PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2019 2020 EDITION 5 Chapter 1 General 1.1 Purpose This document is intended to provide basic guidance on the conduct of port State control inspections in support of the control provisions of relevant conventions and parts of the IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III Code) (resolution A.1070(28)) and afford consistency in the conduct of these inspections, the recognition of de?ciencies of a ship, its equipment, or its crew, and the application of control procedures. 1.2 Application 1.2.1 These Procedures apply to ships falling under the provisions of: .1 the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS 1974); .2 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (SOLAS PROT 1988); .3 the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966, as amended (LL 1966); .4 the Protocol of 1988 relating to the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966, as amended (LL PROT 1988); .5 the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modi?ed by the 1978 and 1997 Protocols, as amended (MARPOL); .6 the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certi?cation and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW 1978); .7 the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969, as amended (TONNAGE 1969); .8 the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, 2001 (AFS 2001); .9 the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, as amended (COLREG 1972); .10 the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969 (CLC 1969); .11 the Protocol of 1992 to amend the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969, as amended (CLC PROT 1992); .12 the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001 (BUNKERS 2001); .13 the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004, as amended (BWM 2004); and .14 the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks, 2007 (NAIROBI WRC 2007), hereafter referred to as the relevant conventions. 1.2.2 Ships of non-Parties should be given no more favourable treatment (see section 1.5). Chapter 1 6 PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2019 2020 EDITION 1.2.3 For ships below convention size, Parties should apply the procedures in section 1.6. 1.2.4 When exercising port State control, Parties should only apply those provisions of the conventions which are in force and which they have accepted. 1.2.5 When the provisions of the relevant conventions are not speci?c, the port State control of?cer (PSCO) should in principle accept the design arrangement approved by the ?ag State and when appropriate consult with the ?ag Administration. 1.2.6 The PSCO should be aware that the provisions of relevant conventions permit Administrations to grant exemptions, allow equivalents* and approve alternative design and arrangements (ADA). When an Exemption Certi?cate is issued in accordance with the relevant provisions of a convention, provided it includes the correct reference to the exemption provision and the requirement to which it relates, or the ship carries the approved ADA documentation (e.g. SOLAS 1974 regulation II-1/55.4.2), port State authorities should interpret this as meaning that the ship complies with the provisions of the convention. Port State authorities should check, whenever possible, with the Administration should there be any doubt whether an exemption, equivalence or ADA has been granted. 1.2.7 Notwithstanding paragraph 1.2.4, in relation to voluntary early implementation of amendments to SOLAS 1974 and related mandatory instruments, Parties should take into account the Guidelines on the voluntary early implementation of amendments to the 1974 SOLAS Convention and related mandatory instruments (MSC.1/Circ.1565). 1.2.8 If a port State exercises control based on: .1 the International Labour Organization (ILO) Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC 2006), guidance on the conduct of such inspections is given in the ILO publication, Guidelines for port State control of?cers carrying out inspections under the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006; or .2 the ILO Convention No. 147, Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976, or the Protocol of 1996 to the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976, guidance on the conduct of such inspections is given in the ILO publication, Inspection of labour conditions on board ship: Guide-lines for procedure. 1.3 Introduction 1.3.1 Under the provisions of the relevant conventions set out in section 1.2 above, the Administration (i.e. the Government of the ?ag State) is responsible for promulgating laws and regulations and for taking all other steps which may be necessary to give the relevant conventions full and complete effect so as to ensure that, from the point of view of safety of life and pollution prevention, a ship is ?t for the service for which it is intended and seafarers are quali?ed and ?t for their duties. 1.3.2 The nature of international shipping means that ships may not frequently call at ports in their ?ag State. It is therefore common to ?nd that such ?ag States appoint the nominated surveyors at foreign ports and authorize recognized organizations (ROs) in accordance with the provisions of various conventions. 1.3.3 The following control procedures should be regarded as complementary to national measures taken by ?ag States Administrations in their countries and abroad and are intended to provide a common and consistent approach to the performance of port State control inspections and control measures taken as a consequence of the detection of serious de?ciencies. These procedures are also intended to provide assistance to ?ag State Administrations in securing compliance with convention provisions in safeguarding the safety of crew, passengers and ships, and ensuring the prevention of pollution. * Any Administration which allows, in substitution, a fitting, material, appliance or apparatus, or type thereof, or provision, shall communicate to the Organization particulars thereof together with a report on any trials made and the Organization shall circulate such particulars to other Contracting Governments for the information of their officers (e.g. SOLAS 1974 regulation I/5). General PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2019 2020 EDITION 7 1.4 Provision for port State control SOLAS 1974 regulations I/19, IX/6.2, IX-1/4 and XI-2/9, as modi?ed by SOLAS PROT 1988; article 21 of LL 1966, as modi?ed by LL PROT 1988; articles 5 and 6, regulation 11 of Annex I, regulation 16.9 of Annex II, regulation 9 of Annex III, regulation 14 of Annex IV, regulation 9 of Annex V and regulation 10 of Annex VI of MARPOL; article X of STCW 1978; article 12 of TONNAGE  1969, article 11 of AFS 2001 and article 9 of BWM 2004 provide for control procedures to be followed by a Party to a relevant convention with regard to foreign ships visiting their ports. The authorities of port States should make effective use of these provisions for the purposes of identifying de?ciencies, if any, in such ships which may render them substandard (see section 3.1) and ensuring that remedial measures are taken. 