Proposal for a Directive …/…/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of […] on port State control (Recast) {SEC(2005) 1499}
Date: 2005-11-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: harbour installation, international standard, maritime transport, prevention of pollution, transport safety, working conditions

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 23.11.2005 
COM(2005) 588 final 

2005/0238 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE …/…/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE 
COUNCIL 

of […] 

on port State control 

(Recast) 

(presented by the Commission) 

{SEC(2005) 1499} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

1) 

110 

•  Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

1) 

Recast Directive 95/21/EC on port State control.  

This  text  has  been  the  subject  of  numerous  amendments  which  have  made  it 
particularly  complex.  The  recasting  will  clarify  the  provisions  of  the  Directive  to 
make  them  more  understandable,  in  line  with  the  "better  law-making"  policy 
promoted by the Commission. 

2) 

Reinforce and improve the effectiveness of port State control. 

The  latter  objective  results  from  a  number  of  undertakings  entered  into  by  the 
Commission and requests made by the other institutions, in particular as a result of 
the  PRESTIGE  accident  in  November  2002.  As  early  as  3  December  2002,  the 
Commission  adopted  a  Communication  (COM(2002)  681  final  of  3.12.2002)  on 
improving  safety  at  sea  in  response  to  the  PRESTIGE  accident,  followed  on 
6 December 2002 by Council conclusions concerning ship safety and the prevention 
of  pollution  in  which  the  Council  invites  the  Commission  to  present  as  soon  as 
possible  a  proposal  aimed  at  reinforcing  port  State  control  procedures.  Finally,  it 
should be emphasised that in its Resolution adopted on 27 April 2004 following the 
work  of  the  temporary  committee  on  improving  safety  at  sea  (the  MARE 
Committee),  the  European  Parliament  also  called  for  an  improvement  and 
intensification of ship inspections in European Union ports. 

•  General context 

The existing regulations are contained in Directive 95/21/EC and its successive amendments. 
Part  of  the  objective  of  the  proposed  measure  is  precisely  to  recast  these  elements  in  a 
consolidated text. 

In addition, the proposal aims to: 

– 

– 

amend  certain  provisions,  with  a  view  to  either  simplification  or  clarification  (for 
example in the case of the expanded inspection programme) or reinforcement (this is 
the case in particular with provisions on the role of pilots in detecting faults and rules 
concerning the banning of substandard ships), 

add  a  number  of  new  provisions  in  areas  which  were  not  covered  by  port  State 
control, such as maritime safety, in order to take account of recent developments in 
international and Community law. 

•  Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 

Directive 95/21/EC. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
•  Consistency with the other policies and objectives of the Union 

The  reinforcement  of  ship  inspections  will  have  a  direct  environmental  impact  by  reducing 
the risks of accidents and consequently of the pollution that such accidents may cause. 

Moreover, the measure will have positive economic repercussions as a result of this reduction 
of  the  risks  of  accidents  and  pollution.  These  changes  are  also  designed  to  establish  fairer 
competition conditions for maritime transport operators by reducing unfair competition from 
substandard  vessels,  which  will  be  the  subject  of  stricter  penalties,  and  by  granting  the 
operators of quality vessels the benefit of less rigorous inspections. 

Finally, the measure contributes to European Union social policy through the monitoring of 
onboard  living  and  working  conditions  and  the  introduction  of  stricter  rules  regarding  the 
following up of complaints made by seamen. 

2) 

CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

•  Consultation of interested parties 

Consultation methods, main sectors targeted and general profile of respondents 

In May 2004 and then in February 2005, the Commission held a twin series of consultation 
meetings  with  the  representatives  of  the  Member  States  and  the  shipping  industry,  on  the 
basis  of  working  documents  from  its  services  containing  a  detailed  list  of  questions  on  the 
proposed changes. 

Summary of responses and how they have been taken into account 

The results of the consultations and impact studies carried out have confirmed: 

– 

– 

– 

the added value of carrying out a complete recasting of the existing text to meet the 
need for clarity and regulatory simplification, 

the  need  to  tighten  up  measures  concerning  those  vessels  posing  the  greatest  risks, 
particularly through the strengthening of the banning regime, 

the importance of establishing the bases of a new inspection system ensuring that no 
vessel  can  evade  inspection  and  that  the  inspection  intervals  are  differentiated  in 
favour  of  vessels  of  a  high  standard  so  as  not  to  adversely  affect  their 
competitiveness through unjustified constraints. 

The data collected and the detailed conclusions of the impact assessment are contained in the 
attached document SEC …/… . 

•  Collection and use of expertise 

Scientific/expertise domains concerned 

Maritime safety, safeguarding of human life, environmental protection and security. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Methodology used 

Commission  participation  in  Paris  Memorandum  groups  of  experts,  studies  entrusted  to  the 
European Maritime Safety Agency on certain points (example: overview of the application of 
the  possibility  of  refused  access  to  ports  since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Directive, 
examination of the possible impacts of the new inspection regime), collection and analysis of 
information obtained from the database of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on port 
State control. 

Main organisations/experts consulted 

Work  of  the  European  Parliament  temporary  committee  on  the  improvement  of  maritime 
safety  following  the  sinking  of  the  tanker  Prestige  in  2002  (conclusions  of  the  "MARE" 
Committee). 

Experts from EMSA and the Paris Memorandum. 

Summary of advice received and used 

The existence of potentially serious risks with irreversible consequences has been mentioned. 
The existence of such risks is universally accepted. 

The  advice  of  the  Paris  Memorandum  experts  helped  to  determine  the  scale  of  the  problem 
and  to  isolate  possible  practical  difficulties  on  subjects  such  as  the  inspection  of  ships  at 
anchor. The work of the group of experts on the introduction of the new inspection regime, in 
which the Commission participated with the assistance of the Agency, allowed the broad lines 
of the future inspection regime to be determined.  

The studies carried out by EMSA have revealed the shortcomings of the existing legislation, 
particularly those concerning the application of existing measures on refusal of access which 
have led to the proposed tightening up of the regime on this point. The experience gained by 
EMSA  in  managing  the  database  on  inspections  of  ro-ro  passenger  ships  (under 
Directive 99/35/EC)  has  made  it  possible  to  propose  a  simplification  and  harmonisation  of 
similar provisions in the two Directives. 

Methods used to make the results of these expert opinions available to the public 

The  expert  opinions  are  described  in  the  impact  assessment.  Moreover,  the  Internet  sites  of 
the  Paris  Memorandum  (http://www.parismou.org/)  and  EMSA  (http://www.emsa.eu.int/) 
contain information on the application of the port State control regime (black lists of banned 
ships, black list of flags whose ships are most frequently detained). 

•  Impact assessment 

The  data  collected  and  the  detailed  conclusions  of  the  impact  study  are  contained  in  the 
attached document SEC ../.. , which is summarised below: 

Option 1: No action  

The present arrangements are maintained. However, the status quo does not meet the demands 
made  by  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  or  the  undertakings  made  by  the 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
Commission following the PRESTIGE accident. It obliges Member States to apply conditions 
which have been overtaken by developments in international law or the situation within the 
EU. The balance sheet is therefore negative from an environmental and social point of view. 
From  an  economic  point  of  view,  although  there  are  no  extra  administrative  costs  for  the 
authorities,  this  option  allows  the  unfair  competition  suffered  by  quality  shipowners  from 
substandard ships to persist. 

Option 2: Resolve the problem through increased cooperation between Member States. 

Cooperation between Member States, whether directly or through the Paris Memorandum, is 
legally conceivable only in areas not already covered by the Directive. This could, however, 
lead  to  a  divergence  between  Community  rules  and  the  procedures  applied  under  these 
intergovernmental  agreements  which  would  be  extremely  detrimental  to  the  effective  and 
harmonised application of port State control. The social, environmental and economic impacts 
would therefore be negative, particularly as some Member States are not parties to the Paris 
Memorandum. 

Option 3: Simplification and improvement of the existing legislation  

Simply  adopting  a  technical  adaptation  of  the  Directive  has  the  advantage  of  leaving  the 
existing  framework  in  place  and  proposing  only  targeted  changes  to  meet  identified  needs. 
The environmental, social and economic costs would therefore be low. However, its benefits 
are less than the more ambitious approach described in Option 4, particularly at the economic 
level, since although it tightens up sanctions on substandard vessels by making it easier to ban 
ships, it does not fully meet the objective of promoting high quality maritime transport. 

Option 4: Modification of the existing regime 

This  would  involve  replacing  the  present  regime  based  on  a  quantitative  approach  (25%  of 
ships inspected by Member State) by a more qualitative and global approach at EU level. The 
new inspection system would be more cost effective by concentrating inspection resources on 
high risk ships and relaxing inspections of vessels  of  a high standard, which would provide 
the environmental, social and economic advantages without the drawbacks. 

The impact assessment is contained in the Commission legislative and work programme, the 
report of which is available on the Commission's Internet site:  

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/impact/index_en.htm." 

3) 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Summary of the proposed measures 

It is proposed to: 

– 

– 

recast Directive 95/21/EC on port State control and its successive amendments in a 
single text, 

make  a  number  of  amendments  in  order  to  update,  complement  and  reinforce  the 
Directive with a view to improving safety and security at sea, and the protection of 
seamen and the environment. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
•  Legal basis 

Article 80(2) of the Treaty. 

•  Principle of subsidiarity 

The principle of subsidiarity applies insofar as the proposal does not affect an area where the 
Community has exclusive competence. 

The  objectives  of  the  proposal  cannot  be  achieved  to  a  sufficient  extent  by  the  action  of 
Member States for the following reasons. 

Individual  action  by  the  Member  States  is  by  its  nature  incompatible  with  the  objectives  of 
port  State  control  which  seeks  to  ensure  that  in  a  particular  geographical  region,  onboard 
inspections are carried out in a harmonised way. 

Moreover,  one  of  the  objectives  of  action  at  regional  level  is  to  reduce  costs  and  optimise 
through  coordinated  action  the  resources  needed  for  an  effective  control  of  ships.  Less 
rigorous application of port State control in a particular Member State would increase safety 
risks and might lead to the appearance of ports of convenience thus creating an unacceptable 
distortion of competition within the Community. 

The objectives of the proposal can be achieved more effectively through Community action 
for the following reasons. 

The proposal reinforces the provisions of an existing Directive.  

Community action guarantees a harmonised application of inspection procedures in particular 
through the establishment of qualification standards and training programmes for inspectors, 
the sharing of information between Member States via a common information system and the 
following  up  of  measures  from  one  Member  State to  another  (for  example,  in  the  matter  of 
refusal of access).  

The scope of the existing Directive is unchanged. 

The proposal therefore conforms to the principle of subsidiarity. 

•  Principle of proportionality 

The proposal conforms to the principle of proportionality for the following reasons. 

The precise and detailed nature of the measures contained in the proposal is essential for the 
establishment of uniform inspection rules in the European Union. 

The proposal combines greater effectiveness in removing substandard ships with better use of 
existing resources, while penalising reputable operators as little as possible.. 

•  Choice of instruments 

Proposed instrument(s): Directive. 

Other instruments would not have been adequate for the following reasons. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
This is primarily a question of recasting an existing Directive. Moreover, self-regulation is not 
a  possibility  since  the  objective  of  port  State  control  is  for  the  public  authorities  to  check 
compliance  with  binding  safety  standards  and  to  penalise  failure  to  do  so  in  a  uniform  and 
proportionate manner. A recommendation is excluded, since it would not make it possible to 
fix binding objectives and require compliance therewith by the Member States.  

4) 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

The proposal has no budgetary implications for the Community. 

5) 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  

•  Simulation, pilot phase and transitional period 

The proposal has been or will be the subject of a transitional period. 

•  Simplification 

The  proposal  introduces  a  simplification  of  the  legislative  framework,  of  the  administrative 
procedures applying to the public authorities (whether national or European). 

In accordance with the objectives of European Union policy on better law-making, a number 
of improvements have been made in the presentation of the text: repeated or cross-references 
to other provisions in the text have been kept to a minimum. Moreover, in order to improve 
the  legibility  of  the  text,  the  provisions  concerning  procedures  or  technical  details  of 
inspections have been consigned to the Annex, to ensure that the operative part contains only 
the principles, objectives and essential elements. 

For reasons of clarity, and having regard to the very considerable number of amendments of 
varying degrees of importance made in the recasting exercise, the main amendments proposed 
are set out below in a thematic form according to objective. 

The  simplification  results  from  the  removal  of  certain  obligations  considered  to  be  obsolete 
(for example procedures applicable where no ISM certificates are carried onboard), and from 
harmonisation with procedures and tools put in place under other Directives (harmonisation of 
checks  for  ro-ro  passenger  ships  with  the  expanded  inspections  provided  for  under 
Directive 95/21/EC). 

The  proposal  forms  part  of  the  Commission  programme  updating  and  simplifying  the 
Community acquis. 

•  Review/revision/sunset clause 

The proposal contains a revision clause. 

•  Legislative recasting 

The proposal involves a recasting of the legislative provisions in force. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
•  European Economic Area 

This  draft  Act  concerns  a  field  covered  by  the  EEA  Agreement  and  should  therefore  be 
extended to the European Economic Area. 

•  Detailed explanation of the proposal by Article 

(1) 

Ensuring more effective application of the system of controls in ports and anchorages 
of the European Union (Articles 10 and 13) 

As regards ports, the primary objective is to ensure that port State control is carried 
out  in  a  uniform  manner  in  ports  of  all  States  of  the  European  Union.  Thus  the 
arrangements  for  banning  a  vessel  will  be  based  on  detentions  enforced  in  all 
Member  States  and  not  only  in  the  Paris  Memorandum  ports  as  is  the  case  in  the 
present Directive. The proposal also lays down the inspection procedures applicable 
in anchorages.  

(2) 

Reinforcing the notification obligations on pilots (Article 17) 

The  Directive  already  contains  an  obligation  for  pilots  to  report  defects.  The 
PRESTIGE accident showed that information had not been transmitted by sea pilots 
in the Baltic approaches in the absence of a clear legal basis. The existing provisions 
have therefore been amended to extend this obligation to deep sea pilots, including 
those  on  ships  in  transit.  Moreover,  it  is  proposed  to  amend  the  provisions  of  the 
Directive to ensure that reports made by pilots and port authorities are followed up 
more effectively by the Member States. 

(3) 

Extending and simplifying access refusal measures (Article 10) 

Refusal  of  access  is  a  very  effective  dissuasive  tool  in  the  campaign  against 
substandard vessels. The current rules will be  

– 

– 

– 

extended to all ships: statistics show that bulk carriers and cargo ships are on 
average the most frequently detained in the European Union; 

simplified: the present criteria are obscure and difficult to implement. A clear 
message will be given, since the proposal is now based on two simple criteria: 
firstly, poor management of the vessel by its operator, as indicated by repeated 
detentions without a significant improvement in the condition of the vessel and 
secondly, inadequate monitoring by the flag State, attested to by its inclusion 
on the black and grey lists of the Paris Memorandum; 

tightened  up:  a  minimum  banning  period  is  established  in  order  to  counter 
abuses  already  observed  in  the  implementation  of  the  Directive,  in  particular 
access refusals which are lifted too quickly, without any  proper inspection of 
the condition of the vessel. Repeat offenders will be penalised more severely, 
with the ultimate possibility of permanent banning from European Union ports. 

(4) 

Tightening  up  requirements  concerning  administrations  responsible  for  inspections 
and the competence of inspectors (Articles 4 and 16) 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
In accordance with international law, port State control can be exercised by a State 
only  if  the  latter  is  fully  in  compliance  with  the  rules  that  it  imposes  on  foreign 
vessels in its ports. The Directive will restate this minimum requirement imposed on 
Member States of the European Union. 

Moreover,  the  competent  authorities  must  be  in  a  position  to  carry  out  the 
compulsory inspections when the ships concerned are in port, including if necessary 
at weekends and on public holidays, in order to ensure that the vessels concerned do 
not evade inspection. 

Finally, it is proposed to tighten up requirements concerning the professional profile 
of  inspectors,  by  requiring  Member  States  to  regularly  check  their  qualifications, 
particularly in the light of new rules resulting from amendments to the Directive or 
international conventions. The Commission will also establish, with the assistance of 
EMSA, harmonised rules on the qualifications and training of inspectors in order to 
reach a high level of competence of inspectors in the enlarged European Union. 

(5) 

Improving  the  planning,  preparation  and  carrying  out  of  inspections  (Articles  7 
and 18) 

Under  the  improved  cooperation  between  authorities  pre-notifications  received  by 
ports  and  other  bodies  will  have  to  be  transmitted  immediately  to  the  inspectors, 
which will enable them to better plan and prepare their inspections. 

Finally,  it  is  laid  down  that  when  carrying  out  inspections,  the  inspector  verifies 
whether  defects  detected  but  not  corrected  in  a  previous  port  have  indeed  been 
rectified in the meantime. 

(6) 

Improving the expanded inspection regime (Article 8) 

Practical  improvements  have  been  made  to  the  expanded  inspection  regime:  ships 
eligible for an expanded inspection will be informed in advance by the inspector that 
they  will  be  subjected  to  the  expanded  inspection  on  their  arrival  in  port  and,  in 
return, will have to take appropriate measures to be available for such an inspection.  

Moreover,  with  a  view  to  simplification,  the  expanded  inspection  scheme  will  be 
applied  to  the  categories  of  vessels  concerned  from  a  uniform  minimum  age 
(12 years). 

(7) 

Tightening up provisions concerning the human element (Article 12) 

The Paris Memorandum statistics show a high number of anomalies connected with 
the qualifications of seamen onboard ships and their living and working conditions. 
Provisions  tighten  up  controls  on  these  aspects,  in  order  in  particular  to  respond  to 
the  worrying  phenomenon  of  the  increasing  number  of  fraudulent  certificates. 
Moreover,  complaints  by  crew  members  regarding  the  safety  and  health  of  crews, 
living  conditions  and  more  generally  the  safety  of  the  ship  and  the  prevention  of 
pollution  will  be  dealt  with  systematically and  seamen  informed  of  the  outcome  of 
their complaint. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
(8) 

Controls regarding security (Article 7) 

Maritime transport is particularly vulnerable to the risk of terrorist or other criminal 
acts.  In  order  to  facilitate  the  application  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  725/2004  of  the 
European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing ship and port facility security, 
the  inspection  procedures  established  under  the  Paris  Memorandum  have  been 
introduced in the Directive. 

(9) 

Greater transparency and wider dissemination of information on ships and operators 
(Article 20) 

In order to reinforce the dissuasive effect on the operators of ships penalised under 
the  Directive,  the  Commission,  through  the  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency,  is 
planning  to  publish  a  black  list  of  owners  of  ships  which  have  been  the  subject  of 
repeated detention or access refusal measures. A black list of ships banned under the 
terms of the Directive will also be published in accordance with the same procedures 
and updated constantly. 

(10) 

Facilitating monitoring by the Commission of the implementation of the Directive by 
the Member States (Article 23) 

The existing provisions, which do not allow satisfactory control by the Commission 
of implementation of the Directive by the Member States, will be amended to enable 
the  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency,  acting  on  behalf  of  the  Commission,  to 
obtain precise electronic data on ships' movements. On this basis, detailed analyses 
of the operation of the regime in the ports of the Member States can be carried out, 
which will make it possible for example to optimise inspection resources on the basis 
of traffic or avoid the risk of seeing "ports of convenience" appear. 

