IMO MEMBER STATE AUDIT SCHEME WORKSHOP FOR MARITIME

IMO MEMBER STATE AUDIT SCHEME WORKSHOP FOR MARITIME ADMINISTRATIONS REPORTING FROM AUDIT DEPT. MSA&IS Dept. MSA&IS

THE AUDIT Scope and objectives of the Audit: • Scope of the audit: • Addresses Flag, Port and Coastal State obligations of the maritime administration of a Member State • Objectives of the audit: To determine: • Extent that the Member State has met the obligations • Effectiveness of the implementation of these objectives Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 2

THE AUDIT (cont. ) Conducting the audit: • Audit team leader has the responsibility to ensure the audit is effective and produces meaningful results • Findings and observations must be established on objective evidence • Absence of objective evidence can give rise to a finding or observation • There are several forms of objective evidence: • Documentary • Visible • Oral Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 3

AUDIT FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS Findings and Observations are reported under the following categories of activities: • General • Flag State • Coastal State • Port State Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 4

AUDIT FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS (cont. ) FINDING What is a Finding? A Finding is a situation where objective evidence indicates the non‑compliance with a mandatory requirement contained in an IMO instrument or in the audit standard. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 5

AUDIT FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS (cont. ) A Finding should only be issued for: • Failings in the legislation, implementation and enforcement of the provisions of applicable IMO instruments or some provisions of the III Code • As some provisions of the III Code are also requirements from mandatory IMO instruments, appropriate references to the applicable provisions from the applicable IMO instrument and the III Code should be inserted in the Findings Notice Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 6

AUDIT FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS (cont. ) OBSERVATION What is an Observation? • An Observation is a statement of fact substantiated by objective evidence, relating to a non-mandatory provision of the audit standard Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 7

AUDIT FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS (cont. ) An Observation should only be given on: • provisions of the III Code that are recommendations (not mandatory requirements) Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 8

DRAFTING OF FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS • Audit teams should report exactly, the current status during the audit • Clear and appropriate references to the applicable provision from the applicable IMO instrument and/or audit standard should be made Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 9

REPORTING by AUDITORS When preparing audit reports auditors will: • • Refer to notes made and evidence gathered Use only objective evidence Clearly identify findings and observations Write precisely Findings and Observations with relevant references Clarify reasons for findings and observations Use the standard reporting format (Form A) ATL will submit report to the Secretary-General Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 10

REPORTING Draft audit interim report • To be tabled at the audit closing meeting Draft executive summary report • contains the details of the audited Member State, including the • • • involved entity(ies) of the State provides a summary of findings and observations relating to the Member State's adherence to the audit standard and implementation of the applicable IMO instruments prepared by ATL standardized template Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 11

REPORTING Audit interim report • ATL to submit to audited Member State, copied to IMO • Should include a succinct description of findings or observations found, if any Audit final report • Audit interim report, previously issued to the Member State, that now incorporates the Member State's comments, corrective action plan and root causes, and submitted to the Member State and IMO Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 12

GENERAL Finding (FD) Corrective action There was no system in place to ensure reporting and no The maritime administration has established a list of all relevant reports were provided to IMO by the maritime reporting requirements to IMO and the responsible administration as required by mandatory instruments departments within this administration as well as within other concerned ministries, to provide the required (SOLAS 74, article III(a), regulation V/7. 2; LL 66, article information. A dedicated person has been charged with 26; STCW 78, article VIII; MARPOL, articles 8, 11 and 12, the responsibility for reporting to IMO as required by Annex I, regulation 38; Annex II, regulation 18, Annex V, relevant instruments. In addition, information in the regulation 7; III Code, part 1, paragraph 8. 3). relevant GISIS modules has been updated and will be kept up to date. The reporting obligation has been Root cause incorporated in the ISO annual internal audit system. The Reporting requirements have not been assessed and date for implementation of this corrective action is implemented within the maritime administration. At the December 2016 (September 2016 for submitting the time of audit, no dedicated personnel was charged with annual report with reference to MEPC/Circ. 318) such responsibility. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 13

GENERAL (cont. ) FD A number of applicable mandatory IMO instruments and amendments thereto have not been fully adopted in national law. Furthermore, it was established that amendments were not adopted on a timely basis (SOLAS 1974, article 1(a) and (b); III Code, part 1, paragraph 8. 1). Root cause Insufficient resources within the maritime administration in the past caused delays in the updating of the national legislation. In addition, frequent updates/amendments of mandatory IMO instruments creates heavy burden on the maritime administration as the national legal system requires a lengthy process to ratify new conventions and/or amendments to existing legislations. Corrective action The maritime administration is in the process to speed up acceptance of IMO instruments into national law. At present, Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 14 MARPOL Annexes II, IV, V (amendments) and VI; LL 88 and COLREG amendments are in the process for acceptance into national law. All relevant codes will undergo a simplified legislative procedure and will be incorporated in the State's national legislation. A dedicated person has been designated to systematically follow up on new and amended mandatory IMO instruments and their entry into force dates to ensure their incorporation into national legislation. All mandatory IMO instruments and related amendments are being reviewed, so that the national legislation could be updated by incorporating the instruments or amendments which has not been done as yet. The legal department concurs with technical amendments for which violation does not constitute criminal charges, to be in the form of notices published by the designated inspectorate. In this regard, a prioritized list has been prepared in order to transpose current amendments into national legislation.

