1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 1
This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents
►B ►M4 COUNCILDIRECTIVE95/21/EC
of19June1995
onportStatecontrolofshipping ◄
(OJ L 157, 7.7.1995, p. 1)
Amended by:
Official Journal
Nopage date
►M1Council Directive 98/25/EC of 27 April 1998 L 133 19 7.5.1998
►M2Commission Directive 98/42/EC of 19 June 1998 L 184 40 27.6.1998
►M3Commission Directive 1999/97/EC of 13 December 1999 L 331 67 23.12.1999
►M4Directive 2001/106/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
19 December 2001L 19 17 22.1.2002
Corrected by:
►C1Corrigendum, OJ L 291, 14.11.1996, p. 42 (95/21)
▼B
COUNCILDIRECTIVE95/21/EC
of19June1995
onportStatecontrolofshipping
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and
in particular Article 84 (2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(2),
Acting in accordance with Article 189c of the Treaty(3),
Whereas the Community is seriously concerned about shipping
casualties and pollution of the seas and coastlines of the Member States;
Whereas the Community is equally concerned about on-board living and
working conditions;
Whereas the Council, at its meeting on 25 January 1993, adopted
conclusions that urged the Community and the Member States to ensuremore effective application and enforcement of adequate international
maritime safety and environment protection standards and to implement
the new measures when adopted;
Whereas, in its resolution of 8 June 1993 on a common policy on safe
seas(
4), the Council urged the Commission to submit as soon as possible
to the Council suggestions for specific action and formal proposals
concerning criteria for the inspection of ships, including the harmoniza-tion of detention rules, and including the possibility of publication of theresults of the inspections and refusal of access to Community ports;
Whereas safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working
conditions may be effectively enhanced through a drastic reduction ofsubstandard ships from Community waters, by strictly applyinginternational Conventions, codes and resolutions;
Whereas monitoring the compliance of ships with the international
standards for safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living andworking conditions should rest primarily with the flag State; whereas,however, there is a serious failure on the part of an increasing number of
flag States to implement and enforce international standards; whereas
henceforth the monitoring ofcompliance withthe international standardsfor safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and workingconditions has also to be ensured by the port State;
Whereas a harmonized approach to the effective enforcement of these
international standards by the Member States in respect of ships sailingin the waters under their jurisdiction and using their ports will avoiddistortions of competition;
Whereas a framework in Community law for harmonizing inspection
procedures is fundamental to ensuring the homogeneous application ofthe principles of shipping safety and prevention of pollution which lie atthe heart of Community transport and environment policies;
Whereas pollution of the seas is by nature a trans-boundary
phenomenon; whereas, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity,the development of the means of taking preventive action in this field asregards the seas adjacent tothe Member States is best do ne at1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 2
(1)OJ No C 107, 15. 4. 1994, p. 14 and OJ NoC 347, 8. 12. 1944, p. 15.
(2) OJ No393, 31. 12. 1994, p. 50.
(3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 27 October 1994 (OJ No C 347, 8. 12.
1994, p. 15), Council common position of 14 March 1995 (OJ No C 93, 13. 4.
1995, p. 25) and European Parliament Decision of 18 May 1995 (not yet
published in the Official Journal) (SIC! OJ No C 151, 19. 6. 1995, p. 227).
(4) OJ NoC 271, 7. 10. 1993, p. 1.▼M4
▼B
▼B
Community level, since Member States cannot take adequate and
effective action in isolation;
Whereas the adoption of a Council Directive is the appropriate
procedure for laying down the legal framework and the harmonized
rules and criteria for port State control;
Whereas advantage should be taken of the experience gained during the
operation of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on PortState Control (PSC), signed in Paris on 26 January 1982;
Whereas the inspection by each Member State of at least 25% of the
number of individual foreign ships which enter its ports in a given yearin practice means that a large number of ships operating within theCommunity area at any given time have undergone an inspection;
Whereas further efforts should be made to develop a better targeting
system;
Whereas the rules and procedures for port-State inspections, including
criteria for the detention of ships, must be harmonized to ensureconsistent effectiveness in all ports, which would also drastically reducethe selective use of certain ports of destination to avoid the net of propercontrol;
Whereas the casualty, detention and deficiency statistics published in the
Commission's communication entitled ‘A common policy on safe seas’
and in the annual report of the MOU show that certain categories ofships need tobe subject toan expanded inspectio n;
Whereas non-compliance with the provisions of the relevant Conven-
tions must be rectified; whereas ships which are required to take
corrective action must, where the deficiencies in compliance are clearly
hazardous to safety, health or the environment, be detained until suchtime as the non-compliance has been rectified;
Whereas a right of appeal should be made available against decisions for
detention taken by the competent authorities, in order to preventunreasonable decisions which are liable to cause undue detention and
delay;
Whereas the facilities in the port of inspection may be such that the
competent authority will be obliged to authorize the ship to proceed toan appropriate repair yard, provided that the conditions for the transferare complied with; whereas non-complying shipswould continue to pose
a threat to safety, health or the environment and to enjoy commercial
advantages by not being upgraded in accordance with the relevantprovisions of the Conventions and should therefore be refused access toall ports in the Community;
Whereas there are circumstances where a ship which has been refused
access to ports within the Community has to be granted permission to
enter; whereas under such circumstances the ship should only be
permitted access to a specific port if all precautions are taken to ensure itsafe entry;
Whereas, given the complexity of the requirements of the Conventions
as regards a ship's construction, equipment and manning, the severeconsequences of the decisions taken by the inspectors, and the necessity
for the inspectors to take completely impartial decisions, inspections
must be carried out only by inspectors who are duly authorized publicservice employees or other such persons, and highly knowledgeable andexperienced;
Whereas pilots and port authorities may be able to provide useful
information on the deficiencies of such ships and crews;
Whereas cooperation between the competent authorities of the Member
States and other authorities or organizations is necessary to ensure aneffective follow-up with regard to ships with deficiencies which havebeen permitted to proceed and for the exchange of information aboutships in port;1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 3
▼B
Whereas the information system called Sirenac E established under the
MOU provides a large amount of the additional information needed forthe application of this Directive;
Whereas publication of information concerning ships which do not
comply with international standards on safety, health and protection ofthe marine environment, may be an effective deterrent discouraging
shippers touse such ships, and an incentive totheir o wners totake
corrective action without being compelled to do so;
Whereas all costs of inspecting ships which warrant detention should be
borne by the owner or the operator;
Whereas for the purposes of implementing this Directive use should be
made of the Committee set up pursuant to Article 12 of CouncilDirective 93/75/EEC of 13 September 1993 concerning minimum
requirements for vessels bound for or leaving Community ports and
carrying dangerous or polluting goods(
1) in order to assist the
Commission with the task of adapting Member States' inspectionobligations on the basis of experience gained, taking into accountdevelopments in the MOU, and also adopting the Annexes as necessaryin the light of amendments to the Conventions, Protocols, codes and
resolutions of relevant international bodies and to the MOU,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Purpose
The purpose of this Directive is to help drastically to reduce substandard
shipping in the waters under the jurisdiction of Member States by:
— increasing compliance with international and relevant Community
legislation on maritime safety, protection of the marine environmentand living and working conditions on board ships of all flags,
— establishing common criteria for control of ships by the port State
and harmonizing procedures on inspection and detention, taking
proper account of the commitments made by the maritime authoritiesof the Member States under the Paris Memorandum of Under-standing on Port State Control (MOU).
Article 2
Definitions
For the purpose of this Directive including its Annexes:
1. ‘Conventions ’ means:
— the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL 66),
— the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974
(SOLAS 74),
— the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
from Ships, 1973, and the 1978 Protocol relating thereto (Marpol73/78),
— the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certifi-
cation and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW 78),
— the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea, 1972 (Colreg 72),
— the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships,
1969 (ITC 69),
— the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976
(ILO No147),
— the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution
Damage, 1992 (CLC 92),1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 4
(1) OJ NoL 247, 5. 10. 1993, p. 19.▼M4
▼M4
together with the Protocols and amendments to these Conventions
and related codes of mandatory status, in force on 19 December2001.
