The Black Sea MoU released the report on the CIC on Safety on Navigation, including ECDIS, completed on November 30, 2017
From 01 September 2017 to 30 November 2017, the Black Sea MoU carried out a Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC) onSafety of Navigation throughout the region.
The campaign involved all member States of the Black Sea MoU and was conducted in conjunction with the Tokyo MOU, Paris MOU and other MOUs. The aim of the campaign was to check the conformity of safety regulations for ships, the overall status of the vessel’s navigation safety and the competency of crew involved innavigation operations.
The Report documents the results of the Concentrated InspectionCampaign (CIC) on Safety of Navigation, including ECDIS, which was carried out by six (6) Black Sea MoU Member Authorities.
The results
During the campaign, a total of 983 inspections were carried out with the CIC questionnaire involving 983 individual ships. Of this quantity 59 ships were detained with 21 (35.6%) detentions being within the CIC scope. This means that in 21 cases the navigationsystems are not meeting SOLAS requirements and had deficiencies, which were serious enough to detain the ship, resulting in a CIC-topic related detention rate of 2.14%.
A total of 180 questionnaires had at least a non-compliance to a requirement, resulting 18.3% of CIC inspections.
The overall average of non-conformities was 2.68%.
The most notable non-conformities
7.6% Lack of exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance with the requirements of COLREG72
6.2% Lack of passage plan covering the whole voyage
It has been observed that ships younger than 15 years age performing relatively well with 566 (58.58%) inspections with only two (2) CIC topic related detentions.
Older ships, particularly those 30 years and older, show reason for concern with majority of detentions 11 (52.4%) and 98 (40.0%) non-conformities, although subjecting one fourth of inspections 241 (24.5%).
Report of the 2017 Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC)
on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 2/16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
From 1st September 2017 to 30th November 2017, the BS MOU carried out a Concentrated
Inspection Campaign (CIC) on Safety of Navigation throughout the region. This campaign involved
all member States of the BS MOU and was conducted in conjunction with the Tokyo MOU and
Paris MOU and other MOUs. The campaign was conducted under the campaign coordination of
the Bulgarian Maritime Administration. Paris and Tokyo MOUs guidelines and questionnaire were
used.
During the campaign, a total of 983 inspections were carried out with the CIC questionnaire
involving 983 individual ships. Of this quantity 59 ships were detained with 21 (35.6%) detentions
being within the CIC scope. This means that in 21 cases the navigation systems are not meeting
SOLAS requirements and had deficiencies, which were serious enough to detain the ship,
resulting in a CIC-topic related detention rate of 2.14 per cent.
A total of 180 questionnaires had at least a non-compliance to a requirement, resulting 18.3 per
cent of CIC inspections. The overall average per cent of non-conformities was 2.68.
The most notable non-conformities observed was lack of exhibition of navigation/signal lights in
accordance with the requirements of COLREG72 (7.6%), followed by lack of passage plan
covering the whole voyage (6.2%) and whether ship’s VDR/SVDR record data fully (2.9%).
A total of 358 (36.42%) CIC inspections concerned general cargo/multi-purpose ships, followed by
bulk carriers with 333 (33.88%) inspections, oil tankers with 130 (13.22%) inspections and
chemical tankers with 72 (7.32%) inspections, which comprises 821 (83.51%) total CIC
inspections.
A total of 13 (61.9%) ships detained for CIC-related deficiencies were general cargo/multipurpose
ships, followed by bulk carriers with 4 (19.05%) detentions, and Ro-Ro Cargo ships with 2 (9.52%)
detentions, which comprises 19 (90.48%) of CIC topic related detentions.
Most inspections were carried out on board ships flying the flags of Panama with 147 (14.95%)
inspections, Malta with 109 (11.08%) inspections, Liberia with 74 (7.53%) inspections and Turkey
with 70 (7.12%) inspections.
A total of 12 flags had CIC-topic related detentions. These flags cover 55.65% of the CIC
inspections.
A total of 43 flags, covering 44.35% of the CIC inspections, had no CIC-related detentions at all.
A total of 24 flags, covering 9.76% of the total CIC inspections, had no non-conformities.
