

( I ): No. of Detentions, ( II ): No. of NK SMC Ships, ( III ): Detention Ratio = ( I ) / ( II ) %30

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Table 3.2.2 Number of Detentions and Detention Ratioof NK SMC Ships per Ship Type (SOLAS IX)
2017
2018
Type of Ship
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
Bulk Carrier
167 2,451 6.8% 160 2,435 6.6% 162
Other Cargo Ship
101 1,958 5.2%
88
1,980 4.4%
72
*Chemical Tanker
10459 2.2%
1
506 0.2%
12
Oil Tanker
4396 1.0%8346 2.3%
6
Gas Carrier
3
263 1.1%
2
249 0.8%
1
MODU
0
2
0.0%
0
1
0.0%
0
Passenger Ship
0
1
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0
High Speed Craft
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0
Total
285 5,530 5.2% 259 5,517 4.7% 253
Note:

1.
2.

2019
(II)
2,500
2,002
544
370
268
1
0
0
5,685

(III)
6.5%
3.6%
2.2%
1.6%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
4.5%

( I ): No. of Detentions, ( II ): No. of NK SMC Ships, ( III ): Detention Ratio = ( I ) / ( II ) %* Chemical Tanker includes Oil/ Chemical Tanker.

Table 3.2.3 shows “the number of detentions” and “the number of ISM detention cases” where ships
were detained due to detainable deficiencies related to ISM Code (hereafter “ISM detainable
deficiency”). Also, “ISM detainable deficiencies ratio per PSC country” is shown.
Table 3.2.3 Number of Detentions and Detention Ratioof ISM Detention Cases per PSC Country
2017
2018
Country
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
(II)
(III)
(I)
15
63
23.8% 20
64
31.3%
23
China
16
48
33.3% 13
47
27.7%
15
Australia
1
16
6.3%
12
32
37.5%
6
Russia
UK
6
9
66.7%
2
3
66.7%
5
Belgium
0
1
0.0%
6
7
85.7%
4
EU
Italy
5
8
62.5%
4
4
100%
4
Other EU Members
2137
56.8% 10
19
52.6%
12
5
16
31.3%
5
16
31.3%
9
USA
20
87
23.0% 1367
19.4%
Other Countries
18
89
285
31.2% 85
259
32.8%
Total
96
Note: ( I ): No. of the ISM detention case
( II ): No. of detentions of NK SMC ships. (Notwithstanding the reason of detention)( III ): ISM detainable deficiencies ratio = ( I ) / ( II ) %

31

2019
(II)
(III)
70
32.9%
53
28.3%
21
28.6%
5
100%
4
100%
4
100%
17
70.6%
14
64.3%
65
27.7%
253
37.9%

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3.3 Analysis of ISM Detainable Deficiencies
This clause introduces a study of ISM detainable deficiencies recorded in China, Australia, and USA
which are top 3 countries of the number of ISM detention cases in 2019 and a part of objective
evidences of the ISM detention by each country.
Deficiency Codes of ISM deficiencies specified by Tokyo MOU these countries participating in are as
following table 3.3.
Table 3.3 Deficiency Code per ISM Code Element (Tokyo MOU, USCG)
Def. Code
ISM Code Element
Defective Item
15101
2
Safety and Environmental Policy
15102
3
Company Responsibility and Authority
15103
4
Designated Person(s)15104
5Masters Responsibility and Authority
15105
6
Resources and Personnel
15106
7
Shipboard Operations
15107
8
Emergency Preparedness
15108
9
Reports of Non-conf., accidents & hazardous occur.
15109
10
Maintenance of the ship and equipment
15110
11Documentation- ISM
15111
12Company Verification, Review and Evaluation
15112
13
Certification, Verification and Control
15199
Other (ISM)32

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3.3.1 China
Table 3.3.1(a) shows the number of ISM detainable deficiencies per Deficiency Code. Table 3.3.1(b)shows the number of deficiencies regarded as the evidences of ISM detainable deficiencies per
Deficiency Code. In 2019, “15199 - Other (ISM)” was most frequently recorded as ISM detainable
deficiencies. For the case where plural ISM code elements corresponding to the objective evidences of
ISM detention were found, “15199 - Other (ISM)” was recorded. Typical objective evidences of the
ISM detainable deficiency are mainly as follows.
・ Malfunction of self-closing device for fire doors
・ The engine of life boat and/or rescue boat not start・ Leakage of fuel oil from main engine and auxiliary engine or oil leakage from the line
・ Malfunction of self-close sounding pipes for fuel oil tank
・ Malfunction of fuel oil shut-off valves・ Corrosions of CO2 pipes