1.5 Ships of non-Parties 1.5.1 Article I(3) of SOLAS PROT 1988, article I(3) of LL PROT 1988, article 5(4) of MARPOL, article X(5) of STCW 1978, article 3(3) of AFS 2001 and article 3(3) of BWM 2004 provide that no more favourable treatment is to be given to the ships of countries which are not Party to the relevant convention. All Parties should, as a matter of principle, apply these Procedures to ships of non-Parties in order to ensure that equivalent surveys and inspections are conducted and an equivalent level of safety and protection of the marine environment is ensured. 1.5.2 As ships of non-Parties are not provided with SOLAS, Load Lines, MARPOL, AFS or BWM certi?cates, as applicable, or the crew members may not hold STCW certi?cates, the PSCO, taking into account the principles established in these Procedures, should be satis?ed that the ship and crew do not present a danger to those on board or an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment. If the ship or crew has some form of certi?cation other than that required by a convention, the PSCO may take the form and content of this documentation into account in the evaluation of that ship. The conditions of and on such a ship and its equipment and the certi?cation of the crew and the ?ag State’s minimum manning standard should be compatible with the aims of the provisions of the conventions; otherwise, the ship should be subject to such restrictions as are necessary to obtain a comparable level of safety and protection of the marine environment. 1.6 Ships below convention size 1.6.1 In the exercise of their functions, PSCOs should be guided by any certi?cates and other documents issued by or on behalf of the ?ag State Administration. In such cases, the PSCOs should limit the scope of inspection to the veri?cation of compliance with those certi?cates and documents. 1.6.2 To the extent a relevant instrument is not applicable to a ship below convention size, the PSCO’s task should be to assess whether the ship is of an acceptable standard in regard to safety and the environment. In making that assessment, the PSCO should take due account of such factors as the length and nature of the intended voyage or service, the size and type of the ship, the equipment provided and the nature of the cargo. 1.7 De?nitions 1.7.1 Bulk carrier: While noting the de?nitions in SOLAS 1974 regulations IX/1.6 and XII/1.1 and resolution MSC.277(85), for the purposes of port State control, PSCOs should be guided by the ship’s type indicated in the ship’s certi?cates in determining whether a ship is a bulk carrier and recognize that a ship which is not designated as a bulk carrier as the ship type on the ship certi?cate may carry certain bulk cargo as provided for in the above instruments. 1.7.2 Clear grounds: Evidence that the ship, its equipment, or its crew does not correspond substantially with the requirements of the relevant conventions or that the master or crew members are not familiar with essential shipboard procedures relating to the safety of ships or the prevention of pollution. Examples of clear grounds are included in section 2.4. 1.7.3 De?ciency: A condition found not to be in compliance with the requirements of the relevant convention. Chapter 1 8 PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2019 2020 EDITION 1.7.4 Detention: Intervention action taken by the port State when the condition of the ship or its crew does not correspond substantially with the relevant conventions to ensure that the ship will not sail until it can proceed to sea without presenting a danger to the ship or persons on board, or without presenting an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment, whether or not such action will affect the normal schedule of the departure of the ship. 1.7.5 Initial inspection: A visit on board a ship to check the validity of the relevant certi?cates and other documents, the overall condition of the ship, its equipment and its crew (see also section 2.2). 1.7.6 More detailed inspection: An inspection conducted when there are “clear grounds”, as de?ned under paragraph 1.7.2. 1.7.7 Nearest appropriate and available repair yard: A port where follow-up action can be taken, and it is in, or closest to, the port of detention or the port where the ship is authorized to proceed taking into account the cargo on board. 1.7.8 Port State control of?cer (PSCO): A person duly authorized by the competent authority of a Party to a relevant convention to carry out port State control inspections, and responsible exclusively to that Party. 1.7.9 Recognized organization (RO): An organization which meets the relevant conditions set forth in the Code for Recognized Organizations (RO Code) (MSC.349(92) and MEPC.237(65)), and has been assessed and authorized by the ?ag State Administration in accordance with provisions of the RO Code to provide the necessary statutory services and certi?cation to ships entitled to ?y its ?ag. 1.7.10 Stoppage of an operation: Formal prohibition against a ship to continue an operation due to an identi?ed de?ciency or de?ciencies which, singly or together, render the continuation of such operation hazardous. 1.7.11 Substandard ship: A ship whose hull, machinery, equipment or operational safety is substantially below the standards required by the relevant convention or whose crew is not in conformity with the safe manning document. 1.7.12 Valid certi?cates: A certi?cate that has been issued, electronically or on paper, directly by a Party to a relevant convention or on its behalf by an RO, contains accurate and effective dates, meets the provisions of the relevant convention and to which the particulars of the ship, its crew and its equipment correspond. 1.8 Professional pro?le of PSCOs 1.8.1 Port State control should be carried out only by quali?ed PSCOs who ful?l the quali?cations and training speci?ed in section 1.9. 1.8.2 When the required professional expertise cannot be provided by the PSCO, the PSCO may be assisted by any person with the required expertise, as acceptable to the port State. 1.8.3 PSCOs and persons assisting them should be free from any commercial, ?nancial, and other pressures and have no commercial interest in the port of inspection, the ships inspected, ship repair facilities or any support services in the port or elsewhere, nor should PSCOs be employed by or undertake work on behalf of ROs or classi?cation societies. 1.8.4 A PSCO should carry a personal document in the form of an identity card issued by the port State and indicating that the PSCO is authorized to carry out the control. 1.9 Quali?cation and training requirements of PSCOs 1.9.1 The PSCO should be an experienced of?cer quali?ed as ?ag State surveyor. 1.9.2 The PSCO should be able to communicate in English with the key crew.