2. ‘MOU’ means the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State
Control, signed in Paris on 26 January 1982, as it stands on 19December 2001.
3. ‘Ship’ means any seagoing vessel to which one or more of the
Conventions apply, flying a flag other than that of the port State.
4. ‘Off-shore installation ’ means a fixed or floating platform operating
on or over the continental shelf of a Member State.
5. ‘Inspector ’ means a public-sector employee or other person, duly
authorized by the competent authority of a Member State to carryout port-State control inspections, and responsible to that competentauthority.
6. ‘Inspection ’ means a visit on board a ship in order to check both the
validity of the relevant certificates and other documents and the
condition of the ship, its equipment and crew, as well as the livingand working conditions of the crew.
7. ‘More detailed inspection ’ means an inspection where the ship, its
equipment and crew as a whole or, as appropriate, parts thereof aresubjected, in the circumstances specified in Article 6 (3), toan in-
depth inspection covering the ship's construction, equipment,
manning, living and working conditions and compliance with on-board operational procedures.
8. ‘Expanded inspection ’ means an inspection as specified in Article 7.
9. ‘Detention ’ means the formal prohibition of a ship to proceed to sea
due to established deficiencies which, individually or together, make
the ship unseaworthy.
10. ‘Stoppage of an operation ’ means a formal prohibition of a ship to
continue an operation due to established deficiencies which,individually or together, would render the continued operationhazardous.
Article 3
Scope
1. This Directive applies toany ship and its crew:
— calling at a port of a Member State or at an off-shore installation, or
— anchored off such a port or such an installation.
Nothing in this Article shall affect the rights of intervention available to
a Member State under the relevant international Conventions.
2. In case of ships of a gross tonnage below 500, Member States shall
apply those requirements of a relevant Convention which are applicableand shall, to the extent that a Convention does not apply, take suchaction as may be necessary to ensure that the ships concerned are not
clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment. In their
application of this paragraph, Member States shall be guided by Annex1 tothe MOU.
3. When inspecting a ship flying the flag of a State which is not a
party to a Convention, Member States shall ensure that the treatmentgiven to suchship and its crew is nomore favourable than that given to aship flying the flag of a State which is a party to that Convention.
4. Fishing vessels, ships of war, naval auxiliaries, wooden ships of a
primitive build, government ships used for non-commercial purposesand pleasure yachts not engaged in trade shall be excluded from thescope of this Directive.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 5
▼B
▼M4
Article 4
Inspectionbody
Member States shall maintain appropriate national maritime adminis-
trations with the requisite number of staff, in particular qualified
inspectors, hereinafter called ‘competent authorities’, for the inspection
of ships and shall take whatever measures are appropriate to ensure thattheir competent authorities perform their duties as laid down in thisDirective.
Article 5
Inspectioncommitments
1. The total number of inspections of the ships referred to in
paragraph (2) and Article 7 to be carried out annually by the competentauthority of each Member State shall correspond to at least 25 % of theaverage annual number of individual ships which entered its ports,calculated on the basis of the three most recent calendar years for which
statistics are available.
2. (a) The competent authority shall, subject to the provisions of Article
7a, ensure that an inspection in accordance with Article 6 iscarried out on any ship not subject to an expanded inspectionwith a target factor greater than 50 in the Sirenac informationsystem, provided that a period of at least one month has elapsed
since the last inspection carried out in a port in the MOU region.
(b) In selecting other ships for inspection, the competent authorities
shall determine the order of priority as follows:
— the first shipsto be selected for inspection shall be those listed
in Annex I, Part I, irrespective of their target factor,
— the ships listed in Annex I, Part II shall be selected in
decreasing order, depending on the order of priority resultingfrom the value of their target factor ranges as referred to inthe Sirenac information system.
3. Member States shall refrain from inspecting ships which have been
inspected by any Member State within the previous six months, provided
that:
— the ship is not listed in Annex I,
— no deficiencies have been reported, following a previous inspection,— no clear grounds exist for carrying out an inspection,— the ship is not covered by paragraph 2(a).
5. The Member States and the Commission shall cooperate in seeking
to develop priorities and practices which will enable ships likely to bedefective tobe targeted mo re effectively.
Any consequent amendment of this Article, except to the figure of 25%
in paragraph 1, shall be made under the provisions of Article 19.
Article 6
Inspectionprocedure
1. The competent authority shall ensure that the inspector shall as a
minimum:
(a) check the certificates and documents listed in Annex II, to the extent
applicable;
(b) satisfy himself of the overall condition of the ship, including the
engine room and accommodation and including hygienic conditions.
2. The inspector may examine all relevant certificates and docu-
ments, other than those listed in Annex II, which are required to becarried on board in accordance with the Conventions.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 6
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼B
3. Whenever there are clear grounds for believing, after the
inspection referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, that the condition of aship or of its equipment or crew does not substantially meet the relevant
requirements of a Convention, a more detailed inspection shall be
carried out, including further checking of compliance with on-boardoperational requirements.
‘Clear grounds’ exist when the inspector finds evidence which in his
professional judgement warrants a more detailed inspection of the ship,
its equipment or its crew.
Examples of ‘clear grounds’ are set out in Annex III.4. The relevant procedures and guidelines for the control of ships
specified in Annex IV shall alsobe o bserved.
Article 7
Mandatoryexpandedinspectionofcertain ships
1. A ship in one of the categories in Annex V, section A, is liable to
an expanded inspection after a period of 12 months since the lastexpanded inspection carried out in a port of a State signatory of the
MOU.
2. If such a ship is selected for inspection in accordance with Article
5(2)(b), an expanded inspection shall be carried out. However aninspection in accordance with Article 6 may be carried out in the periodbetween twoexpanded inspectio ns.
3. (a) The operator or master of a ship to which paragraph 1 applies
shall communicate all the information listed in Annex V, sectionB, to the competent authority of the Member State of each portvisited after a period of 12 months since the last expanded
inspection. This information shall be provided at least three days
before the expected time of arrival in the port or before leavingthe previous port if the voyage is expected to take fewer thanthree days.
(b) Any ship not complying with subparagraph (a) shall be subject to
an expanded inspection at the port of destination.
4. Member States shall, subject toArticle 7a, ensure that an expanded
inspection is carried out on a ship to which paragraph 3 applies and
which has a target factor of 7 or more at its first port visited after aperiod of 12 months since the last expanded inspection.
In cases where the Member States are unable toincrease their capacity
in time to carry out all the additional inspections required, particularly
because of problems connected with the recruitment and training of
inspectors, they shall be allowed until 1 January 2003 to build up theirinspection service gradually. This period may be extended by six monthsfor the port of Rotterdam. The Commission shall notify the MemberStates and the European Parliament of any such extension.
5. Expanded inspection shall be carried out in accordance with the
procedures in Annex V, section C.
6. Where there is a risk that an amendment or draft amendment to the
MOU may weaken the scope of the obligation for expanded inspection
under this Article, the Commission shall submit without delay to the
Committee established by Article 18, draft measures with a view toreintroducing target factor values complying with the objectives of thisDirective.
Article 7a
Procedure incasecertain shipscannotbeinspected
1. In cases where, for operational reasons, a Member State is unable
to carry out an inspection of a ship with a target factor of more than 50as referred to in Article 5(2)(a) or a mandatory expanded inspection as1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 7
▼M4
▼M4
referred to in Article 7(4), the Member State shall, without delay, inform
the Sirenac system that such inspection did not take place.
2. Such cases shall be notified, at intervals of six months, to the
Commission together with the reasons for not inspecting the shipsconcerned.
3. During any calendar year, such non-inspections shall not exceed
5 % of the average annual number of individual ships eligible for theinspections referred to in paragraph 1 calling at the ports of the MemberState, calculated on the basis of the three most recent calendar years forwhich statistics are available.