Code
15101
15102
15104
15105
15106
15107
15108
15109
15110
15199

Code
03103
03105
04110
07105
07109
07114
07199
11101
13101
14402

Table 3.3.1(a) Number of ISM Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency CodeDEF_ITEM
2017
2018
2019
Safety and environmental policy010Company responsibility and authority
021Masters responsibility and authority
010Resources and personnel
5
1
1
Shipboard operations
3
7
9Emergency preparedness
64
3
Reports of NCs, accidents and hazardous occur.
10
1Maintenance of the ship and equipment
16
15
9
Documentation - ISM
00
1
Other (ISM)
1
1
13
Total
32
32
38

Table 3.3.1(b) Number of deficiencies regarded as objective evidencesof ISM Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency Code
Item
No.
Remarks
Railing, gangway, walkway and means for6
safe passage
Covers (hatchway-, portable-, tarpaulins,
7
etc.)
Abandon ship drills
7Fire doors/openings in fire-resisting divisions
7
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
11
Remote Means of control (opening, pumps,
9ventilation, etc.) Machinery spacesE.g.) Automatic closing device
Other (fire safety)
14
of sounding pipe(E/R) broken
Lifeboats
14
Propulsion main engine
12
Sewage treatment plant
7
Others202

33

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3.3.2 Australia
Table 3.3.2(a) shows the number of the ISM detainable deficiencies per Deficiency Code. Table
3.3.2(b) shows the number of deficiencies regarded as objective evidences of ISM detainable
deficiencies per Deficiency Code. In Australia, just like China, “15199 - Other (ISM)” was mostfrequently recorded as ISM detainable deficiencies. Typical objective evidences of the ISM detainable
deficiency are mainly as follows.
・ Exceeding the limits of work time・ Damage and/or wastage of securing devices (cleats) or cleat crutches of cargo hatch covers
・ Malfunction of fire damper’s operations
・ Emergency generator is unable to automatically connect to emergency switchboard
・ Inadequate resetting of on-load release gears of lifeboat
・ Low pressure of cylinders for breathing apparatus of fireman’s outfit
・ Crews are unfamiliar with an operation of ECDIS・ Malfunction of sewage treatment plant

Code
15105
15106
15107
15109
15199

Code
01308
03105
03108
04103
04114
07109
07110
07115
07199
11101
11129
10112
14402

Table 3.3.2(a) Number of ISM Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency Code
Item
2017
2018
2019
Resources and personnel
11
9
Shipboard operations
11
5
4
Emergency preparedness21
5
Maintenance of the ship and equipment02
3
Other (ISM)
9
8
8
Total
23
17
20

Table 3.3.2(b) Number of Deficiencies Regarded as the Evidencesof ISM Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency Code
Item
No.
RemarkRecords of rest
5
Covers (hatchway-, portable-, tarpaulins,
7
etc.)
Ventilators, air pipes, casings
5
Emergency lighting, batteries and switches
5
Emergency source of power - Emergency
8
Generator
Fixed fire extinguishing installation
5
Fire fighting equipment and appliances
6Fire-dampers
12E.g.)High temperature surface
Other (fire safety)
10
not insulated
Lifeboats
11
Operational
readinessoflifesaving
7
appliances
Electronic charts (ECDIS)
4
Sewage treatment plant
4
Others14234

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

3.3.3 USA
Table 3.3.3(a) shows the number of ISM detainable deficiencies per Deficiency Code. Table 3.3.3(b)shows the number of deficiencies regarded as the evidences of ISM detainable deficiencies per
Deficiency Code. In USA where the number of ISM detentions is increasing, “15109 – Maintenance ofthe ship and equipment” was most frequently recorded. Typical objective evidences of the ISM
detainable deficiency are mainly as follows.
・ Inappropriate entries in oil record book・ Low pressure of cylinders for breathing apparatus of fireman’s outfit
・ Leakage from fire lines
・ There are excessive oils or garbage in engine room and engine room is not kept clean
・ Inadequate resetting of on-load release gears of lifeboat
・ Leakage of fuel oil from main engine and auxiliary engine or oil leakage from the line