GENERAL (cont. ) Observation (OB) conventions and resolutions, no need for a The State did not develop a general strategy specific IMO strategy had been identified. for meeting its obligations and responsibilities contained in the mandatory Corrective action IMO instruments to which it is a Party. The State will prepare a maritime strategy Furthermore, there was no overall and consider incorporating into it, the mechanism to coordinate the different commitment to, and the participation in, IMO entities involved in the implementation and activities, as well as the review and enforcement of the mandatory IMO verification of the implementation and instruments and there was no system in enforcement of the mandatory IMO place for review and verification of the instruments. The planned completion date is effectiveness of the State and for continuous 31 December 2016. As a mechanism for improvement of its performance (III Code, continuous compliance with this requirement, part 1, paragraph 3). the strategy will be updated, as appropriate, and its implementation will be monitored and Root cause evaluated regularly through meetings amongst the different governmental entities Although the State had several national and in accordance with the general regional maritime safety and pollution performance guidance procedure of the prevention strategies, none of these were Ministry. IMO specific. As the present strategies highlighted the importance of global rules for the maritime sector, especially IMO Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 15

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES FD It was established during the audit that the Administration Corrective action had no written agreement signed with its ROs, although National legislation will require all ROs acting on behalf of statutory certificates under the State to be signatory to a formal agreement approved SOLAS 74 and LL 66 Conventions, as amended, were by the legal section of the ministry responsible for issued by them on behalf of the Administration on a transport. A system of orderly auditing of ROs will be regular basis (SOLAS 1974 regulation XI-1/1; RO Code; incorporated in the ISO annual internal audit system. A III Code, part 2, paragraph 18. 2). formal written agreement between the maritime administration and ROs has been drafted based on the RO Code and the model agreement. The agreement has Root cause been legally approved and sent to all relevant ROs. A National legislation provided automatic recognition of all formal agreement has been already signed with an RO IACS members, without requiring the signature of a and a finalized format of agreement has been sent to formal agreement. other ROs. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 16

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD It was established that the State had not ensured that Corrective action investigator(s) carrying out a marine safety investigation The Administration is in the process of strictly are impartial and objective, nor that the marine safety distinguishing between the contractor that carries out investigator(s) are able to report on the results of a marine surveys and a contractor that carries out safety investigation without direction or interference from investigations after a casualty. Under the new any persons or organizations, who may be affected by its arrangements, the contractor that carries out surveys and outcome (Casualty Investigation Code, chapter 11. 1 and III the contractor that will be carrying out safety investigations Code, part 2, paragraph 41). cannot be the same entity. The deadline for the implementation of this corrective action is by the end of 2016. Root cause The Administration has overlooked to establish safeguards in order to ensure that investigators carrying out a marine safety investigation comply with the requirements of chapter 11. 1 of the Casualty Investigation Code. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 17

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD Corrective action The Administration has added a clause to the agreements with ROs, which requires them to consult with the Administration before taking action regarding a provision left "to the satisfaction of the Administration". Furthermore, the Administration will issue circulars, on a case by case basis, containing the guidelines which define the term "to the satisfaction of the Administration". No objective evidence was provided to demonstrate that the Administration has established a process for the development, documentation and provision of guidance concerning those requirements that are found "to the satisfaction of the Administration", in relevant mandatory IMO instruments (III Code, part 2, paragraph 16. 5). Root cause The Administration was not aware that it must examine whether guidance or specification of requirements are needed whenever the mandatory IMO instruments use the term "to the satisfaction of the Administration". Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 18

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD Corrective action There was no evidence that sufficient qualified The maritime administration will make available a personnel, with the required technical skills, specific sufficient number of qualified personnel to implement technical guidelines and instructions were available to and enforce national legislation and conduct investigations into the detention of a national investigations on the reasons for detention. flag ship by a port State (III Code, part 2, paragraphs Additionally, guidelines on the investigation of detention of national flag ships by a port State Control 24. 2 and 24. 3). will be included in the procedures manual of the maritime administration. The estimated date for Root cause completing this corrective action is February 2017. The maritime administration had not appointed personnel with appropriate expertise, as necessary, to follow up detentions of national flag ships by the port State. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 19

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD It was found that no actions were taken against ships entitled to fly the flag of the State which have failed to report detentions as a result of non-compliance with international rules and standards (III Code, part 2, paragraphs 22. 7 and 25). Root cause In most cases, the State did not receive the obligatory report from the PSC authorities, as required by SOLAS chapter I, regulation 19(d). Insufficient cooperation of the shipping companies in their obligation to advise the maritime administration as required by the national legislation, as well as by SOLAS chapter I, regulation 11(c), resulted in a situation where no actions were taken against ships entitled to fly the flag of the State, which failed to report detentions. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 20 Corrective action Regular follow up of the fleet, reminder through appropriate notice and random inspections of ships entitled to fly the flag of the State to review PSC inspections carried out and in case of non-conformity with the national legislation, initiate legal proceedings as appropriate. Following the audit, the maritime administration has issued a notice to all ships entitled to fly the flag of the State, reiterating their duty to report detention or a "defect affecting the safety of the ship" as provided by the relevant national legislation and the penalties imposed therein. Implementation of this corrective action has been completed.