(11)  Establishment of a new inspection regime (Article 5) 

The  current  port  State  control  regime  is  based  on  compliance  with  the  purely 
quantitative  threshold  of  25%  of  ships  inspected  by  Member  State,  which  not  only 
allows many ships to pass through the net but also sometimes causes the authorities 
to carry out unjustified inspections solely to reach this figure. The approach proposed 
establishes a collective objective which is to inspect all ships calling at ports in the 
Union, with high risk ships being inspected more frequently and quality ships less so.  

The  new  inspection  regime  will  help  to  ease  the  burden  of  inspections  on  quality 
ships on the basis of criteria relating to the ship itself and its flag (in particular the 
fact that the flag State applies the IMO voluntary audit system). However, it should 
be stressed that this new regime must not lead to a weakening of the present system 
which  would  result  in  greater  insecurity.  In  particular,  the  aim  of  the  new  regime 
should  not  be  a  reduction  of  the  resources  allocated  by  the  Member  States  to  port 
State control but their more effective use. 

The principle is simple but its implementation is complex: a precondition of such a 
regime,  if  the  development  of  ports  of  convenience  is  to  be  avoided,  is  that  an 
objective mechanism is found which guarantees a fair – and verifiable – distribution 
of the number of inspections between the Member States. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
The  details  of  such  a  mechanism  are  currently  being  studied  under  the  Paris 
Memorandum – where a specific task force has been set up – and in EMSA.  

It  is  therefore  proposed  at  this  stage  to  incorporate  the  principles  of  this  new 
inspection regime in the Directive, along with its essential elements: establishment of 
a risk profile applicable to ships, incentives for ships with a low risk profile and the 
adaptation of existing procedures relating to inspections and follow-up.  

Subsequent amendments to the Directive which become necessary will be introduced 
through the "comitology" procedure, once all the elements and practical details of the 
new inspection regime have been established. 

However, until these technical details have been adopted and have entered into force 
at  Community  level,  the  existing  regime  continues  to  apply  and  in  particular  the 
threshold of 25% of individual ships inspected by Member State. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
2005/0238 (COD) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE …/…/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE 
COUNCIL 

of […] 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 1 
(adapted) 

on port State control of shipping 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular 
Article 84(2) ⌦ 80(2) ⌫ thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission1, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee2, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions3, 

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189c ⌦ 251 ⌫ of the Treaty4, 

Whereas: 

1 
2 
3 
4 

OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(1) 

Council  Directive  95/21/EC  of  19  June  1995  on  port  State  control  of  shipping5  has 
been substantially amended several times. Since further amendments are to be made, it 
should be recast in the interests of clarity.  

(cid:216) new 

(2) 

The Community is seriously concerned about shipping casualties and pollution of the 
seas and coastlines of the Member States. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 1 

(3) 

The Community is equally concerned about on-board living and working conditions. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 2 

The  Council,  at  its  meeting  on  25  January  1993,  adopted  conclusions  that  urged  the 
Community and the Member States to ensure more effective application and enforcement of 
adequate  international  maritime  safety  and  environment  protection  standards  and  to 
implement the new measures when adopted; 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 3 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 4 (adapted) 

In  its  resolution  of  8  June  1993  on  a  common  policy  on  safe  seas6,  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 harmonization 
of detention rules, and including the possibility of publication of the results of the inspections 
and refusal of access to Community ports; 

(4) 

Safety,  pollution  prevention  and  shipboard  living  and  working  conditions  may  be 
effectively  enhanced  through  a  drastic  reduction  of  substandard  ships  from 
Community  waters, ⌦ which  will  be  achieved ⌫  by  strictly  applying  international 
Conventions, codes and resolutions. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 5 (adapted) 

5 

6 

OJ L 157, 7.7.1995, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Directive 2002/84/EC (OJ L 324, 29.11.2002, 
p. 53). 
OJ No C 271, 7. 10. 1993, p. 1. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 6 (adapted) 

(5)  Monitoring  the  compliance  of  ships  with  the  international  standards  for  safety, 
pollution  prevention  and  shipboard  living  and  working  conditions  should  rest 
primarily  with  the  flag  State.  However,  there  is ⌦ has  been ⌫  a  serious  failure  on 
the part of an increasing number of flag States to implement and enforce international 
standards.  Henceforth  the  monitoring  of  compliance  with  the  international  standards 
for  safety,  pollution  prevention  and  shipboard  living  and  working  conditions  has 
⌦ should ⌫ also to be ensured by the port State. 

(6) 

A  harmonised  approach  to  the  effective  enforcement  of  these  international  standards 
by the Member States in respect of ships sailing in the waters under their jurisdiction 
and using their ports will avoid distortions of competition. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 7 

(7) 

The shipping industry is vulnerable to acts of terrorism. Transport security measures 
should  be  implemented  effectively  and  Member  States  should  vigorously  monitor 
compliance with the security rules by carrying out security checks. 

(cid:216) new 

A  framework  in  Community  law  for  harmonizing  inspection  procedures  is  fundamental  to 
ensuring the homogeneous application of the principles of shipping safety and prevention of 
pollution which lie at the heart of Community transport and environment policies; 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 8 (adapted) 

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. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 10 (adapted) 

(8) 

Advantage should be taken of the experience gained during the operation of the Paris 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Port State Control (PSC), signed in Paris 
on 26 January 1982. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 11 (adapted) 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

(9) 

The  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency  (EMSA)  established  by  Regulation  (EC) 
No 1406/2002  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council,7  should  provide  the 
necessary  support  to  ensure  the  convergent  and  effective  implementation  of  the  port 
State  control  system.  EMSA  should  in  particular  contribute  to  the  development  of  a 
harmonised Community scheme for the qualification and training of port State control 
inspectors.  

(10)  The  inspection  by  each  Member  State  of  at  least  25%  of  the  number  ⌦ one 
quarter ⌫ of individual foreign ships which enter its ports in a given year in practice 
means that a large number of ships operating within the Community area at any given 
time have undergone an inspection. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 12 (adapted) 

(cid:216) new 

(11)  An  efficient  port  State  control  regime  should  however  seek  to  ensure  that  all  ships 
calling at a port within the European Union are regularly inspected, instead of limiting 
itself  to  the  current  objective  of  inspecting  one  quarter  of  incoming  ships  in  each 
Member  State.  Inspection  should  concentrate  on  substandard  ships,  while  quality 
ships, meaning those which have satisfactory inspection records or which fly the flag 
of a State complying with the IMO Member State Audit Scheme, should be rewarded 
by undergoing less frequent inspections. Such new inspection arrangements should be 
incorporated  into  the  Community’s  port  State  control  regime  as  soon  as  its  various 
aspects have been defined and on the basis of an inspection-sharing scheme whereby 
each Member State contributes fairly to the achievement of the Community objective 
of a comprehensive inspection scheme. 

Further efforts should be made to develop a better targeting system. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 13 (adapted) 

(12)  The rules and procedures for port-State inspections, including criteria for the detention 
of  ships,  must ⌦ should ⌫  be  harmonised  to  ensure  consistent  effectiveness  in  all 
ports,  which  would  also  drastically  reduce  the  selective  use  of  certain  ports  of 
destination to avoid the net of proper control. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 14 (adapted) 

7 

OJ  L  208,  5.8.2002,  p.  1.  Regulation  as  last  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  724/2004  (OJ  L  129, 
29.4.2004, p. 1). 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(13)  Certain  categories  of  ships  present  a  major  accident  or  pollution  hazard  when  they 
reach  a  given  age  and  should  therefore  be  subject  to  an  expanded  inspection;  the 
details of such expanded inspection need to be laid down 

(cid:216) new 

The  casualty,  detention  and  deficiency  statistics  published 
the  Commission's 
communication  entitled  «A  common  policy  on  safe  seas»  and  in  the  annual  report  of  the 
MOU show that certain categories of ships need to be subject to an expanded inspection. 

in 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 15 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Recital 4 
(adapted) 

(14)  Some  ships  pose  a  manifest  risk  to  maritime  safety  and  the  marine  environment 
because  of  their  poor  condition,  flag  and  history;  among  which,  in  particular,  ships 
flying 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. They should therefore be refused access 
to Community ports, unless it can be demonstrated that they can be operated safely in 
Community  waters.  Guidelines  must  ⌦ should ⌫  be  established  setting  out  the 
procedures applicable in the event of the imposition of such an access ban and of the 
lifting  of  the  ban.  In  the  interests  of  transparency,  the  list  of  ships  refused  access  to 
Community ports should be made public. 

(cid:216) new 

(15) 

In  order  to  reduce  the  burden  placed  on  certain  administrations  and  companies  by 
repetitive  inspections,  a  survey  carried  out  on  a  ro-ro  ferry  or  high-speed  passenger 
craft under 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 
services8,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  host  State,  should  be  regarded  as  an  expanded 
inspection under the port State control system. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 16 (adapted) 

(16)  Non-compliance  with  the  provisions  of  the  relevant  Conventions  must  be  rectified. 
Ships  which  are  required  to  take  ⌦ need  to  be  the  subject  of ⌫  corrective  action 
must, where the ⌦ observed ⌫ deficiencies in compliance are clearly hazardous to 
safety, health or the environment, be detained until such time as the non-compliance 
has⌦ shortcomings have ⌫ been rectified. 

8 

OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 1. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(17)  A right of appeal should be made available against decisions for detention taken by the 
competent  authorities, in order to prevent unreasonable  decisions  which are liable to 
cause undue detention and delay. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 17 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 18 (adapted) 

The  facilities  in  the  port  of  inspection  may  be  such  that  the  competent  authority  will  be 
obliged  to  authorize  the  ship  to  proceed  to  an  appropriate  repair  yard,  provided  that  the 
conditions for the transfer are complied with. Non-complying ships would continue to pose a 
threat to safety, health or the environment and to enjoy commercial advantages by not being 
upgraded in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Conventions and should therefore 
be refused access to all ports in the Community. 

There  are  circumstances  where  a  ship  which  has  been  refused  access  to  ports  within  the 
Community has to be granted permission to enter. Under such circumstances the ship should 
only be permitted access to a specific port if all precautions are taken to ensure it safe entry. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 19 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 20 (adapted) 

Given the complexity of the requirements of the Conventions as regards a ship's construction, 
equipment  and  manning,  the  severe  consequences  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 public service employees or other 
such persons, and highly knowledgeable and experienced. 

(cid:216) new 

(18)  Authorities  and  inspectors  involved  in  port  State  control  activities  should  have  no 
conflict  of  interests,  whether  with  the  port  of  inspection  or  with  the  ships  inspected 
and  related  interests.  Inspectors  should  be  adequately  qualified  and  should  receive 
appropriate training so as to maintain and improve their competence in the conduct of 
inspections.  Member  States  should  cooperate  in  developing  and  promoting  a 
harmonised Community scheme for the qualification and training of inspectors. 

(19)  Pilots and port authorities may ⌦ should ⌫ be able ⌦ enabled ⌫ to provide useful 
information on ⌦ defects found on board ships ⌫ the deficiencies of such ships and 
crews. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 21 (adapted) 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(20)  Complaints regarding living and working conditions on board should be investigated. 
Any person lodging a complaint should be informed of the follow-up action given to 
that complaint. 

(cid:216) new 

(21)  Cooperation  between  the  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States  and  other 
authorities or organizations is necessary to ensure an effective follow-up with regard 
to ships with deficiencies which have been permitted to proceed and for the exchange 
of information about ships in port. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 22 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 23 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(22)  (cid:214) Since  the  inspection  database  is  an  essential  part  of  port  State  control,  Member 
States should ensure that it is updated in the light of Community requirements. (cid:213) The 
information  system  called  Sirenac  E  established  under  the  MOU  provides  a  large 
amount of the additional information needed for the application of this Directive. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 24 (adapted) 

(23)  Publication of information concerning ships ⌦ and their operators or companies ⌫ 
which do not comply with international standards on safety, health and protection of 
the marine environment, may be an effective deterrent discouraging shippers ⌦ from 
using ⌫ to use such ships, and an incentive to their owners to take corrective action 
without being compelled to do so. 

(24)  All costs of inspecting ships which warrant detention ⌦, and those incurred in lifting 

a refusal of access, ⌫ should be borne by the owner or the operator. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 25 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC Recital 26 (adapted) 

For the purposes of implementing this Directive use should be made of the Committee set up 
pursuant  to  Article  12  of  Council  Directive  93/75/EEC  of  13  September  1993  concerning 
minimum  requirements  for  vessels  bound  for  or  leaving  Community  ports  and  carrying 
dangerous  or  polluting  goods9  in  order  to  assist  the  Commission  with  the  task  of  adapting 
Member States' inspection obligations on the basis of experience gained, taking into account 

9 

OJ No L 247, 5.10.1993, p. 19. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
developments  in  the  MOU,  and  also  adopting  the  Annexes  as  necessary  in  the  light  of 
amendments  to  the  Conventions,  Protocols,  codes  and  resolutions  of  relevant  international 
bodies and to the MOU. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Recital 18 
(adapted) 

(25)  The  measures  necessary  for  the  implementation  of  ⌦ this ⌫  Directive  95/21/EC 
should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 
laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the 
Commission10. 

(cid:216) new 

(26)  Since the objectives of the action to be taken, namely to reduce substandard shipping 
in Community waters through improvement of the Community’s inspection system for 
seagoing  ships  and  the  development  of  the  means  of  taking  preventive  action  in  the 
field of pollution of the seas cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and 
may,  therefore,  on  account  of  their  scale  and  their  effects,  be  better  achieved  at 
Community level, the Community can take measures in accordance with the principle 
of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of 
proportionality  as  set  out  in  that  Article,  this  Directive  does  not  go  beyond  what  is 
necessary to achieve those objectives. 

(27)  The obligation to transpose this Directive into national law should be confined to those 
provisions  which  represent  a  substantive  change  as  compared  with  the  earlier 
Directive. The obligation to transpose the provisions which are unchanged arises under 
the earlier Directive. 

(28)  This  Directive  should  be  without  prejudice  to  the  obligations  of  the  Member  States 
relating to the time-limits for transposition into national law of the Directives set out in 
Annex XVII, Part B, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 1 

Purpose 

The  purpose  of  this  Directive  is  to  help  drastically  to  reduce ⌦ drastically ⌫  substandard 
shipping in the waters under the jurisdiction of Member States, by: 

10 

OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(a) 

(b) 

increasing  compliance  with  international  and  relevant  Community  legislation  on 
maritime  safety,  (cid:214) maritime  security, (cid:213)  protection  of  the  marine  environment  and 
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 authorities of the Member States under the Paris Memorandum 
of Understanding on Port State Control (MOU). 

Article 2 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this Directive including its Annexes: 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 
(adapted) 

1. 

“Conventions” means ⌦ the following Conventions, together with the Protocols and 
amendments  thereto  and  related  codes  of  mandatory  status,  in  their  up-to-date 
version ⌫: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 

(a) 

the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (LL 66),; 

(b) 

the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS 74),; 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

(g) 

(h) 

the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, 
and the 1978 Protocol relating thereto (Marpol 73/78),; 

the  International  Convention  on  Standards  of  Training,  Certification  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 
(ILO No 147),; 

(Minimum  Standards)  Convention, 

1976 

the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 
(CLC 92),. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 
(adapted) 
(cid:206)1 2002/84/EC Art. 4 pt. 1(a) 

together with the Protocols and amendments to these Conventions and related codes 
of mandatory status, (cid:206)1 in its up-to-date version (cid:205). 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 point 2 
(adapted) 
(cid:206)1 2002/84/EC Art. 4 pt. 1(b) 

“⌦ Paris ⌫  MOU”  means  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding  on  Port  State 
Control, signed in Paris on 26 January 1982, (cid:206)1 in its up-to-date version (cid:205). 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

“Ship” means any seagoing vessel to which one or more of the Conventions apply, 
flying a flag other than that of the port State.  

“Off-shore installation” means a fixed or floating platform operating on or over the 
continental shelf of a Member State. 

“Anchorage” means a place in a port or another area within the jurisdiction of a port 
suitable for ships to anchor. 

(cid:216) new 

“Inspector” means a public-sector employee or other person, duly authorised by the 
competent  authority  of  a  Member  State  to  carry  out  port-State  control  inspections, 
and responsible to that competent authority. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

(cid:216) new 

“Competent authority” means a maritime authority responsible for port State control 
in accordance with this Directive. 

“Competent  authority  for  maritime  security”  means  a  competent  authority  for 
maritime security as defined in Article 2, point 7 of Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of 
the European Parliament and of the Council11. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

11 

OJ L 129, 29.4.2004, p. 6. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

“Inspection” means a visit on board a ship (cid:214) by an inspector, in order to check the 
ship’s  compliance  with  the  relevant  Conventions  and  regulations  and  including  at 
least the checks required by Article 7 (1) (cid:213) 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 living and working conditions of the crew. 

“More  detailed  inspection”  means  an  inspection  where  the  ship,  its  equipment  and 
crew as a whole or, as appropriate, parts thereof are subjected, in the circumstances 
specified in Article ⌦ 7 (4) ⌫ 6 (3), to an in-depth ⌦ examination ⌫ inspection 
covering the ship's construction, equipment, manning, living and working conditions 
and compliance with on-board operational procedures. 

“Expanded inspection” means an inspection (cid:214) whose scope includes as a minimum 
the items listed in Annex VIII Part C. An expanded inspection may include a more 
detailed 
in  accordance  with 
inspection  whenever 
Article 7 (4) (cid:213) .as specified in Article 7. 

there  are  clear  grounds 

(cid:216) new 

“Complaint” means any information or report submitted by the master of the ship, a 
member of the crew, a professional body, an association, a trade union or, generally, 
any person with an interest in the safety of the ship, including an interest in safety or 
health  hazards  to  its  crew,  shipboard  living  and  working  conditions  and  the 
prevention of pollution. 

13. 

“Detention”  means  the  formal  prohibition  of  a  ship  to  proceed  to  sea  due  to 
established deficiencies which, individually or together, make the ship unseaworthy. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

14. 

“Refusal of access order” means a document issued to the master of a ship and to the 
company responsible for the ship notifying them that the ship will be refused access 
to ports of the Community. 

(cid:216) new 

15. 

“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 operation hazardous. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 

“Company”  means  the  corporate  owner  of  the  ship  or  any  other  organisation  or 
person  such  as  the  manager,  or  the  bareboat  charterer,  who  has  assumed  the 
responsibility  for  operation  of  the  ship  from  the  owner  of  the  ship  and  who,  on 
assuming  such  responsibility,  has  agreed  to  take  over  all  the  duties  and 
responsibilities imposed by the International Safety Management (“ISM”) Code. 

“Recognised  Organisation”  means  a  classification  society  or  other  private  body, 
carrying out statutory tasks on behalf of a flag State administration. 

“Statutory  certificate”  means  a  certificate  issued  by  or  on  behalf  of  a  flag  State  in 
accordance with international Conventions. 

