port state control success

With a shortage of suitably experienced shore staff to conduct vessel inspections, often attempts are made to replace competence, knowledge and experience by a long checklist. This does not help with PSC performance, a checklist is no match for the skills and knowledge of a formally trained Port State Control Officer!

No, some inspections can give misleading results, it is important to take into account the time available for the amount of questions and the competency of the inspector. Some regimes only require seafaring experience and not any surveying/inspecting skills, with the competence element being addressed by large checklists that are not possible to realistically complete in the time available.

It must be also be considered who is the beneficiary of the inspection, often they are commisioned by potential Charterers as their risk assessment due diligence, and not for the sole benefit of the shipowner.

Whilst undoubtedly useful, most Flags need to authorise inspectors on a contract basis to carry out inspections on their behalf, to have a global presence, hence the competence of inspectors is widely varied and they are usually restricted to the contents of a checklist provided by the Flag State, with time often very limited. There are many items that will be verified during a PSC inspection that may not be identified on a Flag State checklist. PSC don’t use checklists, they utilise formally trained inspectors with comprehensive polices, procedures and processes that are optimised to identify compliance or deficiencies.

RO’s have a renewed invigorated commercial focus, striving to reduce survey time and keep costs competitive. This has led to insufficient time onboard to carry out a survey scope effectively, let alone allow any time for inspection. In our experience, the only time we’ve seen an RO surveyor tasked to carry out a thorough inspection is when visiting a vessel during a detention.

The processes, policies and procedures of PSC are confidential documents and not known by anyone that has not worked for an MoU Authority. After being the subject of inspections, or reading through reports, some may purport to be ‘experts’ but the truth is very different. Before engaging a pre-PSC inspector, ask for evidence of authorisation as a PSC Officer from a mature and trusted Administration. There’s a huge value difference between engaging a formally trained PSC Officer to guide you, and a salesman with just another checklist. We will deliver measurable results and not just an invoice.

We are so confident that our Assessments will do exactly what they say on the tin, we offer a full money-back guarantee, how many other survey/inspection/audit organisations can say that?

No. Often, detentions come as a shock, with vessels having a previously good PSC history. It doesn’t mean that suddenly something has gone wrong with the vessels condition, the variables of a PSC inspection are not often known and considered by Shipowners, ISM Companies and other stakeholders and make a huge difference, often the difference between a clear report and a detention.

The reasons are many, including political, and only those that have actively worked as PSCO’s tend to be aware. Blindly reviewing PSC history and MoU whitelists, as a definitive metric, assumes that all ships fulfilling the criteria for detention are detained, they most certainly are not.

The only way to sustainably succeed is to not have any identifiable deficiencies!