PSC Code 17 deficiencies have been identified as the most common issue during Port State Control (PSC) inspections. This highlights the critical importance of ship compliance with maritime safety regulations. These deficiencies require immediate rectification before a vessel's departure. Failure to do so can lead to significant operational disruptions and financial consequences for ship operators.
PSC inspections are vital for ensuring ships meet international safety standards, environmental protection measures, and crew welfare requirements. When a PSC officer identifies a Code 17 deficiency, it signals a serious issue. This must be addressed promptly to avoid detention.
The consequences of Code 17 deficiencies go beyond the immediate need for rectification. Failure to address these issues can lead to a ship being deemed unseaworthy. This results in significant delays, financial losses, and reputational damage for the ship operator. Repeated occurrences of Code 17 deficiencies may attract increased scrutiny from PSC authorities. This could result in a company's ships being targeted for more frequent inspections.
Key Takeaways
PSC Code 17 deficiencies are the most prevalent issues identified during PSC inspections
Immediate rectification of Code 17 deficiencies is mandatory before a ship's departure
Failure to address Code 17 issues can lead to vessel detention and operational disruptions
Repeated Code 17 deficiencies may result in increased PSC scrutiny and targeted inspections
Ship operators must prioritize compliance with maritime safety regulations to avoid Code 17 deficiencies
Understanding Port State Control (PSC) Inspections
Port State Control (PSC) inspections are vital for maritime safety, security, and environmental protection. Port authorities conduct these inspections on foreign-flagged vessels visiting their ports. They check if these ships meet international standards and regulations. The main goal is to find and fix issues that could harm the ship, its crew, and the marine environment.
Purpose and Objectives of PSC Inspections
PSC inspections ensure ships follow International Maritime Organization (IMO) standards and conventions. They aim to:
Verify compliance with safety, security, and environmental protection regulations
Identify and fix issues that could endanger the ship, its crew, and the environment
Stop substandard ships from sailing in international waters
Ensure fair competition among shipping companies
Scope and Jurisdiction of PSC Authorities
PSC authorities can inspect foreign-flagged vessels in their ports. These inspections cover various aspects, including:
Structural integrity and seaworthiness of the vessel
Compliance with conventions like SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, and MLC
Functionality of safety and navigation equipment
Crew living and working conditions
Emergency preparedness and response procedures
Qualified Port State Control Officers (PSCOs) conduct these inspections. They have the power to take action based on the severity of found deficiencies. Possible actions include:
Requiring the ship to fix issues before leaving
Imposing fines or penalties for non-compliance
Detaining the ship until serious issues are resolved
MOU Region | Number of Inspections (2007) | Number of Deficiencies (2007) | Number of Detentions (2007) |
Paris MoU | 24,647 | 74,713 | 1,250 |
Tokyo MOU | 17,268 | 59,311 | 1,238 |
Indian Ocean MOU | 3,533 | 9,605 | 246 |
Caribbean MOU | 1,641 | 4,772 | 104 |
The table shows the number of inspections, deficiencies, and detentions by regional MOUs in 2007. It highlights the critical role of PSC inspections in addressing maritime issues. This ensures safety and environmental protection in the shipping industry.
Port State Control is a key safety measure that combats substandard shipping and protects the marine environment. Through cooperation, PSC authorities worldwide enforce international standards. This makes the maritime industry safer, cleaner, and more sustainable.
PSC Inspection Procedures and Criteria
Port State Control (PSC) inspections verify that vessels meet international shipping standards. These inspections adhere to standardized procedures and criteria from various international conventions and codes. The main goal is to identify and fix issues that could threaten the safety of the ship, its crew, and the environment.
Inspection Checklists and Standards
PSC officers (PSCOs) use detailed checklists during inspections. These checklists cover essential areas like ship documentation, crew qualifications, and equipment condition. The aim is to ensure a thorough and consistent inspection process, avoiding any critical oversight.
The standards for inspections come from international conventions and codes, such as:
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL)
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW)
International Labour Organization's Maritime Labour Convention (MLC, 2006)
These conventions outline minimum requirements for ship design, construction, and operation. They also cover environmental protection and seafarer welfare. PSCOs check compliance with these standards, ensuring ships operate safely and responsibly.