“Class certificate” means a document issued by a recognised organisation certifying 
the fitness of a ship for a particular use or service in accordance with the rules and 
regulations laid down and made public by that recognised organisation. 

“Inspection database” means the central information system for port state inspection 
records. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 3 

Scope 

1. This Directive applies to any ship and its crew (cid:214) calling at a port or at an anchorage of a 
Member State. (cid:213): 

(a) 

(b) 

calling at a port of a Member State or at an off-shore installation,; or 

anchored off such a port or such an installation. 

(cid:214) For the purposes of this Directive a Member State may also exercise a power of inspection 
and  detention,  in  accordance  with  international  law,  in  relation  to  a  ship  which  is  in  waters 
within its jurisdiction or at, or anchored off, an offshore installation or at any other installation 
or facility in the waters within its jurisdiction. (cid:213) 

Nothing  in  this  Article  shall  affect  the  rights  of  intervention  available  to  a  Member  State 
under the relevant international Conventions. 

2.  In  the  case  of  ships  of  a  gross  tonnage  below  500,  Member  States  shall  apply  those 
requirements  of  a  relevant  Convention  which  are  applicable  and  shall,  to  the  extent  that  a 
Convention  does  not  apply,  take  such  action  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 Annex 1 to the ⌦ Paris ⌫ MOU. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
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  treatment  given  to  such  ship  and  its  crew  is  no  more 
favourable  than  that  given  to  a  ship  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 purposes and pleasure yachts not engaged in trade 
shall be excluded from the scope of this Directive. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 3 
(adapted) 

Article 4 

⌦ Obligations of Member States ⌫ 

Inspection body 

(cid:216) new 

1. Member States shall take all necessary measures in order to be legally entitled to carry out 
on  board  foreign  ships  the  inspections  referred  to  in  this  Directive  in  accordance  with 
international law. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 3 
(cid:214) new 

2.  Member  States  shall  maintain  appropriate  national  maritime  administrations  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  that  their  competent  authorities  perform  their  duties  as  laid  down  in  this  Directive. 
(cid:214) In particular, they shall recruit and retain the requisite number of staff, including qualified 
inspectors,  taking  into  account  the  volume  and  characteristics  of  shipping  traffic  at  each 
port. (cid:213) 

(cid:214) Member  States  shall  put  in  place  appropriate  arrangements  to  ensure  that  inspectors  are 
available for carrying out expanded and mandatory inspections in accordance with Article 8 
and Annex I, Part A.1. (cid:213) 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

Article 5 

Inspection commitments 

(cid:216) new 

1. Member States shall contribute an individual inspection effort which, added to the number 
of inspections carried out by the other Member States and States signatory to the Paris MOU, 
shall  ensure  that  all  ships  entering  the  ports  or  anchorages  of  the  European  Union  are 
inspected.  This  effort  shall  ensure  that  ships  posing  a  higher  risk  are  subject  to  a  more 
in-depth inspection carried out at more frequent intervals. 

The  inspection  regime  established  with  a  view  to  achieving  the  objective  referred  to  in  the 
first subparagraph shall include the elements described in Annex II. 

2.  The  detailed  rules  of  the  inspection  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  shall  be  adopted  by  the 
Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 24(2). 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 point 4 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

⌦ 3. ⌫  1.  (cid:214) As  long  as  measures  envisaged  in  paragraph  2  are  not  in  force, (cid:213)  the  total 
number of inspections of the ships referred to in paragraph (2) and Article 7 to be carried out 
annually by the competent authority of each Member State shall correspond to at least 25% of 
the average 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  (cid:214) .  This  annual 
number shall be the average of the last three calendar years for which statistics are available. 
The end of the period used shall not be more than one year prior to the start of the inspection 
year. (cid:213) 

4. In selecting ships for inspection, the competent authority shall comply with the rules set out 
in Annex I. 

(cid:216) new 

2. 

(a)  The  competent  authority  shall,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  Article  7a,  ensure 
that an inspection in accordance with Article 6 is carried out on any ship not subject 
to  an  expanded  inspection  with  a  target  factor  greater  than  50  in  the  Sirenac 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 point 4 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
information  system,  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 ships to 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 resulting from the value of their target 
factor ranges as referred to in the 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). 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

4. The provisions of paragraph 3 shall not apply to any of the operational controls specifically 
provided for in the Conventions. 

5.  The  Member  States  and  the  Commission  shall  cooperate  in  seeking  to  develop  priorities 
and practices which will enable ships likely to be defective to be targeted more 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. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 6 

Notification of arrival of ships 

The operator, agent or master of a ship calling at a port or anchorage of a Member State shall 
notify its arrival in accordance with Annex III. 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 7 ⌫ 6 

Inspection procedure 

1. The competent authority shall ensure that the inspector shall as a minimum: 

(a) 

check the certificates and documents (cid:214) required to be kept on board in accordance 
with  the  Community  maritime  safety  legislation  and  international  Conventions,  in 
particular those (cid:213) listed in Annex ⌦ IV ⌫ , to the extent applicable; 

(cid:214) (b)  verify,  where  appropriate,  whether  outstanding  deficiencies  from  the  previous 
inspection carried out by a Member State or by a State signatory to the Paris MOU 
have been rectified; (cid:213) 

⌦ (c) ⌫ 

(b) 

satisfy  himself  of  the  overall  condition  of  the  ship,  ⌦ including  the 
hygiene ⌫ of the ship, including the engine room and accommodation and including 
hygienic conditions. 

(cid:216) new 

2.  When  a  ship  has  been  authorised  to  leave  a  port  on  condition  that  the  deficiencies  are 
rectified at the next port, the inspection at the next port shall be limited to verifying whether 
these deficiencies have been rectified. 

However,  the  inspector  may,  in  the  exercise  of  his  professional  judgment,  decide  that  the 
inspection must be extended to cover additional verifications. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

⌦ 3. ⌫  2.  The  inspector  may  examine  all  relevant  certificates  and  documents,  other  than 
those listed in Annex ⌦ IV ⌫ II, which are required to be carried on board in accordance 
with the Conventions. 

⌦ 4. ⌫ 3. Whenever there are clear grounds for believing, after the inspection referred to in 
paragraphs 1, and 2 ⌦ and ⌫ 3, that the condition of a ship 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-board  operational 
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 ⌦ V and VII, section C ⌫ III. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
⌦ 5. ⌫  4.  The  relevant  procedures  and  guidelines  for  the  control  of  ships  specified  in 
Annex ⌦ VI ⌫ IV shall also be observed. 

(cid:216) new 

However, when the procedures and guidelines referred to in Annex VI, point 4, diverge from 
Community legislation in force, Member States shall not adopt any provision of national law 
or any administrative measure which would result in the implementation of procedures or in 
inspection  practices  contrary  to  such  Community  legislation.  They  shall  ensure  that  their 
competent  authorities  are  duly  informed  of  the  relevant  guidelines  or  procedures  to  be 
implemented  in  accordance  with  Community  legislation  and  they  shall  verify  their  proper 
implementation.  

6. When carrying out security checks on board, the inspector shall follow the procedures set 
out in Annex VII. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 5 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 8 ⌫ 7 

Mandatory Expanded inspection of certain ships 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 5 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

1. A ship in one of the categories in Annex ⌦ VIII, point B, ⌫ V, section A, is ⌦ shall be 
eligible  for ⌫  liable  to  an  expanded  inspection  after  a  period  of  12  months  since  the  last 
expanded inspection carried out in a port of (cid:214) a Member State or of (cid:213) a State signatory of 
⌦ to ⌫ the ⌦ Paris ⌫ MOU. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 5 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

2.  If  such  a  ship  is  selected  for  inspection  in  accordance  with  ⌦ Annex  I,  point  A.2, ⌫ 
Article  5(2)  (b),  an  expanded  inspection  shall  be  carried  out.  However  an  inspection  in 
accordance with Article ⌦ 7 ⌫ 6 may be carried out in the period between two expanded 
inspections. 

3. 

(a)  The  operator  or  master  of  a  ship  to  which  paragraph  1  applies  shall 
communicate  all  the  information  listed  in  Annex  V,  section  B,  to  the  competent 
authority of the Member State of each port visited after a period of 12 months since 
the last expanded inspection. This information shall be provided at least three days 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
before the expected time of arrival in the port or before leaving the previous port if 
the voyage is expected to take fewer than three days. 

b) 

Any  ship  (cid:214) referred  to  in  paragraph  1 (cid:213)  not  complying  with  (cid:214) the  notification 
requirements  in  Article  6 (cid:213)  subparagraph  (a)  shall  be  subject  to  an  expanded 
inspection at the port of (cid:214) anchorage or (cid:213) destination. 

⌦ 3. ⌫  4.  Member  States  shall,  subject  to  Article  ⌦ 9, ⌫  7a  ensure  that  an  expanded 
inspection  is  carried  out  on  a  ship  to  which  paragraph  ⌦ 1 ⌫  3  applies  and  which  has  a 
target  factor  of  7  or  more  ⌦ ,  as  referred  to in  Annex  I, ⌫  at  its  first  port  visited  after  a 
period of 12 months since the last ⌦ previous ⌫ expanded inspection. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 5 
(adapted) 

In cases where the Member States are unable to increase 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 
their inspection service gradually. This period may be extended by six months for the port of 
Rotterdam. The Commission shall notify the Member States and the European Parliament of 
any such extension. 

⌦ 4. ⌫  5.  ⌦ An ⌫  expanded  inspection  shall  be  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the 
procedures ⌦ set out ⌫ in ⌦ Annex VIII, point C ⌫, 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 
to reintroducing target factor values complying with the objectives of this Directive. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 6 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 9 ⌫ 7a 

Procedure in case certain ships cannot be inspected 

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 50 as referred to in ⌦ Annex I ⌫ Article 5(2)(a) 
or  a  mandatory  expanded  inspection  as  referred  to  in  Article ⌦ 8(3) ⌫  7(4),  the  Member 
State shall, without delay, inform the (cid:214) competent authorities of the next port, if it is a port of 
a  Member  State  or  of  a  State  signatory  to  the  Paris  MOU (cid:213)  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  ships  concerned.  (cid:214) In  addition,  Member  States  shall  provide 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
 
 
the total number of inspections as referred to in Article 8(2) and in Annex I, point A.1 carried 
out during these six months. (cid:213) 

(cid:214) These  notifications  shall  be  provided  within  four  months  from  the  end  of  the  period  to 
which data pertained. (cid:213) 

3. During any (cid:214) three consecutive (cid:213) calendar years, (cid:214) the missed inspections (cid:213) such non-
inspections  (cid:214) as  referred  to  in  paragraph  1 (cid:213)  shall  not  exceed  5  %  of  the  average  annual 
number of individual ships eligible for the inspections referred to in paragraph 1 calling at the 
ports of the Member State (cid:214) during that period. (cid:213), calculated on the basis of the three most 
recent calendar years for which statistics are available. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 6 
(adapted) 

4.  Ships  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  shall  be  subject  to ⌦ a  mandatory ⌫  an  inspection,  as 
provided for in ⌦ Annex I, point A.1 ⌫Article 5(2)(a) or a mandatory expanded inspection 
as  referred  to  in  Article  ⌦ 8(2) ⌫  7(4),  as  appropriate,  in  the  next  port  of  call  in  the 
Community. 

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 is considered appropriate, in accordance with the 
procedure referred to laid down in Article ⌦ 24(2) ⌫ 19. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 7 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 10 ⌫ 7b 

Access refusal measures concerning certain ships 

1.  A  Member  State  shall  ensure  that  (cid:214) any (cid:213)  a  ship  (cid:214) meeting  the  criteria  listed  in 
Annex IX, point A. (cid:213) in one of the categories of Annex XI, section A, is refused access to its 
ports (cid:214) and anchorages (cid:213) , except in the situations described in Article (cid:214) 15(6). (cid:213) 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 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
 
has been detained more than once in the course of the preceding 36 months in a port of 

– 
a State signatory of the MOU. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 7 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

The  refusal  of  access  shall  become  applicable  immediately  ⌦ as  soon  as ⌫  the  ship  has 
(cid:214) left the port or anchorage (cid:213) been authorised to leave the port where it has been the subject 
of  a  second  or  third  detention  (cid:214) and  where  a  refusal  of  access  order  has  been  issued (cid:213)  as 
appropriate. 

2.  For  the  purposes  of  paragraph  1,  Member  States  shall  comply  with  the  procedures  laid 
down in Annex IX, XI, section ⌦ point ⌫ B. 

3. The Commission shall publish every six months the information relating to ships that have 
been refused access to Community ports in application of this Article. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 8 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 11 ⌫ 8 

Report of inspection to the master 

On  completion  of  an  inspection,  a  more  detailed  inspection  or  an  expanded  inspection,  the 
inspector  shall  draw  up  a  report  in  accordance  with  Annex  ⌦ X ⌫  IX.  A  copy  of  the 
inspection report shall be provided to the ship's master. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 12 

Complaints 

All complaints regarding conditions on board shall be investigated.  

When  the  competent  authority  deems  the  complaint  to  be  manifestly  unfounded,  it  shall 
inform the complainant of its decision and of the reasons for it. 

The  identity  of  the  person  lodging  the  complaint  shall  not  be  revealed  to  the  master  or  the 
shipowner  of  the  ship  concerned.  The  inspector  shall  ensure  confidentiality  during  any 
interviews of crew members. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Member  States  shall  inform  the  flag  State  administration,  with  a  copy  to  the  International 
Labour  Organization  (ILO)  if  appropriate,  of  complaints  not  manifestly  unfounded  and  of 
follow-up actions taken. 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

Article ⌦ 13 ⌫ 9 

Rectification and detention 

1. The competent authority shall be satisfied that any deficiencies confirmed or revealed by 
the inspection referred to in Article 5(2) and Article 7 are or will be rectified in accordance 
with the Conventions. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 9(a) 
(adapted) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

2. In the case of deficiencies which are clearly hazardous to safety, health or the environment, 
the competent authority of the port State where 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 operation shall not be lifted until 
the  hazard  is  removed  or  until  such  authority  establishes  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. 

(cid:216) new 

3.  Without  prejudice  to  restrictions  on  security  grounds  decided  in  accordance  with 
Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004, a detention order issued by a competent authority may: 

(a) 

(b) 

include a direction that the ship shall remain in a particular place, or shall move to a 
particular anchorage or berth; and 

specify the circumstances in which the master of the ship may move the ship from a 
specified place for reasons of safety or prevention of pollution. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 9(b) 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

⌦ 4. ⌫ 3. When exercising his professional judgement as to whether or not a ship should be 
detained, the inspector shall apply the criteria set out in Annex ⌦ XI ⌫ VI.  

In this respect, ⌦ if the inspection reveals that the ship is ⌫ the ship shall be detained, if not 
equipped  with  a  functioning  voyage  data  recorder  system,  when  its  use  is  compulsory  in 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
accordance  with  (cid:214) Directive  2002/59/EC  of 
the 
Council12 (cid:213)Annex XII, ⌦ the competent authority shall ensure that the ship is detained ⌫ . 

the  European  Parliament  and  of 

If  (cid:214) the  deficiencies justifying  detention (cid:213)this  deficiency  cannot  be  readily  rectified  in  the 
port  of  detention,  the  competent  authority  may  allow  the  ship  to  proceed  to  the  (cid:214) nearest 
available repair yard to the port of detention where it (cid:213)nearest appropriate port where it shall 
⌦ may ⌫  be  readily  rectified  or  ⌦ it  may ⌫  require 
the  (cid:214) deficiencies 
be (cid:213)deficiency is rectified within a maximum period of 30 days (cid:214) , in accordance with the 
guidelines developed by the Paris MOU (cid:213) . For these purposes, the procedures laid down in 
Article ⌦ 15 ⌫ 11 shall apply. 

that 

⌦ 5. ⌫ 4. In exceptional circumstances, where the overall condition of a ship is obviously 
substandard,  the  competent  authority  may  suspend  the  inspection  of  that  ship  until  the 
responsible parties have taken the steps necessary to ensure that it complies with the relevant 
requirements of the Conventions. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 9(c) 
(adapted) 

⌦ 6. ⌫ 5. In ⌦ the event of ⌫ the event that the inspections referred to in Article 5(2) and 
Article 7 give rise to detention, the competent authority shall immediately inform, in writing 
and including the report of inspection, the ⌦ flag State ⌫ 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  organisations  responsible  for  the  issue  of  class  certificates  or 
certificates  issued  on  behalf  of  the  flag  State  in  accordance  with  the  international 
Cconventions shall also be notified where relevant. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

⌦ 7. ⌫  6.  The  provisions  of  this  Directive  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  the  additional 
requirements of the Conventions concerning notification and reporting procedures related to 
port State control. 

⌦ 8. ⌫ 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  operator  shall  be  entitled  to  compensation  for  any  loss  or  damage 
suffered. In any instance of alleged undue detention or delay the burden of proof shall lie with 
the owner or operator of the ship. 

12 

OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 10. 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:216) new 

9. In order to alleviate port congestion, a competent authority may allow a detained ship to be 
moved to another part of the port if it is safe to do so. However, the risk of port congestion 
shall not be a consideration when deciding on a detention or on a release from detention. 

Port  authorities  shall  cooperate  with  the  competent  authority  with  a  view  to  facilitating  the 
accommodation of detained ships. 

(cid:208) 98/25/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 

Article 9a 

Procedure applicable in the absence of ISM certificates 

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 vessel 
to which, within the Community, the ISM Code is applicable at the date of the inspection, the 
competent authority shall ensure that the vessel is detained. 

2.  Notwithstanding  the  absence  of  the  documentation  referred  to  in  paragraph  1,  if  the 
inspection  finds  no  other  deficiencies  warranting  detention  the  competent  authority  may  lift 
the detention order in order to avoid port congestion. Whenever such a decision is taken, the 
competent authority shall immediately inform the competent authorities of the other Member 
States thereof. 

3. Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that all ships authorised to leave 
a port in a Member State under the circumstances referred to in paragraph 2 shall be refused 
access to all ports in the Community, except in the situations referred to in Article 11(6), until 
the  owner  or  operator  of  the  vessel  has  demonstrated,  to  the  satisfaction  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  in 
Article 9(2) are found and cannot be rectified in the port of detention, the relevant provisions 
of Article 11 shall also apply. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

Article ⌦ 14 ⌫ 10 

Right of appeal 

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  or  refusal  of  access  taken  by  the  competent 
authority. An appeal shall not cause the detention or refusal of access to be suspended. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 10 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

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. 

(cid:216) new 

4. When, as a result of an appeal or of a request made by the owner or the operator of a ship 
or his representative, a detention or a refusal of access order is revoked or amended: 

(a) 

(b) 

Member  States  shall  ensure  that  the  inspection  database  is  amended  accordingly 
without delay, 

The  Member  State  where  the  detention  or  refusal  of  access  order  has  been  issued 
shall,  within  24  hours  of  such  a  decision,  ensure  that  the  information  published  in 
accordance with Article 19 is rectified. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 15 ⌫ 11 

Follow-up to inspections and detentions 

1. Where deficiencies as referred to in Article ⌦ 13 ⌫ 9 (2) cannot be rectified in the port 
of inspection, the competent authority of that Member State may allow the ship concerned to 
proceed to the (cid:214) nearest available repair yard to the port of detention where follow-up action 
can  be  taken (cid:213)nearest  appropriate  repair  yard  available,  as  chosen  by  the  master  and  the 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
authorities concerned, provided that the conditions determined by the competent authority of 
the  flag  State  and  agreed  by  that  Member  State  are  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  harm  to  the  marine 
environment. 