4. Ships referred toin paragraph 1 shall be subject toan inspectio n,
as provided for in Article 5(2)(a) or a mandatory expanded inspection asreferred to in Article 7(4), as appropriate, in the next port of call in theCommunity.
5. By 22 July 2008 the figure of 5 % referred to in paragraph 3 shall
be amended on the basis of an assessment by the Commission, if it isconsidered appropriate, in accordance with the procedure laid down inArticle 19.
Article 7b
Accessrefusalmeasuresconcerningcertain ships
1. A Member State shall ensure that a ship in one of the categories of
Annex XI, section A, is refused access to its ports, except in thesituations described in Article 11(6), if the ship:
either
— flies the flag of a State appearing in the black list as published in the
annual report of the MOU, and
— has been detained more than twice in the course of the preceding 24
months in a port of a State signatory of the MOU,
or— flies the flag of a State described as ‘very high risk’ or ‘high risk’ in
the black list as published in the annual report of the MOU, and
— has been detained more than once in the course of the preceding 36
months in a port of a State signatory of the MOU.
The refusal of access shall become applicable immediately the ship has
been authorised to leave the port where it has been the subject of asecond or third detention as appropriate.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, Member States shall comply with
the procedures laid down in Annex XI, section B.
3. The Commission shall publish every six months the information
relating toships that have been refused access toCo mmunity po rts in
application of this Article.
Article 8
Reportofinspectiontothemaster
On completion of an inspection, a more detailed inspection or an
expanded inspection, the inspector shall draw up a report in accordancewith Annex IX. A copy of the inspection report shall be provided to the
ship's master.
Article 9
Rectification anddetention
1. The competent authority shall be satisfied that any deficiencies
confirmed or revealed by the inspection referred to in Article 5(2) andArticle 7 are or will be rectified in accordance with the Conventions.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 8
▼B
▼M4
▼B
2. In the case of deficiencies which are clearly hazardous to safety,
health or the environment, the competent authority of the port Statewhere the ship is being inspected shall ensure that the ship is detained,
or the operation in the course of which the deficiencies have been
revealed is stopped. The detention order or stoppage of an operationshall not be lifted until the hazard is removed or until such authorityestablishes that the ship can, subject to any necessary conditions,proceed to sea or the operation be resumed without risk to the safety and
health of passengers or crew, or risk to other ships, or without there
being an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment.
3. When exercising his professional judgment as to whether or not a
ship should be detained, the inspector shall apply the criteria set out inAnnex VI. In this respect, the ship shall be detained, if not equippedwith a functioning voyage data recorder system, when its use is
compulsory in accordance with Annex XII. If this deficiency cannot be
readily rectified in the port of detention, the competent authority mayallow the ship to proceed to the nearest appropriate port where it shall bereadily rectified or require that the deficiency is rectified within amaximum period of 30 days. For these purposes, the procedures laid
down in Article 11 shall apply.
4. In exceptional circumstances, where the overall condition of a ship
is obviously substandard, the competent authority may suspend theinspection of that ship until the responsible parties have taken the stepsnecessary to ensure that it complies with the relevant requirements of theConventions.
5. In the event that the inspections referred to in Article 5(2) and
Article 7 give rise to detention, the competent authority shallimmediately inform, in writing and including the report of inspection,the administration of the State whose flag the ship is entitled to fly(hereinafter called ‘flag administration’) or, when this is not possible,the Consul or, in his absence, the nearest diplomatic representative of
that State, of all the circumstances in which intervention was deemed
necessary. In addition, nominated surveyors or recognised organisationsresponsible for the issue of class certificates or certificates issued onbehalf of the flag State in accordance with the international conventionsshall alsobe no tified where relevant.
6. The provisions of this Directive shall be without prejudice to the
additional requirements of the Conventions concerning notification andreporting procedures related to port State control.
7. When exercising port State control under this Directive, all
possible efforts shall be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or
delayed. If a ship is unduly detained or delayed, the owner or operatorshall be entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. In anyinstance of alleged undue detention or delay the burden of proof shall liewith the owner or operator of the ship.
Article 9a
ProcedureapplicableintheabsenceofISMcertificates
1. Where the inspection reveals that the copy of the document of
compliance or the safety management certificate issued in accordance
with the International management code for the safe operation of ships
and for pollution prevention (ISM Code) are missing on board a vesselto which, within the Community, the ISM Code is applicable at the dateof the inspection, the competent authority shall ensure that the vessel isdetained.
2. Notwithstanding the absence of the documentation referred to in
paragraph 1, if the inspection finds no other deficiencies warrantingdetention the competent authority may lift the detention order in order toavoid port congestion. Whenever such a decision is taken, the competent1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 9
▼M4
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼M1
▼M1
authority shall immediately inform the competent authorities ofthe other
Member States thereof.
3. Member States shall take the measures necessary toensure that all
ships authorised to leave a port in a Member State under thecircumstances referred toin paragraph 2 shall be refused access toallports in the Community, except in the situations referred to in Article11(6), until the owner or operator of the vessel has demonstrated, to thesatisfaction of the competent authority of the Member State in which
detention was ordered, that the ship has valid certificates issued in
accordance with the ISM Code. Where deficiencies as referred to inArticle 9(2) are found and cannot be rectified in the port of detention,the relevant provisions of Article 11 shall also apply.
Article 10
Rightofappeal
1. The owner or the operator of a ship or his representative in the
Member State shall have a right of appeal against a detention decision orrefusal of access taken by the competent authority. An appeal shall notcause the detention or refusal of access to be suspended.
2. Member States shall establish and maintain appropriate procedures
for this purpose in accordance with their national legislation.
3. The competent authority shall properly inform the master of a ship
referred to in paragraph 1 of the right of appeal.
Article 11
Follow-uptoinspectionsanddetention
1. Where deficiencies as referred toin Article 9 (2) canno t be
rectified in the port of inspection, the competent authority of that
Member State may allow the ship concerned to proceed to the nearestappropriate repair yard available, as chosen by the master and theauthorities concerned, provided that the conditions determined by thecompetent authority of the flag State and agreed by that Member Stateare complied with. Such conditions shall ensure that the ship can
proceed without risk to the safety and health of passengers or crew, or
risk to other ships, or without there being an unreasonable threat of harmtothe marine enviro nment.
2. In the circumstances referred toin paragraph 1, the co mpetent
authority of the Member State in the port of inspection shall notify the
competent authority of the State where the repair yard is situated, the
parties mentioned in Article 9 (5) and any other authority as appropriateof all the conditions for the voyage.
3. The notification of the parties referred to in paragraph 2 shall be in
accordance with Annex 2 to the MOU.
The competent authority of a Member State receiving such notification
shall inform the notifying authority of the action taken.
4. Member States shall take measures toensure that ships referred to
in paragraph 1 which proceed to sea:
(i) without complying with the conditions determined by the competent
authority of any Member State in the port of inspection; or
(ii) which refuse to comply with the applicable requirements of the
Conventions by not calling into the indicated repair yard;
shall be refused access to any port within the Community, until the
owner or operator has provided evidence to the satisfaction of thecompetent authority of the Member State where the ship was founddefective that the ship fully complies with all applicable requirements ofthe Conventions.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 10
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼B
5. In the circumstances referred toin paragraph 4 (i), the co mpetent
authority of the Member State where the ship was found defective shallimmediately alert the competent authorities of all the other Member
States.
In the circumstances referred toin paragraph 4 (ii), the co mpetent
authority of the Member State in which the repair yard lies shall
immediately alert the competent authorities of all the other MemberStates.
Before denying entry, the Member State may request consultations with
the flag administration of the ship concerned.
6. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 4, access to a specific
port may be permitted by the relevant authority of that port State in theevent offorce majeure or overriding safety considerations, or to reduce
or minimize the risk of pollution or to have deficiencies rectified,
provided adequate measures to the satisfaction of the competent
authority of such Member State have been implemented by the owner,the operator or the master of the ship to ensure safe entry.
Article 12
Professional profileofinspectors
1. The inspections shall be carried out only by inspectors who fulfil
the qualification criteria specified in Annex VII.