Deficiency Identification and Classification
During PSC inspections, deficiencies are identified and classified based on their severity. Deficiencies are categorized as minor, major, or detainable. Minor issues need to be fixed within a certain timeframe. Major and detainable issues require immediate corrective action.
Minor deficiencies: Issues that do not pose an immediate threat to safety or the environment but must be addressed within a specified timeframe.
Major deficiencies: Significant non-conformities that may compromise the safety of the ship, its crew, or the environment, requiring prompt corrective action.
Detainable deficiencies: Serious deficiencies that render the ship unseaworthy or pose an unacceptable risk to safety or the environment, leading to the vessel's detention until the issues are rectified.
Code 17 deficiencies are considered critical and must be fixed before the ship departs. These are serious issues that need immediate attention to ensure compliance with international shipping standards and prevent accidents.
According to data from the Tokyo MoU, the detention percentage of ships inspected between 2010 and 2012 ranged from 4.59% to 5.64%, highlighting the importance of effective PSC inspections in identifying and addressing critical deficiencies.
PSCOs evaluate the ship's documentation, crew competence, and equipment condition. This thorough assessment ensures ships meet international standards. It also ensures any deficiencies are promptly addressed, improving maritime safety and environmental protection.
Year | Number of Inspections | Number of Detentions | Detention Percentage |
2010 | 25,762 | 1,411 | 5.48% |
2011 | 28,627 | 1,562 | 5.46% |
2012 | 30,929 | 1,421 | 4.59% |
Effective safety management systems and regular maintenance are key for shipowners and operators. They help minimize the risk of deficiencies and ensure compliance with PSC requirements. By addressing issues proactively and maintaining high safety and environmental standards, vessels can avoid delays and disruptions caused by PSC inspections and vessel detention criteria.
PSC Code 17: Rectify Deficiency Before Departure
Port State Control (PSC) inspections are vital for ensuring vessels' safety and compliance in international waters. PSC officers identify various deficiencies during these inspections. Code 17 mandates rectifying these issues before departure.
Code 17 deficiencies are serious, affecting vessel safety, crew, and the marine environment. These can include structural and operational issues. Ignoring them can lead to detention by PSC authorities.
The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) leads in enforcing strict PSC measures. In October 2020, the USCG introduced the Vessel Cyber Risk Management Work Instruction (CVC-WI-027(1)). It requires addressing cyber risk in Safety Management Systems (SMS) for U.S. and foreign vessels, as well as Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs).
Accurate deficiency data is essential for developing the Fleet Risk Index and the Small Passenger Vessel Risk Based Inspection Program.
This Work Instruction applies to all vessels visiting U.S. ports, regardless of flag. A cyber risk management deficiency during a PSC inspection may result in an action code 17 or, in severe cases, an action code 30 (Ship Detained).
Action Code | Description | Consequence |
10 | Corrected on the Spot | No further action required |
17 | Rectify Prior to Departure | Vessel cannot depart until deficiency is rectified |
30 | Ship Detained | Vessel is detained until deficiency is rectified and reinspected |
Vessel owners and operators must proactively address deficiencies to comply with regulations and avoid detention. This includes rectifying Code 17 issues before departure and implementing effective safety management systems that include cyber risk management.
By focusing on rectifying Code 17 deficiencies and maintaining high safety and compliance standards, owners and operators can reduce the risk of delays, financial losses, and reputational damage from PSC inspections and detention.
Implications of Code 17 Deficiencies for Ship Operators
Code 17 deficiencies pose significant challenges for ship operators, necessitating immediate action before departure. These serious issues can cause operational disruptions and substantial financial losses. They also risk damaging the operator's reputation.
Potential Delays and Operational Disruptions
Receiving a Code 17 deficiency means a ship must stay in port until the problem is fixed. The time needed to address these issues can be extensive, depending on the problem's severity. Finding the right parts, technical support, or even dry-docking can be a major hurdle.
These delays can severely impact a ship's schedule. They may lead to missed cargo operations, extended off-hire periods, and breaches of charter agreements. For vessels on tight schedules, like container ships or cruise liners, these delays can be disastrous.