Table 3.3.3(a) Number of ISM Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency Code
Code
Item
2017
2018
2019
15100
ISM
0
1
0
15101
Safety and environmental policy
4
0
2
15102
Company responsibility and authority
1
1
0
15105
Resources and personnel
3
0
0
15106
Shipboard operations
0
1
2
15108
Reports of NCs, accidents and hazardous occur.
0
2
0
15109
Maintenance of the ship and equipment
1
1
13
15110
Documentation - ISM
2
0
0
15111
Company verification, review and evaluation
0
0
1
15112
Certification, verification and control
0
0
1
15150
ISM
0
1
0
Total
11
7
19

Code
01315
07108
07113
07126
09209
11112
13101
13199
14107

Table 3.3.3(b) Number of Deficiency Regarded as the Evidencesof ISM Detainable Deficiency per Deficiency Code
Item
No.
Remarks
Oil record book3
Readily availability of fire fighting equipment
3
Fire pumps and its pipes
3
Oil accumulation in engine room
5
Electrical3
Launching arrangements for survival craft
5
Propulsion main engine
6
Other (machinery)
5E.g.) Leakage from pipes
Oil discharge Monitoring and control system
4
Others12935ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Chapter 4
Statistical Analysis of NK MLC Ships Detained by PSC (MLC, 2006)
4.1 General
This chapter presents statistical analysis from the viewpoints of MLC, 2006 on the ships holding
Maritime Labour Certificate issued by the Society (hereafter, “NK MLC ships”) based on the PSC
Inspection Reports having been obtained. Table 4.1 shows the registered number of the NK MLC ships.
About 88% of the NK MLC ships are classed with this Society.

Classification
NK class
Other class
Total

Table 4.1 Number of NK MLC Ships (per Class)
2017
2018
2019
4,629
87.9%
4,588
88.3%
4,847
88.6%
635
12.1%
603
11.6%
623
11.4%
5,264
5,191
5,470

4.2 Statistics of Detentions of NK MLC Ships
As of the end of April 2020, 96 countries have ratified MLC, 2006 and many countries have been
carrying out PSC inspections based on the convention. For detailed situations of the enforcement by thecountries, please refer to the following website of ILO.
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:11300:0::NO:11300:P11300_INSTRUMENT_ID:312331:NO

The table 4.2 shows the number of detention cases due to deficiencies related to MLC, 2006 (hereafter,“MLC deficiencies”) for NK MLC ships in the last 3 years.

Table 4.2 Number of Detention Cases due to MLC Deficiencies (per PSC country)
Country
2017
2018
2019
Australia
624Canada
1
2
1
China
3
2
0
Russia
2
2
2
Italy
0
2
4
Belgium
1
4
2
EU
Sweden201Other EU Members
18
50
Other Countries
3
4
4
Total
36
23
18

36

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

4.3 Analysis of MLC Detainable Deficiencies
This clause introduces the analysis of detainable deficiencies related to MLC, 2006 (hereafter, “MLC
detainable deficiencies”) and MLC deficiencies recorded as objective evidences of ISM detainable
deficiencies for NK MLC ships in 2019. In this Chapter, the deficiencies with Codes listed in Table
4.3.1 are defined as MLC deficiencies.
The number of MLC detainable deficiencies per the deficiency code is shown in Table 4.3.2. Also, top
10 MLC deficiencies regarded as objective evidences of ISM detainable deficiencies are shown in
Table 4.3.3. As for the MLC detainable deficiencies, “18203 - Wages ” was most frequently recorded on
NK MLC ships in 2019. And “01220 - Seafarers' employment agreement (SEA)” and “18302 - Sanitaryfacilities” followed it.
On the other hand, the following deficiencies were recorded more than 4 as objective evidences of ISM
detainable deficiencies.
・ “01220 - Seafarers' employment agreement (SEA)”・ “18302 – Sanitary facilities”
・ “18313 - Cleanliness”
・ “18324 - Cold room, cold room cleanliness, cold room temperature”
・ “18408 - Electrical”
・ “18412 - Personal equipment”
・ “18418 - Winches and capstans”