2. When the required professional expertise cannot be provided by
the competent authority of the port State, the inspector of that competent
authority may be assisted by any person with the required expertise.
3. The inspectors carrying out port State control and the persons
assisting them shall have no commercial interest either in the port of
inspection or in the ships inspected, nor shall the inspectors be employedby or undertake work on behalf of non-governmental organizationswhich issue statutory and classification certificates or which carry outthe surveys necessary for the issue of those certificates to ships.
4. Each inspector shall carry a personal document in the form of an
identity card issued by his competent authority in accordance with thenational legislation, indicating that the inspector is authorized to carry
out inspections.
A common model for such an identity card shall be established in
accordance with the procedure in Article 19.
Article 13
Reportsfrompilotsandportauthorities
1. Pilots of Member States, engaged in berthing or unberthing ships
or engaged on ships bound for a port within a Member State, shallimmediately inform the competent authority of the port State or the
coastal State, as appropriate, whenever they learn in the course of their
normal duties that there are deficiencies which may prejudice the safenavigation of the ship, or which may pose a threat of harm to the marineenvironment.
2. If port authorities, when exercising their normal duties, learn that a
ship within their port has deficiencies which may prejudice the safety ofthe ship or poses an unreasonable threat of harm to the marineenvironment, such authority shall immediately inform the competent
authority of the port State concerned.
Article 14
Cooperation
1. Each Member State shall make provision for cooperation between
its competent authority, its port authorities and other relevant authoritiesor commercial organizations to ensure that its competent authority canobtain all relevant information on ships calling at its ports.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 11
▼M4
2. Member States shall maintain provisions for the exchange of
information and cooperation between their competent authority and thecompetent authorities of all other Member States and maintain the
established operational link between their competent authority, the
Commission and the Sirenac information system set up in St Malo,France.
For the purposes of carrying out the inspections referred to in Article
5(2) and Article 7, inspectors shall consult the public and privatedatabases relating to ship inspection accessible through the Equasisinformation system.
3. The information referred to in paragraph 2 shall be that specified in
Annex 4 to the MOU, and that required to comply with Article 15 of this
Directive.
Article 15
Releaseofinformation
1. The competent authority of each Member State shall take
necessary measures in order to ensure that information listed in Annex
VIII, Part I, concerning ships which have been detained in, or which aresubject to refusal of access to, a port of this Member State during theprevious month, is published at least every month.
2. The information listed in Annex VIII, Parts I and II, and the
information on changes, suspensionsand withdrawals ofclass referred to
in Article 15(3) of Directive 94/57/EC, shall be available in the Sirenacsystem. It shall be made public through the Equasis information system,as soon as possible after the inspection has been completed or thedetention has been lifted.
3. Member States and the Commission shall cooperate in order to
establish the appropriate technical arrangements referred to in paragraph
2.
4. Where appropriate, the Sirenac information system is amended in
order to implement the abovementioned requirements.
5. The provisions of this Article do not affect national legislation on
liability.
Article 16
Reimbursementofcosts
1. Should the inspections referred to in Articles 6 and 7 confirm or
reveal deficiencies in relation to the requirements of a Conventionwarranting the detention of a ship, all costs relating to the inspections inany normal accounting period shall be covered by the shipowner or theoperator or by his representative in the port State.
2. All costs relating to inspections carried out by the competent
authority of a Member State under the provisions of Article 11 (4) shallbe charged to the owner or operator of the ship.
2a. In the case of detention of a vessel for deficiencies or lack of
valid certificates as laid down in Article 9 and Annex VI, all costs
relating to the detention in port shall be borne by the owner or operatorof the ship.
3. The detention shall not be lifted until full payment has been made
or a sufficient guarantee has been given for the reimbursement of thecosts.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 12
▼B
▼M3
▼M4
▼M3
▼M4
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼M4
Article 17
Datatomonitorimplementation
Member States shall provide the Commission with the information listed
in Annex X at the intervals stated therein in that Annex.
Article 18
RegulatoryCommittee
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee set up
pursuant toArticle 12 o f Directive 93/75/EEC.
2. Where reference is made tothis paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 o f
Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of
Article 8 thereof.
The period laid down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be
set at three months.
3. The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure.
Article 19
Amendmentprocedure
This Directive may, without broadening its scope, be amended in
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18(2), in order to:
(a) adapt the obligations referred to in Article 5, except the figure of
25 % referred toin paragraph 1 thereo f, in Articles 6, 7, 7a, 7b, 8, 15and 17, and in the Annexes towhich these Articles refer, o n thebasis of the experience gained from the implementation of thisDirective and taking into account developments in the MOU.
(b) adapt the Annexes in order to take into account amendments which
have entered into force to the Conventions, Protocols, codes and
resolutions of relevant international organizations and to the MOU.
(c) adapt the dates in Article 2 in order to take into account amendments
which have entered into force to the international Conventions andtothe MOU referred toin the said Article with the exceptio n o f
Protocols to such Conventions.
Article 19a
Penalties
Member States shall lay down a system of penalties for the breach of
national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take allthe measures necessary toensure that tho se penalties are applied. Thepenalties thus provided shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Article 20
Implementation
1. Member States shall adopt the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to implement this Directive not later than 30 June1996 and shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
2. When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a
reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference onthe occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such areference shall be laid down by Member States.
3. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of
the provisions of national law which they have adopted in the fieldgoverned by this Directive.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 13
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼M1
▼M4
▼B
▼M4
4. In addition, the Commission shall inform the European Parliament
and the Council on a regular basis of progress in the implementation ofthe Directive within the Member States.
Article 21
This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following that of its
publication.
Article 22
This Directive is addressed tothe Member States.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 14
▼B
▼M2
ANNEX I
SHIPSTOBECONSIDEREDFORPRIORITYINSPECTION
(as referred toin Article 5(2))
I.Overridingfactors
Regardless of the value of the target factor, the following ships shall be
considered as an overriding priority for inspection.
1. Ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as having
deficiencies which may prejudice their safe navigation (pursuant to
Directive 93/75/EEC and Article 13 of this Directive).
2. Ships which have failed to comply with the obligations laid down in
Directive 93/75/EEC.
3. Ships which have been the subject of a report or notification by another
Member State.
4. Ships which have been the subject of a report or complaint by the master, a
crew member, or any person or organization with a legitimate interest in
the safe operation of the ship, shipboard living and working conditions or
the prevention of pollution, unless the Member State concerned deems the
report or complaint to be manifestly unfounded; the identity of the person
lodging the report or complaint must not be revealed to the master or the
shipowner of the ship concerned.
5. Ships which have been:
— involved in a collision, grounding or stranding on their way to the port,
— accused of an alleged violation of the provisions on discharge of
harmful substances or effluents,
— manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner whereby routing measures,
adopted by the IMO, or safe navigation practices and procedures have
not been followed, or
— otherwise operated in such a manner as to pose a danger to persons,
property or the environment.
6. Ships which have been suspended ►M3or withdrawn ◄from their class
for safety reasons in the course of the preceding six months.
II.Overall targetingfactor
The following ships shall be considered as priority for inspection.
1. Ships visiting a port of a Member State for the first time or after an
absence of 12 months or more. In applying these criteria Member States
shall also take into account those inspections which have been carried out
by members of the MOU. In the absence of appropriate data for this
purpose, Member States shall rely upon the available Sirenac data and
inspect those ships which have not been registered in the Sirenac
following the entry into force of that database on 1 January 1993.
2. Ships not inspected by any Member State within the previous six months.3. Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship's construction and
equipment, issued in accordance with the conventions, and the
classification certificates, have been issued by organisations which are
not recognised under the terms of Council Directive 94/57/EC.
4. Ships flying the flag of a State appearing in the black list as published in
the annual report of the MOU.