It is observed that ships younger than 15 years age performing relatively well with 566 (58.58%)
inspections with only 2 CIC topic related detentions.
Older ships, particularly those 30 years and older, show reason for concern with majority of
detentions 11 (52.4%) and 98 (40.0%) non-conformities, although subjecting one fourth of
inspections 241 (24.5%).
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 3/16
REPORT OF THE CONCENTRATED INSPECTION CAMPAIGN (CIC)
ON SAFETY OF NAVIGATION INCLUDING ECDIS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
1 INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 4
1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE CIC 4
1.3 SCOPE OF THE CIC 4
1.4 GENERAL REMARKS 4
2 SUMMARY ANALYSIS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5
2.1 SUMMARY ANALYSIS 5
2.2 CONCLUSIONS 6
2.3 RECOMMENDATIONS 6
3 ANALYSIS 7
3.1 GENERAL 7
3.2 ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONSE TO THE CIC QUESTIONNAIRE 7
3.3 ANALYSES BY SHIP TYPES 9
3.4 ANALYSES BY SHIP AGE 9
3.5 ANALYSES BY SHIP FLAG 10
3.6 ANALYSES BY SHIP RISK GROUP 11
3.7 ANALYSES OF THE MAJOR NON-COMPLIANCES 11
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of inspections during the CIC 7
Table 2 Responses CIC Questionnaire on CIC on Safety of Navigation (1) 8
Table 3 Results by ship types 9
Table 4 Results by ship age 10
Table 5 Results by ship Flag 10
Table 6 CIC inspection data by ship risk groups 11
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Responses for each of the 11 questions compliance to the requirements 7
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 4/14
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of the report
This report documents the results of the Concentrated Inspection Campaign (CIC) on Safety of
Navigation, including ECDIS, which was carried out by 6 BS MOU Member Authorities between
September 1st and November 30th, 2017. This campaign was conducted in conjunction with the
Paris and Tokyo MOUs as well as other MOUs shows results presented in this report.
1.2 Objective of the CIC
The objective of the Campaign on the Safety of Navigation aimed at checking the conformity of
safety regulations for ships, the overall status of the vessel’s navigation safety, and the
competency of crew involved in navigation operations. The results of the CIC, which reveal that a
total of 245 non-conformities and 180 CIC inspections with at least one non-compliant response
recorded, as a direct result of this campaign on board 983 individual vessel subjected CIC
inspections.
1.3 Scope of the CIC
The campaign targeted 11 aspects to verify compliance provisions of SOLAS Chapter V to assure
that:
.1 For ships of all types, equipment shall conform with valid legal
certificates, and shall be accompanied with proper records;
.2 Related equipment shall be accompanied with valid type approval
certificates;
.3 Related equipment shall receive proper maintenance and shall function
properly; and
.4 The captain and officers in carrying out their duties shall be familiar with
operation of bridge equipment, especially ECDIS.
The Paris MOU guidelines and questionnaire utilized. The guideline provides aid to CIC for SOLAS
Chapter V, besides, PSCOs shall refer to the following files:
− SOLAS 74 Chapter V
− Regulation 9 of Chapter I STCW I/4 and I/14
− COLREG 72
1.4 General remarks
This report presents analysis of the responses to the CIC Questionnaire submitted during the
campaign period.
Thereby for the purpose of this report:
• Inspection: An inspection with a completed CIC Questionnaire with applicable
response (Except Table 1);
• Non-compliant response: a “NO” response to any of the questions 1-11 which indicates
non-compliance to a requirement in the questionnaire;
• CIC inspection with non-compliant response: Questionnaire with at least one “NO”
response to any question 1-11;
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 5/14
• Non-compliant response: “NO” response to a question, indication non- compliance of a
requirement;
• CIC Detention: a CIC-topic related detention which is indicated by a “YES” response to
Question 12, which also coincides with recorded detentions; and
• Total applicable responses: Total number of “YES-Compliant” plus “NO-Non compliant”
answers to the questions. i.e. “N/A” responses filtered out from the result.
2 SUMMARY ANALYSIS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Summary analysis
During the campaign, a total of 983 inspections were carried out with the CIC questionnaire
involving 983 individual ships. Only one CIC inspection has been carried out on board of an
individual vessel.
