FOREWORD The Committee is pleased to present this fourteenth annual report on the Port State Control (PSC) activities of the members of the Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding (IOMOU) on PSC. Apart from general information, this report provides a compilation of the results of PSC inspections undertaken by individual members during. Member Authorities strive to ensure that the Indian Ocean region does not become a safe haven for substandard or unseaworthy shipping that could increase the risk of serious accidents including loss of life and marine pollution. To this effect they have made every effort to continuously improve the standard of PSC inspections in the region. It is apparent that PSC has proven to be a valuable tool in addressing many of the current maritime safety problems around the world. Members realise that there are still many challenges ahead, and to face these challenges, the IOMOU is committed to enhancing the skills of the PSC officers through consultation and training. You can find more information on the IOMOU web site, www.iomou.org. Wilfred Kagimbi Chairman Port State Control Committee Bimalesh Ganguli Secretary IOMOU Secretariat
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Page General List of the Members and the Observers... ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE Organisational Structure of the IOMOU IOMOU Secretariat 5 Contact Details... 5 THE COMMITTEE A description of its work. Some objectives 6 TRAINING FOR PORT STATE CONTROL OFFICERS 7 CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER REGIONAL MOUs.. 8 VISITOR 9 IOCIS / WEBSITE. STATISTICS. PORT STATE CONTROL INSPECTION ACTIVITIES....
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Page Table Deficiencies by Type of Ship... Table Deficiencies by Flag. Table Deficiencies by Categories... 6 Table Deficiencies by Recognised Organisation 7 Table 5 Comparison of Inspections and Deficiencies per Ship Type 8 Table 6 Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Ship Type 9 Table 7 Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Flag.. Table 8 Comparison of Deficiencies by Categories... Table 9 Comparison of Inspections and Deficiencies per Recognised Organisation. Table Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Recognised Organisation 6 Figure Inspection Efforts.. 8 Figure Percentage of Ship Type with Deficiencies... 9 Figure Percentage of Detention per Ship Type. Figure Percentage of Deficiencies per Flag.. Figure 5 Percentage of Detentions per Flag.... Figure 6 Deficiency Percentage by Categories.... Figure 7 Detention Percentage by Recognised Organisation.. Figure 8 Comparison of Inspections per Ship Type 5 Figure 9 Comparison of Detentions per Ship Type. 6 Figure Summary of Years Inspections with Deficiencies per Ship Type 7 Figure Comparison of Detentions per Flag... 8 Figure Summary of Years Detentions percentage per Flag 9 Figure Comparison of Deficiencies by Categories Figure Comparison of Inspections per Recognised Organisation. Figure5 Comparison of Detentions per Recognised Organisation.. REPORT OF CIC ON STRUCTURAL SAFETY AND THE INTERNATIONALCONVENTION ON LOAD LINES. PRESENTATION OF MEMBER ADMINISTRATION: FRANCE..
INTRODUCTION GENERAL The Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (PSC) in the Indian Ocean region (IOMOU) was finalised on the basis of the first preparatory meeting in India in October 997 and the second meeting in June 998 in South Africa. The second meeting was attended by Australia, Bangladesh, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Myanmar, Oman, Seychelles, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Yemen. The Port State Control system aims to verify whether foreign flagged vessels calling at a port of a State, comply with applicable international maritime conventions. When vessels are found not to be in substantial compliance with applicable regulations laws or relevant convention requirements, the PSC system imposes actions to ensure they are brought into compliance. Ships to be inspected are selected on the basis of targeting criteria outlined in the Memorandum and a non-discriminatory policy is observed. Under the Memorandum each Authority will establish and maintain an effective system of port State control. The ultimate goal is to identify and eliminate substandard ships from the region.
LIST OF THE MEMBERS AND THE OBSERVERS As of December, there are sixteen countries, which have become parties to the Memorandum. These are: Australia, Bangladesh, Comoros, Eritrea, France (La Reunion Island), India, Iran, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritius, Oman, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania and Yemen. Black Sea MOU, Equasis, Ethiopia, West & Central Africa Memorandum of Understanding, the International Maritime Organisation, International Labour Organisation, Tokyo MOU, United States Coast Guard and Riyadh MOU participate in the Memorandum as observers. Opening of the 5 th Meeting at South Africa
The Participants of 5 th Meeting at South Africa Meeting in Progress
ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE IOMOU Member Authorities Observer Authorities International Labour Organization (ILO) Port State Control Committee International Maritime Organisation (IMO) National Port State Control Centres IOMOU Secretariat Indian Ocean Computerised Information System (IOCIS) Other Memorandum of Understanding
IOMOU SECRETARIAT The Secretariat of the Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding is based at Goa in India. The Secretariat is governed by and accountable to the Committee of the IOMOU on Port State Control. It services the Committee meetings and assists the Committee in its activities. The IOMOU Secretariat is headed by the Secretary, Mr. Bimalesh Ganguli and Deputy Secretary Mr. Dilip Mehrotra, assisted by Office Assistant Ms. Milan Sawant and Data Processor Mrs. Priyanka Sawant. From L to R: Mr. Bimalesh Ganguli, Mrs. Priyanka Sawant, Ms. Milan Sawant, Mr. Dilip Mehrotra CONTACT DETAILS Postal Address: The Secretary IOMOU Secretariat, Ushakal, House No. 9, Plot No. A-8, Rangavi Estate, Dabolim GOA - 8. INDIA. Email Address: Website: iomou@dataone.in iomou.sec@nic.in www.iomou.org Telephone : +9 8 58 8/58 98 Telefax : +9 8 58 7 5