(cid:216) new 

2. Where the decision to send a ship to a repair yard is due to a lack of compliance with IMO 
Resolution A. 744(18), either with respect to a ship's documentation or with respect to a ship's 
structural  failures  and  deficiencies,  the  competent  authority  may  require  that  the  necessary 
thickness measurements be carried out in the port of detention before the ship is allowed to 
sail. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

⌦ 3. ⌫  2.  In  the  circumstances  referred  to  in  paragraph  1,  the  competent  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 ⌦ 13(6) ⌫ 9 (5) and any other 
authority as appropriate of 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  to  ensure  that  ⌦ access  to  any  port  within  the 
Community is refused to ⌫ ships referred to in paragraph 1 which proceed to sea: 

⌦ (a) ⌫ (i)  without complying with the conditions determined by the competent authority 

of any Member State in the port of inspection; or 

⌦ (b) ⌫ (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,⌦ Such  refusal  shall  be 
maintained ⌫  until  the  owner  or  operator  has  provided  evidence  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  where  the  ship  was  found  defective  ⌦ , 
demonstrating ⌫  that  the  ship  fully  complies  with  all  applicable  requirements  of  the 
Conventions. 

5.  In  the  circumstances  referred  to  in  paragraph  4 ⌦ (a) ⌫  (i),  the  competent  authority  of 
the Member State where the ship was found defective shall immediately alert the competent 
authorities of all the other Member States. 

In the circumstances referred to in paragraph 4 ⌦ (b) ⌫ (ii), the competent authority of the 
Member State in which the repair yard lies shall immediately alert the competent authorities 
of all the other Member States. 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
 
 
Before  denying  entry,  the  Member  State  may  request  consultations  with  the  flag 
administration of the ship concerned. 

6. Notwithstanding ⌦ By way of derogation from ⌫ the provisions of paragraph 4, access 
to a specific port may be permitted by the relevant authority of that port State in the event of 
force  majeure  or  overriding  safety  considerations,  or  to  reduce  or  minimize  the  risk  of 
pollution  or  to  have  deficiencies  rectified,  provided  ⌦ that ⌫  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. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 16 ⌫ 12 

Professional profile of inspectors 

1. The inspections shall be carried out only by inspectors who fulfil the qualification criteria 
specified in Annex ⌦ XII ⌫ VII (cid:214) and who are authorized to carry out port State control 
by the competent authority (cid:213) . 

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  (cid:214) competent  authority,  the (cid:213)  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 employed by or undertake work on behalf of 
non-governmental organizations which issue statutory and classification certificates or which 
carry out the 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  (cid:214) Commission  Directive  96/40/EC13 (cid:213)the  national 
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. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

13 

OJ L 196 , 7.8.1996, p. 8. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:216) new 

5.  Member  States  shall  ensure  that  the  competence  of  inspectors  is  verified,  and  their 
knowledge  as  referred  to  in  Annex  XII  is  tested,  before  authorising  them  to  carry  out 
inspections and at intervals of five years thereafter.  

6.  Member  States  shall  ensure  that  inspectors  receive  appropriate  training  in  relation  to 
changes to the port State control regime as laid down in this Directive and amendments to the 
Conventions. 

7.  In  cooperation  with  Member  States,  the  Commission  shall  develop  and  promote  a 
harmonised Community scheme for the qualification and training of inspectors. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article ⌦ 17 ⌫ 13 

Reports from pilots and port authorities 

1. (cid:214) Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that their pilots engaged on the 
berthing  or  unberthing  of  ships  or  engaged  on  ships  bound  for  a  port  or  in  transit  within  a 
Member State (cid:213)Pilots of Member States, engaged in berthing or unberthing ships or engaged 
on  ships  bound  for  a  port  within  a  Member  State,  shall  immediately  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 ⌦ defects ⌫ deficiencies which may prejudice 
the  safe  navigation  of  the  ship,  or  which  may  pose  a  threat  of  harm  to  the  marine 
environment. 

2. If port authorities, when exercising their normal duties, learn that a ship within their port 
has  ⌦ defects ⌫  deficiencies  which  may  prejudice  the  safety  of  the  ship  or  poses  an 
unreasonable  threat  of  harm  to  the  marine  environment,  such  authority  shall  immediately 
inform the competent authority of the port State concerned. 

(cid:216) new 

3.  Member  States  shall  require  pilots  and  port  authorities  to  use  the  model  report  in 
Annex XIII or that of an equivalent report, in electronic format whenever possible. 

Member States shall ensure that proper follow-up action is taken on defects notified by pilots 
and port authorities. 

Every year Member States shall provide the Commission with a report on the implementation 
of paragraphs 1 and 2, including details on action taken to follow up defects reported by pilots 
and port authorities. 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 18 14 

Cooperation 

1. Each Member State shall (cid:214) ensure that its port authorities and other relevant authorities or 
bodies  provide  the  competent  port  State  control  authority  with  the  following  types  of 
information  in  their  possession: (cid:213)  make  provision  for  cooperation  between  its  competent 
authority,  its  port  authorities  and  other  relevant  authorities  or  commercial  organizations  to 
ensure that its competent authority can obtain all relevant information on ships calling at its 
ports. 

(cid:214) – 

information notified in accordance with Annex III; (cid:213) 

(cid:214) – 
information  concerning  ships  which  have  failed  to  comply  with  notification 
requirements  in  accordance  with  this  Directive  and  with  European  Parliament  and  Council 
Directives  2000/59/EC14 and 2002/59/EC15, as well as, if appropriate, with Regulation (EC) 
No. 725/2004; (cid:213) 

information  concerning  ships  which  have  proceeded  to  sea  without  having  complied 

(cid:214) – 
with Article 7 or 10 of Directive 2000/59/EC; (cid:213) 

information concerning ships which have been denied entry or expelled from port on 

(cid:214) – 
security grounds. (cid:213) 

(cid:208)2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 11 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

2. Member States shall maintain provisions for the exchange of information and cooperation 
between their competent authority and the competent authorities of all other Member States 
and  maintain  the  established  operational  link  between  their  competent  authority,  the 
Commission  and  the  ⌦ inspection  database. ⌫  Sirenac  information  system  set  up  in  St 
Malo, France. 

(cid:214) Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure the updating of the inspection 
database in the light of the requirements arising from this Directive. (cid:213) 

For  the  purposes  of  carrying  out  the  inspections  referred  to  in  Article  5(2)  and  Article  7, 
inspectors shall consult the public and private databases relating to ship inspection accessible 
through the Equasis information system. 

14 
15 

OJ L 332, 28.12.2000, p. 81. 
OJ L 208, 5.2.2002, p. 10. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

3. (cid:214) Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the information related 
to inspections is transferred to the inspection database without delay. (cid:213) 

The information referred to in ⌦ this ⌫ paragraph 2 shall be that specified in Annexes (cid:214) X 
and  XIV  and  all  the  information  relevant  for  the  selection  of  the  ship  in  accordance  with 
Article 5(4) (cid:213) 4 to the MOU, and that required to comply with Article 15 of this Directive. 

(cid:208) 1999/97/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 19 ⌫ 15 

⌦ Publication ⌫ Release of information 

(cid:208) 1999/97/EC Art. 1 point 2 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

1. The competent authority of each Member State shall take ⌦ the ⌫ necessary measures in 
order  to  ensure  (cid:214) the  publication  of  information  related  to  inspections,  detentions  and 
refusals  of  access  in  accordance  with  Annex  XIV (cid:213)that  information  listed  in  Annex  VIII, 
Part I, concerning ships which have been detained in, or which are subject to refusal of access 
to, a port of this Member State during the previous month, is published at least every month. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 12 

2.  The  information  listed  in  Annex  VIII,  Parts  I  and  II,  and  the  information  on  changes, 
suspensions and withdrawals of class referred to in Article 15(3) of Directive 94/57/EC, shall 
be  available  in  the  Sirenac  system.  It  shall  be  made  public  through  the  Equasis  information 
system, as soon as possible after the inspection has been completed or the detention has been 
lifted. 

(cid:208) 1999/97/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 

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. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
⌦ 2. ⌫  5.  The  provisions  of  this  Article ⌦ shall ⌫  do  not  affect  national  legislation  on 
liability. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 13 
(adapted) 

(cid:216) new 

Article 20 

Black-list on performance of ship operators and companies 

The Commission shall establish and publish every year a black-list showing the performance 
of ship operators and companies in accordance with the procedures and criteria laid down in 
Annex XV. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

Article ⌦ 21 ⌫ 16 

Reimbursement of costs 

1.  Should  the  inspections  referred  to  in  Articles  ⌦ 7  and  8 ⌫  6  and  7  confirm  or  reveal 
deficiencies in relation to the requirements of a Convention warranting the detention of a ship, 
all costs relating to the inspections in any normal accounting period shall be covered by the 
shipowner or the operator 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  ⌦ 15(4)  and  Article  10 ⌫  11(4)  shall  be  charged  to  the 
owner or operator of the ship. 

⌦ 3. ⌫ 2a. In the case of detention of a ⌦ ship ⌫ 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 operator of the ship. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 14 
(adapted) 

⌦ 4. ⌫ 3. The detention shall not be lifted until full payment has been made or a sufficient 
guarantee has been given for the reimbursement of the costs. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 15 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 22 ⌫ 17 

Data to monitor implementation 

Member  States  shall  provide 
Annex ⌦ XVI ⌫ X at the intervals stated in that Annex. 

the  Commission  with 

the 

information 

listed 

in 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 point 15 
(adapted) 

Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the Commission has a full 
and  unrestricted  access  to  all  data  administered  by  the  inspection  database  referred  to  in 
Article 18(2). 

(cid:216) new 

Article 23 

Monitoring of compliance and performance of Member States 

In  order  to  ensure  the  effective  implementation  of  this  Directive  and  to  monitor  the  overall 
functioning of the Community’s port State control regime in accordance with Article 2(b)(i) 
of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1406/2002,  the  Commission  shall  collect  the  necessary  information 
and carry out visits to Member States. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 15 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 24 ⌫ 18 

Regulatory Committee 

1.  The  Commission  shall  be  assisted  by  the  Committee  on  Safe  Seas  and  the  Prevention  of 
Pollution from Ships  (COSS)  created  by Article 3 of  Regulation (EC) No  2099/2002 of the 

(cid:208) 2002/84/EC Art. 4 pt. 2 
(adapted) 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5  November  2002  establishing  a  Committee  on 
Safe Seas and the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (COSS)16. 

2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of 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. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 15 

3. The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

Article ⌦ 25 ⌫ 19 

Amendment procedure 

This  Directive  may,  without  broadening  its  scope,  be  amended  in  accordance  with  the 
procedure laid down ⌦ referred to ⌫ in Article ⌦ 24(2) ⌫ 18(2), in order to: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 16 
(adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 16 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(a) 

adapt the obligations referred to in Articles except the figure of 25 % referred to in 
paragraph  1  thereof,  in  Articles  (cid:214) 5  to  17  and  19  to  22 (cid:213)  and  in  the  Annexes  to 
which  these  Articles  refer,  on  the  basis  of  the  experience  gained  from  the 
implementation  of  this  Directive  and  taking  into  account  developments  in  the 
⌦ Paris ⌫ MOU; 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(b) 

adapt the Annexes in order to take into account amendments which have entered into 
force to (cid:214) the Community legislation on maritime safety and security, and to (cid:213) the 
Conventions, Protocols, codes and resolutions of relevant international organizations 
and to the ⌦ Paris ⌫ MOU.; 

16 

OJ L 324, 29.11.2002, p. 1. 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(c) 

(cid:214) amend  the  definitions  in,  and (cid:213)  update,  in  Article  2(1),  the  list  of  international 
Conventions which are relevant for the purposes of this Directive. 

(cid:208) 2002/84/EC Art. 4 pt. 3(a) 
(cid:214) new 

The  amendments  to  the  international  instruments  referred  to  in  Article  2  may  be  excluded 
from the scope of this Directive, pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 2099/2002. 

(cid:208) 2002/84/EC Art. 4 pt. 3(b) 

(cid:216) new 

Article 26 

Integration of the new inspection regime into Community law 

Additional  measures  may  be  adopted,  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in 
Article 24 (2), in order to: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

establish  the  values  attributed  to  each  risk  parameter;  Flag  State  performance, 
elements  related  to  classification  societies  and  company  performance  should  be 
given higher values than other criteria; 

determine the combination of risk parameters corresponding to each level of ship risk 
profile; 

develop criteria and procedures related to the type and scope of inspections; 

develop  the  principles  and  modalities  related  to  the  inspection  commitments  of 
Member States; 

Each year, the Commission shall review the implementation of the ship risk parameters and, if 
appropriate,  make  a  proposal  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in  Article  24(2) 
with a view to adjusting the parameters in the light of experience gained or policy objectives 
to be met. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 17 
(adapted) 

Article ⌦ 27 ⌫ 19a 

⌦ Sanctions ⌫ Penalties 

Member  States  shall  lay  down  a  system  of  ⌦ sanctions ⌫  penalties  for  the  breach  of 
national  provisions  adopted  pursuant  to  this  Directive  and  shall  take  all  the  measures 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
necessary  to  ensure  that  those  ⌦ sanctions ⌫  penalties  are  applied.  The  ⌦ sanctions ⌫ 
penalties thus provided shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 3 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

⌦ Article 28 ⌫ 

⌦ Review ⌫ 

The Commission shall review the implementation of this Directive no later (cid:214) than 18 months 
after  expiry  of  the  time-limit  for  the  transposition  of  this  Directive (cid:213)22  July  2006.  The 
review will examine, inter alia, the number of port State control inspectors in each Member 
State and the number of inspections carried out, including mandatory expanded inspections. 

The  Commission  shall  communicate  the  findings  of  the  review  to  the  European  Parliament 
and  the  Council  and  shall  determine  on  the  basis  of  the  review  whether  it  is  necessary  to 
propose an amending Directive or further legislation in this area. 

(cid:208)  

Article 29 

Implementation and notification 

1.  Member  States  shall  bring  into  force  the  laws,  regulations  and  administrative  provisions 
necessary  to  comply  with  Articles  […]  and  points  […]  of  Annexes  [….]  [  articles  or 
subdivisions thereof, and points of Annexes which have been changed as to their substance by 
comparison  with  the  earlier  Directive]  not  later  than  18  months  after  the  date  fixed  in 
Article 31. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions 
and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive. 

2.  When  Member  States  adopt  those  provisions,  they  shall  contain  a  reference  to  this 
Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. 
They  shall  also  include  a  statement  that  references  in  existing  laws,  regulations  and 
administrative  provisions  to  the  directive[s]  repealed  by  this  Directive  shall  be  construed  as 
references to this Directive. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made 
and how that statement is to be formulated.  

3.  Member  States  shall  communicate  to  the  Commission  the  text  of  the  main  provisions  of 
national law adopted in the field covered by this Directive. 

4.  In  addition,  the  Commission  shall  inform  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  a 
regular basis of progress in the implementation of the Directive within the Member States. 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
 
 
Article 30 

Repeal 

Directive 95/21/EC, as amended by the Directives listed in Annex XVII, Part A, is repealed, 
with  effect  from  [date  of  entry  into  force  of  the  recast  Directive],  without  prejudice  to  the 
obligations of the Member States relating to the time-limits for transposition into national law 
of the Directives set out in Annex XVII, Part B. 

References  to  the  repealed  Directive  shall  be  construed  as  references  to  this  Directive  and 
shall be read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex XVIII. 

Article 31 

Entry into force 

This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Union. 

Articles […] and points […] of annexes […] [articles or subdivisions thereof, and points of 
annexes which are unchanged by comparison with the earlier directive shall apply from [date 
of entry into force of the recast directive]. 

Article 32 

Addressees 

This Directive is addressed to the Member States. 

Done at Brussels, […] 

For the European Parliament 
The President 
[…] 

For the Council 
The President 
[…]

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 1 (adapted) 

ANNEX I 

⌦ SELECTING ⌫ SHIPS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR PRIORITY INSPECTION 

(as referred to in Article 5(4) (2)) 

(cid:216) new 

A. 

Inspection commitments  

1. The competent authority shall ensure that an inspection is carried out on any ship in port or 
at an anchorage, other than a ship which has been selected for an expanded inspection, with a 
target factor greater than 50 in the inspection database provided that a period of at least one 
month  has  elapsed  since  the  last  inspection  carried  out  by  a  Member  State  or  by  a  State 
signatory to the Paris MOU.  

2. In selecting other ships for inspection, the competent authorities shall determine the order 
of priority as follows:  

(a) 

(b) 

the  first  ships  to  be  selected  for  inspection  shall  be  those  listed  in  Part  B.I  of  this 
Annex, irrespective of their target factor,  

the  ships  listed  in  Part  B.II  shall  be  selected  in  decreasing  order,  depending  on  the 
order of priority resulting from the value of their target factor ranges as referred to in 
the  inspection  database,  provided  that  a  period  of  at  least  one  month  has  elapsed 
since the last inspection carried out in a port or anchorage of a Member State of the 
European Union or in the Paris MOU region.  

3.  Member  States  shall  refrain  from  inspecting  ships  which  have  been  inspected  by  any 
Member  State  of  the  European  Union  or  the  Paris  MOU  region  within  the  previous 
six months, provided that:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

the  ship,  other  than  a  ship  eligible  for  an  expanded  inspection,  has  a  target  factor 
lower than 7,  

the ship is not an overriding priority under part B.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).  

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
 
4.  A  survey  of  a  ro-ro  ferry  or  a  high-speed  passenger  craft  carried  out  by  a  host  State  in 
accordance  with  Articles  6  and  8  of  Directive  1999/35/EC1  shall  be  considered  as  a  more 
detailed  or  an  expanded  inspection,  as  relevant,  and  recorded  as  such  in  the  inspection 
database.  In  the  case  of  deficiencies  which  are  clearly  hazardous  to  safety,  health  or  the 
environment, the ship shall be detained in accordance with Article 13.  

B. SHIPS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR PRIORITY INSPECTION 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 1 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

⌦ B. ⌫ I.  OVERRIDING FACTORS 

Regardless  of  the  value  of  the  target  factor,  the  following  ships  shall  be  considered  as  an 
overriding priority for inspection . : 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as having ⌦ defects ⌫ 
deficiencies  which  may  prejudice  their  safe  navigation  (pursuant  to  Directive 
93/75/EEC2  and  Article  13  of  this  Directive)  ⌦ or  pose  a  threat  of  harm  to  the 
environment in accordance with Article 17 of this Directive ⌫ . 

failed 

the  (cid:214) relevant  notification 
Ships  which  have 
to  comply  with 
requirements (cid:213)obligations  laid  down  in  Directive  93/75/EEC(cid:214) referred  to  in 
Article 6  of  this  Directive,  in  Directive  2000/59/EC,  Directive  2002/59/EC  and,  if 
appropriate, in Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 (cid:213). 