Analysis of the results of the CIC revealed the following:
.1 A total of 59 ships were detained, in which 28.57% of them were CIC-topic related
which means that in 21 cases the Navigation systems and equipment deficiencies,
which were serious enough to detain the ship resulting a CIC-topic related detention
rate of 2.14%.
.2 A total of 245 non-compliances to the CIC topic requirements have been recorded as
a direct result of this campaign. The overall average per cent of non-conformities was
2.68.
.3 A total 180 questionnaires had at least one non-compliant response, which resulted
18.31% of CIC inspections not conforming with the requirements set out in
questionnaire.
.4 The requirements that reported the most favourable results related to the ship’s
Automatic Identification System transmitting correct particulars Q7 (0.5%);
demonstration of the watch keeping officers familiarization with ECDIS Q4 (0.6%); and
whether the second and/or third stage remote audible alarm of BNWAS recognized:
Q6 (0.9%).
.5 The most un-favourable results are questions 11, 8 and 5, which asked whether the
exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance with the requirements of
COLREG72 (7.63%); whether passage plan covering the whole voyage (6.2%) and
ship’s VDR/SVDR record data fully (2.9%).
.6 A total of 159 (64.9%) non conformities out of 245 total non-conformities due to Q11:
75 (30.6%); Q8: 61 (24.9%) and Q5 : 23 (9.4%).
.7 A total of 358 (36.42%) CIC inspections concerned general cargo/multi-purpose ships,
followed by bulk carriers with 333 (33.88%) inspections, oil tankers with 130 (13.22%)
inspections and chemical tankers with 72 (7.32%) inspections, which comprises 821
(83.51%) total CIC inspections.
.8 A total of 13 (61.9%) ships detained for CIC-related deficiencies were general
cargo/multipurpose ships, followed by bulk carriers 4 (19.05%) detentions and Ro-Ro
Cargo ships with 2 (9.52%) detentions, which comprises 19 (90.48%)
.9 By ship age, ships under 15 years reported the most favourable results but the
situation worsened as the age of ships increased.
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 6/14
.10 Older ships, particularly those 30 years and older, reported the least favourable
results. Although they comprised only 20.14% of all inspections, they accounted for
52.38% of total detentions and 40.00% of non-conformities. The detention rate per
inspection was 8.70% for ships 30 to 34 years old and 3.88% for ships over 35 years
old.
.11 A total of 12 flags had CIC-related detention. These flags cover 55.65% of the
inspections. The flags, with the highest CIC-related detention rate were Sierra Leone
(13.04%); Moldova (10.53%); Comoros (5.56%) and Cook Islands (5.56%) which
cover 7.9% of the total number of CIC inspections 33.3% CIC-related detentions.
.12 A total of 21 flags, which cover 9.76% of the total CIC inspections, had no nonconformities.
When compared by ship flag, Greece, Bahama and Italy showed best
results because with 25; 18 and 15 CIC questionnaire recorded without any noncompliance
to the CIC topic requirements.
.13 Breakdown of major non-conformities as indicated by “NO” responses have been
studied by ship flag, ship type and ship age presented in Section 3.7
2.2 Conclusions
High CIC topic related detention rate, CIC inspections with non-conformities, unfavourable results
to the questions 11, 8 and 5 raise concern industry level of compliance to the SOLAS Chapter V in
particular overall status of the vessel’s navigation safety.
2.3 Recommendations
Non-compliance or inadequacy of the exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance with the
requirements of COLREG72 is a significant potential danger to the vessel itself and overall safety.
High rate of non-compliances observed on board ships 25 years and older indicates a potential
risk.
Thereby it is recommended:
1. Basic findings of the report in general, analysis of the responses to the questionnaire and
breakdown of major non-conformities by ship flag, ship type and age, to be submitted IMO
III Sub-committee 5th session.