Delays can disrupt itineraries, causing inconvenience to passengers and cargo owners. In extreme cases, finding alternative transport or accommodations may be necessary, adding to the financial strain.
Financial and Reputational Consequences
Code 17 deficiencies can be financially devastating. Costs include rectification expenses, such as parts, labor, and dry-docking fees. There are also indirect costs like lost revenue, penalties for missed cargo, and higher insurance premiums.
These issues can also harm a ship operator's reputation, which is critical in the industry. Detentions or serious deficiencies can make securing charters and maintaining relationships with stakeholders more challenging.
Industry data shows only about 5% of 80,599 worldwide inspections resulted in detention. This highlights the gravity of Code 17 deficiencies and the need for strict compliance with international regulations.
To avoid these risks, ship operators must focus on proactive maintenance, crew training, and robust safety management. Investing in these areas can help prevent Code 17 situations. It also ensures compliance, protecting operations and financial health.
Consequences of Non-Compliance with Code 17 Requirements
Not adhering to Code 17 requirements during a Port State Control (PSC) inspection can have severe repercussions. A vessel found with Code 17 deficiencies will receive a "Rectify Prior to Departure" order. This mandates fixing the issues before leaving port.
Departing without addressing Code 17 issues can classify a ship as unseaworthy. This is a serious offense, endangering crew lives and the environment. The master might face criminal charges for operating a substandard ship.
The repercussions of not meeting Code 17 standards are extensive. They go beyond immediate detention. Possible outcomes include:
Fines and penalties from port state authorities
Increased scrutiny in future PSC inspections
Higher insurance costs due to safety concerns
Damage to the shipowner's and vessel's reputation
Potential loss of charter contracts and future business
The table below outlines the possible outcomes of non-compliance with Code 17:
Consequence | Description |
Detention | The vessel is detained in port until the deficiencies are rectified, leading to delays and additional costs. |
Fines and Penalties | The shipowner may face substantial fines and penalties imposed by the port state authorities for non-compliance. |
Legal Ramifications | The master and shipowner may face criminal charges for operating an unseaworthy ship, depending on the severity of the deficiencies and the consequences of non-compliance. |
Reputational Damage | Non-compliance can tarnish the reputation of the shipowner and the vessel, making it more difficult to secure future charters and business opportunities. |
To avoid these severe consequences, it is essential for shipowners and masters to ensure their vessels comply with international regulations and standards. By addressing deficiencies proactively and maintaining a robust safety management system, they can reduce the risk of Code 17 issues during PSC inspections.
Strategies for Avoiding Code 17 Deficiencies
To minimize the risk of Code 17 deficiencies during Port State Control (PSC) inspections, ship operators must adopt a proactive approach. This includes maintenance, crew training, and safety management. By implementing effective strategies in these areas, vessels can ensure compliance with international regulations. This avoids delays, financial penalties, and reputational damage.
Proactive Maintenance and Preparedness
Proactive maintenance is essential for preventing Code 17 deficiencies. Ship operators should establish a detailed maintenance plan. This plan includes regular inspections, timely repairs, and an adequate inventory of spare parts. By identifying and addressing issues before they escalate, vessels can maintain operational readiness and avoid deficiencies during PSC inspections.
Some key elements of a proactive maintenance strategy include:
Conducting regular inspections of critical equipment and systems
Promptly addressing any identified deficiencies or areas of concern
Maintaining accurate records of maintenance activities and repairs
Ensuring an adequate supply of spare parts and consumables on board
Crew Training and Awareness
Well-trained and informed crew members are vital in avoiding Code 17 deficiencies. Ship operators should invest in training programs. These programs should familiarize the crew with international regulations, safety procedures, and best practices. Regular drills and exercises can reinforce this knowledge, ensuring the crew is prepared for any situation during a PSC inspection.
Crew training should cover topics such as fire safety, life-saving appliances, pollution prevention, and emergency response. By empowering the crew with the necessary skills and knowledge, ship operators can foster a culture of safety and compliance on board.
Effective Safety Management Systems
An effective Safety Management System (SMS) is the foundation for avoiding Code 17 deficiencies. The SMS should provide clear guidance on maintaining the ship's safety standards, identifying hazards, and responding to deficiencies. By implementing a robust SMS, ship operators can ensure their vessels meet international requirements and are prepared for PSC inspections.