THE COMMITTEE The Committee of the IOMOU held its fifteenth meeting at Port Elizabeth, South Africa between the rd and 6 th of September. South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA), kindly hosted the meeting. Representatives from the following IOMOU member States attended the meeting. Australia, France, India, Iran, Kenya, Mauritius, Oman, South Africa, Tanzania, and IOCIS Manager from the National Informatics Centre (NIC). Mr. Wilfred Kagimbi of Kenya presided over the Committee meeting as Chairman. Important outcomes of the meeting included. a) Development of the guidelines for Flag State and RO s responsibilities for inclusion in Target Factor. b) Inclusion of Ro s responsibility in the PSC Manual. c) Participation in joint Concentrated Inspection Campaign with Tokyo MOU. d) Amendments in MOU e) Revision of PSC Manual f) Incorporation of Date Keel Laid and Maritime Mobile Service Identity(MMSI) number in IOCIS g) Changing the format of Website. h) Presentation of symbolic cheque for AUD 5,/- towards AusAID. 6
TRAINING AND SEMINARS FOR PORT STATE CONTROL OFFICERS The Authority of South Africa hosted the fourth Expert Mission programme, offered by the Tokyo MOU in the month of March. IMO extended sponsorship to all MOUs during this mission. A total of 6 participants took part in this expert mission, including 6 participants sponsored by IMO from all MOUs. One PSCO from Yemen was nominated to attend the Paris MOU expert training on the Human Element, in The Hague, the Netherlands from 5 to 9 March and sponsored by IMO. nd General Training Course for PSCOs in Yokohama, Japan, sponsored by IMO was conducted by Tokyo MOU from 7 August to September,, which was attended by one PSCO from the Authority of Comoros. Australia Maritime Safety Authority granted funds to the IOMOU Secretariat under AusAID Programme. Presentation of symbolic cheque by AMSA for AusAID programme. 7
CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER REGIONAL MOUs Considering the importance of inter-regional co-operation and harmonisation, IOMOU participated in the CIC on Fire Safety System jointly with Paris MOU and Tokyo MOU in. All the CIC inspections were recorded in the Indian Ocean Computerised Information System (IOCIS) for the information of all interested parties. The Committee has decided to participate in other joint CIC as and when conducted by the Paris and Tokyo MOUs. The Committee also confirmed that it would consider granting observer status to other MOUs as and when such requests are received by the Committee. The IOMOU realized the need for this co-operation right from its inception and obtained the observer status with the Tokyo MOU. It continues to maintain this status by attending their Committee meetings and other activities. In a similar spirit the IOMOU has granted observer status to the MOUs as indicated under the list of observers. The representatives of the Secretariat attend each other s Committee meetings depending upon their own programmes. During the year the Secretary was invited to attend the following meetings: Mediterranean MOU Abuja MOU Tokyo MOU. The Secretary could attend only the nd meeting of the Tokyo MOU Committee held in Viña Del Mar, Chile from 6 th to 9 th April. As one of the inter-governmental Organisation (IGO) member of IMO, the Secretary attended th Flag State Implementation (FSI) Sub-Committee in February,. 8
VISITORS IMO Secretary General Mr. Koji Sekimizu and the Director General of Shipping, India Mr. Deepak Shetty, visited the Secretariat on 6... During the visit the Secretariat made a presentation on the development of the Indian Ocean MOU on port State control. IMO Secretary General s visit to IOMOU Secretariat 9
IOCIS / WEBSITE In line with other MOU, harmonized coding system implemented in IOCIS. Data exchange with Equasis, Information Handling Services Fairplay( IHS) and Lloyds List Group (LLG) is being carried out. 5 th Committee meeting discussed and decided to implement many changes in IOCIS, such as time limit for reporting the PSC inspections, implementation of MMSI number etc. Technicalities are in progress for data transfer to IMO under Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GISIS). 5 th Committee also decided to change the format of the web-site. IOCIS and the website are maintained by the National Informatics Centre, Government of India. The Secretariat is in continuous contact with the Manager of IOCIS discussing further improvements to the system. The web-site http://www.iomou.org is being visited by many to gather information on PSC inspections in the Indian Ocean region. The yearly statistical analysis of the use of the website is as given below: Month Hits Visits Page views Kbytes sent Jan- 6887 58 658 98 Feb- 866 5 8 766 Mar- 879 568 5 986 Apr- 755 5 87 87976 May- 6677 59 6 58976 Jun- 66 57 5 8675 Jul- 569 99 9 987 Aug- 58 5 9 69 Sep- 577 9 8 999 Oct- 9989 58 5 966 Nov- 67 556 98 9588 Dec- 689 686 88 7788 Total 85 67 877
STATISTICS A total of 55 inspections were carried out in. Out of these 55 inspections, 8 inspections had deficiencies and the total numbers of deficiencies were 95. Serious deficiencies noted by PSCOs led to the detention of ships. The detentions allow for the rectification of the serious deficiencies prior to the ships departure; the overall detention percentage for the year is 8.57%. There is decrease in total number of inspections in, compared with those in ; the detention percentage decreased from.8% recorded in. The average number of deficiencies per inspection in (.95) has also decreased compared to the previous year (.6). The information given in the following tables and charts represents the port State control activities of Australia, France, India, Iran, Kenya, Mauritius, Oman, South Africa, Tanzania & Yemen. The rest of the member Authorities are trying to develop their PSC Inspection activities. It should be noted that Australia, is a member of both the Tokyo MOU and the Indian Ocean MOU. South Africa is a member of the Abuja MOU and Indian Ocean MOU, Oman is the member of Riyadh MOU and the Indian Ocean MOU. Each record their PSC data with both MOUs and so when considering a world picture of statistics, this duplication of data should be taken into account. A joint CIC on Fire Safety System was held jointly with the Paris and the Tokyo MOUs in. The consolidated report on CIC activities in the Indian Ocean region is provided in this Annual Report.