Table 4.3.1 Deficiency Codes of MLC Deficiencies - Paris MOU and Tokyo MOU
Deficiency Code
Category / Item (Description in the List of Tokyo MOU Def. Codes)
01xxx
Certificates & Documentation-Crew Certificate
01218
Medical Certificate
012
01219
Training and Qualification MLC- Personal Safety Training
01220
Seafarers` Employment Agreement (SEA)
01221
Record of Employment-Document
Max. Hours of Work or Min, Hours of Rest
01307
(Table of Working Hours)
Records of Seafarer’s Daily Hours of Work or Rest
013
01308
(Records of Rest)
01330
Procedure for Complaint under MLC, 2006
01331
Collective Bargaining Agreement
18xxx
MLC, 2006 (Labour Conditions)
Minimum Requirements to Work on a Ship
18101-04 & 99
(Minimum Requirements for Seafarers)
182
01-05 & 99
Conditions of Employment
183
01-28 & 99
Accommodation, Recreational Facilities, Food and Catering
18401-32 & 99
Health Protection, Medical Care, Social Security

37

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Code
01xxx
01220
01308
18xxx
18203
18204
18302
18306
18312
18314
18316
18321
18326
18401
18408
18416
18417
18418
18420

Table 4.3.2 Number of MLC Detainable Deficiencies per Deficiency Code
Item
No.
Country (*ISO des.)Certificates & Documentation
Seafarer' employment agreement (SEA)
3 BEL, ITA, SWE
Records of rest
2 BEL, ITA
Labour Conditions (MLC, 2006)
Wages
5 AUS, BEL, NZL, RUS
Calculation and payment of wages
1 AUS
Sanitary Facilities
3 AUS, CAN, ITA
Sleeping room, additional spaces
1 IND
Galley, handling room (maintenance)
1 ITA
Provisions quantity
1 IDN
Water, pipes, tanks
1 BEL
Heating, air conditioning and ventilation
1 ITA
Laundry, Adequate Locker
1 ITA
Medical Equipment, medical chest, medical guide
1 ITA
Electrical
1 RUS
Ropes and wires
1 ITA
Anchoring devices
1 ITA
Winches and capstans
1 ITA
Cleanliness of engine room
3 DZA, ITA
29 Total*ISO description of the country
ISO des.
Country
ISO des.
AUS
Australia
BEL
DZA
Algeria
IDN
ITA
Italy
NZL
SWE
Sweden

Code
01xxx
01220
01308
18xxx
18302
18313
18324
18407
18408
18412
18416
18418
-

Country
BelgiumIndonesia
New Zealand

ISO des.
CAN
IND
RUS

Country
CanadaIndia
RussiaTable 4.3.3 Top 10 MLC Deficiencies Regarded as the Evidencesof ISM Detainable Deficiencies
Item
Certificates & Documentation
Seafarer' employment agreement (SEA)
Records of rest
Other Deficiencies with 01xxx
Labour Conditions (MLC, 2006)
Sanitary Facilities
Cleanliness
Cold room, cold room cleanliness, cold room temperatureLighting (Working spaces)
Electrical
Personal equipment
Ropes and wires
Winches and capstans
Other Deficiencies with 18xxx
Total
38

No.
7
4
3
7
6
6
4
9
5
4
7
45
107

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control(Reference)

PSC Inspections on Working and Living Conditions in Countries not ratifying
MLC, 2006
Regarding the matters of ILO, Tokyo MOU, Paris MOU and other MOUs had been carrying out PSC
inspections using deficiency codes 09000 series “Working and Living Conditions” since the time before
implementation of MLC, 2006. These codes are still used by the countries in which MLC, 2006 has not
yet come into force. Table 4.3.4 shows the number of detainable deficiencies with the Code pointed out
in 2019.

Table 4.3.4 Number of ILO Detainable Deficiencies (per Deficiency Code)
Code
Item
092xx
Working Conditions
09210
Machinery
09219
Pipes, wires (insulation)
09232
Cleanliness of engine room
Total

39

No.
1
1
2
4

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

Chapter 5
Statistical Data from Tokyo MOU, Paris MoU and USCG
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, the Paris MoU and the USCG in 2019.
The full text of each respective Annual Report can be obtained from the following websites.
Tokyo MOU
Paris MoU
USCG

http://www.tokyo-mou.org
http://www.parismou.org
https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Assistant-Commandant-for-Preventio
n-Policy-CG-5P/Inspections-Compliance-CG-5PC-/Commercial-Vessel-Compliance/Foreign-Offshore-Compliance-Division/Port-State-Control/Annual-Reports/