2. PSC Officers should be instructed to submit CIC Questionnaire for each initial PSC
inspection during the campaign, and;
3. Continue to put emphasis on the vital requirements of the SOLAS when performing PSC
inspections, particularly the requirements that raised the most concern in the CIC.
a. lack of proper exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance with the
requirements of COLREG72: Q11: 75 (30.6%)
b. lack of the passage plan cover the whole voyage: Q8: 61 (24.9%);
c. ship’s VDR/SVDR not record data fully: Q5: 23 (9.4%).
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 7/14
3 ANALYSIS
3.1 General
The total number of ships inspected and the total number of inspections performed during the CIC
are presented in Table 1.
Table 1 Summary of inspections during the CIC
No. of individual ships
with CIC Questionnaire
No. of inspections
with a CIC
questionnaire
No. of inspections
without CIC
questionnaire
Total 983 983 303
Total number of detentions 59 59 12
Detentions with CIC-topic deficiencies 21 21 N/A
Looking at the number of inspections performed with a CIC questionnaire (Column 2&3 of Table
1), there is 59 detentions during CIC inspections and 21 (35.59%) of these detentions were CIC
topic related Questionnaire submission rate was 76.44% which around three out of four initial
inspections were accompanied with a CIC questionnaire.
Table 1 also illustrates that all individual ships that were involved with this CIC underwent only one
CIC inspection. Thereby number of individual ship inspected for CIC are not incorporated in the
inspection and detention data presented in this report.
3.2 Analysis of the response to the CIC questionnaire
The responses to the questionnaire presented in Figure 1. The number of responses for each of
the 11 CIC questions broken down by type of answer indicating compliance to the requirements
and applicability of the requirements. Due to the data validity and recording procedures no blank
responses exist.
Figure 1 Responses for each of the 11 questions compliance to the requirements
Table 2 presents response to the questionnaire. In order to analyse results on an individual
question basis all Not Applicable (N/A) responses are filtered and total relevant/applicable
responses compliances to the requirement presented in the last column of the Table 2.
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11
COMPLIANT "YES" 954 472 523 493 769 946 978 922 966 958 908
COMPLIANT "NO" 15 7 5 3 23 9 5 61 17 25 75
N/A 14 504 455 487 191 28 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 983 983 983 983 983 983 983 983 983 983 983
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 8/14
It indicates that the requirements that reported the most favourable results related to the ship’s
Automatic Identification System transmitting correct particulars Q7 (0.51%); demonstration of the
watch keeping officers familiarization with ECDIS Q4 (0.6%); and whether the second and/or third
stage remote audible alarm of BNWAS recognized: Q6 (0.94%).
The CIC questionnaire indicate that “unsatisfactory” answer was given to a question on 2.38% of
occasions. It is average per cent of unsatisfactory responses indicating overall compliance of the
requirements. Number of “YES” responses to the Question 12 coincides with the recorded CIC
topic related detentions as a result of an observed non-conformity (“NO” response) to any of the
questions (1-11) in the questionnaire.
Breakdown CIC inspections, inspections with non-conformities to the requirements set out in the
questionnaire questions 1-11, average per-cent of non-conformities, number of unfavourable
responses/non conformities and CIC topic related detentions by ship type, ship age, ship flag and
ship risk profiles presented in Section 3.3 - Section 3.6. Breakdown of the major non-conformities
by ship flag, ship type and ship age are presented in Section 3.7.
Table 2 Responses CIC Questionnaire on CIC on Safety of Navigation (1)
Nr. Questions
YES NO Total Nr. of
applicable
responses
Compliance
Nr. Nr. YES % NO %
1 Is ship’s navigation equipment in accordance with its
applicable safety certificate (SEC, PSSC, CSSC)? 954 15 969 98.45 1.55
2
Does the ECDIS have the appropriate electronic charts
for the intended voyage and is there a suitable back-up
arrangement?
472 7 479 98.54 1.46
3 Is there evidence that all watch keeping officers
comply with STCW requirements for ECDIS? 523 5 528 99.05 0.95
4 Can watch keeping officers demonstrate familiarization
with ECDIS? 493 3 496 99.40 0.60
5 Can ship’s VDR/SVDR record data fully? 769 23 792 97.10 2.90
6 Is second and/or third stage remote audible alarm of
BNWAS recognized? 946 9 955 99.06 0.94
7 Is the ship’s Automatic Identification System
transmitting correct particulars? 978 5 983 99.49 0.51
8 Does the passage plan cover the whole voyage? 922 61 983 93.79 6.21
9
Does all crew know and respect the official working
language as established and recorded in the ship’s
logbook?