STATISTICS FOR PORT STATE CONTROL INSPECTIONS CARRIED OUT BY AUTHORITIES Authority Number of Inspections Number of Inspections with deficiencies Number of Deficiencies Number of Detentions Detention Percentage Australia 79 678 7775 6.6 France 5 65. India 6 58 7 9 8.77 Iran 7 9 89.6 Kenya 5 8 6.88 Mauritius. Oman. South Africa 57 9 7.5 Tanzania 8. Yemen 9 89. Total 55 8 95 8.57 See comment on page regarding Australia, South Africa, and Oman data duplication between IOMOU and Tokyo MOU, Abuja MOU and Riyadh MOU. PORT STATE CONTROL INSPECTION ACTIVITIES
Table:. NLS Tanker * Type of Ship Deficiencies by Type of Ship Number of Inspections 7 Number of Inspections with Deficiencies 8 Number of Deficiencies Number of Detentions Detention Percentage 5.88 Percentage of Inspections with Deficiencies 7.6 Oil Tanker 6 78 8.6 6. Gas Carrier 7 67.7 9.7 Chemical Tanker 6 5 85.6 9. Bulk Carrier 65 9 759 9 7.7 57.9 Vehicle Carrier 8 68 9.9 7.6 Container Ship 5 56 69 8 7.5 8.85 Ro-Ro Cargo Ship 5 6 5 6. 5. General Cargo / Multipurpose ship 579 5 866 9 6. 7. Refrigerated Cargo Carrier 57 8.7.8 Woodchip Carrier 5 5 5 5.56 6.8 Livestock Carrier 9 65. 75.86 Ro-Ro Passenger Ship 5.. Passenger Ship 7 5 8.6 5.9 Heavy Load Carrier 56 8 7 6.7 67.86 Offshore Service Vessel 5 8 9 9. 6. MODU & FPSO.. Special Purpose Ship 8 56 9.9 7.7 Tugboat 9 5.55 65.9 Other Types of Ship 6 9 7 5 9. 7.8 Total 55 8 95 * Earlier known to be Tanker not otherwise specified.
Table: Deficiencies by Flag Flag Antigua and Barbuda Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belgium Belize Bermuda, (GB) Bolivia Bulgaria Cambodia Cayman Islands, (GB) China Comoros Cook Islands Croatia Curacao (NL) Cyprus Denmark Dominica Egypt France Germany Gibraltar, (GB) Greece Hong Kong, China India Indonesia Ireland Isle of Man, (GB) Italy Japan Jordan Kiribati Korea, Democratic People s Republic Korea, Republic of Kuwait Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Luxembourg Malaysia Maldives Malta Marshall Island Mauritius Moldova Mongolia Myanmar Number of Inspections 6 9 8 9 8 6 9 6 5 6 8 6 6 9 77 8 7 6 65 6 9 55 7 6 Number of Inspections With Deficiencies 8 7 5 8 7 69 6 69 7 8 6 9 7 55 9 9 5 56 65 9 5 57 6 Number of Deficiencies 6 5 5 5 8 8 9 8 5 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 7 5 77 7 7 8 8 6 79 5 77 76 9 6 5 Number of Detentions 7 9 7 5 6 9 7 5 Detention Percentage 7.5.5.9..5......85.7 8.6... 8.6 5.56. 6.67...5 7.79.8 5....76.8.76 5. 5. 5. 9.57. 7... 5.88. 6.9 6.6. 75. 5..
Table: (Contd.) Deficiencies by Flag Flag Namibia Netherlands New Zealand Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Philippines Portugal Qatar Russian Federation Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa Saudi Arabia Sierra Leone Seychelles Singapore Sri Lanka Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, China Tanzania Thailand Togo Tonga Turkey Tuvalu United Arab Emirates (UAE) United Kingdom, United States of America Ukraine Vanuatu Viet Nam Number of Inspections 7 9 56 5 6 59 5 6 9 6 7 8 8 7 8 5 5 5 8 8 Number of Inspections With Deficiencies 778 9 5 7 89 5 6 5 8 7 9 5 Number of Deficiencies 5 8 7 75 5 56 5 59 8 78 88 6 6 5 6 76 5 59 55 86 7 9 89 8 Number of Detentions 9 5 5 6 5 6 6 6 Detention Percentage. 8.5.... 8.78 5.7.6... 7.5.7.. 5.. 5.. 7.69.9. 9.5 6...9.....85.5... Total 55 8 95 * Flag Netherland Antilles changed to Curacao with effect from... 5
Table: Deficiencies by Categories Code Nature Of Deficiencies Number of Deficiencies Percentage 5 6 7 8 9 9 5 6 5 6 7 Certificate & Documentation Ship Certificates Certificate & Documentation Crew Certificates Certificate & Documentation Documents Structural Conditions Water/Weathertight conditions Emergency Systems Radio Communications Cargo operations including equipment Fire safety Alarms Living Conditions Working Conditions Safety of Navigation Life saving appliances Dangerous goods Propulsion and auxiliary machinery Pollution prevention Marpol Annex I Pollution prevention Marpol Annex II Pollution prevention Marpol Annex III Pollution prevention Marpol Annex IV Pollution prevention Marpol Annex V Pollution prevention Marpol Annex VI ISM ISPS Other 65 75 67 69 85 65 76 7 5 6 59 9 6 56 5 9 6 98 66 775 6 Total 95..8..6 5.7.7.79.5 5.8.98.7 7.97 5.79..7 6......9. 5.8.9.76 6