Ships  which  have  been  the  subject  of  a  report  or  notification  by  another  Member 
State. 

Ships  which  have  been  reported  by  a  Member  State  for  failure  to  comply  with  the 
Recommendation  on navigation through the entrances to  the Baltic Sea  as given in 
the Annexes to Resolution MSC.138(76) of the IMO. 

(cid:216) new 

1 
2 

OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 1. 
OJ No L 247, 5.10.1993, p. 19. 

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 1 (adapted) 
(cid:206)1 1999/97/EC Art. 1 pt. 3 and 
Annex pt. 1(a) 
(cid:214) new 

5. 4. 

Ships  which  have  been  the  subject  of  a  report  or  complaint  by  the  master,  a  crew 
member,  or  any  person  or  organiszation  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. 

6. 5. 

Ships which have been: 

(a) 

involved in a collision, grounding or stranding on their way to the port,; 

(b) 

accused  of  an  alleged  violation  of  the  provisions  on  discharge  of  harmful 
substances or effluents,; 

(c)  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 

(d)  otherwise operated in such a manner as to pose a danger to persons, property or 

the environment. 

7. 6. 

Ships  which  have  been  suspended  (cid:206)1 or  withdrawn (cid:205)from  their  class  for  safety 
reasons in the course of the preceding six months (cid:214) since the last inspection in the 
European Union or in the Paris MOU region. (cid:213). 

8. 

Ships  carrying  certificates  issued  by  a  former  recognised  organisation  whose 
recognition  has  been  withdrawn.  in  accordance  with  Article  9  of  Directive  XX/XX 
on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organizations and for 
the relevant activities of maritime administrations 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 19 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

⌦ B. ⌫ II.  OVERALL TARGETING FACTOR 

(cid:214) The competent authority shall select the ships listed below in decreasing order, depending 
on the order of priority resulting from the value of their target factor ranges as referred to in 
the inspection database. (cid:213) The following ships shall be considered as priority for inspection. 

EN 

50 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

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 
⌦ Paris ⌫  MOU.  In  the  absence  of  appropriate  data  for  this  purpose,  Member 
States  shall  rely  upon  the  available  Sirenac  data  ⌦ in  the  inspection  database ⌫ 
and inspect those ships which ⌦ do not appear in the inspection database ⌫ have 
not been registered in the Sirenac following the entry into force of that database on 1 
January 1993. 

Ships not inspected by any Member State within the previous six months. 

Ships whose statutory certificates on the ship's construction and equipment, issued in 
accordance  with  the  Cconventions,  and  the  classification  certificates,  have  been 
issued  by  organisations  which  are  not  recognised  under  the  terms  of  [Council 
Directive 94/57/EC]. 

Ships  flying  the  flag  of  a  State  ⌦ whose  detention  rate,  as  calculated  on  the  last 
three  calendar  years  of  inspections  recorded  in  the  inspection  database,  falls 
into ⌫appearing  in  the  black  list  as  ⌦ defined  by ⌫  in  the  annual  report  of  the 
⌦ Paris ⌫ MOU. 

Ships which have been permitted to leave the port (cid:214) or anchorage (cid:213) of a Member 
State on certain conditions, such as: 

(a) 

deficiencies to be rectified before departure; 

(b)  deficiencies to be rectified at the next port of call; 

(c) 

deficiencies to be 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 into account. 

Ships  for  which  deficiencies  have  been  recorded  during  a  previous  inspection, 
according to the number of deficiencies. 

Ships which have been detained in a previous port (cid:214) or anchorage (cid:213) . 

Ships  flying  the  flag  of  a  country  which  has  not  ratified  all  relevant  international 
Cconventions referred to in Article 2 of this Directive. 

Ships classed with classification (cid:214) societies described as having a performance level 
of “low” or “very low” in the table of “three-year detention rates per Classification 
Society”  published  by  the  Paris  MOU. (cid:213)  society  with  deficiency  ratio  above 
average. 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 19 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

10. 

11. 

Ships of the categories referred to in Annex ⌦ VIII(B). ⌫ V(A). 

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  MOUItems  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 ⌦ 8(3) ⌫ 7.4, the overall target factor shall not take 
into account item 10. 

(cid:214) For the purposes of items 4 and 9, the lists defined by the Paris MOU shall enter into force 
as from the 1 July each year following the calendar year on which the statistics are based. (cid:213)

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX II 

Main elements of the Community Port State Inspection Regime  
(as referred to in Article 5(2)) 

The following elements shall be included in the Community Port State Inspection Regime: 

I. 

SHIP RISK PROFILE 

The risk profile of a ship is determined by a combination of the following parameters: 

(a) 

Type of ship 

Passenger  ships,  oil  and  chemical  tankers,  gas  carriers  and  bulk  carriers  are  considered  as 
posing a higher risk. 

(b) 

Age of ship 

Older ships are considered as posing a higher risk. 

(c) 

Flag State performance 

(i) 

Ships flying the flag of a State with a high detention rate within the EU and 
Paris MOU region are considered as posing a higher risk. 

(ii)  Ships flying the flag of a State with a low detention rate within the EU and 

Paris MOU region are considered as posing a lower risk. 

(iii)  Ships flying the flag of a State for which an independent audit has been carried 
out  in  accordance  with  the  Code  for  the  implementation  of  mandatory  IMO 
instruments which has demonstrated compliance with the relevant instruments 
are considered as posing a lower risk. 

(d) 

Recognised organisations 

(i) 

Ships  which  have  been  delivered  certificates  from  recognised  organisations 
having  a  low  or  very  low  performance  level  in  relation  with  their  detention 
rates  within  the  EU  and  the  Paris  MOU  region  are  considered  as  posing  a 
higher risk. 

(ii)  Ships  which  have  been  delivered  certificates  from  recognised  organisations 
having a high performance level in relation with their detention rates within the 
EU and the Paris MOU region are considered as posing a lower risk. 

(iii)  Ships  with  certificates  issued  by  organisations  recognised  under  the  terms  of 

Council Directive 94/57/EC are considered as posing a lower risk. 

(e) 

Company performance 

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
 
(i) 

Ships of a company with a low or very low performance as determined by its 
ships’ deficiency and detention rates within the European Union and the Paris 
MOU region are considered as posing a higher risk. 

(ii)  Ships  of  a  company  with  a  high  performance  as  determined  by  its  ships’ 
deficiency and detention rates within the European Union and the Paris MOU 
region are considered as posing a lower risk. 

(f) 

Inspection history in the European Union and Paris MOU region 

(i) 

Ships  which  have  been  detained  more  than  once  are  considered  as  posing  a 
higher risk. 

(ii)  Ships  which  have  not  been  detained  within  the  previous  36  months  and  have 

had few deficiencies are considered as posing a lower risk. 

The risk parameters referred to in the first subparagraph shall be combined to determine the 
following ship risk profiles: 

– 

– 

– 

high risk, 

standard risk, 

low risk. 

In  determining  these  risk  profiles  greater  emphasis  will  be  given  to  the  parameters  for  flag 
State performance, recognised organisations and company performance 

II –INSPECTION OF SHIPS 

Ships calling at Community ports are subject to periodic inspections at regular intervals, and 
to additional inspections when unexpected factors arise. 

1. 

Periodic inspections 

The intervals between periodic inspections shall be determined by the ship risk profile. The 
interval  between  periodic  inspections  of  high  risk  ships  shall  not  exceed  6  months.  The 
interval between periodic inspections of ships of other risk profiles shall increase as the risk 
decreases. 

Member States shall carry out a periodic inspection on: 

– 

– 

Any  ship  with  a  high  risk  profile  which  has  not  been  inspected  in  a  port  of  the 
European  Union  or  of  the  Paris  MOU  region  during  the  last  6  months.  High  risk 
ships become eligible for inspection as from the fifth month. 

Any ship with a standard risk profile which has not been inspected in a port of the 
European Union or of the Paris MOU region during the last 12 months. Standard risk 
ships become eligible for inspection as from the tenth month. 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
– 

Any ship with a low risk profile which has not been inspected in a port of the EU or 
of the Paris MOU region during the last 36 months. Low risk ships become eligible 
for inspection as from the 24th month. 

2. 

Additional inspections 

Ships to which the following unexpected factors apply are subject to an inspection regardless 
of the period since their last periodic inspection. 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Ships  which  have  been  suspended  or  withdrawn  from  their  class  for  safety  reasons 
since the last inspection in the European Union or in the Paris MOU region. 

Ships  carrying  certificates  issued  by  a  formerly  recognised  organisation  whose 
recognition has been withdrawn since the last inspection in the European Union or in 
the Paris MOU region. 

Ships  which  have  been  the  subject  of  a  report  or  notification  by  another  Member 
State. 

Ships which cannot be identified in the inspection database. 

Ships which : 

– 

– 

– 

– 

have been involved in a collision, grounding or stranding on their way to the 
port; 

have  been  accused  of  an  alleged  violation  of  the  provisions  on  discharge  of 
harmful substances or effluents, or 

have  manoeuvred  in  an  erratic  or  unsafe  manner  whereby  routing  measures, 
adopted by the IMO, or safe navigation practices and procedures have not been 
followed. 

otherwise  been  operated  in  such  a  manner  as  to  pose  a  danger  to  persons, 
property or the environment, or 

– 

not complied with recommendations on navigation adopted by the IMO. 

Ships which have been reported by pilots or port authorities as having defects which 
may  prejudice  their  safe  navigation  or  pose  a  threat  of  harm  to  the  environment  in 
accordance with Article 17 of this Directive . 

Ships  which  have  failed  to  comply  with  the  relevant  notification  requirements 
referred  to  in  Article  6  of  this  Directive,  in  Directive  2000/59/EC,  Directive 
2002/59/EC and if appropriate in Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004. 

Ships  which  have  been  the  subject  of  a  report  or  complaint  by  the  master,  a  crew 
member, or any person or organisation 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. 

EN 

55 

   EN 

 
– 

– 

– 

– 

Ships which have been previously detained more than three months ago. 

Ships which have been reported with outstanding deficiencies. 

Ships which have been reported with problems concerning their cargo, in particular 
noxious and dangerous cargoes. 

Ships  which  have  been  operated  in  such  a  manner  as  to  pose  a  danger  to  persons, 
property or the environment. 

3. 

Scope of inspections 

Periodic  and  additional  inspections  shall  include  an  examination  of  pre-identified  areas  for 
each  ship  which  will  vary  according  to  the  type  of  the  ship,  the  type  of  inspection  and  the 
findings  of  previous  port  state  controls.  Periodic  inspections  of  high  risk  ships  and  ships 
posing a higher risk due to their type and age, and re-inspections of ships to which a refusal of 
access order has been issued in accordance with Annex XII shall be more in-depth. 

The inspection database will indicate the elements to identify the risk areas to be checked at 
each inspection. 

III – INSPECTION COMMITMENTS OF MEMBER STATES 

Member  States  shall  contribute  an  equitable  effort  towards  the  objective  of  inspecting  all 
eligible ships calling at EU ports. 

A Member State shall carry out a proportion of the total number of inspections required in the 
Paris  MOU  Region.  This  proportion  is  based  on  the  number  of  individual  ships  calling  at 
ports  of  the  Member  State  concerned  relative  to  the  sum  of  the  number  of  individual  ships 
calling at each Member State. 

In addition the compliance of Member States with the above objective shall be evaluated in 
the light of the number of missed periodic inspections. 

A mechanism shall be developed, as appropriate, for a fair sharing of the inspections between 
Member States. 

EN 

56 

   EN 

 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX III 

Notification 

(as referred to in Article 6) 

1. The operator, agent or master of a ship eligible for an expanded inspection in accordance 
with Article 8(1) bound for a port or anchorage of a Member State shall notify the information 
listed  below  to  the  port  authority  or  to  the  authority  or  body  designated  for  that  purpose  at 
least three days before the expected time of arrival in the port or anchorage or before leaving 
the previous port or anchorage if the voyage is expected to take fewer than three days: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

ship identification (name, call sign, IMO identification number or MMSI number); 

planned duration of the call; 

for tankers: 

(i) 

configuration: single hull, single hull with SBT, double hull; 

(ii) 

condition of the cargo and ballast tanks: full, empty, inerted; 

(iii)  volume and nature of the cargo; 

planned  operations  at  the  port  or  anchorage  of  destination  (loading,  unloading, 
other); 

planned statutory survey inspections and substantial maintenance and repair work to 
be carried out whilst in the port or anchorage of destination; 

(f) 

date of last expanded inspection in the Paris MOU. 

2. The operators, agents or masters of other ships bound for a port of a Member State shall 
notify their arrival in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/59/EC. 

3. On receipt of the information listed above, the relevant port authority or body shall forward 
such information to the port State control competent authority. Electronic means shall be used 
whenever possible. 

4.  The  procedures  and  formats  developed  by  the  Member  States  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Annex  shall  comply  with  the  relevant  provisions  laid  down  in  Directive  2002/59/EC 
regarding ships’ notifications. 

EN 

57 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

ANNEX ⌦ IV⌫ II 

LIST OF CERTIFICATES AND DOCUMENTS 

(⌦ as ⌫ referred to in Article 76(1)) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

International Tonnage Certificate (1969). 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Passenger Ship Safety Certificate; 

Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate; 

Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate; 

Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelegraphy Certificate; 

Cargo Ship Safety Radiotelephony Certificate; 

Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate; 

– 

Exemption certificate, including, where appropriate, the list of cargoes; 

(cid:208) 1999/97/EC Art. 1 pt. 4(a) 

– 

Cargo Ship Safety Certificate. 

International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC). 

Continuous Synopsis Record. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 3. 

International Certificate of Fitness for Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk; 

– 

Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk. 

6. 4. 

International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk; 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
– 

Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk. 

7. 5. 

International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate. 

8. 6. 

International  Pollution  Prevention  Certificate  for  the  Carriage  of  Noxious  Liquid 
Substances in Bulk. 

9. 7. 

International Load Line Certificate (1966); 

– 

International Load Line Exemption Certificate. 

10. 8.  Oil record book, parts I and II. 

11. 9.  Cargo record book. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 20(a) 
(cid:214) new 

12. 10.  Minimum Safe Manning Document. 

13. 10a. Certificates  (cid:214) or  any  other  documents (cid:213)  issued  in  accordance  with  the  STCW 

Convention. 

14. 11.  Medical certificates, (see ILO Convention No 73 concerning Medical Examination of 

Seafarers). 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

15. 

16. 

Table of shipboard working arrangements (ILO Convention No.180 and STCW 95). 

Records of hours of work and rest of seafarers (ILO Convention No.180). 

(cid:216) new 

17. 12.  Stability information. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 2.1 

18. 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). 

EN 

59 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC 
(cid:214) new 

19. 14.  Certificates  as  to  the  ship's  hull  strength  and  machinery  installations  issued  by  the 
classification society (cid:214) recognised organisation (cid:213) in question (only to be required if 
its  class  with  a  classification  society  (cid:214) recognised 
the  ship  maintains 
organisation (cid:213)). 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 2.2 
(cid:214) new 

20. 15.  Document of compliance with the special requirements for ships carrying dangerous 

goods. 

21. 16.  High speed craft safety certificate and permit to operate high speed craft. 

22. 17.  Dangerous goods special list or manifest, or detailed stowage plan. 

23. 18.  Ship's log book with  respect to  the records of tests and drills, (cid:214) including security 
drills, (cid:213)  and  the  log  for  records  of  inspection  and  maintenance  of  lifesaving 
appliances and arrangements (cid:214) and of fire fighting appliances and arrangements (cid:213) . 

24. 19.  Special purpose ship safety certificate. 

25. 20.  Mobile offshore drilling unit safety certificate. 

26. 21.  For oil tankers, the record of oil discharge monitoring and control system for the last 

ballast voyage. 

27. 22.  The muster list, fire control plan, and for passenger ships, a damage control plan. 

28. 23.  Shipboard oil pollution emergency plan. 

29. 24.  Survey report files (in case of bulk carriers and oil tankers). 

30. 25.  Reports of previous port State control inspections. 

31. 26.  For ro-ro passenger ships, information on the A/A-maximum ratio. 

32. 27.  Document of authorization for the carriage of grain. 

33. 28.  Cargo securing manual. 

34. 29.  Garbage management plan and garbage record book. 

35. 30.  Decision support system for masters of passenger ships. 

(cid:208) 1999/97/EC Art. 1 pt. 4(b) 

EN 

60 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
36. 31.  SAR cooperation plan for passenger ships trading on fixed routes. 

37. 32.  List of operational limitations for passenger ships. 

38. 33.  Bulk carrier booklet. 

39. 34.  Loading and unloading plan for bulk carriers. 

40. 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). 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 20(b) 

(cid:216) new 

41. 

42. 

Certificates  required  under  Directive  2006/XX/EC  concerning  civil  liability  and 
financial guarantees of shipowners. 

Certificate  required  under  Regulation  (EC)  No.  XXXX/2006  on  the  liability  of 
carriers of passengers by sea and inland waterways in the event of accidents. 

EN 

61 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 3 (adapted) 
(cid:206)1 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 21 

ANNEX ⌦ V ⌫ III 

EXAMPLES OF “«CLEAR GROUNDS”» FOR A MORE DETAILED INSPECTION 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

(as referred to in Article 7 6(3)) 

Ships  identified  in  Annex  I,  Part  B.I  and  Part  B.II,  paragraphs  II-3,  II-4,  II-5b,  II-
5c(cid:206)1 and II-8 (cid:205). 

The oil record book has not been properly kept. 

During examination of the certificates and other documentation, (see Article 6(1)(a) 
and (2)), inaccuracies have been revealed. 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 3 (adapted) 

Indications  that  the  crew  members  are  unable  to  comply  with  the  requirements 
⌦ related to on-board communication ⌫ of ⌦ set out in ⌫ Article 8 ⌦ 17 ⌫ of 
Council Directive 94/58/EC ⌦ 2001/25/EC ⌫ of ⌦ the European Parliament and 
of the Council ⌫ 22 November 1994 on the minimum level of training of seafarers1. 

(cid:216) new 

A certificate has been fraudulently  obtained  or the  holder of a certificate is not the 
person to whom that certificate was originally issued, 

The  ship  has  a  master,  officer  or  rating  holding  a  certificate  issued  by  a  country 
which has not ratified the STCW Convention. 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 3 

7. 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 to the 
cargo tanks is above the prescribed maximum level. 

8. 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. 

1 

OJ L 136, 18.5.2001, p. 17. 

EN 

62 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
9. 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. 

10. 8.  The emission of false distress alerts not followed by proper cancellation procedures. 

11. 9.  The absence of principal equipment or arrangements required by the conventions. 

12. 10.  Excessively unsanitary conditions on board the ship. 

13. 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. 

14. 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. 

15. 

The absence of a table of shipboard working arrangements or of records of hours of 
work or rest of seafarers. 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

63 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 4 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

ANNEX ⌦ VI ⌫ IV 

PROCEDURES FOR THE CONTROL OF SHIPS 

(as referred to in Article7 6(45)) 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Principles  of  safe  manning  (IMO  Resolution  ⌦ A.890(21)  as  amended) ⌫ 
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). 

The provisions of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code. 