5. Ships which have been permitted to leave the port of a Member State on
certain conditions, such as:
(a) deficiencies tobe rectified befo re departure;
(b) deficiencies to be rectified at the next port of call;
(c) deficiencies tobe rectified within 14 days;
(d) deficiencies for which other conditions have been specified.If ship-related action has been taken and all deficiencies have been
rectified, this is taken intoacco unt.
6. Ships for which deficiencies have been recorded during a previous
inspection, according to the number of deficiencies.
7. Ships which have been detained in a previous port.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 15
▼M4
▼M4
8. Ships flying the flag of a country which has not ratified all relevant
international conventions referred to in Article 2 of this Directive.
9. Ships classed with classification society with deficiency ratio above
average.
10. Ships of the categories referred to in Annex V(A).11. Ships above 13 years old.
In determining the order of priority for the inspection of the ships listed
above, the competent authority shall take into account the overall target
factor displayed on the Sirenac information system, according to Annex I,
Section I, of the MOU. A higher target factor is indicative of a higher
priority. The overall target factor is the sum of the applicable target factor
values as defined within the framework of the MOU. Items 5, 6 and 7
shall only apply to inspections carried out in the last 12 months. The
overall target factor shall not be less than the sum of the values
established for items 3, 4, 8, 9, 10 and 11.
However, for the purpose of Article 7.4, the overall target factor shall not
take intoacco unt item 10.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 16
▼B
ANNEX II
LISTOFCERTIFICATESANDDOCUMENTS
(referred toin Article 6 (1))
1. International Tonnage Certificate (1969)
2. — Passenger Ship Safety Certificate,
— Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate,
— CargoShip Safety Equipment Certificate,— CargoShip Safety Radio telegraphy Certificate,— Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelephony Certificate;— CargoShip Safety RadioCertificate,
— Exemption certificate, including, where appropriate, the list of cargoes,— CargoShip Safety Certificate.
3. International Certificate of Fitness for Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk;
— Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk.
4. International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals
in Bulk;
— Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk.
5. International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate.6. International Pollution Prevention Certificate for the Carriage of Noxious
Liquid Substances in Bulk.
7. International Load Line Certificate (1966);
— International Load Line Exemption Certificate.
8. Oil record book, parts I and II.9. Cargo record book.
10. Minimum Safe Manning Document.
10a. Certificates issued in accordance with the STCW Convention.
11. Medical certificates, (see ILO Convention No 73 concerning Medical
Examination of Seafarers).
12. Stability information.
13. Copy of the Document of Compliance and the Safety Management
Certificate issued, in accordance with the International Management Code
for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (SOLAS,
Chapter IX).
14. Certificates as tothe ship's hull strength and machinery installatio ns issued
by the classification society in question (only to be required if the ship
maintains its class with a classification society).
15. Document of compliance with the special requirements for ships carrying
dangerous goods.
16. High speed craft safety certificate and permit too perate high speed craft.
17. Dangerous goods special list or manifest, or detailed stowage plan.18. Ship's log book with respect to the records of tests and drills and the log for
records of inspection and maintenance of lifesaving appliances and
arrangements.
19. Special purpose ship safety certificate.
20. Mobile offshore drilling unit safety certificate.
21. For oil tankers, the record of oil discharge monitoring and control system
for the last ballast voyage.
22. The muster list, fire control plan, and for passenger ships, a damage control
plan.
23. Shipboard oil pollution emergency plan.24. Survey report files (in case of bulk carriers and oil tankers).
25. Reports of previous port State control inspections.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 17
▼M3
▼B
▼M4
▼B
▼M2
▼B
▼M2
▼M2
26. For ro-ro passenger ships, information on the A/A-maximum ratio.
27. Document of authorization for the carriage of grain.28. Cargosecuring manual.
29. Garbage management plan and garbage record book.
30. Decision support system for masters of passenger ships.
31. SAR cooperation plan for passenger ships trading on fixed routes.
32. List of operational limitations for passenger ships.33. Bulk carrier booklet.34. Loading and unloading plan for bulk carners.
35. Certificate of insurance or any other financial security in respect of civil
liability for oil pollution damage (International Convention on Civil
Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992).1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 18
▼M3
▼M4
▼M2
ANNEX III
EXAMPLES OF ‘CLEAR GROUNDS’ FOR A MORE DETAILED
INSPECTION
(as referred toin Article 6(3))
1. Ships identified in Annex I, Part I and Part II, paragraphs II-3, II-4, II-5b, II-
5c►M4and II-8 ◄.
2. The oil record book has not been properly kept.
3. During examination of the certificates and other documentation, (see Article
6(1)(a) and (2)), inaccuracies have been revealed.
4. Indications that the crew members are unable to comply with the
requirements of Article 8 of Council Directive 94/58/EC of 22 November
1994 on the minimum level of training of seafarers(1).
5. Evidence of cargo and other operations not being conducted safely, or in
accordance with IMO guidelines, e.g. the content of oxygen in the inert-gas
main supply tothe cargotanks is abo ve the prescribed maximum level.
6. Failure of the master on an oil tanker to produce the record of the oil
discharge monitoring and control system for the last ballast voyage.
7. Absence of an up-to-date muster list, or crew members not aware of their
duties in the event of fire or an order to abandon the ship.
8. The emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancellation
procedures.
9. The absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the
conventions.
10. Excessively unsanitary conditions on board the ship.11. Evidence from the inspector's general impression and observations that
serious hull or structural deterioration or deficiencies exist that may place at
risk the structural, watertight or weathertight integrity of the ship.
12. Information or evidence that the master or crew is not familiar with essential
shipboard operations relating to the safety of ships or the prevention of
pollution, or that such operations have not been carried out.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 19
(1) OJ L 319, 12. 12. 1994, p. 28.
▼M2
ANNEX IV
PROCEDURESFORTHECONTROLOFSHIPS
(as referred toin Article 6(4))
1. Principles of safe manning (IMO Resolution A.481(XII) and Annexes which
are contents of Minimum Safe Manning Document (Annex 1) and Guidelines
for the Application of Principles of Safe Manning (Annex 2).
2. The provisions of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code.
3. International Labour Organisation (ILO) publication ‘Inspection of Labour
Conditions on Board Ship: Guidelines for procedures’.
4. Annex I, ‘Port State Control Procedures’ to the Paris MOU.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 20
▼M4
ANNEX V
A. CATEGORIES OF SHIPS SUBJECT TO EXPANDED INSPECTION (as
referred toin Article 7(1))
1. Gas and chemical tankers older than 10 years of age, as determined on the
basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
2. Bulk carriers older than 12 years of age, as determined on the basis of the
date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
3. Oil tankers with a gross tonnage of more than 3 000 gross tonnes and older
than 15 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction
indicated in the ship's safety certificates.
4. Passenger ships older than 15 years of age other than the passenger ships
referred to in Article 2(a) and (b) of Council Directive 1999/35/EC of 29
April 1999 on a system of mandatory surveys for the safe operation of
regular ro-ro ferry and high speed passenger craft services(1).
B. INFORMATION TO BE NOTIFIED TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
(as referred toin Article 7(3)(a))
A. name,B. flag,C. IMO identification number, if any,D. dead-weight tonnage,E. date of construction of the ship, as determined on the basis of the date
indicated in the ship's safety certificates,
F. for tankers:
F.a. configuration: single hull, single hull with SBT, double hull,
F.b. condition of the cargo and ballast tanks: full, empty, inerted,
F.c. volume and nature of the cargo,
G. probable time of arrival at the port of destination or pilot station, as
required by the competent authority,
H. planned duration of the call,I. planned operations at the port of destination (loading, unloading, other),J. planned statutory survey inspections and substantial maintenance and
repair work to be carried out whilst in the port of destination.
C. PROCEDURES RELATING TO EXPANDED INSPECTION OF CERTAIN
CATEGORIES OF SHIPS (as referred toin Article 7(5))
Subject to their practical feasibility or any constraints relating to the safety of
persons, the ship or the port, the following items at least must be part of an
expanded inspection. Inspectors must be aware that it may jeopardise the safe
execution of certain on-board operations, e.g. cargo handling, if tests having a
direct effect thereon are required to be carried out during such operations.