40

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.1 Tokyo MOU
In 2019, 31,372 inspections were carried out in the Tokyo MOU region, and 983 ships were detained
due to serious deficiencies found onboard.
5.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities
Table 5.1.1 shows the numbers of Port State inspections carried out by each Port State from 2017
through 2019.
Table 5.1.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Port Authorities (Tokyo MOU)Country
1)

Australia
2)
Canada
Chile
China
Fiji
Hong Kong, China
Indonesia
Japan
Republic of Korea
Malaysia
Marshall Islands
New Zealand
3)
PanamaPapua New Guinea
Peru
Philippines
2)
RussiaSingapore
Thailand
Vanuatu
VietnamTotal

No. of Inspection

No. of Detentions

2017
2018
2019
3,128 2,922 3,222
615
511
703
888
831
759
7,242 7,549 7,756
42
64
36
664
716
710
1,920 1,803 1,766
5,439 5,173 5,023
1,947 1,925 1,950
1,544 1,567 1,413
20
21
11
241
288
228
0
0
0
143
154
187
502
544
462
2,714 2,976 2,302
1,101 1,162 1,171
1,027 1,097 1,199
607
669
760
5
4
8
1,526 1,613 1,706
31,315 31,589 31,372

1) Data is also provided to Indian Ocean MOU.
2) Data is only for the Pacific ports.
3) Data for Panama in 2019 is not provided in Tokyo MOU

41

2017
165
5
13
372
2
27
66
107
66
24
1
6
0
7
2
2
54
15
0
0
7
941

2018
161
3
12
360
0
24
60
100
67
13
3
16
0
5
4
1
90
15
0
0
0
934

Detention ratio (%)

2019 2017 2018 2019
163
5.27
5.51
5.06
12
0.81
0.59
1.71
7
1.46
1.44
0.92
434
5.14
4.77
5.60
1
4.76
0.00
2.78
20
4.07
3.35
2.82
73
3.44
3.33
4.13
93
1.97
1.93
1.85
59
3.39
3.48
3.03
11
1.55
0.83
0.78
2
5.00 14.29 18.18
6
2.49
5.56
2.63
0
0
0
0
3
4.90
3.25
1.60
1
0.40
0.74
0.22
7
0.07
0.03
0.30
65
4.90
7.75
5.55
21
1.46
1.37
1.75
0
0
0.00
0
0
0
0.00
0
5
0.46
0.00
0.29
983 3.00% 2.96% 3.13%

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.1.2 Black List of Flag States
Table 5.1.2 shows the Black List of Flag State announced in the Tokyo MOU Annual Report.
Table 5.1.2 Black List of Flag States (Tokyo MOU)
No. ofNo. ofGrey toBlack toFlag State
Inspections
Detentions
White limit Grey limit
2017-20192017-2019
Tanzania
44
15
6.20
Togo
1,201
174
2.95
Mongolia
261
37
2.28
Korea, Democratic People’s Republic
315
43
2.21
Sierra Leone
1,202
126
1.69
Palau
239
29
1.64
1.62
Niue
127
17
1.46
Saint Kitts and Navis
34
6
1.36
Barbados
71
10
1)
1.03
Micronesia, Federated States of7091) Fraudulently registered vessels are involved.

5.1.3 Recognized Organization Performance
Table 5.1.3 shows the detention data of IACS affiliated Recognized Organization in the Tokyo MOU
Annual Report.
Table 5.1.3 Inspections and Detentions per Recognized Organization (Tokyo MOU) (*)
Recognized
Organization
ABS
BV
CCS
CRS
DNV GL
IRS
KR
LR
NK
PRS
RINA
RS

No. of Inspections
2017-2019

No. of Detentions
2017-2019

Detention
ratio (%)

11,75412,0007,589
135
25,444254
9,399
14,60432,871
174
3,407
1,350

203
394
57
8
531
15
156
331
816
7
113
47

1.73
3.28
0.75
5.93
2.09
5.91
1.66
2.27
2.48
4.02
3.32
3.48

(*) According to the Tokyo MOU annual report, in cases where a ship’s certificates were issued by more than one
recognized organization (RO), the number of inspections would be counted towards both of organizations, while thenumber of detentions would be counted only towards the RO that issued the certificate relating to the detainable
deficiency or deficiencies.

42ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.1.4 Deficiencies per Category
Figure 5.1.4 shows the number of deficiencies by category for the three years from 2017 through 2019.

9,893
9,363
9,787

Life saving appliances

2019
Fire safety measures

13,17813,3402018

13,707

2017

2,507
2,046
2,324

Stability, structure andrelated equipment

5,472
5,017
5,283

Load lines

9,179
Safety of navigation

10,127
11,701

1,486
1,616

ISM related deficiencies

1,987

31,67831,93231,319Others0

5,000

10,00015,00020,00025,00030,000No. of Deficiencies

Fig. 5.1.4 Deficiencies per Category (Tokyo MOU)

43

35,000ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.2 Paris MoU
In 2019, 17,908 inspections were carried out in the Paris MoU region, and 526 ships were detained due
to serious deficiencies found onboard.
5.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities
Table 5.2.1 shows the numbers of Port State Inspections carried out by each respective Port State from2017 through 2019.
Table 5.2.1 Port State Inspections carried out by Authorities (Paris MoU)Country
Belgium
Bulgaria
CanadaCroatia
CyprusDenmark
Estonia
FinlandFranceGermany
GreeceIceland
IrelandItaly
LatviaLithuania
Malta
Netherlands
NorwayPolandPortugal
Romania
1)
RussiaSlovenia
Spain
SwedenUnited Kingdom
Total

No. of Inspections

No. of Detentions

2017 2018 2019 2017
961
990 1,010
23
288
329
342
9
1,150 1,022 1,237
21
323
341
299
11
122
114
106
11
471
493
491
0
202
210
251
0
282
282
280
1
1,140 1,072 1,047
32
1,121 1,134 1,116
48
1,016 982
987
66
60
63
64
2
288
285
299
8
1,464 1,381 1,447
93
290
303
309
4
239
231
253
2
211
196
181
5
1,264 1,278 1,287
32
557
569
555
6
502
507
492
18
499
514
528
7
510
533
489
58
1,337 1,360 1,177 126
132
136
140
2
1,562 1,557 1,517
39
562
573
570
10
1,363 1,499 1,434
51
17,916 17,954 17,908 685

2018
28
16
19
11
7
6
0
0
35
36
42
1
9
60
3
0
6
28
8
26
9
28
103
1
33
11
40
566

Detention ratio (%)

2019 2017 2018 2019
36
2.39
2.83
3.56
12
3.13
4.86
3.51
25
1.83
1.86
2.02
9
3.41
3.23
3.01
9
9.02
6.14
8.49
4
0.00
1.22
0.81
1
0.00
0.00
0.40
0
0.35
0.00
0.00
24
2.81
3.26
2.29
19
4.28
3.17
1.70
50
6.50
4.28
5.07
1
3.33
1.59
1.56
12
2.78
3.16
4.01
83
6.35
4.34
5.74
3
1.38
0.99
0.97
0
0.84
0.00
0.00
8
2.37
3.06
4.42
22
2.53
2.19
1.71
14
1.08
1.41
2.52
19
3.59
5.13
3.86
3
1.40
1.75
0.57
25
11.37 5.25
5.11
57
9.42
7.57
4.84
1
1.52
0.74
0.71
43
2.50
2.12
2.83
8
1.78
1.92
1.40
38
3.74
2.67
2.65
526 3.82% 3.15% 2.94%

1) Only movements to the Russian ports in the Baltic Azov, Caspian and Barents Sea are included.

44

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.2.2 Black List of Flag States
Table 5.2.2 shows the Black List of Flag States announced by the Paris MoU.
Table 5.2.2 Black List of Flag States (Paris MoU)
Inspections
Detentions
Flag State
Risk
2017-20192017-2019Black toGrey Limit