International  Labour  Organisation  (ILO)  publication  “«Inspection  of  Labour 
Conditions on Board Ship: Guidelines for procedures”». 

Annex  I,  “«Port  State  Control  Procedures”»  to  the  Paris  MOU  (cid:214) and  the  relevant 
instructions or guidelines issued by the Paris MOU (cid:213) . 

IMO  Resolution  MSC.159(78)  (adopted  on  21  May  2004)  “Interim  guidance  on 
control and compliance measures to enhance maritime security”. 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

64 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX VII 

Procedures for the control of ships on security aspects 

(as referred to in Article 7(6)) 

A. 

Prior to boarding. 

1. This guidance applies only to ships mentioned in articles 3(1), 3(2) and 3(3) of Regulation 
(EC) No. 725/2004, as long as they do not fly the flag of the port state of inspection. 

2. Inspectors should be aware of the security level of the port facility at which a ship is to be 
inspected. 

3. Reports or complaints relating to security received by inspectors prior to boarding the ship 
should be passed to the competent authority for maritime security1 who will decide on priority 
for security inspection by an Officer Duly Authorised for Security.  

4. While the master of a ship has discretion for ship security, he is not entitled to deny access 
to  a  duly  authorised  inspector  to  carry  out  an  inspection.  There  may  be  cases  when  it  is 
mandatory  to  carry  out  a  port  State  control  inspection  but  the  master  attempts  to  limit  the 
inspection on grounds of security. If the inspector considers this to be unreasonable he should 
consult the competent security authority. 

5. Inspectors should be aware that on a ship at security level 3 the protective measures set up 
may restrict the scope of the “safety” port State control inspection. 

For  example  a  full  emergency  drill  may  not  be  allowed.  There  may  also  be  circumstances 
where the competent security authority restricts port State control activity. 

B. 

Initial inspection 

During the initial inspection the inspector should: 

1. while approaching and boarding the ship and moving around the ship take note of security 
aspects  as  defined  in  the  relevant  guidelines  of  the  Paris  MOU,  taking  into  account  the 
security  level  imposed  by  the  port  and  ship.  Inspectors  are  not  required  to  test  the  security 
system and should only consider those aspects which arise during the course of their normal 
business on board; 

2.  check  that  the  International  Ship  Security  Certificate  (ISSC)  or  the  Interim  ISSC  is  on 
board, valid and has been issued by the ship’s Administration, an organisation authorised by it 
or by another State at the request of the Administration; 

3. ask the master with which security level the ship is complying and confirm that this is at 
least the level imposed by the port; 

1 

The Authority designated by the State for the application of security measures. 

EN 

65 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
4. when checking other documentation ask for evidence that security drills have been carried 
out  at  appropriate  intervals  –  at  least  every  3  months  but  also  after  certain  crew  changes  - 
(ISPS Code Part A section 13 and Part B paragraphs 13.6 and 13.7) and seek information on 
any exercise involving the ship; 

5. check the records of the last 10 calls at port facilities including any ship/port or ship/ship 
interfaces which should include for each interface: 

– 

– 

security  level  at  which  ship  operated  -  any  special  or  additional  security  measures 
that were taken, 

that  appropriate  ship  security  measures  were  maintained  during  any  ship/ship 
activity. 

6.  assess  whether  key  members  of  the  ship’s personnel  are  able  to  communicate  effectively 
with each other. 

C. 

Clear grounds 

1. The inspector may establish clear grounds for further control measures on security during 
the initial PSC inspection as follows: 

1.1. 

ISSC is not valid or it has expired 

1.2. 

The ship is at a lower security level than the port 

1.3. 

Drills related to the security of the ship have not been carried out 

1.4. 

Records for the last 10 ship/port or ship/ship interfaces are incomplete 

1.5. 

Evidence or observation that key members of ship’s personnel cannot communicate 
with each other 

1.6. 

Evidence from observations that serious deficiencies exist in security arrangements 

1.7 

1.8 

Information  from  third  parties  such  as  a  report  or  a  complaint  concerning  security 
related information 

The ship holds a subsequent, consecutively issued Interim International Ship Security 
Certificate  (ISSC)  and  in  the  professional  judgement  of  the  inspector  one  of  the 
purposes  of  the  ship  or  company  in  requesting  such  a  certificate  is  to  avoid  full 
compliance with SOLAS74 Ch XI-2 and part A of the ISPS Code, beyond the period 
of the initial Interim Certificate. ISPS Code Part A specify the circumstances when 
an Interim Certificate may be issued. 

2. If clear grounds as described above are established the inspector will immediately inform 
the  competent  security  authority  (unless  the  inspector  is  also  a  Officer  Duly  Authorised  for 
Security). The competent security authority will then decide on what further control measures 
are  necessary  taking  into  account  the  security  level  in  accordance  with  Regulation  9  of 
SOLAS Chapter XI. 

EN 

66 

   EN 

 
3.  Clear  grounds  other  than  those  above  are  a  matter  for  the  Officer  Duly  Authorised  for 
Security. 

D. 

Further control measures. 

1. If there is no valid International Ship Security Certificate (ISSC) or Interim ISSC onboard 
the  inspector  will  detain  the  ship  and  apply  the  detention  procedure  in  Annex  XI  of  this 
Directive. 

2. All other control measures will be decided by the competent security authority. These are 
listed in SOLAS 74 Chapter XI-2. 

3.  Subject  to  applicable  requirements  in  Community  legislation,  national  legislation  and 
arrangements  the  competent  security  authority  may  request  the  inspector  to  make  further 
verifications before coming to a decision or until Officers Duly Authorised for Security can 
board the ship. 

These verifications should be limited to: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

verifying that a security plan is on board and that a ship security officer (SSO) is on 
board; 

verifying that the master and ship’s personnel, in particular the SSO, duty officer and 
person(s)  controlling  access,  are  familiar  with  essential  shipboard  security 
procedures; 

verifying  that  communication  has  been  established  between  the  SSO  and  the  Port 
Facility Security Officer; 

(d) 

verifying that records exist for maintaining the ship’s security system including: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

internal audits and reviews of security activities, 

periodic review of the ship security assessment, 

periodic review of the ship security plan, 

implementation of any amendments to the ship security plan, 

maintenance,  calibration  and  testing  of  any  security  equipment  provided  on 
board including testing of the ship security alert system; 

(e) 

checking records of any: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

security threats, 

breaches of security, 

changes in security levels, 

communications relating to the direct security of the ship. 

EN 

67 

   EN 

 
4.  Where  the  only  means  to  verify  or  rectify  the  non  compliance  is  to  review  the  relevant 
requirements of the ship security plan, limited access to specific sections of the plan relating 
to the non compliance is exceptionally allowed, but only with the consent of the flag State, or 
the  master,  of  the  ship  concerned.  These  specific  sections  are  listed  in  Part  A  of  the  ISPS 
Code. 

5. Some provisions of the plan relating to certain confidential information cannot be subject to 
inspection unless agreed by the flag State concerned. 

These specific sections are listed in Part A of the ISPS Code. 

6. If the competent security takes further control actions which limit the scope of or prevent 
the completion of the “safety” port state control inspection the inspector should liaise with the 
competent security authority and endeavour to complete the safety inspection when the ship 
has been cleared. The principle of not unduly delaying a ship still applies. However the fact 
that  security  breaches  have  been  found  would  normally  justify  the  inspector  completing  the 
initial safety inspection or continuing where clear grounds for a more detailed inspection of 
non-security aspects have been found. 

7.  If  the  competent  security  authority  decides  to  expel  the  ship  the  inspector  should  ensure 
that  the  competent  security  authority  is  made  fully  aware  of  the  possible  safety  and/or 
environmental  consequences  of  the  ship  leaving  the  berth  and/or  putting  to  sea.  This  may 
include  risks  arising  from  the  interruption  of  cargo  operations.  The  competent  security 
authority should decide on the necessary action taking account of all risks. 

8.  If  a  ship  is  detained  on  non-security  grounds  but  then  expelled  before  the  ship  is  finally 
released, the detention will count towards a refusal of access in accordance with Article 10.

EN 

68 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

ANNEX ⌦ VIII ⌫ V 

⌦ PROCEDURES FOR EXPANDED INSPECTIONS OF SHIPS ⌫ 

⌦ (as referred to in Article 8) ⌫ 

(cid:216) new 

A. 

MEASURES  TO  FACILITATE  THE  CONDUCT  OF  AN  EXPANDED 
INSPECTION 

On reception of a pre-notification provided by a ship eligible for an expanded inspection, the 
competent  authority  shall  inform  the  ship  without  delay  whether  or  not  an  expanded 
inspection will be carried out.  

The operator or master of the ship shall ensure that sufficient time is available in the operating 
schedule to allow the expanded inspection to be carried out. 

Without prejudice to control measures required for security purposes the ship shall remain in 
the port or anchorage until the inspection is completed. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

B.A. CATEGORIES OF SHIPS SUBJECT TO EXPANDED INSPECTION (as referred to in 

Article 8 7(1)) 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Gas and chemical tankers older than (cid:214) 12 (cid:213) 10 years of age, as determined on the 
basis of the date of construction indicated in the ship's safety certificates. 

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. 

Oil tankers with a gross tonnage of more than 3 000 ⌦ gt ⌫ gross tonnes and older 
than (cid:214) 12 (cid:213) 15 years of age, as determined on the basis of the date of construction 
indicated in the ship's safety certificates. 

Passenger  ships  older  than  (cid:214) 12 (cid:213)  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. 

EN 

69 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
B. INFORMATION TO BE NOTIFIED TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY 

(as referred to in Article 7(3)(a) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 

A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

E. 

name, 

flag, 

IMO identification number, if any, 

dead-weight tonnage, 

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. 

J. 

planned operations at the port of destination (loading, unloading, other), 

planned statutory survey inspections and substantial maintenance and repair work to 
be carried out whilst in the port of destination. 

EN 

70 

   EN 

 
 
C.  PROCEDURES  RELATING  TO  EXPANDED 

INSPECTION  OF  CERTAIN 

CATEGORIES OF SHIPS (as referred to in Article 8(4)) 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 ⌦ point B ⌫) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

–  (cid:214) Simulated  main  power  failure  (black-out  test) (cid:213)  Black-out  and  start  of 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

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,  ⌦ as  far  as ⌫  to  the  extent  possible,  test  of  engine  room 
separator. 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

EN 

71 

   EN 

 
 
 
2. 

GAS AND CHEMICAL TANKERS 

In addition to the items listed under section 1 ⌦ point C(1) ⌫ , the following items 
are to be considered as part of the expanded inspection for gas and chemical tankers: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

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 cargo being 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 ⌦ point C(1) ⌫ , the following items 
are to be considered as part of the expanded inspection for bulk carriers: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 

– 

– 

– 

– 

possible corrosion of deck machinery mountings, 

possible deformation and/or corrosion of hatch covers, 

possible cracks or local corrosion in transverse bulkheads, 

access to cargo holds, 

EN 

72 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
– 

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 ⌦ point C(1) ⌫ , the following items 
are to be considered as part of an expanded inspection of oil tankers: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

fixed deck foam system, 

fire-fighting equipment in general, 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 

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  tanks  within  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). 

EN 

73 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
5. 

PASSENGER SHIPS NOT COVERED BY DIRECTIVE 1999/35/EC 

In  addition  to  the  items  listed  under  section  C  1 ⌦ point  C(1) ⌫  ,  the  following 
items may also be considered as part of the expanded inspection for passenger ships: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 

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, 

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. 

EN 

74 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 22 
(adapted) 

ANNEX ⌦ IX ⌫ XI 

PROVISIONS CONCERNING REFUSAL OF ACCESS TO COMMUNITY PORTS 

(cid:216) new 

(as referred to in Article 10) 

A.  CATEGORIES  OF  SHIPS  SUBJECT  TO  REFUSAL  OF  ACCESS  TO  COMMUNITY 

PORTS  

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 

(as referred to in Article 7b9(1)) 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Gas and chemical tankers. 

Bulk carriers. 

Oil tankers. 

Passenger ships. 

(cid:216) new 

A. CRITERIA FOR REFUSAL OF ACCESS (as referred to in Article 10(1)) 

1. 

2. 

The  refusal  of  access  is  applicable  to  any  ship  flying  the  flag  of  a  State  whose 
detention rate falls into the black list or grey list as defined by the Paris MOU which 
has  been  detained  or  issued  with  a  prevention  of  operation  order  under  Council 
Directive  99/35/EC  more  than  twice  in  the  course  of  the  preceding  36  months  in  a 
port of a Member State or of a State signatory of the MOU. 

For  the  purposes  of  paragraph1,  the  list  defined  by  the  Paris  MOU  shall  enter  into 
force as from 1 July each year.  

B. 

PROCEDURES  RELATING  TO  REFUSAL  OF  ACCESS  TO  COMMUNITY 
PORTS (as referred to in Article 10(1)) 7b 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

EN 

75 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

2. 

If  the  conditions  described  in  ⌦ Point  A ⌫  Article  7b  are  met,  the  competent 
authority of the port (cid:214) or anchorage (cid:213) in which the ship is detained for the second 
or third time, as appropriate, ⌦ shall ⌫ must inform the (cid:214) master (cid:213) captain and 
the owner or the operator of the ship in writing (cid:214) that a refusal of access order will 
be issued which will become applicable immediately after the ship has left the port or 
anchorage (cid:213) of the access refusal order served on the ship (cid:214) . The refusal of access 
order  shall  become  applicable  immediately  after  the  ship  has  left  the  port  or 
anchorage after the deficiencies leading to the detention have been remedied. (cid:213) 

The competent authority ⌦ shall ⌫ must (cid:214) send a copy of the order of refusal of 
access  to (cid:213)  inform  the  flag  State  administration,  the  recognised  organisation 
concerned, the other Member States (cid:214) , and the other signatories to the MOU, (cid:213) the 
Commission  the  Centre  administratif  des  affaires  maritimes  and  the  ⌦ Paris ⌫ 
MOU  Secretariat.  (cid:214) The  competent  authority  shall  also  update  the  inspection 
database with information on the refusal of access without delay (cid:213). 

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. 

(cid:216) new 

3. 

The  refusal  of  access  order  shall  be  lifted  only  after  a  period  of  three  months  has 
passed from the date of issue of the order and when the conditions in paragraphs 4 to 
10 are met.  

If  the  ship  is  subject  to  a  second  refusal  of  access,  the  period  shall  be  of  twelve 
months. Any subsequent detention in a port of the Community shall result in the ship 
being permanently refused access in any port or anchorage within the Community. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(cid:214) new 

4. 2. 

5. 

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 
(cid:214) document (cid:213) certificate from the flag State administration (cid:214) issued following an 
on-board  visit  by  a  surveyor  duly  authorized  by  the  flag  State  administration, (cid:213) 
showing that the ship fully conforms to the applicable provisions of the international 
Cconventions.  (cid:214) The  flag  State  administration  shall  provide  evidence  to  the 
competent authority that a visit on board has taken place. (cid:213)  

The  request  for  the  lifting  of  the  access  refusal  order  must  also  be  accompanied, 
where  appropriate,  by  a  (cid:214) document (cid:213)  certificate  from  the  classification  society 
which  has  the  ship  in  class  (cid:214) following  an  on-board  visit  by  a  surveyor  from  the 
classification  society, (cid:213)  showing  that  the  ship  conforms  to  the  class  standards 
stipulated by that society. (cid:214) The classification society shall provide evidence to the 
competent authority that a visit on board has taken place. (cid:213) 

EN 

76 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
6. 3. 

The  access  refusal  order  may  be  lifted  only  (cid:214) ,  after  the  period  of  three  months 
referred to in paragraph 3 above has elapsed and (cid:213) following a re-inspection of the 
ship at an agreed port (cid:214) or anchorage. (cid:213) 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 Conventions 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

If the agreed port is located within the Community, If the agreed port or anchorage is 
located  in  a  Member  State,  the  competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  of  the 
(cid:214) that State (cid:213) port of destination may, ⌦ at the request ⌫ with the agreement of 
the  competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  that  imposed  (cid:214) which  issued (cid:213)  the 
access refusal order, authorise the ship to (cid:214) enter the agreed port  in order  to carry 
out  the  re-inspection (cid:213)  proceed  to  the  port  of  destination  in  question,  for  the  sole 
purpose of verifying that the ship meets the conditions specified in paragraph 2. (cid:214) In 
such cases, no cargo operations shall take place at the port until the refusal of access 
order has been lifted. (cid:213) 

(cid:216) new 

7. 

8. 

If  the  detention  which  led  to  the  issue  of  a  refusal  of  access  order  included 
deficiencies in the ship’s structure, the competent authority which issued the refusal 
of access order may require that certain spaces, including cargo spaces and tanks, are 
made available for examination during the re-inspection. 

The  re-inspection  shall  be  carried  out  by  the  competent  authority  of  the  Member 
State that imposed the refusal of access order, or by the competent authority of the 
port  of  destination  with  the  agreement  of  the  competent  authority  of  the  Member 
State that imposed the refusal of access order. The competent authority may require 
up  to  14  days  notice  for  the  re-inspection.  Evidence  shall  be  provided  to  the 
satisfaction  of  this  Member  State  that  the  ship  fully  complies  with  the  applicable 
requirements of the International Conventions. 

9. 

The re-inspection shall consist of an expanded inspection that must cover at least the 
relevant items of Annex VIII V, section ⌦ point ⌫ C. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 

10. 

All costs of this expanded inspection will be borne by the owner or the operator. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 

EN 

77 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

11. 4. 

12. 

If the results of the expanded inspection satisfy the Member State in accordance with 
paragraph  2  ⌦ Annex  VIII  point  C ⌫,  the  access  refusal  order  must  be  lifted 
⌦ and  the  company  of  the  ship  informed  thereof  in  writing. ⌫  The  owner  or  the 
operator of the ship must be informed thereof in writing. 

The competent authority ⌦ shall ⌫ must also notify its decision in writing to the 
flag  State  administration,  the  classification  society  concerned,  the  other  Member 
States,  (cid:214) the  other  signatories  to  the  Paris  MOU, (cid:213)  the  Commission,  the  Centre 
administratif  des  affaires  maritimes  and  the  ⌦ Paris ⌫  MOU  Secretariat.  (cid:214) The 
competent authority must also update the inspection database with information on the 
removal of the access without delay. (cid:213) 

5 13. 

Information relating to ships that have been refused access to Community ports must 
be made available in the SIReNaC system ⌦ inspection database ⌫ and published 
in conformity with the provisions of Article 15 19 and of Annex VIII XIV. 

EN 

78 

   EN 

 
 
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): 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

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  gross  tonnage  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: 

(a) 

(b) 

cargo ships of 20 000 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 3 000 gross tonnage and upwards but less than 20 000 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. 

EN 

79 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

ANNEX ⌦ X ⌫ IX 

Inspection report  

(as referred to in Article 11)8 

The inspection report must contain at least the following items. 

I. 

GENERAL 

1. 