1. SHIPS IN GENERAL (categories in section A)
— Black-out and start of emergency generator,
— inspection of emergency lighting,
— operation of emergency fire-pump with two fire hoses connected to the
fire main-line,
— operation of bilge pumps,
— closing of watertight doors,
— lowering of one lifeboat to the water,— test of remote emergency stop for, e.g., boilers, ventilation and fuel
pumps,
— testing of steering gear including auxiliary steering gear,— inspection of emergency source of power to radio installations,
— inspection and, to the extent possible, test of engine room separator.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 21
(1) OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 1.
▼M4
2. GAS AND CHEMICAL TANKERS
In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be
considered as part of the expanded inspection forgasand chemical tankers:
— cargo tank monitoring and safety devices relating to temperature,
pressure and ullage,
— oxygen analysing and explosimeter devices, including their calibration.
Availability of chemical detection equipment (bellows) with an
appropriate number of suitable gas detection tubes for the specific
cargobeing carried,
— cabin escape sets giving suitable respiratory and eye protection for
every person on board (if required by the products listed on the
International Certificate of Fitness or Certificate of Fitness for the
Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk,
as applicable),
— check that the product being carried is listed in the International
Certificate of Fitness or Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of
Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk or Liquefied Gases in Bulk, as
applicable,
— the fixed fire-fighting installations on deck, whether they be foam or
dry chemical or other as required by the product carried.
3. BULK CARRIERS
In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be
considered as part of the expanded inspection for bulk carriers:
— possible corrosion of deck machinery mountings,
— possible deformation and/or corrosion of hatch covers,
— possible cracks or local corrosion in transverse bulkheads,— access tocargoho lds,
— verification that the following documents are on board, review them
and confirm that the flag State or classification society has endorsed
them:
(1) reports of structural surveys,
(2) condition evaluation reports,(3) thickness measurement reports,(4) descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A.744(18).
4. OIL TANKERS
In addition to the items listed under section 1, the following items are to be
considered as part of an expanded inspection of oil tankers:
— fixed deck foam system,
— fire-fighting equipment in general,— inspection of fire dampers in engine room, pump room and
accommodation,
— control of pressure of inert gas and oxygen content thereof,— ballast tanks: at least one of the ballast tankswithin the cargo area to be
examined from tank manhole/deck access in first instance and entered
if inspector establishes clear ground for further inspection,
— verification that the following documents are on board, review them
and confirm that the flag State or classification society has endorsed
them:
(1) reports of structural surveys,
(2) condition evaluation reports,(3) thickness measurement reports,(4) descriptive document referred to by IMO resolution A.744(18).
5. PASSENGER SHIPS NOT COVERED BY DIRECTIVE 1999/35/EC
In addition to the items listed under section C 1, the following items may
also be considered as part of the expanded inspection for passenger ships:
— testing of fire detection and alarm system,
— testing of proper closing of fire doors,— test of public address system,
— fire drill where, as a minimum, all sets of firemen's outfits must be
demonstrated and part of the catering crew take part,1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 22
▼M4
— demonstration that key crew members are acquainted with the damage
control plan.
If deemed appropriate, the inspection may be continued while the ship is
on passage to or from the port in the Member State, with the consent of the
ship's master or the operator. Inspectors must not obstruct the operation of
the ship, nor must they induce situations that, in the master's judgement,
could endanger the safety of the passengers, the crew and the ship.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 23
▼B
ANNEX VI
CRITERIAFORDETENTIONOFASHIP
(as referred toin Article 9 (3))
Introduction
Before determining whether deficiencies found during an inspection warrant
detention of the ship involved, the inspector must apply the criteria mentioned
below in sections 1 and 2.
Section 3 includes examples of deficiencies that may for themselves warrant
detention of the ship involved (see Article 9 (3)).
Where the ground for detention is the result of accidental damage suffered on the
ship's voyage to a port, no detention order shall be issued, provided that:
1. due account has been given to the requirements contained in Regulation I/
11(c) of SOLAS 74 regarding notification to the flag State administration, the
nominated surveyor or the recognised organisation responsible for issuing the
relevant certificate;
2. prior to entering a port, the master or shipowner has submitted to the port State
control authority details on the circumstances of the accident and the damage
suffered and information about the required notification of the flag State
administration;
3. appropriate remedial action, to the satisfaction of the Authority, is being taken
by the ship; and
4. the authority has ensured, having been notified of the completion of the
remedial action, that deficiencies which were clearly hazardous to safety,
health or the environment have been rectified.
1.Maincriteria
When exercising his professional judgement as to whether or not a ship
should be detained the inspector must apply the following criteria:
Timing:
Ships which are unsafe to proceed to sea must be detained upon the first
inspection irrespective of how much time the ship will stay in port.
Criterion:The ship is detained if its deficiencies are sufficiently serious to merit an
inspector returning to satisfy himself that they have been rectified before
the ship sails.
The need for the inspector to return to the ship is a measure of the
seriousness of the deficiencies. However, it does not impose such an
obligation for every case. It implies that the authority must verify one way
or another, preferably by a further visit, that the deficiencies have been
rectified before departure.
2.Applicationofmaincriteria
When deciding whether the deficiencies found in a ship are sufficiently
serious to merit detention the inspector must assess whether:
1. the ship has relevant, valid documentation;
2. the ship has the crew required in the Minimum Safe Manning
Document.
During inspection the inspector must further assess whether the ship and/or
crew is able to:
3. navigate safely throughout the forthcoming voyage;
4. safely handle, carry and monitor the condition of the cargo throughout
the forthcoming voyage;
5. operate the engine room safely throughout the forthcoming voyage;6. maintain proper propulsion and steering throughout the forthcoming
voyage;
7. fight fires effectively in any part of the ship if necessary during the
forthcoming voyage;1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 24
▼M2
▼B
▼B
8. abandon ship speedily and safely and effect rescue if necessary during
the forthcoming voyage;
9. prevent pollution of the environment throughout the forthcoming
voyage;
10. maintain adequate stability throughout the forthcoming voyage;
11. maintain adequate watertight integrity throughout the forthcoming
voyage;
12. communicate in distress situations if necessary during the forthcoming
voyage;
13. provide safe and healthy conditions on board throughout the
forthcoming voyage;
14. provide the maximum of information in case of accident.
If the answer to any of these assessments is negative, taking into account all
deficiencies found, the ship must be strongly considered for detention. A
combination of deficiencies of a less serious nature may also warrant the
detention of the ship.
3. To assist the inspector in the use of these guidelines, there follows a list of
deficiencies, grouped under relevant conventions and/or codes, which are
considered of such a serious nature that they may warrant the detention of
the ship involved. This list is not intended to be exhaustive.
However, the detainable deficiencies in the area of STCW 78 listed under
item 3.8 below are the only grounds for detention under this Convention.
3.1. General
►M4The lack of valid certificates and documents ◄as required by the
relevant instruments. However, ships flying the flag of States not party to a
Convention (relevant instrument) or not having implemented another
relevant instrument, are not entitled to carry the certificates provided for by
the Convention or other relevant instrument. Therefore, absence of the
required certificates should not by itself constitute reason to detain these
ships; however, in applying the ‘no more favourable treatment’ clause,
substantial compliance with the provisions is required before the ship sails.
3.2.Areas under the Solas Convention (References are given in brackets)
1. Failure of the proper operation of propulsion and other essential
machinery, as well as electrical installations.
2. Insufficient cleanliness of engine room, excess amount of oily-water
mixtures in bilges, insulation of piping including exhaust pipes in
engine room contaminated by oil, improper operation of bilge pumping
arrangements.
3. Failure of the proper operation of emergency generator, lighting,
batteries and switches.
4. Failure of the proper operation of the main and auxiliary steering gear.
5. Absence, insufficient capacity or serious deterioration of personal life-
saving appliances, survival craft and launching arrangements.
