160 likes | 309 Views
Peter M Swift. One Inspection, Two Inspections, Three Inspections, More. WHY CONCERNED ?. Too many inspections . WHY ? FAILURE OF TRUST. Too many inspections. All stakeholders in the maritime businesses are linked in the expanded Chain of Responsibility. Designers . Shipbuilders.
E N D
Peter M Swift One Inspection, Two Inspections, Three Inspections, More........
WHY CONCERNED ? Too many inspections
WHY ? FAILURE OF TRUST Too many inspections
All stakeholders in the maritime businesses are linked in the expanded Chain of Responsibility Designers Shipbuilders Class Equipment Suppliers Financiers / Guarantors Charterers Operator/Manager Owner P&I Hull insurers Cargo Owners Brokers Flag states Ports & Terminals Waterways authorities Coastal States Labour providers Tug operators Bunker suppliers Pilots Agents Salvers Paint Suppliers Repairers Spill Response Cash Buyers Ship Breakers Regulators
ALL SHIPS Flag State Port State Classification Society ISM P&I ADDITIONALLY FOR TANKERS Extra Flag State (CAS) Extra PSC (Targeting) Extra P&I OCIMF-SIRE CDI Terminal Vetting Oil Company/CAP USCG – TVEL/LOC The Inspection Problem
IMO – Secretary-Generals’ initiatives Reductions in number of SIRE & CDI inspections/ per ship noted over recent years TMSA – has potential to reduce “the number of inspections that each ship undergoes” Not all bad news
But ! Indications that OCIMF is advising that: “ SIRE reports start to lose their value after 6 months and OCIMF therefore recommends that the vessel is re-inspected accordingly ”
Ship is seaworthy Operators are up to the job Compliance with Statutory requirements Inspections – what for ?
Another World • Roadworthiness • Operator Licence • Registration - Roadworthiness - Insurance Overseas - International licences & insurance certification
Better coordination of PSC inspections More rationalised commercial inspections – SIRE/CDI/Terminals Integration of “voluntary additional” structural assessments by class – principally CAP Better sharing of information among all parties – e.g. for P&I Other – e.g. removal of flag state & ROs overlap Areas for rationalisation
Need : Global sharing and mutual recognition of records between ”responsible” MoUs,- thereby reducing number of inspections Central database – with PSC records logged by all ”responsible” MOUs in Equasis or other Better harmonisation and consistency of standards, training, etc. across all PSC regimes - including consistency in inspection and targeting criteria – based in part on analysis of PSC records and not arbitrary mechansisms, such as quota systems Uniformity in internal procedures,such as clear grounds for detention, independent appeal panels, close-out of deficiencies, etc. & To ensure that the integrity of PSC is maintained Port State Control
VPQ (Vessel Particulars Questionnaire) harmonised between CDI and SIRE BUT COMMON VIQ (Vessel Inspection Questionnaire) still not agreed ULTIMATE GOAL: Full merger of both systems with a single report issued and accepted by ALL the Oil & Chemical Companies, Terminals and other cargo interests Common VIQ
Charterers & Terminals Port State Control MOUs IMO – jointly with the other stakeholders Any hope ?
Thank you www.intertanko.com www.shippingfacts.com www.themaritimefoundation.com