Table: Deficiencies by Recognised Organisation Recognised Organisation Abbreviation Number of Inspections Number of Inspections with Deficiencies Number of Detentions* Detention Percentage American Bureau of Shipping Biro Klasifikasi Indonesia Bureau Veritas China Classification Society China Corporation Register of Shipping Croatian Register of Shipping Det Norske Veritas Dromon Bureau Inc. Germanischer Lloyd Global Marine Bureau Inc. International Naval Surveys Bureau Indian Register of Shipping Inspeccion y Classificacion Maritima International Register of Shipping International Ship Classification Isthmus Bureau of Shipping Korea Classification Society Korean Register of Shipping Lloyd's Register Maritime Bureau of Shipping Maritime Lloyd Ltd., Georgia Nippon Kaiji Kyokai NV Unitas Overseas Marine Certification Services Panama Maritime Documentation Services Panama Register Corporation Panama Marine Survey and Certification Services Inc. Phoenix Register of Shipping Registro Italiano Navale Russian Maritime Register of Shipping RINAVE Portuguesa Sing-Lloyd Sing Class International Pte Ltd. Turkish Lloyd Universal Shipping Bureau Inc. Ukraine Shipping Register Viet Nam Register of Shipping Other ** No Class ABS BKI BV CCS CCRS CRS DNV DBS GL GMB INSB IRS INCLAMAR IS ISC IBS KCS KRS LR MBS MLG NKK UN OMCS PMDS PRC PMSCS PHRS RINA RMRS RP SGL SCI TL USB USR VR 98 55 6 68 97 7 9 8 5 8 659 7 57 7 5 9 9 9 57 8 86 85 5 7 5 56 9 7 86 9 8 7 5 6 59 6 8 5 5 7 5 5. 5.. 5. 5.8..89 5..6..86 7.. 7. 66.67. 5. 6. 6.7 75. 8.57 7.8.... 5. 66.67 8.8....... 6. 8.8 5. Total 55 8 Note: * Deficiencies for which a ship is detained may not necessarily be related to the matters covered by the certificates issued by the Recognised Organisation. ** Inspection classed with Venezuelean Register of shipping, Intertek Martime Bureau, International Maritime Registry, Bureau ITMB, Maritime Lloyd, Union Marine Classification Society, Belgium Register of Shipping, Registrar of Shipping, American Register of Shipping, TG, etc. are included in this RO. 7
Table: 5 Comparison of Inspections and Deficiencies per Ship Type Type of Ship Number of Inspections Number of Inspections with Deficiencies -year average percentage YEAR YEAR Total Total NLS Tanker * 7 7 6 8 8.89 Combination Carrier 75. Oil Tanker 566 9 6 8 9 5 7.6 Gas Carrier 66 8 7 7.5 Chemical Tanker 6 6 966 6 7 5 56 7. Bulk Carrier 6 68 65 795 59 69 9 65 58.6 Vehicle Carrier 6 5 8 7 66 56 68 9.5 Container Ship 58 66 5 75 6 56 8 6.9 Ro-Ro Cargo Ship 56 68 5 7 6 8 7. General Cargo / Multi-purpose Ship 78 766 579 76 5 59 5 5 7. Refrigerated Cargo Carrier 5 5 5.98 Woodchip Carrier 6 67 5 8 7 5 6. Livestock Carrier 9 9 7 8 77 75.9 Ro-Ro Passenger Ship 8 8. Passenger Ship 7 9 8 5 66 5.6 Heavy Load Carrier 56 9 5 8 7 7.59 Offshore Service Vessel 6 6 5 7 7 8 96 56. MODU & FPSO 7 5 85.7 Special Purpose Ship 7 8 6 8 5 5.57 High Speed Passenger Craft. Tugboat 8 8 9 69 6.89 Factory Ship. Other Types of Ship 8 6 6 6 9 87 75. Total 55 555 55 67 869 6 8 8975 55.7 * Earlier known to be Tanker not otherwise specified. 8
Table: 6 Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Ship Type Type of Ship Number of Inspections Number of Detention -year YEAR YEAR average percentage Total Total NLS Tanker * 7 7 6.78 Combination Carrier 5. Oil Tanker 566 9 6 7 7 5 7.9 Gas Carrier 66 8 7 7. Chemical Tanker 6 6 966 9 8 8.9 Bulk Carrier 6 68 65 795 6 68 9 66 8.8 Vehicle Carrier 6 5 8 7 9 7. Container Ship 58 66 5 75 9 6 8 7.98 Ro-Ro Cargo Ship 56 68 5 7 6 6 5 8.6 General Cargo/Multipurpose Ship 78 766 579 7 7 9 55 7. Refrigerated Cargo Carrier 5 5 5.85 Woodchip Carrier 6 67 5 8 6 6.56 Livestock Carrier 9 9 7.76 Ro-Ro Passenger Ship 8 5. Passenger Ship 7 9. Heavy Load Carrier 56 6.78 Offshore Service Vessel 6 6 5 7 8 9 7.6 MODU & FPSO 7 7. Special Purpose Ship 7 8 7. High Speed Passenger Craft. Tugboat 8 5 8 7. Factory Ship. Other Types of Ship 8 6 6 9 5 8 5.5 Total 55 555 55 67 7 6 5 9. * Earlier known to be Tanker Not Otherwise Specified. 9
Table: 7 Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Flag Flag Number of Inspections Number of Detentions YEAR YEAR Total Total -year average percentage Algeria 5. Antigua and Barbuda 8 6 56.79 Argentina. Bahamas 96 9 6 59 6 6 7 9 5.8 Bahrain 5. Bangladesh 5 8 57 9 8.6 Barbados 9 6 9 7 5.9 Belgium 8 8 8. Belize 8 8 9 5 5. Bermuda, (GB) 7 8 66.5 Bolivia 6. Bulgaria 6 7 57. Cambodia 5 7 5 6 85.7 Cayman Islands(GB) 7 6 6 79.8 China 9 7 5 8 7 5.5 Comoros 58 7 5 5 6. Cook Islands 6.76 Croatia 6 8.57 Curacao (NL) 5 5 7.69 Cyprus 65 55 6 6 7 9.7 Denmark 6 8 8.8 Dominica 5 9 5.79 Egypt 8 6 8 6.67 Ethiopia 6. Fiji. France 9 6 7.7 Georgia 9.76 Germany 7 99 5 5.5 Gibraltar, (GB) 6 9 56 5 8.9 Greece 9 77 75 5 5 6 6 5.8 Hong Kong, China 6 55 8 8 9 6 86 5.9 India 5 7 6 8 6.5 Indonesia 9.6 Iran. Ireland. Isle of Man (GB) 5 6 6 6 6.75 Italy 77 6 65 5 8.9 Jamaica.