6. Absence, non-compliance or substantial deterioration of fire detection
system, fire alarms, firefighting equipment, fixed fire-extinguishing
installation, ventilation valves, fire dampers, quick-closing devices to
the extent that they cannot comply with their intended use.
7. Absence, substantial deterioration or failure of proper operation of the
cargo deck area fire protection on tankers.
8. Absence, non-compliance or serious deterioration of lights, shapes or
sound signals.
9. Absence or failure of the proper operation of the radio equipment for
distress and safety communication.
10. Absence or failure of the proper operation of navigation equipment,
taking the provisions of Solas Regulation V/12(o) into account.
11. Absence of corrected navigational charts, and/or all other relevant
nautical publications necessary for the intended voyage, taking into
account that electronic charts may be used as a substitute for the charts.
12. Absence of non-sparking exhaust ventilation for cargo pump rooms
(Solas Regulation II-2/59.3.1).1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 25
▼M4
▼B
▼M2
▼B
▼M2
13. Serious deficiency in the operational requirements, as described in
Section 5.5 of Annex I to the MOU.
14. Number, composition or certification of crew not corresponding with
the safe manning document.
15. Failure to carry out the enhanced survey programme in accordance
with SOLAS 74, Chapter XI, Regulation 2.
16. Absence or failure of a VDR, when its use is compulsory.
3.3.Areas under the IBC Code (References are given in brackets)
1. Transport of a substance not mentioned in the Certificate of Fitness or
missing cargo information (16.2).
2. Missing or damaged high-pressure safety devices (8.2.3).3. Electrical installations not intrinsically safe or not corresponding to code
requirements (10.2.3).
4. Sources of ignition in hazardous locations referred to in 10.2 (11.3.15).
5. Contraventions of special requirements (15).6. Exceeding of maximum allowable cargo quality per tank (16.1).7. Insufficient heat protection for sensitive products (16.6).
3.4.Areas under the IGC Code (References are given in brackets)
1. Transport of a substance not mentioned in the Certificate of Fitness or
missing cargo information (18.1).
2. Missing closing devices for accommodations or service spaces (3.2.6).3. Bulkhead not gastight (3.3.2).
4. Defective air locks (3.6).
5. Missing or defective quick-closing valves (5.6).6. Missing or defective safety valves (8.2).7. Electrical installations not intrinsically safe or not corresponding to
code requirements (10.2.4).
8. Ventilators in cargo area not operable (12.1).
9. Pressure alarms for cargo tanks not operable (13.4.1).
10. Gas detection plant and/or toxic gas detection plant defective (13.6).11. Transport of substances to be inhibited without valid inhibitor
certificate (17/19).
3.5.Areas under the Load Lines Convention
1. Significant areas of damage or corrosion, or pitting of plating and
associated stiffening in decks and hull affecting seaworthiness or
strength to take local loads, unless proper temporary repairs fora voyage
to a port for permanent repairs have been carried out.
2. A recognized case of insufficient stability.3. The absence of sufficient and reliable information, in an approved form,
which by rapid and simple means, enables the master toarrange fo r the
loading and ballasting of his ship in such a way that a safe margin of
stability is maintained at all stages and at varying conditions of the
voyage, and that the creation of any unacceptable stresses in the ship's
structure are avoided.
4. Absence, substantial deterioration or defective closing devices, hatch
closing arrangements and watertight doors.
5. Overloading.6. Absence of draft mark or draft mark impossible to read.
3.6.Areas under the Marpol Convention, Annex I (References are given in
brackets)
1. Absence, serious deterioration or failure of proper operation of the oily-
water filtering equipment, the oil discharge monitoring and control
system or the 15 ppm alarm arrangements.
2. Remaining capacity of slop and/or sludge tank insufficient for the
intended voyage.
3. Oil Record Book not available (20 (5)).1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 26
▼M4
▼B
▼B
4. Unauthorized discharge bypass fitted.
5. Survey report file missing or not in conformity with Regulation
13G(3)(b) of the Marpol Convention.
3.7.Areas under the Marpol Convention, Annex II (References are given in
brackets)
1. Absence of the P& A Manual.
2. Cargo is not categorized (3 (4)).3. No cargo record book available (9 (6)).4. Transport of oil-like substances without satisfying the requirements or
without an appropriately amended certificate (14).
5. Unauthorized discharge bypass fitted.
3.8.Areas under the STCW Convention
1. Failure of seafarers to hold a certificate, to have an appropriate
certificate, to have a valid dispensation or to provide documentary proof
that an application for an endorsement has been submitted to the flag
State administration.
2. Failure to comply with the applicable safe manning requirements of the
flag state administration.
3. Failure of navigational or engineering watch arrangements to conform to
the requirements specified for the ship by the flag State administration.
4. Absence in a watch of a person qualified to operate equipment essential
to safe navigation, safety radio communications or the prevention of
marine pollution.
5. Failure to provide proof of professional proficiency for the duties
assigned to seafarers for the safety of the ship and the prevention of
pollution.
6. Inability to provide for the first watch at the commencement of a voyage
and for subsequent relieving watches persons who are sufficiently rested
and otherwise fit for duty.
3.9.Areas under the ILO Conventions
1. Insufficient food for voyage to next port.
2. Insufficient potable water for voyage to next port.3. Excessively unsanitary conditions on board.
4. No heating in accommodation of a ship operating in areas where
temperatures may be excessively low.
5. Excessive garbage, blockage by equipment or cargo or otherwise unsafe
conditions in passageways/accommodations.
3.10.Areas which may not warrant a detention, but where e.g. cargo operations
have to be suspended.
Failure of the proper operation (or maintenance) of inert gas system, cargo-
related gear or machinery are considered sufficient grounds for stopping
cargo operation.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 27
▼M4
▼B
▼M2
▼B
▼B
ANNEX VII
MINIMUMCRITERIAFORINSPECTORS
►C1(as referred toin Article 12 (1)) ◄
1. The inspector must be authorized to carry out port-State control by the
competent authority of the Member State.
2. Either:
— The inspector must have completed a minimum of one year's service as a
flag-State inspector dealing with surveys and certification in accordance
with the Conventions,
— and be in possession of:
(a) a certificate of competency as master, enabling that person to take
command of a ship of 1 600 GT or more (see STCW, Regulation II/2);
or
(b) a certificate of competency as chief engineer enabling him to take up
that task on board a ship whose main power plant has a power equal or
superior to 3 000 KW, (see STCW, Regulation III/2); or
(c) have passed an examination as a naval architect, mechanical engineer
or an engineer related to the maritime fields and worked in that
capacity for at least five years,
— The inspectors mentioned under (a) and (b) must have served for a period
of not less than five years at sea as officer in the deck- or engine-
department respectively.
Or:
The inspector must:— hold a relevant university degree or an equivalent training, and
— have been trained and qualified at a school for ship safety inspectors, and— have served at least twoyears as a flag-State inspecto r dealing with
surveys and certification in accordance with the Conventions.
3. Ability to communicate orally and in writing with seafarers in the language
most commonly spoken at sea.
4. Appropriate knowledge of the provisions of the international Conventions and
of the relevant procedures on port-State control.
5. Inspectors not fulfilling the above criteria are also accepted if they are
employed by the competent authority of a Member State for port-State control
at the date of adoption of this Directive.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 28
▼M4
ANNEX VIII
Publication of information related to detentions and inspections in ports of
Member States (as referred toin Article 15)
I. Information published in accordance with Article 15(1) must include the
following:
— name of the ship,
— IMO number,
— type of ship,
— tonnage (gt),— year of construction as determined on the basis of the date indicated in the
ship's safety certificates,
— name and address of the shipowner or operator of the ship,
— in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and
address of the charterer responsible for the selection of the vessel and the
type of charter,
— flag State,— the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which
has/have issued tothis ship the class certificates, if any,
— the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party
which has/have issued tothis ship certificates in acco rdance with the
applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates
delivered,
— port and date of the last expanded inspection stating, where appropriate,
whether a detention was ordered,
— port and date of the last special survey and the name of the organisation
which carried out the survey,
— number of detentions during the 24 previous months,— country and port of detention,
— date when the detention was lifted,
— duration of detention, in days,— number of deficiencies found and the reasons for detention, in clear and
explicit terms,
— description of the measures taken by the competent authority and, where
relevant, by the classification society as a follow-up to detention,
— if the ship has been refused access to any port within the Community, the
reasons for such measure in clear and explicit terms,
— indication, where relevant, of whether the classification society or any
other private body that carried out the survey has a responsibility in
relation to the deficiencies which, alone or in combination, led to
detention,
— description of the measures taken in the case of a ship which has been
allowed to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard, or which has
been refused access to a Community port.