Competent authority that wrote the report 

2.  Date and place of inspection 

3.  Name of the ship inspected 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

Flag 

Type of ship (cid:214) (as indicated in the Safety Management Certificate) (cid:213) 

IMO number 

Call sign 

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  (cid:214) recognised  organisation  or  recognised  organisations (cid:213)  classification 
society or classification societies, where relevant, which has/have issued to this 
ship the class certificates, if any 

12.  The  (cid:214) recognised  organisation  or  recognised  organisations (cid:213)  classification 
society or classification societies and/or any other party which has/have issued 
to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable conventions on behalf 
of the flag State 

13.  Name and address of the ship's owner or the operator 

14.  Name  and  address  of  the  charterer  responsible  for  the  selection  of  the 
⌦ ship ⌫  vessel  and  type  of  charter  in  the  case  of  ships  carrying  liquid  or 
solid cargoes in bulk 

EN 

80 

   EN 

 
 
15.  Final date of writing the inspection report 

16. 

Indication  that  detailed  information  on  an  inspection  or  a  detention  may  be 
subject to publication. 

II. 

INFORMATION RELATING TO INSPECTION 

1. 

2. 

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 

Parts or elements of the ship that were inspected (in the case of more detailed 
or expanded inspection) 

3.  Port  and  date  of  the  last  intermediate  or  annual  survey  and  the  name  of  the 

organisation which carried out the survey 

(cid:216) new 

4. 3.  Type of inspection (inspection, more detailed inspection, expanded inspection) 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25) 

5. 4.  Nature of the deficiencies 

6. 5.  Measures taken. 

III. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE EVENT OF DETENTION 

1.  Date of detention order 

2.  Date of lifting the detention order 

3.  Nature  of  the  deficiencies  warranting  the  detention  order  (references  to 

Conventions, if relevant) 

4. 

Information on the last intermediate or annual survey 

4. 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 

5. 6.  Measures taken. 

EN 

81 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

ANNEX ⌦ XI ⌫ VI 

CRITERIA FOR DETENTION OF A SHIP 

(as referred to in Article 13(4) 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 ⌦ points ⌫ 
1 and 2. 

Section  ⌦ Point ⌫  3  includes  examples  of  deficiencies  that  may  for  themselves  warrant 
detention of the ship involved (see Article 913(4)). 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 5.1 (adapted) 

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: 

(a) 1. 

(b) 2. 

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; 

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; 

(c) 3. 

appropriate remedial action, to the satisfaction of the Authority, is being taken by the 
ship; and 

(d) 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. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

1. 

MAIN CRITERIA 

When  exercising  his  professional  judgement  as  to  whether  or  not  a  ship  should  be 
detained the inspector must apply the following criteria: 

EN 

82 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
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. 

APPLICATION OF MAIN CRITERIA 

When  deciding  whether  the  deficiencies  found  in  a  ship  are  sufficiently  serious  to 
merit detention the inspector must assess whether: 

1. 

2. 

the ship has relevant, valid documentation; 

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. 

4. 

navigate safely throughout the forthcoming voyage; 

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. 

8. 

fight  fires  effectively  in  any  part  of  the  ship  if  necessary  during  the 
forthcoming voyage; 

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; 

EN 

83 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
14.  provide the maximum of information in case of accident. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 23(a) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 

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. 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 5.2 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:206)1 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 23(b) 
(cid:214) new 

3.1. 

General 

(cid:206)1 The  lack  of  valid  certificates  and  documents (cid:205)  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. 

2. 

Failure of the proper operation of propulsion and other essential machinery, as 
well as electrical installations. 

Insufficient cleanliness of engine room, ⌦ excessive ⌫ 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. 

EN 

84 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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/16.2 ⌫ 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  (cid:214) a 
type  approved  electronic  chart  display  and  information  system  (ECDIS) 
operating  on  official  data (cid:213)  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). 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 5.3 (adapted) 

13.  Serious deficiency in the operational requirements, as described in Section 5.5 

of Annex I to the ⌦ Paris ⌫ 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. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 23(c) 

16.  Absence or failure of a VDR, when its use is compulsory. 

EN 

85 

   EN 

 
 
 
3.3. 

Areas under the IBC Code (References are given in brackets) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

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. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Electrical  installations  not  intrinsically  safe  or  not  corresponding  to  code 
requirements (10.2.3). 

Sources of ignition in hazardous locations referred to in 10.2 (11.3.15). 

Contraventions of special requirements (15). 

Exceeding of maximum allowable cargo quantity quality per tank (16.1). 

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 

EN 

86 

   EN 

 
 
loads,  unless  proper  temporary  repairs  for  a  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 to arrange for 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)). 

4.  Unauthorized discharge bypass fitted. 

5. 

Survey report file missing or not  in conformity with  Regulation 13G(3)(b) of 
the Marpol Convention. 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 23(d) 

3.7. 

Areas under the Marpol Convention, Annex II (References are given in brackets) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

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. 

EN 

87 

   EN 

 
 
 
3.8. 

Areas under the Marpol Convention, Annex V  

1.  Absence of the garbage management plan.  

2.  No garbage record book available. 

(cid:216) new 

3. 

Ship’s personnel not familiar with disposal/discharge requirements of garbage 
management plan. 

3.83.9  Areas under the STCW Convention (cid:214) and Directive 2001/25/EC of the European 

Parliament and of the Council (cid:213) 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC 
(cid:214) new 

(cid:208) 98/42/EC Art. 1 pt. 2 and 
Annex pt. 5.4 
(cid:214) new 

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. 

(cid:214) 2.  Evidence  that  a  certificate  has  been  fraudulently  obtained  or  the  holder  of  a 

certificate is not the person to whom that certificate was originally issued. (cid:213) 

3. 2.  Failure  to  comply  with  the  applicable  safe  manning  requirements  of  the  flag 

state administration. 

4. 3.  Failure  of  navigational  or  engineering  watch  arrangements  to  conform  to  the 

requirements specified for the ship by the flag State administration. 

5. 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. 

6. 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. 

7. 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. 

EN 

88 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC 
(cid:214) new 

3.10 3.9. Areas under the ILO Conventions 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Insufficient food for voyage to next port. 

Insufficient potable water for voyage to next port. 

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. 

(cid:214) 6.  Clear evidence that watch keeping and other duty personnel for the first watch 

or subsequent relieving watches are impaired by fatigue (cid:213) 

3.11 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. 

EN 

89 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:206)1 Corrigendum 95/21/EC 
(OJ L 291, 14.11.1996, p. 42) 

ANNEX ⌦ XII ⌫ VII 

MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR INSPECTORS 

(cid:206)1 (as referred to in Article 16 12(1) and (5)) (cid:205) 

(cid:216) new 

1. 

1. 

2. 

Inspectors must have appropriate theoretical knowledge and practical experience of 
ships  and  their  operation.  They  must  be  competent  in  the  enforcement  of  the 
requirements  of  international  Conventions  and  of  the  relevant  port  State  control 
procedures.  This  knowledge  and  competence  in  enforcing  international  and 
training 
Community 
programmes  including  examination  and  revalidation  at  intervals  specified  in 
Article 16. 

requirements  must  be  acquired 

through  documented 

The  inspector  must  be  authorized  to  carry  out  port-State  control  by  the  competent 
authority of the Member State. 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

⌦ Inspectors must, as a minimum, have ⌫ either: 

(a) 

appropriate  qualifications  from  a  marine  or  nautical  institution  and  relevant 
seagoing experience as a certificated ship officer holding or having held a valid 
STCW II/2 or III/2 certificate of competency; or 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(b)(c) passed an examination (cid:214) recognised by the competent Authority (cid:213) as a naval 
architect, mechanical engineer or an engineer related to the maritime fields and 
worked in that capacity for at least five years; ; (cid:214) or (cid:213) 

⌦ (c) a relevant university degree or equivalent and have trained and qualified at a 

school for ship safety inspectors. ⌫ 

EN 

90 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 95/21/EC (adapted) 

3. 

4. 

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. 

The  inspectors  mentioned  under  ⌦ 2(a) ⌫  (a)  and  (b)  must  have  served  for  a 
period of not less than five years at sea as officers in the deck- or engine-department 
respectively. 

– 

and be in possession of: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

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 

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 

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  two  years  as  a  flag-State  inspector  dealing  with  surveys 
and certification in accordance with the Conventions. 

5. 3.  ⌦ The  inspectors  must  have  the ⌫  ability  to  communicate  orally  and  in  writing 

with seafarers in the language most commonly spoken at sea. 

4. 

6. 5. 

Appropriate knowledge of the provisions of the international Conventions and of the 
relevant procedures on port-State control. 

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. 

EN 

91 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

7. 

Where  in  a  Member  State  inspections  referred  to  in  Article  7(5)  are  performed  by 
port  State  control  inspectors;  those  inspectors  shall  have  appropriate  qualifications, 
which  shall  include  sufficient  theoretical  and  practical  experience  in  maritime 
security. This shall normally include: 

(a) 

a  good  understanding  of  maritime  security  and  how  it  is  applied  to  the 
operations being examined; 

(b) 

a good working knowledge of security technologies and techniques; 

(c) 

a knowledge of inspection principles, procedures and techniques;  

(d) 

a working knowledge of the operations being examined. 

EN 

92 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX XIII 

Report from Pilot or Port Authority to Port State or Coastal State. 

(as referred to in Article 17(1)) 

Date 

Port/position 

Ship information 

Name 

IMO number 

Call Sign 

Flag 

Defects  

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

… 

Description 

Sailing Information 

From (port/anchorage) 

To (port/anchorage) 

Date 

Date 

EN 

93 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Actions initiated by competent authority 

Description 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

… 

Name of the pilot/port representative: 

Competent authority:  

EN 

94 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 24 
(adapted) 

ANNEX ⌦ XIV ⌫ VIII 

Publication of information related to detentions and inspections, ⌦ detentions and 
refusals of access ⌫ in ports of Member States  

(as referred to in Article 19(1) 15) 

(cid:216) new 

1. 

2. 

Members States shall publish the information listed in paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 below 
in  a  public  website  within  72  hours  after  the  inspection  has  been  completed  or  the 
detention has been lifted or the refusal of access has been imposed. 

The Commission shall publish regularly in a website the information relating to ships 
that have been refused access to Community ports in application of Articles 10 and 
15. 

3. I. 

Information  published  in  accordance  with  Article  19  15  (1)  must  include  the 
following: 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 24 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

(g) 

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 (cid:214) company (cid:213) 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 ⌦ ship ⌫  vessel  and  the  type  of 
charter, 

(h) 

flag State, 

– 

the  classification  society  or  classification  societies,  where  relevant,  which 
has/have issued to this ship the class certificates, if any, 

EN 

95 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
– 

the  classification  society  or  classification  societies  and/or  any  other  party 
which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance with the applicable 
conventions on behalf of the flag State, stating the certificates delivered, 

(i) 

class  and  statutory  certificates  issued  in  accordance  with  the  relevant  international 
Conventions, and the authority or organisation that issued each one of the certificates 
in question, including the date of issue and expiry, 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 24 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

– 

port  and  date  of  the  last  expanded  inspection  stating,  where  appropriate, 
whether a detention was ordered, 

(j) 

port  and  date  of  the  last  (cid:214) intermediate  or  annual (cid:213)  special  survey  (cid:214) for  the 
certificates in point (i) above (cid:213) and the name of the (cid:214) authority or (cid:213) organisation 
which carried out the survey, 

– 

number of detentions during the 24 previous months, 

(k) 

(cid:214) date, (cid:213) country, and port (cid:214) or anchorage (cid:213) 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. 

4. II.  (cid:214) For  ships  which  have  been  detained,  information  published  in  accordance  with 
Article 19 must also include (cid:213) Information concerning ships inspected made public 
in accordance with Article 1518(2) must include the following: 

EN 

96 

   EN 

 
 
 
– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

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 to this ship the class certificates, if any, 

the  classification  society  or  classification  societies  and/or  any  other  party 
which has/have issued to this ship certificates in accordance 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. 

⌦ (a) 

number of detentions during the previous ⌫ (cid:214) 36 (cid:213) 24 ⌦ previous 

months ⌫, 

⌦ (b) 

date when the detention was lifted, ⌫ 

⌦ (c) 

duration of detention, in days, ⌫ 

⌦ (d) 

the reasons for detention, in clear and explicit terms, ⌫ 

⌦ (e) 

indication, where relevant, of whether the recognised organisation that 
carried out the survey has a responsibility in relation to the deficiencies which, 
alone or in combination, led to detention, ⌫ 

⌦ (f) 

description of the measures taken in the case of a ship which has been 

allowed to proceed to the nearest appropriate repair yard, ⌫ 

⌦ (g) 

if the ship has been refused access to any port within the Community, 

the reasons for the measure in clear and explicit terms, ⌫ 

EN 

97 

   EN 

 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX XV 

Blacklist of operators and companies 

(as referred to in Article 20) 

The blacklist of operators and companies shall include the name and address of : 

– 

– 

– 

ship operators and companies operating a ship or ships that have been refused access 
in a port of a Member State during the last 12 months; 

ship operators or companies operating a fleet in which more than one ship has been 
detained in a port of a Member State during the last 12 months; 

ship  operators  or  companies  with  one  ship  detained  more  than  once  in  a  port  of  a 
Member State during the last 12 months. 

EN 

98 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:208) 2001/106/EC Art. 1 pt. 25 
(adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

ANNEX ⌦ XVI ⌫ X 

Data provided in the context of monitoring implementation in application of Article 17 

⌦ (as referred to in Article 22) ⌫ 

1. 

Every year Member States must provide the Commission with the following data for 
the preceding year by 1 (cid:214) July (cid:213) 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 ⌦ (1) (2). ⌫ 

Port/area 

Number of full-time 
inspectors 

number of part-time 
inspectors ⌦ (B) ⌫ 

Conversion ⌦ of 
(B) ⌫ to full-time 

(cid:214) Total (cid:213) 

(cid:214) (A+C) (cid:213)

⌦ (A) ⌫ 

⌦ (C) ⌫ 

Port X …. 

Port Y …. 

TOTAL 

(1)  Where the inspections carried out in the context of port State control represent only part of the 
inspectors’ work, the total number of inspectors must be converted to a number equivalent to 
full-time inspectors. (cid:214) Where the same inspector works in more than one port or geographical 
area the applicable part-time equivalent must be counted in each port (cid:213). 

⌦ (2) ⌫ 

This information must be provided at national level and for each port of the 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. 
(cid:214) The figure shall be the number of foreign ships covered by the Directive that 
entered their ports at national level counted only once. (cid:213) 

2. 

Member States must either: 

(a) 

provide the Commission the Commission every (cid:214) three (cid:213) six months with a 
list  of  movements  of  individual  ships,  other  than  regular  (cid:214) passenger  and 
freight (cid:213) ferry services, that entered their ports or which have notified to a port 
authority their arrival in an anchorage, containing (cid:214) for each movement of the 

EN 

99 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ship its (cid:213) the IMO number, of the ships and its date of arrival; or alternatively 
(cid:214) and  the  port  or  anchorage.  The  list  shall  be  provided  in  the  form  of  a 
spreadsheet  programme  enabling  an  automatic  retrieval  and  processing  of  the 
above mentioned information. The list shall be provided within 4 months from 
the end of the period to which data pertained, (cid:213) 

(cid:214) and (cid:213) 

(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 (cid:214) separate (cid:213) the lists of regular (cid:214) passenger (cid:213) 
ferry  services  (cid:214) and  regular  freight  ferry  services (cid:213)  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. (cid:214) The 
list shall contain for each ship its IMO number, its name and the route covered 
by the ship. The list shall be provided in the form of a spreadsheet programme 
enabling  an  automatic  retrieval  and  processing  of  the  above  mentioned 
information. (cid:213) 

EN 

100 

   EN 

 
(cid:207) 

ANNEX XVII 

Part A 

Repealed Directive with its successive amendments 

(as referred to in Article 30) 

Council Directive 95/21/EC 
(OJ L 157, 7.7.1995, p. 1) 

Council Directive 98/25/EC 
(OJ L 133, 7.5.1998, p. 19) 

Commission Directive 98/42/EC 
(OJ L 184, 27.6.1998, p. 40) 

Commission Directive 1999/97/EC 
(OJ L 331, 23.12.1999, p. 67) 

Directive 2001/106/EC of the European 
Parliament and of the Council  
(OJ L 19, 22.1.2002, p. 17) 

Directive 2002/84/EC of the European 
Parliament and of the Council  
(OJ L 324, 29.11.2002, p. 53) 

Only Article 4 

EN 

101 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Part B 

List of time-limits for transposition into national law 
(as referred to in Article 30) 

Directive 

Time-limit for transposition 

Directive 95/21/EC 

Directive 98/25/EC 

30 June 1996 

30 June 1998 

Directive 98/42/EC 

30 September 1998 

Directive 1999/97/EC 

13 December 2000 

Directive 2001/106/EC 

22 July 20031 

Directive 2002/84/EC 

23 November 2003 

_____________ 

1 

Under  Article  3  of  Directive  2001/106/EC,  “The  Commission  shall  review  the  implementation  of  this 
Directive  no  later  than  22  July  2006.  The  review  will  examine,  inter  alia,  the  number  of  port  State 
control  inspectors  in  each  Member  State  and  the  number  of  inspections  carried  out,  including 
mandatory expanded inspections. The Commission shall communicate the findings of the review to the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council  and  shall  determine  on  the  basis  of  the  review  whether  it  is 
necessary to propose an amending Directive or further legislation in this area”. 