966 17 983 98.27 1.73
10 Is the crew familiar with the procedure of emergency
operation of steering gear? 958 25 983 97.46 2.54
11 Are the exhibition of navigation/signal lights in
accordance with the requirements of COLREG72? 908 75 983 92.37 7.63
TOTAL 8889 245 9134 97.32 2.68
12 Was the ship detained as a result of this CIC? 21 962 983 2.14 97.86
(1) Includes Bulgaria and Romania data which are submitted also to the Paris MOU. The Russian
Federation and Turkey data includes only Black Sea ports
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 9/14
3.3 Analyses by Ship types
When considering the breakdown of ships inspected by ship type, presented in Table 3, largest
group of the ship inspected during campaign period were general cargo/multi-purpose ships with
421 (36.74%) inspections followed by bulk carrier with 399 (34.82%) inspections and oil tanker
with 112 (9.77%) inspections.
358 (36.42%) CIC inspections concerned general cargo/multi-purpose ships, followed by bulk
carriers with 333 (33.88%) inspections, oil tankers with 130 (13.22%) inspections and chemical
tankers with 72 (7.32%) inspections, which comprises 821 (83.51%) total CIC inspections.
Majority of inspection with non-conformities observed were general cargo/multi-purpose ship with
102 (56.7%) inspections, bulk carriers with 48 (13.69%). Although they constituted only 81.32% of
all inspections they accounted for 85.71% of CIC-topic related detentions and 88.09% of related
non-conformities.
13 (61.9%) of the ships detained for CIC-related deficiencies were general cargo/multipurpose
ships, followed by bulk carriers 4 (19.05%) detentions and Ro-Ro Cargo ships with 2 (9.52%)
detentions, which comprises 19 (90.48%) CIC topic related detentions.
Table 3 Results by ship types
Ship Type
Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of CIC
inspection with
non-compliant
responses
% noncompliant
CIC
inspections
Total Nr. of
applicable
responses
Nr. of noncompliances
% of noncompliance
% total noncompliances
CIC topic
related
detentions
% CIC topic
related
detentions
Bulk carrier 333 48 14.41 3242 59 1.82 24.08 4 1.20
Chemical tanker 72 7 9.72 783 8 1.02 3.27 1 1.39
Commercial yacht 1 1 100.00 6 2 33.33 0.82 0 0.00
Container 22 3 13.64 214 3 1.40 1.22 0 0.00
Gas carrier 13 1 7.69 133 1 0.75 0.41 0 0.00
General cargo/multipurpose 358 102 28.49 2886 142 4.92 57.96 13 3.63
Livestock carrier 7 3 42.86 50 3 6.00 1.22 0 0.00
Offshore supply 5 2 40.00 48 5 10.42 2.04 0 0.00
Oil tanker 130 4 3.08 1415 5 0.35 2.04 1 0.77
Other special activities 2 1 50.00 18 2 11.11 0.82 0 0.00
Ro-Ro cargo 23 5 21.74 187 10 5.35 4.08 2 8.70
Ro-Ro passenger ship 7 2 28.57 71 3 4.23 1.22 0 0.00
Tugboat 6 1 16.67 40 2 5.00 0.82 0 0.00
Others 4 0 0.00 41 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
TOTAL 983 180 18.31 9134 245 2.68 100.00 21 2.14
3.4 Analyses by ship age
By ship age, ships under 15 years reported the most favourable results but the situation worsened
as the age of ships increased.
Older ships, particularly those 30 years and older, show reason for concern with majority of
detentions 11 (52.4%) and non-conformities 98 (40.0%), although subjecting minority of
inspections 241 (21.29%). The detention rate per inspection was 8.70% for ships 30 to 34 years
old and 3.88% for ships over 35 years old.