II. Information concerning ships inspected made public in accordance with
Article 15(2) must include the following:
— name of the ship,
— IMO number,— type of ship,— tonnage (gt),— year of construction,
— name and address of shipowner or operator of the ship,
— in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, the name and
address of the charterer responsible for the selection of the vessel and the
type of charter,
— flag State,— the classification society or classification societies, where relevant, which
has/have issued tothis ship the class certificates, if any,1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 29
▼M4
— the classification society or classification societies and/or any other party
which has/have issued tothis ship certificates in acco rdance with the
applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates
delivered,
— country, port and date of inspection,— number and nature of deficiencies.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 30
▼M4
ANNEX IX
InspectionreportdrawnupinaccordancewithArticle 8
The inspection report must contain at least the following items.
I.General
1. Competent authority that wrote the report2. Date and place of inspection
3. Name of the ship inspected
4. Flag5. Type of ship
6. IMO number
7. Call sign8. Tonnage (gt)
9. Deadweight tonnage (where relevant)
10. Year of construction as determined on the basis of the date indicated in
the ship's safety certificates
11. The classification society or classification societies, where relevant,
which has/have issued tothis ship the class certificates, if any
12. The classification society or classification societies and/or any other
party which has/have issued tothis ship certificates in acco rdance with
the applicable conventions on behalf of the flag State
13. Name and address of the ship's owner or the operator14. Name and address of the charterer responsible for the selection of the
vessel and type of charter in the case of ships carrying liquid or solid
cargoes in bulk
15. Final date of writing the inspection report
16. Indication that detailed information on an inspection or a detention may
be subject topublicatio n.
II.Information relating to inspection
1. Certificates issued in application of the relevant international conventions,
authority or organisation that issued the certificate(s) in question,
including the date of issue and expiry
2. Parts or elements of the ship that were inspected (in the case of more
detailed or expanded inspection)
3. Type of inspection (inspection, more detailed inspection, expanded
inspection)
4. Nature of the deficiencies5. Measures taken.
III.Additional information in the event of detention
1. Date of detention order
2. Date of lifting the detention order3. Nature of the deficiencies warranting the detention order (references to
Conventions, if relevant)
4. Information on the last intermediate or annual survey
5. Indication, where relevant, of whether the classification society or any
other private body that carried out the survey has a responsibility in
relation to the deficiencies which, alone or in combination, led to
detention
6. Measures taken.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 31
▼M4
ANNEX X
Dataprovidedinthecontextofmonitoringimplementationinapplicationof
Article17
1. Every year Member States must provide the Commission with the following
data for the preceding year by 1 April at the latest.
1.1. Number of inspectors acting on their behalf in the framework of port
State control of shipping.
This information must be communicated to the Commission using the
following model table.
This information must be provided at national level and for each port ofthe Member State concerned. For the purposes of this Annex, a port is
taken to mean an individual port and the geographical area covered by an
inspector or team of inspectors, comprising several individual ports where
appropriate. The same inspector may work in more than one port/
geographical area.
1.2. Total number of individual ships that entered their ports at national level.
2. Member States must either:
(a) provide the Commission every six months with a list of movements of
individual ships, other than regular ferry services, that entered their ports,
containing the IMO number of the ships and the date of arrival; or
alternatively
(b) provide to Sirenac the IMO numbers and the date of arrival of the ships,
other than regular ferry services, that daily entered their ports.
Member States must provide the Commission with the list of regular ferry
services referred to in points (a) and (b), not later than six months following
the implementation of this Directive, and thereafter each time changes take
place in such services.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 32
▼M4
ANNEX XI
A. CATEGORIES OF SHIPS SUBJECT TO REFUSAL OF ACCESS TO
COMMUNITY PORTS (as referred toin Article 7b(1))
1. Gas and chemical tankers.
2. Bulk carriers.
3. Oil tankers.4. Passenger ships.
B. PROCEDURES RELATING TO REFUSAL OF ACCESS TO COMMU-
NITY PORTS (as referred toin Article 7b(2))
1. If the conditions described in Article 7b are met, the competent authority
of the port in which the ship is detained for the second or third time, as
appropriate, must inform the captain and the owner or the operator of the
ship in writing of the access refusal order served on the ship.
The competent authority must also inform the flag State administration, the
classification society concerned, the other Member States, the Commis-
sion, the Centre administratif des affaires maritimes and the MOU
Secretariat.
The access refusal order will take effect as soon as the ship has been
authorised to leave the port after the deficiencies leading to the detention
have been remedied.
2. In order to have the access refusal order lifted, the owner or the operator
must address a formal request to the competent authority of the Member
State that imposed the access refusal order. This request must be
accompanied by a certificate from the flag State administration showing
that the shipfully conforms to the applicable provisionsof the international
conventions. The request for the lifting of the access refusal order must
also be accompanied, where appropriate, by a certificate from the
classification society which has the ship in class showing that the ship
conforms to the class standards stipulated by that society.
3. The access refusal order may only be lifted following a re-inspection of the
ship at an agreed port by inspectors of the competent authority of the
Member State that imposed the access refusal order and if evidence is
provided to the satisfaction of this Member State that the vessel fully
complies with the applicable requirements of the International Conven-
tions.
If the agreed port is located within the Community, the competent
authority of the Member State of the port of destination may, with the
agreement of the competent authority of the Member State that imposed
the access refusal order, authorise the ship to proceed to the port of
destination in question, forthe sole purpose of verifying that the ship meets
the conditions specified in paragraph 2.
The re-inspection shall consist of an expanded inspection that must cover
at least the relevant items of Annex V, section C.
All costs of this expanded inspection will be borne by the owner or the
operator.
4. If the results of the expanded inspection satisfy the Member State in
accordance with paragraph 2, the access refusal order must be lifted. The
owner or the operator of the ship must be informed thereof in writing.
The competent authority must also notify its decision in writing to the flag
State administration, the classification society concerned, the other
Member States, the Commission, the Centre administratif des affaires
maritimes and the MOU Secretariat.
5. Information relating to ships that have been refused access to Community
ports must be made available in the Sirenac system and published in
conformity with the provisions of Article 15 and of Annex VIII.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 33
▼M4
ANNEX XII
International and Community requirements concerning voyage data
recorder systems
Ships in the following classes must, inasmuch as they call at a port of a Member
State of the Community, be fitted with a voyage data recorder system meeting the
performance standards of IMO Resolution A.861(20) and the testing standards set
by Standard No 61996 of the International Electronics Commission (IEC):
— passenger ships built on or after 1 July 2002,
— ro-ro passenger ships built before 1 July 2002, not later than the first survey
on or after 1 July 2002,
— passenger ships other than ro-ro passenger ships, built before 1 July 2002, not
later than 1 January 2004,
— ships other than passenger ships, of 3 000 grosstonnage and upwards, built on
or after 1 July 2002.
Ships in the following classes and built before 1 July 2002 must, inasmuch as
they call at a port of a Member State of the Community, be fitted with a voyage
data recorder system meeting the relevant IMO standards:
— cargo ships of 20000 gross tonnage and upwards, not later than the date fixed
by the IMO or, in the absence of a decision in IMO, not later than 1 January
2007,
— cargo ships of 3000 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 20000 gross
tonnage, not later than the date fixed by the IMO or, in the absence of a
decision in IMO, not later than 1 January 2008.1995L0021 — EN — 22.01.2002 — 003.001 — 34