EN 

102 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(cid:207) 

ANNEX XVIII 

CORRELATION TABLE 

Directive 95/21/EC 

This Directive 

Article 1, introductory words 

Article 1, introductory words 

Article 1, first indent 

Article 1, second indent 

Article 1(a) 

Article 1(b) 

Article 2, introductory words 

Article 2, introductory words 

Article 2(1), introductory words 

Article 2(1), introductory words 

Article 2(1), first indent 

Article 2(1), second indent 

Article 2(1), third indent 

Article 2(1), fourth indent 

Article 2(1), fifth indent 

Article 2(1), sixth indent 

Article 2(1), seventh indent 

Article 2(1), eighth indent 

Article 2(2) 

- 

Article 2(3) 

Article 2(4) 

- 

Article 2(5) 

- 

- 

Article 2(1)(a) 

Article 2(1)(b) 

Article 2(1)(c) 

Article 2(1)(d) 

Article 2(1)(e) 

Article 2(1)(f) 

Article 2(1)(g) 

Article 2(1)(h) 

Article 2(2) 

Article 2(3) 

Article 2(4) 

Article 2(5) 

Article 2(6) 

Article 2(7) 

Article 2(8) 

Article 2(9) 

EN 

103 

   EN 

 
 
Article 2(6) 

Article 2(7) 

Article 2(8) 

- 

Article 2(9) 

- 

Article 2(10) 

- 

- 

- 

Article 2(10) 

Article 2(11) 

Article 2(12) 

Article 2(13) 

Article 2(14) 

Article 2(15) 

Article 2(16) 

Article 2(17) 

Article 2(18) 

Article 2(19) 

Article  3(1),  first  subparagraph,  introductory 
words 

Article 
introductory words 

3(1), 

first 

subparagraph, 

Article 3(1), first subparagraph, first indent 

Article 3(1), first subparagraph, point (a) 

Article 3(1), first subparagraph, second indent  Article 3(1), first subparagraph, point (b) 

Article 3(1), second subparagraph 

Article 3(1), second subparagraph 

Article 3(2) to (4) 

- 

Article 4 

- 

- 

Article 5(1) 

- 

Article 5(2) to 5(5) 

- 

Article 3(2) to (4) 

Article 4(1) 

Article 4(2), first subparagraph 

Article 4(2), second subparagraph 

Article 5(1) to 5(3) 

Article 5(4) 

Article 5(5) 

- 

Article 6 

Article 6(1) introductory words 

Article 7(1) introductory words 

Article 6(1)(a) 

- 

Article 7(1)(a) 

Article 7(1)(b) 

EN 

104 

   EN 

 
Article 6(1)(b) 

Article 7(1)(c) 

- 

Article 6(2) 

Article 6(3) 

Article 6(4) 

Article 7(2) 

Article 7(3) 

Article 7(4) 

Article 7(5) 

Article 7(1) and (2) 

Article 8(1) and (2) first subparagraph 

Article 7(3)(a) 

Article 7(3)(b) 

- 

Article 8(2), second subparagraph 

Article 7(4) first subparagraph 

Article 8(3), first subparagraph 

Article 7(4), second subparagraph  

- 

Article 7(5) 

Article 7(6) 

Article 7a(1) 

Article 7a(2)  

- 

Article 7a(3) to (5) 

Article 7b(1) and (2) 

Article 7b(3) 

Article 8 

- 

Article 8(4) 

- 

Article 9(1) 

Article 9(2), first subparagraph 

Article 9(2), second subparagraph 

Article 9(3) to (5) 

Article 10(1) and (2) 

- 

Article 11 

Article 12 

Article 9 (1) and (2) 

Article 13 (1) and (2) 

- 

Article 13 (3) 

Article 9 (3) to (7) 

Article 13 (4) to (8) 

- 

Article 9a 

Article 10(1) to (3) 

- 

EN 

Article 13 (9) 

- 

Article 14(1) to (3) 

Article 14(4) 

105 

   EN 

 
Article 11(1) 

- 

Article 11(2) 

Article 15(1) 

Article 15(2) 

Article 15(3), first subparagraph 

Article 11(3) first subparagraph 

- 

Article 11(3) second subparagraph 

Article 15(3) second subparagraph 

Article 11(4) to (6) 

Article 12 (1) to (3) 

Article 15(4) to (6) 

Article 16(1) to (3) 

Article 12(4) first subparagraph 

Article 16(4), first subparagraph 

Article 12(4) second subparagraph 

- 

- 

Article 13(1) 

- 

Article 13(2) 

- 

Article 14(1) 

Article 16(5) to (7) 

Article 17(1), first subparagraph 

Article 17(1), second subparagraph 

Article 17(2) 

Article 17(3) 

Article 18(1) 

Article 14(2) first subparagraph 

Article 18(2), first subparagraph 

- 

Article 18(2), second subparagraph 

Article 14(2) second subparagraph 

Article 18(2), third subparagraph 

Article 14(3) 

Article 15(1) 

Article 15(2) to (4) 

Article 15(5) 

- 

Article 18(3) 

Article 19(1) 

- 

Article 19(2) 

Article 20 

Article 16(1) and (2) 

Article 21(1) and (2) 

Article 16(2a) 

Article 16(3) 

Article 17 

EN 

Article 21(3) 

Article 21(4) 

Article 22(1) 

106 

   EN 

 
- 

- 

Article 18 

Article 19 

- 

Article 19a 

Article 3 Directive 2001/106/EC 

Article 20 

- 

Article 21 

Article 22 

Annex I 

- 

- 

Annex II 

Annex III 

Annex IV 

- 

Annex V 

Annex VI 

Annex VII 

Annex VIII 

Annex IX 

Annex X 

Annex XI 

Annex XII 

- 

Article 22 (2) 

Article 23 

Article 24 

Article 25 

Article 26 

Article 27 

Article 28 

Article 29 

Article 30 

Article 31 

Article 32 

Annex I 

Annex II 

Annex III 

Annex IV 

Annex V 

Annex VI 

Annex VII 

Annex VIII 

Annex XI 

Annex XII 

Annex XIV 

Annex X 

Annex XVI 

Annex IX 

- 

Annex XIII 

EN 

107 

   EN 

 
- 

- 

- 

Annex XV 

Annex XVII 

Annex XVIII 

___________________ 

EN 

108 

   EN 

 
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT 

1. 

NAME OF THE PROPOSAL: 

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on port State 
control. 

2. 

ABM / ABB FRAMEWORK 

Policy area: Energy and transport 

Activities: Maritime and inland waterway transport, intermodality 

3. 

BUDGET LINES 

3.1. 

Budget  lines  (operational  lines  and  related  technical  and  administrative 
assistance lines (ex- BA lines)) including headings: Not applicable 

3.2. 

Duration of the action and of the financial impact: not applicable 

3.3. 

Budgetary characteristics (add rows if necessary): not applicable 

Budget 
line 

Expenditure type 

New 

EFTA 
contribution 

Contributions 
from applicant 
countries 

Heading in 
financial 
perspective 

Comp/ 
Non-
comp 

Comp/ 
Non-
comp 

Diff1/ 
Non-
diff2 

Diff/No
n-diff 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

YES/NO 

YES/ NO 

YES/ NO 

YES/NO 

No  

No  

1 
2 

Differentiated appropriations. 
Non-differentiated appropriations. 

EN 

109 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
4. 

SUMMARY OF RESOURCES 

4.1. 

Financial resources 

4.1.1. 

Summary of commitment appropriations (CA) and payment appropriations (PA) 

Section 
No 

Expenditure type 
Operational expenditure3 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Year n 

n +1 

n + 2 

n +3 

n +4 

n  +  5 
and 
later 

Total 

8.1 

Commitment 
appropriations (CA) 
Payment 
(PA) 
Administrative expenditure within reference amount4 

appropriations 

b 

a 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8.2.4 

Technical 
& 
administrative  assistance 
(NDA) 
TOTAL REFERENCE AMOUNT 
Commitment 
appropriations 

c 

a+c 

Payment appropriations 

b+c 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

None 

None 

None 

Not 
appli-
cable.
Not 
appli-
cable.

Administrative expenditure not included in reference amount5 

resources 

and 
expenditure 

Human 
associated 
(NDA) 
costs, 
Administrative 
other 
human 
than 
resources  and  associated 
costs,  not 
in 
reference amount (NDA) 

included 

8.2.5 

d 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.324 

8.2.6 

e 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Total indicative financial cost of action 

including 
TOTAL  CA 
cost of human resources 

TOTAL  PA 
including 
cost of human resources 

a+c
+d+
e 
b+c
+d+
e 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.324 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.324 

3 
4 
5 

Expenditure that does not fall under Chapter xx 01 of the Title xx concerned. 
Expenditure within article xx 01 04 of Title xx. 
Expenditure within chapter xx 01 other than articles xx 01 04 or xx 01 05. 

EN 

110 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Co-financing details 

The legislative proposal does not involve co-financing by Member States 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Co-financing body 

…………………… 
TOTAL  CA  including 
co-financing 

f 
a+c+d
+e+f 

Year 
n 
0 
0 

n + 1 

n + 2 

n + 3 

n + 4 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

n+5 
and 
later 
0 
0 

Total 

0 
0 

4.1.2.  Compatibility with financial programming 

Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming. 
Proposal  will  entail  reprogramming  of  the  relevant  heading  in  the  financial 

(cid:133) 
perspective. 
(cid:133) 
(flexibility instrument or revision of the financial perspective). 

Proposal may require application of the provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement6 

4.1.3.  Financial impact on revenue 

Proposal has no financial implications on revenue 
Proposal has financial impact – the effect on revenue is as follows: 

(cid:133) 

NB: All details and observations relating to the method of calculating the effect on revenue 
should be shown in a separate annex. 

Budget 
line 

Returns 

EUR million (to one decimal place) 

Situation following action 

[n+1] 

[n+2] 

[n+3] 

[n+4] 

[n+5]7 

[Year 
n] 

Prior 
to 
action 
[Year 
n-1] 

a)  Revenue  in  absolute 
terms 
b) Change in revenue 

 ∆ 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

6 
7 

See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement. 
Additional columns should be added if necessary, i.e. if the duration of the action exceeds 6 years. 

EN 

111 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
4.2. 

Human resources FTE (including officials, temporary and external staff) – see 
details under point 8.2.1. 

(Management by existing staff). 

Annual requirements 

Total  number  of  human 
resources 

Year  n 
(2007*) 

n + 1 

n + 2 

n + 3 

n + 4 

n+5  and 
later 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

5. 

CHARACTERISTICS AND OBJECTIVES 

5.1. 

Need to be met in the short or long term 

The objective of port State control is to verify, through inspections carried out in the 
ports  of  a  particular  State  by  the  competent  authorities,  that  third  country  ships 
calling there conform to the applicable international conventions and pose no risk to 
maritime safety, the marine environment or on-board living and working conditions. 
It is now essential to clarify, simplify and improve the body of Community law on 
port  State  control.  This  objective  is  both  a  legal  necessity,  to  take  account  of 
developments  in  international,  Community  and  Paris  Memorandum  law,  and  the 
consequences of extending port State control rules to the new Member States, and a 
political imperative to take account of the new directions of European Union policy 
resulting  from  the  Lisbon  strategy  and  the  improvement  in  the  regulatory 
environment of the European Union.  

5.2. 

Value-added  of  Community  involvement  and  coherence  of  the  proposal  with 
other financial instruments and possible synergy 

Individual  action  by  the  Member  States  is  by  its  nature  incompatible  with  the 
objectives  of  port  State  control  which  seeks  to  ensure  that  in  a  particular 
geographical  region,  on-board  inspections  are  carried  out  in  a  harmonised  way. 
Moreover,  one  of  the  objectives  of  actions  at  regional  level  is  to  reduce  costs  and 
optimise through coordinated action the resources needed for an effective control of 
ships.  Less  rigorous  application  of  port  State  control  in  a  particular  Member  State 
would increase safety risks and might lead to the appearance of ports of convenience 
thus creating an unacceptable distortion of competition within the Community. 

5.3. 

Objectives, expected results and related indicators of the proposal in the context 
of the ABM framework 

The  revision  of  Directive 95/21/EC  on  port  State  control  proposed  by  the 
Commission is based on the following elements:  

•  a  recasting  of  Directive  95/21/EC  and  its  numerous  amendments  in  a  single 

consolidated text;  

•  compliance  with  the  policy  demands  made  by  the  European  Parliament,  the 
Council  and  the  Commission  after  the  Prestige  accident  to  improve  maritime 
safety;  

EN 

112 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  the  updating  of  a  number  of  provisions  of  the  Directive  in  the  light  of 
developments  in  international  conventions  and  agreements  and  Community 
legislation; 

•  the introduction of measures aimed at improving the application of the Directive 
and the monitoring of its application, in particular through increased cooperation 
and exchange of information; 

•  the  reinforcement  of  certain  existing  provisions,  in  order  in  particular  to  impose 
more  stringent  penalties  on  substandard  ships;  this  entails  in  particular  the 
extension and reinforcement of refusal of access for multiple detentions; 

•  a number of provisions aimed that relaxing inspections for quality ships; 

•  the  introduction  of  the  principles  of  a  new  inspection  regime,  in  the  light  in 

particular of the limits encountered by the present regime. 

5.4.  Method of implementation (indicative) 

Show below the method(s)8 chosen for the implementation of the action.  

(cid:133) Centralised management 
(cid:58) 
(cid:133) 

Directly by the Commission 
Indirectly by delegation to: 
(cid:133) 
Executive Agencies, 
(cid:133) 
bodies set up by the Communities, as referred to in Art. 185 of the Financial 

Regulation, 

(cid:133) 

national public-sector bodies/bodies with a public-service mission. 

with Member States 
with third countries 

(cid:133) Shared or decentralised management 
(cid:133) 
(cid:133) 
(cid:133) Joint management with international organisations (please specify) 
Comments: 

6. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The  draft  Directive  contains  a  provision  requiring  the  Member  States  to  notify  the 
Commission  of  the  national  implementing  measures  to  be  adopted  with  a  view  to 
transposing the Directives into national law.  

In the event of failure to notify these national implementing measures (or in the event 
of  incomplete  notification),  the  infringement  procedures  will  automatically  be 
launched in accordance with Article 226 of the Treaty. 

The  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency  will  help  to  monitor  the  implementation  of 
the Directive by the Member States.  

8 

If a number of methods are indicated, please provide details in the “comments” section.  

EN 

113 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
6.1. 

Evaluation 

6.1.1.  Ex ante evaluation 

The  Commission  has  focussed  the  impact  assessment  on  the  principal  measures 
introduced  in  the  Directive  which  could  have  an  impact  on  operators  and  maritime 
authorities, in order to evaluate in particular whether the measures introduced would 
lead to an increase in the number of ships affected by the said measures.  

The effects on the various parties involved are as follows:  

•  EU  bodies:  the  proposal  reinforces  the  current  provisions  on  publication  (black 
list)  and  the  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  the  Directive.  In  practice  the 
EMSA will be entrusted with these implementing tasks. 

•  The  maritime  authorities  responsible  for  port  State  control:  pending  the  possible 
introduction of the new inspection regime, this proposal will not bring about any 
major change in the activities of the authorities responsible for port State control. 

•  The port authorities: they will play a greater role in improving port State control, 
in  particular  through  the  exchange  of  information  between  ports  and  the 
inspection centres. These administrative and logistical measures may cause local 
cost  increases  for  port  authorities  but  are  necessary  in  order  to  ensure  that 
application of the Directive is fully effective. 

•  Pilot  services:  the  proposed  measure  is  a  direct  response  to  an  explicit  request 
made  by  the  Council  of  Transport  Ministers  following  the  Prestige  accident.  Its 
quantitative impact on the number of ships reported is impossible to predict. 

•  Ship operators: in general terms, the proposal improves the capacity of operators 
of quality ships (fewer inspections, better planning of ports of call, better qualified 
inspectors and thus a reduction in the risk of incorrect or unjustified decisions). 

•  Seamen:  the  new  provisions  will  guarantee  that  complaints  relating  to  on-board 

living and working conditions are followed up more effectively.  

6.1.2.  Measures taken following an intermediate/ex post evaluation (lessons learned from 

similar experiences in the past) 

Not applicable 

6.1.3.  Terms and frequency of future evaluations 

Not applicable 

7. 

ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES 

Not applicable 

EN 

114 

   EN 

 
8. 

DETAILS OF RESOURCES 

8.1. 

Objectives of the proposal in terms of their financial cost: not applicable 

Type  of 
outputs 

Av. 
cost 

Year n 

Year n+1 

Year n+2 

Year n+3 

Number 
of outputs

Total 
cost 

Number 
of 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Number 
of 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Number 
of 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Number 
of outputs

Total 
cost 

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 
Year n+4 

TOTAL 

Year  n+5  and 
later 
Number 
of 
outputs 

Total 
cost 

Number 
of outputs 

Total 
cost 

(Headings of 
Objectives, 
actions and 
outputs should 
be provided) 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No 19………… 

Action 1……… 
- Output 1 

- Output 2 

Action 2……… 
- Output 1 

Sub-total 
Objective 1 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No 2……… 
Action 1……… 
- Output 1 

Sub-total 
Objective 2 

9 

As described under Section 5.3. 

EN 

115 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
OPERATIONAL 
OBJECTIVE 
No n 
Sub-total 
Objective n 
TOTAL COST 

EN 

116 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8.2. 

Administrative expenditure 

8.2.1.  Number and type of human resources 

Types of post 

Staff  to  be  assigned  to  management  of  the  action  using  existing  and/or  additional 
resources (number of posts/FTEs) 

and 

Officials 
temporary 
staff10 
(06 01 01) 

financed11 
Staff 
Article XX 01 02 

A*/
AD 
B*, 
C*/
AST 

by 

Other  staff  financed12 
by art. XX 01 04/05 

TOTAL 

Year n 

Year n+1 

Year n+2 

Year n+3 

Year n+4 

Year n+5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0.5 

0 

0 

0 

0.5 

0 

0 

0 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

8.2.2.  Description of tasks deriving from the action: tasks 

The  changes  to  the  Community  port  State  control  system  extend  Community 
competence  in  the  area  of  maritime  safety.  An  increase  in  human  resources 
- estimated at ½ A official-is necessary for proper monitoring of the implementation 
of the Directive.  

8.2.3. 

Sources of human resources (statutory) 

Posts currently allocated to the management of the programme to be replaced 

(cid:133) 
or extended 

(cid:133) 

(cid:133) 

Posts pre-allocated within the APS/PDB exercise for year n 

Posts to be requested in the next APS/PDB procedure 

  Posts  to  be  redeployed  using  existing  resources  within  the  managing  service 

(internal redeployment) 

Posts required for year n although not foreseen in the APS/PDB exercise of the 

(cid:133) 
year in question 

10 
11 
12 

Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount. 
Cost of which is NOT covered by the reference amount. 
Cost of which is included within the reference amount 

EN 

117 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
8.2.4.  Other  administrative  expenditure  included  in  reference  amount  (XX  01  04/05  – 

Expenditure on administrative management) 

Year n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year 
n+3 

Year 
n+4 

Year n+5 
and later 

TOTAL 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Budget line 
(Number and title) 
1. 
and 
administrative 
assistance 
(including related staff costs) 
 Executive Agencies13 

Technical 

technical 

Other 
administrative assistance 
- intra muros  

and 

- extra muros 
Total 
administrative assistance 

technical 

and 

. 

8.2.5.  Financial cost of human resources and associated costs not included in the reference 

amount 

Type of human resources 

Officials and temporary staff (06 01 01) 

Staff  financed  by  Article  XX 01 02 
(auxiliary, END, contract staff, etc.) 
(specify budget line) 
Total  cost  of  Human  Resources  and 
associated  costs  (NOT  in  reference 
amount) 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Year n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year n+3  Year n+4  Year n+5 
and later 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

0.054 

Calculation – Officials and temporary staff 

(0.5 x €108 000 = €54 000 ) 

Calculation – Staff financed under Article XX 01 02 

None 

13 

Reference  should  be  made  to  the  specific  legislative  financial  statement  for  the  Executive 
Agency/Agencies concerned. 

EN 

118 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
8.2.6.  Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount 

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) 

Year 
n 

Year 
n+1 

Year 
n+2 

Year 
n+3 

Year 
n+4 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Year 
n+5 
and 
later 
0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

TOTAL 

0*  

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

XX 01 02 11 01 – Missions 

XX  01  02  11  02  –  Meetings  and 
conferences 
XX 01 02 11 03 – Committees14 

XX 01 02 11 04 - Studies and consultations 

XX 01 02 11 05 - Information systems 

including  reference 

2.  Total  other  management  expenditure 
(XX 01 02 11) 
3. Other expenditure of an administrative 
nature  (specify 
to 
budget line) 
Total  administrative  expenditure,  other 
than  human  resources  and  associated 
costs 
reference 
included 
amount) 
* 

(NOT 

in 

No impact on the current budget for missions 

Calculation - Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount 

Not applicable 

14 

Specify the type of committee and the group to which it belongs. 

EN 

119 

   EN