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 10/14
Table 4 Results by ship age
Ship Age
Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of CIC
inspection with
non-compliant
responses
% noncompliant
CIC
inspections
Total Nr. of
applicable
responses
Nr. of noncompliances
% of noncompliance
% total noncompliances
CIC topic
related
detentions
% CIC topic
related
detentions
0-5 150 15 10.00 1604 18 1.12 7.35 1 0.67
6-10 247 24 9.72 2458 31 1.26 12.65 1 0.40
11-15 169 20 11.83 1640 28 1.71 11.43 0 0.00
16-20 103 20 19.42 953 23 2.41 9.39 4 3.88
21-24 61 18 29.51 520 23 4.42 9.39 2 3.28
25-29 55 17 30.91 441 24 5.44 9.80 2 3.64
30-34 69 23 33.33 529 33 6.24 13.47 6 8.70
35+ 129 43 33.33 989 65 6.57 26.53 5 3.88
Totals 983 180 18.31 9134 245 2.68 100.00 21 2.14
3.5 Analyses by ship flag
The following Table 5 presents the results of the CIC in accordance by ship flag. A total of 983
individual ships from 55 flag administration subjected CIC inspection during the campaign.
Most inspections were carried out on board ships flying the flags of Panama with 147 (14.95%)
inspections, Malta with 109 (11.08%) inspections, Liberia with 74 (7.53%) inspections and Turkey
with 70 (7.12%) inspections.
Table 5 Results by ship Flag
Ship Flag
Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of CIC
inspection with
non-compliant
responses
% noncompliant
CIC
inspections
Total Nr. of
applicable
responses
Nr. of noncompliances
% of noncompliance
% total noncompliances
CIC topic
related
detentions
% CIC topic
related
detentions
Antigua and Barbuda 20 3 15.00 178 3 1.69 1.22 0 0.00
Belize 16 4 25.00 126 5 3.97 2.04 0 0.00
Comoros 18 6 33.33 139 14 10.07 5.71 1 5.56
Cook Islands 18 7 38.89 144 12 8.33 4.90 1 5.56
Hong Kong. China 30 2 6.67 323 2 0.62 0.82 0 0.00
Liberia 74 7 9.46 752 8 1.06 3.27 0 0.00
Malta 109 11 10.09 1082 14 1.29 5.71 1 0.92
Marshall Islands 94 10 10.64 953 12 1.26 4.90 1 1.06
Moldova. Republic of 19 5 26.32 147 9 6.12 3.67 2 10.53
Netherlands 23 1 4.35 237 2 0.84 0.82 0 0.00
Palau 14 6 42.86 110 8 7.27 3.27 0 0.00
Panama 147 36 24.49 1284 45 3.50 18.37 7 4.76
Russian Federation 40 9 22.50 360 16 4.44 6.53 1 2.50
Sierra Leone 23 12 52.17 180 17 9.44 6.94 3 13.04
Singapore 34 4 11.76 355 4 1.13 1.63 0 0.00
Tanzania United Republic of 39 12 30.77 301 14 4.65 5.71 1 2.56
Togo 30 10 33.33 236 15 6.36 6.12 1 3.33
Turkey 70 11 15.71 600 13 2.17 5.31 0 0.00
Others 165 24 14.55 1627 12 0.74 4.90 2 1.21
Totals 983 180 18.31 9134 245 2.68 100.0 21 2.14
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 11/14
A total of 12 flags had CIC-topic related detentions. These flags cover 55.65% of the CIC
inspections.
The flags with more than 10 inspections with the highest CIC-related detention rate were Sierra
Leone (13.04%); Moldova (10.53%) followed by Cook Islands and Comoros (5.56%) each which
cover 4.9% of the total number of CIC inspections and 50.0% CIC-related detentions.
A total of 21 flags, with 96 (9.8%) of the total inspections, had no non-conformities. When
compared by ship flag, Greece, Bahama and Italy showed best results because with 25; 18 and 15
CIC questionnaires recorded without any non-compliance to the CIC topic requirements.
3.6 Analyses by ship risk group
Table 6 presents CIC data by ship risk group indicates that higher risk ships have consistently
attracted more non-compliant responses and detentions per inspection than lower risk ships is
considered to be validation of the BS MOU ship risk profile system to identify sub-standard
vessels for inspection.