Key components of an effective SMS include:
Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for all crew members
Procedures for reporting and investigating incidents and near-misses
Regular audits and reviews to identify areas for improvement
Continuous improvement through the incorporation of lessons learned
Strategy | Key Elements | Benefits |
Proactive Maintenance | Regular inspections, timely repairs, adequate spare parts | Maintains operational readiness, prevents deficiencies |
Crew Training | Familiarization with regulations, safety procedures, best practices | Empowers crew, fosters culture of safety and compliance |
Effective SMS | Clear guidance, incident reporting, audits, continuous improvement | Ensures consistent compliance, preparedness for inspections |
By implementing these strategies, ship operators can significantly reduce the risk of Code 17 deficiencies. This ensures a smoother, more efficient operation. Investing in proactive maintenance, crew training, and a robust SMS will not only help avoid costly delays and penalties. It also contributes to a safer, more sustainable maritime industry.
Role of Classification Societies and Flag States
Classification societies and flag states are key players in the maritime world. They ensure ships meet international rules and maintain safety standards. These entities collaborate with shipowners to fix issues found during inspections and support them throughout the process.
A study in the Journal of Marine Science and Engineering found 74,713 deficiencies in 2007, leading to 1,250 detentions. The role of classification societies and flag states is critical in addressing these problems and avoiding more detentions.
Assistance in Rectifying Deficiencies
Classification societies help develop plans to fix deficiencies found during inspections. Their expertise guides shipowners on how to meet international standards effectively.
Flag states also support shipowners in rectifying deficiencies. They offer guidance on regulations, help communicate with authorities, and provide resources to solve issues. This collaboration ensures deficiencies are resolved quickly, preventing further detentions.
Appeals and Dispute Resolution Processes
Shipowners may contest PSC inspection findings or actions. Flag states help in appeals and dispute resolution. They provide legal advice, represent shipowners, and aim for a fair resolution with authorities.
The appeals and dispute resolution processes are vital for a fair PSC system. They ensure shipowners' rights are protected and promote fairness in the maritime industry.
Convention | Entry into Force | Contracting States | World Tonnage |
IMO Convention | 17-Mar-58 | 168 | 97.22% |
SOLAS 1974 | 25-May-80 | 158 | 99.04% |
MARPOL 73/78 (Annex I/II) | 02-Oct-83 | 148 | 99.00% |
STCW 1978 | 28-Apr-84 | 151 | 99.00% |
The table shows widespread adoption of key maritime conventions. It highlights flag states' commitment to safety and environmental protection. By collaborating with classification societies and PSC authorities, flag states help implement these conventions effectively, improving the maritime industry globally.
Best Practices for Managing Code 17 Situations
Ship operators face a Code 17 deficiency during a Port State Control (PSC) inspection. They must act quickly and effectively to fix the issue before leaving. It's vital to follow best practices to avoid delays, detentions, and other negative outcomes.
Prompt Reporting and Communication
Prompt reporting and communication are key to managing Code 17 situations. The ship's master should inform the company's shore-based team, classification society, and flag state authorities immediately. This ensures a coordinated response and keeps everyone informed.
Effective communication channels are essential. They help exchange information and updates on fixing the deficiency. The master should keep the PSC inspector informed to clarify any doubts and ensure all requirements are met.
Efficient Resource Allocation and Planning
Fixing Code 17 deficiencies often requires resources like spare parts and specialized technicians. Efficient planning and resource allocation are critical. They ensure resources are available when needed and the work is done on time.
Ship operators should have contingency plans for challenges like spare part unavailability. These plans should include backup sources, agreements with suppliers, and the ability to quickly send personnel to the vessel.
Effective planning involves prioritizing tasks and allocating resources wisely. The company's technical and operations teams should work with the ship's crew to create a realistic plan. This plan should consider the repair's complexity, resource availability, and logistical challenges.
Best Practice | Key Actions |
Prompt Reporting |
|
Efficient Resource Allocation |
|
Effective Planning |
|
By implementing these best practices, ship operators can proactively manage Code 17 situations, minimize the risk of detentions, and ensure the smooth operation of their vessels in compliance with international regulations.