Table: 7 (Contd.) Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Flag Flag Number of Inspections Number of Detentions -year average percentage YEAR YEAR Total Total Japan 59 6 6 5 5. Jordan 6 5. Kiribati 5 5 5.5 Korea Democratic People s 8 8. Republic Korea Republic of 9 8 6 9 9.97 Kuwait 6 7 7.76 Lebanon. Liberia 96 56 55 57 7 7.7 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 6. Lithuania 5. Luxembourg 6 6.67 Malaysia 7 9 8. Maldives 6 66.67 Malta 8 6 77 7 5 5 6.86 Marshall Islands 66 87 5 55 6. Mauritius 9. Moldova 9 7 77.78 Mongolia 9 6 6 7 5 57.69 Myanmar 5 5 6 6 7.69 Namibia. Netherlands 5 5 7 7 6 8.76 New Zealand 5. Norway 6 57 9 7 6 9 5.9 Oman. Pakistan 5 9. Panama 56 78 56 95 8 7 9 8 9.7 Papua New Guinea 5 5. Philippines 5 8 5 9 6. Portugal 5. Qatar 8. Russian Federation 8 5 5 8 6.67 Saint. Kitts and Nevis 7 8 6 5 6 8 5.9 Saint Vincent and the 5 59 6 5 5 8.9 Grenadines Samoa 5. Saudi Arabia 5 5 9.5 Seychelles.
Table: 7 (Contd.) Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Flag Flag Number of Inspections Number of Detentions YEAR YEAR Total Total -year average percentage Sierra Leone 9 8 6 7 5.88 Singapore 8 9 5 8 7 6.6 Slovakia 5 5. South Africa. Spain. Sri Lanka 5 6 6 9.86 Sweden 7.7 Switzerland 9 7 7. Syrian Arab Republic 6. Taiwan, China 9 6 6 9.8 Tanzania 8 5 5 6.9 Thailand 8 8 5 8 9.6 Togo 5 7.77 Tonga 6 7.7 Turkey 9 8 9 5 5 8.6 Tuvalu 9 5 6 6.9 Ukraine 5. United Arab Emirates(UAE) 7 6 5 8 6.9 United Kingdom 7 6 5 8 8.7 United States of America 6 8.7 Vanuatu 9 7 6 8.7 Viet Nam 8 8 6 6 8. Total 55 555 55 6 7 6 5
Table: 8 Comparison of Deficiencies by Categories Nature of Deficiencies Number of Deficiencies YEAR Certificate & Documentation Ship Certificates 89 5 65 Certificate & Documentation Crew Certificates 65 75 Certificate & Documentation Documents 6 9 67 Structural Conditions 76 9 69 Water/Weathertight conditions 8 9 85 Emergency Systems 69 65 65 Radio Communications 966 9 76 Cargo operations including equipment 7 Fire safety 59 75 5 Alarm Signals 6 65 6 Alarms 59 Living Conditions 67 8 9 Working Conditions 6 96 6 Safety of Navigation 77 79 56 Life saving appliances 67 6 5 Dangerous goods 6 9 Propulsion and auxiliary machinery 77 5 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex I 6 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex II 7 5 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex III 98 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex IV 58 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex V 6 66 Pollution prevention Marpol Annex VI ISM 87 9 775 ISPS 57 6 Other. 7 85 6 Total 687 99 95
Table: 9 Comparison of Inspections and Deficiencies per Recognised Organisation Recognised Organisation Number of Inspections Number of Inspections with Deficiencies YEAR YEAR Total Total -year average percentage American Bureau of Shipping 5 7 98 7 9 9 689 6.87 Belize Register Corporation. Biro Klasifikasi Indonesia. Bulgarski Koraben Registar 75. Bureau Veritas 59 59 55 58 79 68 977 6.7 China Classification Society 6 86 6 85 78 57 75 55.6 China Corporation Register of Shipping 6 5 8 6. Croatian Register of Shipping 8 6 66.67 Det Norske Veritas 86 57 68 6 7 86 686 9.8 Dromon Bureau of Shipping 75. Germanischer Lloyd 55 589 97 6 56 85 88.98 Global Marine Bureau. Hellenic Register of Shipping. Inspeccion y Classificacion Maritima. Indian Register of Shipping 9 8 5 5. Intermaritime Certification Services S.A. 8 8. International Naval Surveys Bureau 9 7 8 7 5 8. International Register of Shipping 8 68 7 6 7 6 88. International Ship Classification 5 9 5 8 9.7 Isthmus Bureau of Shipping 7 8 5 7 8 5. Korea Classification Society 5 7 5 6 9. Korean Register of Shipping 67 8 86 76 56 66 5.9 Korea Ship Safety Technology Authority. Lloyd's Register 7 7 659 5 8 9 5 5.66 Maritime Bureau of Shipping 75. Maritime Lloyd Ltd., Georgia 7 7 7 7. National Shipping Adjuster Inc. NV Unitas. Nippon Kaiji Kyokai 657 67 57 8 8 9 86 598 5. Overseas Marine Certification Services 6 8 6 7 87.5 Panama Bureau of Shipping. Panama Marine Survey and Certification. Services Inc. Panama Maritime Surveyors Bureau Inc.. Panama Maritime Documentation Service 5 5. Panama Register Corporation 66.67 Panama Shipping Registrar Inc. 5 8. Phoenix Register of Shipping 8 8 95.8
Table: 9 (Contd.) Comparison of Inspections and Deficiencies per Recognised Organisation Recognised Organisation Number of Inspections Number of Inspections with Deficiencies YEAR YEAR Total Total -year average percentage Polski Rejestr Statkow 7 6 8 7.7 Registro Italiano Navale 76 8 7 5 7 9 9 65.8 Registro Internacional Naval S.A.. RINAVE Portuguesa. Russian Maritime Register of Shipping 7 55 5 6 57 9 8 8.7 Shipping Register of Ukraine. Turkish Lloyd Union Bureau of Shipping 5 7 6 6 8.5. Universal Shipping Bureau. Viet Nam Register of Shipping 9 9 9 7 99 98. No Class 7 6 76.9 ther 56 5 9 5 5 9 8.7 Total 55 555 55 6 869 6 8 8975 5
Table: Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Recognised Organisation Number of Inspections Number of Detentions -year Recognised Organisation average YEAR YEAR percentage Total Total American Bureau of Shipping 5 7 98 7 7 6 86 5.85 Belize Register Corporation. Biro Klasifikasi Indonesia 8. Bulgarski Koraben Registar 75. Bureau Veritas 59 59 55 585 8 7 59 8.6 China Classification Society 6 86 6 85 6 8 6 5 5.85 China Corporation Register of Shipping 6 5 7. Croatian Register of Shipping 8 8. Det Norske Veritas 86 57 68 6 9 8 8 5.88 Dromon Bureau of Shipping 5. Germanischer Lloyd 55 589 97 6 68 5 59 9.7 Global Marine Bureau. Hellenic Register of Shipping. Inspeccion y Classificacion Maritima. Indian Register of Shipping 9 5. Intermaritime Certification Services S.A. 8 5 5. International Naval Surveys Bureau 9 7 8 9 5 5.57 International Register of Shipping 8 68 6 9 8 55.88 International Ship Classification 5 9 7 6.8 Isthmus Bureau of Shipping 7 8 5 6 55. Korea Classification Society 5 7 Korean Register of Shipping 67 8 86 9 7 59 6.86 Korea Ship Safety Technology Authority. Lloyd's Register 7 7 659 5 5 6 56 7.8 Maritime Bureau of Shipping 75. Maritime Lloyd Ltd., Georgia 7 7 8.57 National Shipping Adjuster Inc. Nippon Kaiji Kyokai 657 67 57 8 5 67 7.6 NV Unitas (UN). Overseas Marine Certification Services 6 8.5 Panama Bureau of Shipping. Panama Maritime Surveyors Bureau Inc.. Panama Maritime Documentation Services 5 6 6. Panama Marine Survey Certification 5. Panama Register Corporation. Panama Shipping Registrar Inc. 5 6. Phoenix Register of Shipping 8 5 7 7.8 6