HRS and SRS comprised the total number of detentions 21 (100.0%) and majority of noncompliances
92 (5.99%) and 143 (63.6%), and high per cent of average non-compliance per
applicable question 5.99% and 2.32% respectively.
Table 6 CIC inspection data by ship risk groups
SHIP RISK PROFILE
Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of CIC
inspection with
non-compliant
responses
% non-compliant
CIC inspections
Total Nr.of
applicable
responses
Nr.of noncompliances
% of noncompliance
% total noncompliances
CIC topic related
detentions
% CIC topic
related
detentions
HRS 195 64 32.82 1536 92 5.99 37.55 9 4.62
SRS 646 107 16.56 6157 143 2.32 58.37 12 1.86
LRS 141 9 6.38 1430 10 0.70 4.08 0 0.00
UNKOWN 1 0 0.00 11 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
Totals 983 180 18.31 9134 245 2.68 100.00 21 2.14
3.7 Analyses of the major non-compliances
In this part of the report, breakdown of the major non-compliances by ship flag ship type and ship
age are presented below for Questions 11, 8 and 5; with 75 (30.6%), 61 (24.89%) and 21 (8.57%)
unsatisfactory responses.
Question 11, which asked whether or not the exhibition of navigation/signal lights in accordance
with the requirements of COLREG72; recorded the highest per cent of unsatisfactory responses of
the questionnaire. Of 983 inspections 75 were unsatisfactory in this area. This represents 7.63%
of questionnaire and 30.61% of the total unsatisfactory responses. Breakdown of the compliance
to the Question 11 by ship flag, ship type and ship age are presented below.
43 (57.3%) of unsatisfactory responses to this question observed on board of ships flying five flag
States. 32 (42.7%) unsatisfactory responses spreads over ships flying other flags. High noncompliant
rate observed on board ship flag Sierra Leone 30.43%; Palau 21.43%, and Cook
Islands 16.67%.
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 12/14
Ship Flag Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Belize 16 2 2.67 12.50
Comoros 18 1 1.33 5.56
Cook Islands 18 3 4.00 16.67
Liberia 74 6 8.00 8.11
Malta 109 2 2.67 1.83
Marshall Islands 94 5 6.67 5.32
Moldova, Republic of 19 2 2.67 10.53
Palau 14 3 4.00 21.43
Panama 147 19 25.33 12.93
Russian Federation 40 2 2.67 5.00
Sierra Leone 23 7 9.33 30.43
Singapore 34 2 2.67 5.88
Tanzania, United Republic of 39 1 1.33 2.56
Togo 30 3 4.00 10.00
Turkey 70 6 8.00 8.57
Others 238 11 14.67 4.62
Totals 983 75 100.00 7.63
71 (94.7%) of unsatisfactory responses in this area observed on boards four ships types
presented below. High non-compliant response ro-ro cargo ship, general cargo/multipurpose
ships and bulk carrier with inspection more than 10 raise concern.
Ship Type Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Bulk carrier 333 26 34.67 7.81
Chemical tanker 72 3 4.00 4.17
Container 22 1 1.33 4.55
General cargo/multipurpose 358 39 52.00 10.89
Offshore supply 5 1 1.33 20.00
Oil tanker 130 1 1.33 0.77
Ro-Ro cargo 23 3 4.00 13.04
Ro-Ro passenger ship 7 1 1.33 14.29
Others 33 0 0.00 0.00
Totals 983 75 100.00 7.63
55 (32.74%) of unsatisfactory responses to this question observed on board ships 16-34 years.
Records related to safety of navigation compliant with the requirements on board younger ships up
to 15 years old non-compliance rates are lower.
Ship Age Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr .of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
0-5 150 6 8.00 4.00
6-10 247 12 16.00 4.86
11-15 169 10 13.33 5.92
16-20 103 12 16.00 11.65
21-24 61 10 13.33 16.39
25-29 55 6 8.00 10.91
30-34 69 10 13.33 14.49
35+ 129 9 12.00 6.98
Totals 983 75 100.00 7.63
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 13/14
Question 8 was asked whether the passage plan cover the whole voyage, recorded the second
highest number of unsatisfactory results. Out of 245 unsatisfactory 61 were unsatisfactory in this
area. This represents 6.2% of CIC inspections. Breakdown of the compliance to the Question 8
by ship flag, ship type and ship age are presented below.