FLAG STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD Corrective action There was no documentary evidence that personnel The maritime administration will ensure that all undertaking the tasks of RO monitoring, issuing of personnel undertaking tasks of RO monitoring will be certificates on Tonnage 69 and Load lines 66, were properly qualified and will undergo training. A training adequately qualified to carry out these tasks. programme for all inspectors has been prepared in Furthermore, there was no record of continuous cooperation with the designated authority for maritime education and training, which includes the ISM lead updating of their knowledge (III Code, part 2, auditors course. In addition, following the audit paragraph 35). recommendations, the designated inspectorate has established a periodic meeting of inspectors for the Root cause purpose of continuous professional update as well as In the past, shipping inspectors went through training. evaluation of training needs. The date for Such training for naval architects was deemed implementation of this corrective action is December unnecessary. 2016. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 21

COASTAL STATE ACTIVITIES FD Passenger ships operating in the State's search-and- Corrective action rescue (SAR) area do not have SAR cooperation plans The maritime administration will provide concerned prepared in collaboration between the ship, the parties with easily accessible information on the company and search and rescue services (SOLAS State's SAR and other emergency services available in 1974, regulation V/7. 3; III Code, part 3, paragraph a ship's area of operations for decision-making and 46. 1). contingency-planning. Exercises will also be organized with the passenger ships operating in the State's SAR area and its SAR collaboration measures will be tested Root cause annually in order to ensure effective use of available The maritime administration has not established resources. The estimated date for completing this policies to link the SAR response plans of companies, corrective action is July 2017. passenger ships and the State's SAR service so that the plans complement each other and enable all parties to work together effectively in an emergency. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 22

COASTAL STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) FD Corrective action The maritime administration did not have an effective The State will implement a revised National Oil Pollution system of receiving reports of, and responding in a Contingency Plan by 31 October 2016. All stakeholders timely manner to, reported incidents of marine pollution will be familiarized with the plan through formal training and desktop/practical exercises to be completed by 30 that occur in the State's territorial waters (III Code, part November 2016. As a mechanism to ensure continuous 3, paragraph 50. 2). compliance with this requirement in the future, the responsible entity will implement a programme to Root cause constantly review, update and execute the National Oil The State lacked a comprehensive Oil Pollution Contingency Plan. In addition, the general Contingency Plan with clear lines of communication and public will be sensitized to the plan through an a reporting/investigation framework. awareness programme on the reporting procedures in the event of an oil pollution incident. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 23

PORT STATE ACTIVITIES FD Corrective action The State did not keep a register of local fuel oil suppliers A relevant State entity will be designated to maintain a (MARPOL Annex VI, regulation 18. 9. 1; III Code, part 4, register of local fuel oil suppliers through amendments to paragraph 57). the relevant national laws. The target date for completion of this corrective action is 31 December 2016. To prevent similar problems in the future, the State will further develop Root cause processes for periodic performance evaluation concerning Competencies in respect of the MARPOL requirement the effective implementation of the mandatory IMO related to a register of local fuel oil suppliers were divided instruments. The State will also improve the national between two State entities and were unclear. In addition, a legislative procedure including detailed analysis of all the small number of suppliers and a requirement foreign obligations in the mandatory IMO instruments and their ships to use a local agent led to an interpretation that appropriate incorporation in the national legislation. bunker suppliers were commonly known and no register as such was needed. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 24

PORT STATE ACTIVITIES (cont. ) OB The maritime authority was not adhering to the guidelines for PSC inspections as outlined in its quality management system procedure (III Code, part 4, paragraph 57). Root cause A lack of ships' arrival information, as the main input for targeting of foreign ships for PSC inspections, was not addressed by the maritime authority and PSC personnel conducting daily operations were not following procedures. Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS 25 Corrective action All personnel carrying out PSC operations will ensure that they are familiar with, and following, the procedures outlined by the organization. A parallel review of the procedures is underway in association with the regional PSC regime to ensure consistency. The procedures within the quality management system will be amended by 30 June 2017. As a mechanism to ensure continuous compliance with this requirement in the future, the procedures within the quality management system will be rewritten to reflect the changes and to ensure that continuous monitoring and updating occurs on a periodic basis.

International Maritime Organization 4 Albert Embankment London SE 1 7 SR United Kingdom twitter. com/imohq Dept. MSA&IS DEPT. MSA&IS Tel: +44 (0)20 7735 7611 Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3210 Email: msa@imo. org http: //www. imo. org facebook. com/imohq youtube. com/imohq flickr. com/photos/ imo-un/collections