Table: (Contd.) Comparison of Inspections and Detentions per Recognised Organisation Number of Inspections Number of Detentions -year Recognised Organisation average YEAR YEAR percentage Total Total Polski Rejestr Statkow 7 8.8 Registro Italiano Navale 76 8 7 5 9 8 6.9 Registro Internacional Naval S.A.. RINAVE Portuguesa. Russian Maritime Register of Shipping 7 55 5 6 7 9 8.5 Shipping Register of Ukraine 66.67 Turkish Lloyd 5 7 6 5.5 Union Bureau of Shipping. Universal Shipping Bureau 66.67 Viet Nam Register of Shipping 9 9 7 9 5.59 No Class 7 5 8.6 ther 56 5 9 5 5 6 5.9 Total 55 555 55 6 7 6 5 7
INSPECTION EFFORTS INDIA 6 % Fig. IRAN 7 % SOUTH AFRICA % MAURITIUS KENYA % FRANCE 5 % OMAN YEMEN % TANZANIA AUSTRALIA 79 6% TOTAL INSPECTIONS: 55 8
Fig. Percentage of Ship Type with Deficiencies 8. 7. 6. 5. Percentage..... Refrigerated Cargo Carrier Other Type of Ship Livestock Carrier Tugboat Offshore Service Vessel Passenger Ship Ro-Ro Cargo Ship Woodchip Carrier Heavy Load Carrier Gas Carrier Vehicle Carrier Chemical Tanker Oil Tanker Container Ship General Cargo / Multipurpose Ship Bulk Carrier This graph depicts inspections and above/ Ship Type 9
Fig. Percentage of Detention per Ship Type 5.. 5. Percentage. 5.. Refrigerated Cargo Carrier Other Type of Ship Livestock Carrier Tugboat Offshore Service Vessel Passenger Ship Ro-Ro Cargo Ship Woodchip Carrier Heavy Load Carrier Gas Carrier Vehicle Carrier Chemical Tanker Oil Tanker Container Ship General Cargo / Multipurpose Ship Bulk Carrier This graph depicts inspections and above/ Ship Type
Percentage of Deficiencies per Flag Fig. Hong Kong, China 8.7 Singapore 5.89 Marshall Island 5. Malta.8 Bahamas.9 China.6 Cyprus. Antigua & Barbuda.68 Korea Republic of. Greece. Liberia Panama 8.56 8.6 Panama 8.6 This graph depicts 75 inspections and above / Flag
Fig 5 Percentage of Detentions per Flag. 8. 6... Percentage. 8. 6.... Greece Korea, Republic of Antigua and Barbuda Cyprus China Bahamas Malta Marshall Islands Singapore Hong Kong, China Liberia Panama This graph depicts 75 inspections and above/flag
Fig. 6 Deficiency Percentage By Categories 8 6 Percentage 8 6 Other ISM Pollution prevention Marpol Annex I Propulsion and auxiliary machinery Life saving appliances Safety of Navigation Working Conditions Living Conditions Fire safety Radio Communications Emergency Systems Water/Weathertight conditions Structural Conditions Certificate & Documentation Documents Certificate & Documentation Crew Certificates Certificate & Documentation Ship Certificates This graph depicts deficiencies percentage.5 and above
Fig. 7 Detention Percentage By Recognised Organisation 8 7 6 5 Percentage China Corporation Register of Shipping International Register of Shipping Vietnam Register of Shipping Other Indian Register of Shipping Russian Maritime Register of Shipping Registro Italiano Navale Korean Register of Shipping China Classification Society Det Norske Veritas Germanischer Lloyd American Bureau of Shipping Bureau Veritas Lloyd's Register Nippon Kaiji Kyokai This graph depicts inspections of Ships and above/recognised Organisation
Fig. 8 Comparison of Inspections per Ship Type 5 5 5 Refrigerated Cargo Carrier Other Type of Ship Livestock Carrier Tugboat Offshore Service Vessel Passenger Ship Ro-Ro Cargo Ship Woodchip Carrier Heavy Load Carrier Gas Carrier Vehicle Carrier Chemical Tanker Oil Tanker Container Ship General Cargo / Multipurpose Ship Bulk Carrier This graph depicts inspections and above either for, or / Ship Type 5
Fig. 9 Comparison of Detentions per Ship Type 5 5 5 Heavy Load Carrier Tugboat Livestock Carrier Passenger Ship Refrigerated Cargo Carrier Other Types of Ship Ro-Ro Cargo Ship Woodchip Carrier Offshore Service Vessel Gas Carrier Vehicle Carrier Chemical Tanker Oil Tanker Container Ship General Cargo / Multipurpose Ship Bulk Carrier This graph depicts inspections and above either for, or / Ship Type 6
Fig. Summary of -year Inspections with Deficiencies per Ship Type -.7 Other Types of Ships Livestock Carrier Tugboat Offshore Service Vessel Refrigerated Cargo Carrier. 8.9 9. 9.79-8.57 -.5 Passenger Ship Ro-Ro Cargo Ship -.5-5.5 Woodchip Carrier Heavy Load Carrier -8.5 6.6 Gas Carrier Vehicle Carrier Chemical Tanker.89-8. -9. General Cargo / Multipurpose Ship Bulk Carrier Oil Tanker Container Ship.9 7.6 - - - % over (+) or under (-) average 7
Fig. Comparison of Detentions per Flag 8 6 8 6 Italy St.Vincent & Grenadines Greece China Korea Republic of Antigua and Barbuda Cyprus Bahamas Marshall Islands Malta Singapore Hong Kong, China Liberia Panama This graph depicts detentions of and above either for, or / flag 8
Fig. Summary of Year Detention Percentage Per Flag -5. Italy St.Vincent & Grenadines 9.6 -.5 -.98 Greece China Korea Republic of.6 Antigua and Barbuda.5 -.6 Cyprus -.5 Bahamas -. -.7 -.87 -.9 -.96 Marshall Islands Malta Singapore Hong Kong, China Liberia Panama. -8. -6. -. -.... 6. 8... % over (+) or under (-) average 9
Fig. Comparison of Deficiencies by Categories 5 5 5 5 Other ISM Pollution prevention Marpol Annex V Pollution prevention Marpol Annex IV Pollution prevention Marpol Annex I Propulsion and auxiliary machinery Life saving appliances Safety of Navigation Working Conditions Living Conditions Alarms Fire safety Cargo operations including equipment Radio Communications Emergency Systems Water/Weathertight conditions Structural Conditions Certificate & Documentation Documents Certificate & Documentation Crew Certificates Certificate & Documentation Ship Certificates This graph depicts deficiencies of and above either for, or
