On April 16, China MSA official website issued the March PSC detention list. In March, 29 PSC authorities across Chinese mainland detained 53 vessel calls, up 8 from 45 in February but down 17 from 70 in January, with the detention boom index on a sluggish drop.

Details as follows:

01 Detention Intensity Analysis

Tier 1 – PSC Red Alert Ports: Tianjin, Guangzhou, Shanghai.

In March 2024, Tianjin outperformed Guangzhou and Shanghai to take the top spot, detaining the largest number of vessels among all ports with 6 vessel calls, doubling the 3 vessel calls recorded in the previous month. Both Guangzhou and Shanghai detained 5 vessel calls respectively.

Notably, Guangzhou’s detention figures have surged rapidly in recent months; all operators are advised to make proactive preparations in advance.

Tier 2 – PSC Orange Alert Ports: Changshu, Yantai, Zhoushan. Each of these three ports detained 3 vessel calls.

Tier 3 – PSC Yellow Alert Ports: Lianyungang, Qingdao, Rizhao, Taizhou, Zhangjiagang. Each of the above ports detained 2 vessel calls.

Tier 4 – PSC Blue Alert Ports: Caofeidian, Dalian, Dongjiakou, Fuzhou, Humen, Jiangyin, Nanjing, Ningbo, Qinzhou, Quanzhou, Shenzhen, Taicang, Tangshan, Yangpu, Yingkou, Zhenjiang, Zhangzhou, Zhuhai. Each of the above ports detained 1 vessel.

02 Detentions Characteristics in High-Detention Ports

Characteristics of Vessel Detentions by Tianjin MSA

1) Inspection intensity has increased significantly. Among the 6 detained vessels, 5 were bulk carriers and 1 was a general cargo vessel; bulk and general cargo ships remain the focus of inspections in the Tianjin region.

Notably, 3 of these 6 vessels (call signs 8747862/ 9478169/ 9339777) were detained due to mechanical and electrical deficiencies. Mechanical and electrical installations will be the key inspection focus for the next six months and require your high attention.

Vessel 9218064 was issued 10 detention deficiencies by the PSCO, and vessel 9414008 was issued 5 detention deficiencies. This would have been unimaginable in the past, fully indicating that inspection intensity in Tianjin is on the rise.

2) No PSC ISM Code detention deficiencies were issued for any of the vessels. It is worth noting that none of the 5 detained vessels in March were issued ISM Code detention deficiencies, and ISM Code detentions by other authorities have also decreased significantly. Shipowners can breathe a sigh of relief regarding ISM Code-related detentions.

Characteristics of Vessel Detentions by Guangzhou MSA

Among the 5 detained vessels in Guangzhou, bulk carriers and general cargo ships still dominated.

Notably, these 5 detained vessels had more detention deficiencies related to engine rooms and fewer deck-related ones. Every single vessel was detained for violations of MARPOL Annexes I to IV, which indicates that the PSCOs from a deck background in Guangzhou’s PSC are highly competent. For vessels bound for Guangzhou, the engine department must pay heightened attention.

Characteristics of Vessel Detentions by Shanghai MSA

Shanghai MSA has seen a consecutive two-month decline in ship detention rate with sustained weak inspection intensity. Among the 5 detained vessels this time (4 bulk carriers and 1 container ship), both 9458444 and 9120011 were detained due to main propulsion unit failures. You may ease up a bit when going to Shanghai.

Characteristics of Vessel Detentions by Changshu, Yantai, Zhoushan MSA

1) Changshu MSA: 2 out of the 3 detained vessels were detained for a single detention-deficiency. The PSC inspectors are quite confident in their judgments.

Vessel 9281554 was detained due to ECDIS malfunction or absence.

Vessel 9431525 was detained due to rescue boat release gear failure. In all likelihood, the crew is not proficient in the three operation modes of the boat davit.

2) Yantai MSA: 3 detained vessels include 1 oil tanker, 1 gas carrier and 1 general cargo ship. The PSC issued quite a few deficiencies for each vessel, with more than 3 items per vessel.

Common detention causes mainly cover: malfunction of oily water separator and 15ppm alarm device, incomplete certificates, loose cargo hold covers, fire pump malfunction, etc.

3) Zhoushan MSA: Vessel inspections have been stringent recently and the detention rate is rising sharply. All personnel shall make full preparations for inspection. Over the past months, this MSA has focused heavily on MARPOL Annex IV and ballast water, and often checks SEEMP and NOx-related contents. Vessel 9376373 was cited for unrecorded parameters of main and auxiliary engine NOx-related spare parts; Vessel 9192260 was also cited for emission-related deficiencies.

03 Distribution of Detention Deficiencies

1. Among the 53 detained vessels, 20 were bulk carriers and 14 were general cargo ships, totaling 34 vessels and accounting for 64.2%. Inevitably, PSC authorities nationwide are expert at inspecting these two vessel types.

2. 6 container ships and 8 oil tankers were detained. Detention of container ships was concentrated in Qingdao, Shanghai and Shenzhen. Detention of oil tankers was concentrated in Zhoushan and Rizhao; shipowners calling at Nanjing and Yantai shall pay close attention prior to berthing.

3. In terms of classification societies, ClassNK topped the list with 16 detentions, followed by 2 for BV, 1 for ABS, 4 for RINA, 6 for LR, 3 for DNV, 3 for KR and 1 for CCS; the rest were from little-known small societies.

4. Among well-known flag states of flag of convenience ships, Panama ranked first with 13 detentions, Liberia and Marshall Islands 6 each, and Singapore and South Korea 1 each.

Overall, China’s PSC conducted 747 inspections and detained 53 vessels in March, with a detention rate of 7.1%. There were 58 zero-deficiency reports, representing a zero-deficiency rate of 7.76%.

By the way, Hong Kong, China carried out 46 PSC inspections and detained 1 vessel in March, with a detention rate of 2.2%. The number of zero-deficiency reports stood at 21, accounting for 45.7%.

The Tokyo MOU conducted a total of 2,737 PSC inspections and detained 97 vessels in March, with a detention rate of 3.54%. There were 1,057 zero-deficiency reports, a zero-deficiency rate of 38.6%. In comparison, China’s PSC inspections are relatively stricter.

Among the 97 detained vessels by the Tokyo MOU in March, 53 were detained by China, 14 by Australia, 1 by Canada, 2 by Chile, 1 by Hong Kong, China, 1 by Indonesia, 4 by Japan, 5 by South Korea, 0 by Malaysia, 3 by New Zealand, 1 by the Philippines, 2 by Russia, 9 by Singapore, 0 by Thailand and 1 by Vietnam.

Across the Tokyo MOU, vessels flying the Chinese flag underwent 97 PSC inspections in March. Among them, 58 passed with zero deficiencies and none were detained, delivering an outstanding performance.

   Reprinted from PSCReady