Comoros

380

69

35

Albania

74

16

Togo

492

80

44

Moldova, Republic of

381

57

35

Tanzania, United Republic of

354

53

33

Ukraine

89

15

Palau

221

31

22

Belize

322

43

31

Sierra Leone

362

43

34

Mongolia

4987Saint Kitss and Nevis

163

19

Cook Islands

379

38

35

Tunisia

38

6

6

9

High Risk

Medium toHigh Risk

Medium Risk

11

17

5.2.3 Recognized Organization Performance
Table 5.2.3 shows the PSC performance of IACS affiliated Recognized Organizations among thoseannounced by the Paris MoU for the three years from 2017 through 2019.
Table 5.2.3 Recognized Organization Performance Table (Paris MoU)
RO-responsible
Recognized
Inspections
Performance
Detentions
Organization
2017-2019
Level
2017-2019
ABS
6,254
3
DNVGL
19,09416
LR
12,446
14
NK
8,507
17
BV
11,464
26
High
RINA
4,865
11
RS
2,785
6
KRS
1,335
2
CCS
890
1
PRS
582
4
CRS
163
1
Medium
IRS
184
4

45

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.3 USCG
In 2019, a total of 10,394 individual vessels visited U.S. ports, and a total of 8,622 SOLAS based safety
examinations were conducted by the USCG during the year.
5.3.1 USCG Statistics
Table 5.3.1 shows the number of safety related detentions for the three years from 2017 through 2019.
The three-year average detention ratio increased slightly for the second year in a row from 1.06% to1.08%.

Year
2017
2018
2019

Distinct
VesselArrivals*
10,19010,418
10,394

Table 5.3.1 Detentions by Year (Safety)
SOLAS Safety
Annual Detention
Detentions
Ratio
91
0.98%
103
1.14%
97
1.12%

3 Year Average
Detention Ratio
1.39%
1.06%
1.08%

* Distinct Vessel Arrivals: Number of ships greater than or equal to 500 GT, calling upon at least one
U.S. port.

5.3.2 Targeted Flag States (Safety)
The USCG publicly announced targeted flag states. The following flag states having a detention ratio
higher than the overall average were listed as targeted flag states.
Table 5.3.2 USCG Targeted Flag States (Safety)
2017-2019
Points ofFlag State
Detention Ratio
Targeting Matrix
Barbados
5.43%
Belgium*
2.82%
Cook islands
4.65%
Israel*15.79%
Mexico
5.81%
Philippines
2.24%
7 points
Portugal
2.24%
St. Kitts and Nevis
21.43%Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
3.87%
Tanzania
19.35%
Togo
6.59%
Vanuatu
4.23%
Antigua and Barbuda
1.77%
Greece1.28%
Liberia*
1.27%
2 points
Malta
1.30%
Panama1.10%* Administration not targeted last year.

46

ClassNK Annual Report on Port State Control

5.3.3 Recognized Organization Performance (Safety)
The table 5.3.3 shows the PSC performance of IACS affiliated Recognized Organizations among thoseannounced by the USCG.

Class
ABS
BV
CCS
CRS
DNV GL
IRS
KR
LR
NK
PRS
RINA
RS

Table 5.3.3 Recognized Organization Performance Table (USCG)
Vessel Examinations
Class-Related Detentions Detention Targeted
Ratio
Points2017 2018 2019 Total 2017 2018 2019 Total
1,685 1,936 1,833 5,454
0
0.00%
0 points
1,166 1,191 1,150 3,507
2
2
4
0.11%
0 points
194
240
204
638
0
0.00%
0 points
14
20
16
50
0
0.00%
0 points
3,271 3,658 2,577 9,506
3
3
6
0.06%
0 points
13
22
23
58
0
0.00%
0 points
314
269
296
879
0
0.00%
0 points
2,405 2,684 2,457 7,546
1
5
6
0.08%
0 points
2,282 2,478 2,456 7,216
2
2
4
0.05%
0 points
22
32
18
72
0
0.00%
0 points
320
431
420 1,171
00.00%
0 points
29
32
30
91
1
1
1.09%
5 points

In accordance with the Boarding Priority Matrix, Recognized Organizations are evaluated on their PSC
performance over the previous three years. The evaluation for 2019 was based on the records for 2017,2018, and 2019.
The level of performance required to be in the 0 point category is a three year average class-related
detention ratio less than 0.5%. A classification society that has a class-related detention ratio between
0.5% and 1.0% will be assigned 3 points; those societies with a detention ration of between 1.0% and2.0% will be assigned 5 points and class-related detention ratios above 2.0% will be assigned a Priority
I status.

47

Port State Control Annual Report[English]Survey Department
3-3 Kioi-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0094 JapanTel: +81-3-5226-2027,2028
Fax : +81-3-5226-2029
E-mail : svd@classnk.or.jp

www.classnk.com

June 2020