Investing in training and awareness programs for crew members is essential. Regular drills and exercises should familiarize the crew with reporting and addressing deficiencies. This also reinforces their understanding of the consequences of non-compliance.
Case Studies: Lessons Learned from Code 17 Incidents
Examining Code 17 incidents offers valuable insights into the challenges faced by ship operators. It highlights the need for proactive measures to prevent deficiencies. The Costa Concordia maritime incident in 2012 is a prime example. It resulted in 20 fatalities, 2 missing persons, and 4,197 passengers and crew needing rescue due to radio communication breakdowns during evacuation. This incident underlines the critical role of effective communications on board vessels and the severe consequences of deficiencies in this area.
A vessel was detained by Port State Control authorities due to multiple Code 17 deficiencies. These were related to the ship's radio equipment and documentation. The ship operator faced significant delays and financial losses, showing the importance of maintaining compliance with international regulations. It also emphasizes the need to ensure all equipment is properly maintained and certified.
"The reliability and effectiveness of the communications department on board ships are critical for safety. They require experienced Officers of the Watch (OOW) for proper operation and management."
Lessons learned from these case studies include:
Ensuring regular maintenance and testing of radio equipment to prevent malfunctions during critical situations
Providing thorough training to crew members on the proper use and operation of communication systems
Maintaining accurate and up-to-date documentation related to radio equipment certifications and inspections
Implementing robust safety management systems that prioritize effective communication and emergency preparedness
Convention | Entry into Force | Contracting States | World Tonnage |
SOLAS 1974 | May 25, 1980 | 158 | 99.04% |
STCW 1978 | April 28, 1984 | 151 | 99.00% |
MARPOL 73/78 (Annex I/II) | October 2, 1983 | 148 | 99.00% |
By analyzing these case studies and understanding the lessons learned, ship operators can take proactive steps. They can minimize the risk of Code 17 deficiencies and ensure the safety and efficiency of their vessels. Adherence to international conventions and regulations, along with a strong commitment to safety management and crew training, is essential. It prevents incidents and maintains compliance with Port State Control requirements.
Emerging Trends and Challenges in PSC Enforcement
The maritime industry's growth brings new challenges and trends to Port State Control (PSC) enforcement. With over 80% of global trade on vessels, effective PSC inspections are critical. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed PSC inspection procedures, showing the need for adaptability.
Environmental protection is a growing focus in PSC enforcement. International maritime regulations are tightening, and PSC is ensuring compliance with environmental standards. This includes emissions, waste management, and eco-friendly technologies. Ship operators must keep up with these changes and take proactive steps to meet new requirements.
Cyber security is another area of concern. The maritime industry's digitalization makes ships vulnerable to cyber threats. PSC inspectors now check for cyber security measures onboard. Ship operators need to train their crews in cyber security and update systems to prevent risks.
Seafarer well-being is also under scrutiny. PSC is focusing on crew living and working conditions, medical care, and shore leave. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of crew welfare, with many facing extended sea time. Ship operators must prioritize crew health and safety to avoid PSC deficiencies.
The primary responsibility for monitoring compliance of ships with international standards lies with the flag State, with the PSC acting as the second line of defense against substandard ships.
Ship operators must stay informed and proactive as PSC enforcement evolves. Implementing strong safety management systems, investing in crew training, and communicating with PSC authorities are key. Collaborating with classification societies and flag states can also help navigate PSC inspections, as discussed in this research paper.
The maritime industry will continue to evolve in PSC enforcement practices. New technologies and updated regulations will require ship operators to stay vigilant and adaptable. By prioritizing compliance, the industry can ensure safer, cleaner, and more efficient maritime operations for the future.
PSC Inspection Indicators | Description |
Inspection Number | The total number of PSC inspections conducted within a specific time frame or region. |
Average Deficiency Number per Inspection | The average number of deficiencies identified during PSC inspections, indicating the overall compliance level of vessels. |
Detention Rate | The percentage of vessels detained due to serious deficiencies, reflecting the effectiveness of PSC enforcement in identifying and addressing substandard ships. |
Conclusion
Port State Control (PSC) Code 17 deficiencies pose significant risks to ship operators. Data from the Tokyo MoU and authorities like the Australia Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) and China's PSC operations show these are common issues. Ignoring these problems can cause operational disruptions, financial losses, and legal issues. Vessels may be deemed unseaworthy and detained.