High rate non-compliant response to question 8 observed on board of ships flying Tanzania,
Sierra Leone and Togo.
Ship Flag Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr .of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Comoros 18 3 4.92 16.67
Cook Islands 18 3 4.92 16.67
Malta 109 3 4.92 2.75
Marshall Islands 94 1 1.64 1.06
Moldova. Republic of 19 2 3.28 10.53
Netherlands 23 1 1.64 4.35
Palau 14 3 4.92 21.43
Panama 147 10 16.39 6.80
Russian Federation 40 6 9.84 15.00
Sierra Leone 23 4 6.56 17.39
Tanzania. United Republic of 39 7 11.48 17.95
Togo 30 5 8.20 16.67
Turkey 70 4 6.56 5.71
Others 339 9 14.75 2.65
Totals 983 61 100.00 6.21
Total 61 unsatisfactory responses to the Question 8 observed on board four ship types is
indicated below. Ro-ro cargo ships and General cargo/multipurpose least favourable leading with
high rate of non-compliant responses.
Ship Type Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr.of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Bulk carrier 333 8 13.11 2.40
Chemical tanker 72 2 3.28 2.78
Commercial yacht 1 1 1.64 100.00
Gas carrier 13 1 1.64 7.69
General cargo/multipurpose 358 41 67.21 11.45
Livestock carrier 7 3 4.92 42.86
Offshore supply 5 1 1.64 20.00
Other special activities 2 1 1.64 50.00
Ro-Ro cargo 23 2 3.28 8.70
Ro-Ro passenger ship 7 1 1.64 14.29
Others 162 0 0.00 0.00
Totals 983 61 100.00 6.21
Breakdown of the non-compliance to question 8 by ship age are presented below. 41 (67.27%) of
unsatisfactory responses to this questions observed on board ships 20 years and older with an
average non-compliant rate of 16.20%.
Report of the 2017 CIC on Safety of Navigation including ECDIS Page 14/14
Ship Age Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
0-5 150 3 4.92 2.00
6-10 247 5 8.20 2.02
11-15 169 5 8.20 2.96
16-20 103 3 4.92 2.91
21-24 61 4 6.56 6.56
25-29 55 9 14.75 16.36
30-34 69 11 18.03 15.94
35+ 129 21 34.43 16.28
TOTAL 983 61 100.00 6.21
The results for Question 5 which asked whether ship’s VDR/SVDR can record data fully also
raises concern and account for the third highest number of unsatisfactory result in this area which
represent 2.90% of applicable CIC inspections. Breakdown of the compliance to the Question 5
by ship flag, ship type and ship age are presented below:
Ship Flag Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Antigua and Barbuda 13 1 4.35 7.69
Cook Islands 12 2 8.70 16.67
Hong Kong. China 30 1 4.35 3.33
Malta 102 3 13.04 2.94
Marshall Islands 92 3 13.04 3.26
Panama 117 5 21.74 4.27
Sierra Leone 13 1 4.35 7.69
Turkey 48 1 4.35 2.08
Others 365 6 26.09 1.64
Totals 792 23 100.00 2.90
Ship Type Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
Bulk carrier 327 9 39.13 2.75
Chemical tanker 70 1 4.35 1.43
Container 22 1 4.35 4.55
General cargo/multipurpose 199 10 43.48 5.03
Ro-Ro cargo 20 1 4.35 5.00
Tugboat 1 1 4.35 100.00
Others 153 0 0.00 0.00
Totals 792 23 100.00 2.90
Ship Age
Nr. of CIC
inspections
Nr. of noncompliances
% total noncompliances
Non-compliant
ratex100
0-5 142 2 8.70 1.41
6-10 233 6 26.09 2.58
11-15 153 2 8.70 1.31
16-20 92 3 13.04 3.26
21-24 48 4 17.39 8.33
25-29 36 2 8.70 5.56
30-34 33 2 8.70 6.06
35+ 55 2 8.70 3.64
Totals 792 23 100.00 2.90
No comments:
Post a Comment