Fig. Comparison of Inspections per Recognised Organisation 8 6 8 6 N ip p o n K a iji K y o k a i L lo y d 's R e g is te r G e r m a n is c h e r L lo y d B u r e a u V e r ita s A m e r ic a n B u r e a u o f S h ip p in g D e t N o r s k e V e r ita s K o r e a n R e g is te r o f S h ip p in g C h in a C la s s if ic a tio n S o c ie ty R e g is tr o I ta lia n o N a v a le R e g is te r o f R u s s ia n M a r itim e O th e r I n d ia n R e g is te r o f S h ip p in g This graph depicts inspections of ships and above either for, or
Fig. 5 Comparison of Detentions per Recognised Organisation 6 8 6 Korea Classification Society Phonix Register of Shipping Isthmus Bureau of Shipping International Naval Surveys Bureau Russian Maritime Register of Shipping Indian Register of Shipping Vietnam Register of Shipping International Register of Shipping Registro Italiano Navale Other China Classification Society Korean Register of Shipping American Bureau of Shipping Det Norske Veritas Lloyd's Register Germanischer Lloyd Bureau Veritas Nippon Kaiji Kyokai This graph depicts detentions of 5 and above either for, or
THE REPORT OF CIC ON FIRE SAFETY SYSTEM (FSS) Name of reporting Authority AUSTRALIA Total number of inspection 66 Total number of deficiencies 9 Total number of detention Name of reporting Authority FRANCE Total number of inspection 9 Total number of deficiencies Total number of detention Name of reporting Authority INDIA Total number of inspection Total number of deficiencies 5 Total number of Detentions Name of reporting Authority IRAN Total number of inspection 5 Total number of deficiencies Total number of detention 6 Name of reporting Authority SOUTH AFRICA Total number of inspection 8 Total number of deficiencies Total number of detention Name of reporting Authority YEMEN Total number of inspection Total number of deficiencies 6 Total number of detention All Reporting Authorities Total number of inspection 96 Total number of deficiencies 7 Total number of detention 8
Length of the whole French coast is approximately 7 kilometers for mainland, 7 kilometers for West Indian Islands, 8 kilometers for Corsica and 6 kilometers for La Reunion Island. To protect and develop this areas, the President of the French Republic has created the Ministry for Ecology, Sustainable Development, Transport and Housing to take up the challenges of sustainable development, to prepare and implement decisions made at the Grenelle Environnement. In order to respond effectively to these issues, Ministry was agonized around five key Directorates- General. In terms of transport, the creation of a Directorate General for Infrastructure, Transport and the Sea (DGITM) will promote a voluntary policy of modal transfer by including the concept of sustainable development in each stage of the decision-making process. Main objectives of DGITM are: inter modal planning of transport infrastructures, taking all their direct and indirect effects on the environment and the economy fully into consideration, and searching for greater interdependency between the modes available to transport users; implementing a suitable and modern State stewardship of public institutions and companies working in its sphere of competence; conducting a maritime policy that respects biodiversity and encourages development; maintaining a high level of reliability, security and safety in transport; ensuring the economic development and competitiveness of the sector, in particular by the use of regulatory tools ensuring transparency and non-discrimination; creating and implementing some of the most highly developed legislation and public regulations in Europe. This new organization propose and implement an integrated transport and maritime policy serving the economy, meeting the social expectations of people working in this sector, preserving the environment and natural resources, for the benefit of every citizen. DGITM has three departments and one service: -The department of transport infrastructures, for multimodal planning, management, modernization and development of railways, waterways and main roads; -The department of transport services, for the regulation, security, safety, control and social aspects of land transport, the major maritime and waterway ports, as well as projects relating to public transport; -The department of maritime affairs, for maritime safety, training and education, monitoring of seafarers, development of the national flag, and policy for leisure yachting and nautical activities;
Tasks of the Department of Maritime Affairs: regulation for maritime safety, prevention of pollutions by vessels and the security of vessels. Most IMO and ILO conventions have been ratified by France. MLC 6 will be ratified first semester. definition of maritime signalization definition of guidelines for maritime training and education definition of working regulations, working conditions and social welfare of sailors development of the national flag, support to the merchant fleet and statistical monitoring of the fleet registered under the different French registers regulations relating to leisure boats, yachtsmen and nautical activities design and implementation of national and international maritime computer systems stewardship of ENIM (National Establishment for Maritime Invalids), National Maritime College of France and professional maritime colleges management of maritime affairs local departments. Port State Control. Port State Control activity is performed by approximately 9 PSCO. These officers after a University license or a seagoing vessels Master's course and a National concourse are joining the Ministry education center in Nantes for one or two years depending of their background. Then, new inspectors are nominated in one of the 6 survey safety ship centers or one of the overseas agencies located in : Dunkerque, Boulogne sur mer, Rouen, Le Havre, Caen, Saint Malo, Brest, Concarneau, Lorient, Saint Nazaire, La Rochelle, Bordeaux, Sete, Marseille, Fort de France-Martinique-, Le Port - Reunion, Tahiti (French Polynesia) and Noumea (New Caledonia). Due to the location of these safety centers around the world, France is today full member of two Mou's Indian Ocean Mou and ParisMOu and observer in the Caribbean Mou. Inspections are not shared between different Mou's and are recorded separately in the information systems used by port State control officers in the relevant Mou's. Number of inspections: Year Paris MOU Indian Ocean MOU 76 85 56 6 9 589 Due to a different targeting system with the New Inspection Regime in the ParisMou area, number of inspections has seriously decreased during year. 5
Indian Ocean ports and safety ship center The center of safety of the Southern ships Indian Ocean is in charge of: the study of the plans and documents of the ships registered with the Meeting, Mayotte and in the TAAF, or quite simply used in the Indian Ocean, and this for the delivery of the titles of safety, safety and prevention of pollution at sea. It ensures the control of the ships and the armaments by: MRCC Gris Nez the inspection and the certification of the armaments and ships French, and the inspection of the foreign ships making stopover in the ports of La Reunion and Mayotte under the memorandum of the Indian Ocean. It ensures the control of the approved technical centers. It leads missions of investigations after accidents and evaluations at the time of events of sea. It animates a mission of prevention of the maritime occupational hazards and assists in its other services of the administration as regards safety of the ships. It leads missions of regional co-operation in its field of competences. The military personnel ensures, also the functions of search maritime coordinator within La Réunion MRCC or search maritime organization of Mayotte. The center of safety of the ships is attached to the Management of the Southern Sea Indian Ocean. The director of the sea exerts clean attributions which are reserved for him by the texts relating to the human life at sea, with the habitability aboard the ships and the prevention of pollution to the title of safety of the ships, and in particular the presidency of the regional commission of safety. For the exercise of these competences, it is placed under the direct authority of the minister charged with the sea. The chief of the ships safety center exerts clean competences which are reserved for him by the texts relating to the safeguard of the human life at sea and with the safety of the ships. For the exercise of these competences, he is under the direct authority of the director of the sea. It ensures moreover a role of animation and control of the prevention of the maritime occupational hazards. PORT REUNION TRAFFIC Overall Traffic traffic (,5,6 metric tonnes [MT]) was down % compared with (,,65 MT). Most affected trades were : Container traffic:,86,86 MT (,99 TEU) handled in, versus,9,66 MT (9,5 TEU) in ; this was mainly due to a drop in raw sugar and paper waste exports. Solid bulk traffic:,69,598 MT in versus,,95 MT in, due to lower bulk sugar exports (8, MT in versus 9,77 MT in ). Navigation on the Seine River 6
However liquid bulk traffic reached 8,8 MT in over 8,576 MT in, in particular with heavy fuel (8,6 MT in, 7,99 MT in ) and jet fuel (89,95 MT in, 8, MT in ), in spite of a drop in petrol (95,78 MT in, 6,7 in ). Private car imports were slightly up with 6, units (,586 in ), but still well below the 8 all-time high (, units). Harbour Activity in Relation to Traffic Type Traffic with Europe is not representative, as certain carriers retrieve goods from Europe transhipped in the Middle-East and Asia. This increases the number of regional calls. Ship Call Variation by Service Type Number of Calls 7 8 9 Car Carrier 6 6 6 5 5 Line Carrier 6 9 5 5 of which Europe 5 6 68 56 58 of which Asia-Africa 7 58 5 Of which Regional Traders 75 7 9 Bulk Traders 7 Passenger Ship 57 8 6 6 7 Other 6 5 9 Total 79 699 65 68 6 Traffic by Area and Cargo Type Asia's share of Port Reunion traffic was %, Europe's %, and that of regional traffic 5%. Europe accounted for 6% of in container traffic, of which 6% from mainland France. Bulk traffic share remained high, representing: 7% of South-East Asia and Far East trades (mainly in oil products and clinker); 7% of regional trades (mainly with coal and bitumen from South Africa); 6% of Middle East trades (heavy fuel and gas). La Reunion 7
PORT MAYOTTE FACILITIES AND ACTIVITY Port facilities are located on different areas: Longoni harbor, with oil, gas, container and general cargo terminal, Badamiers anchorage (oil) Mayotte-Dzaudzi Mamoudzou Dzaoudzi, which includes anchorages (cruise boats), and an international passengers terminal. Two surveyors are located in Mayotte maritime survey local office, which depends from La Reunion main office. French Directorate of Maritime Affairs activities, in charge of maritime survey department, cover: Administration and survey of French ships registered, Local contact for prevention of professionals maritime risks (health and safety), Providing expertise in maritime emergency response (assess team) and maritime assistance, Port State control. One port State control officer based in Dzaoudzi takes part to the national % effort in the area (with La Reunion main office), with aims to promote the safety of foreign ships operating in French waters around Mayotte island. Vessel traffic Year Cargo gross tonnage No of call Including cruise ship No of passengers Number of PSC inspection NC NC NC NC 6 7976 95 6 7 5 5757 5 9 675 7 75 8 579 8 797 5 7 598 75 8 99 5 6 8897 9 8 686 5 6696 9 6 7 8