Ship operators must focus on proactive maintenance, crew training, and safety management systems. Creating a culture of compliance and continuous improvement is key. This approach enhances ship safety and reduces the chance of encountering deficiencies during inspections. Advanced analytical techniques, as discussed in the research article on maritime operations, can also help identify and address issues.
The maritime industry is constantly evolving, and operators must stay updated on PSC enforcement trends and challenges. Adopting best practices, maintaining communication with authorities, and efficiently addressing deficiencies are essential. A proactive and diligent approach to deficiency rectification and compliance ensures a safer, more sustainable maritime environment for all.
FAQ
What is Port State Control (PSC), and why are PSC inspections conducted?
Port State Control (PSC) involves inspections by port authorities to ensure ships meet safety, security, and environmental standards. These inspections aim to identify and fix issues that could harm the ship, its crew, and the environment.
What are the consequences of a ship being issued a Code 17 deficiency during a PSC inspection?
A Code 17 deficiency means the ship must fix the issue before leaving. If it doesn't, the ship could be detained. This causes big problems, including financial losses and damage to the ship's reputation.
What happens if a ship departs port without rectifying a Code 17 deficiency?
Leaving port with a Code 17 issue can make the ship unseaworthy. This is very bad for the ship's owner and the captain. They could face serious legal and financial issues. In extreme cases, the captain might even face criminal charges.
How can ship operators avoid Code 17 deficiencies during PSC inspections?
Ship operators can prevent Code 17 issues by focusing on maintenance and preparation. This includes regular checks on equipment, timely repairs, and having spare parts ready. Training the crew and having a strong Safety Management System (SMS) are also key.
What role do classification societies and flag states play in assisting ships with Code 17 deficiencies?
Classification societies and flag states are very important in helping ships fix problems and follow rules. They offer advice and support to ship owners. They can also help with appeals and solving disputes.
What are some best practices for managing Code 17 situations effectively?
To handle Code 17 issues well, ship operators should act quickly and communicate clearly. They need to plan well and have the right resources and support ready. This ensures the ship can fix problems on time.
Source Links
Types of PSC deficiencies and how to deal with these? - MySeaTime - https://www.myseatime.com/blog/detail/how-to-handle-port-state-control-deficiencies
Inspection results | Paris MoU - https://parismou.org/PMoU-Procedures/Library/inspection-results
Port state control - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_state_control
Port state control at European Union under pandemic outbreak - European Transport Research Review - https://etrr.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12544-020-00460-4
PDF - https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=msem_dissertations
PDF - https://www.atlanticarea.uscg.mil/Portals/7/CG 091 Coast Guard CVC-PR-001 (series) Documenting Deficiencies on U_S_ Flag Vessels_Redacted.pdf
PDF - https://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/pdf/tech_info/tech_img/T1310e.pdf
Differences in deficiency types causing ship detentions at the Black Sea Region during the Covid-19 pandemic and pre-pandemic - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9951048/
The role of Port State Control in the future - Splash247 - https://splash247.com/role-port-state-control-future/
PSC Top 18 items – the main detainable deficiencies you need to know about - https://www.dnv.com/news/psc-top-18-items-the-main-detainable-deficiencies-you-need-to-know-about-172190/
Microsoft Word - MELCBS-Guidelines-_Rev._-[2008-09-0257-12]-En.doc - https://www.ilo.org/media/128461/download
The Use Of Port State Control In Maritime Industry And The Application Of The Paris MOU - https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1096&context=oclj
PROCEDURES FOR PORT STATE CONTROL, 2021 - https://www.register-iri.com/wp-content/uploads/A.115532.pdf
Analyzing Port State Control Data to Explore Future Improvements to GMDSS Training - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/11/12/2379
Ranking port state control detention remarks: professional Judgement and spatial overview - European Transport Research Review - https://etrr.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12544-021-00480-8
Is port state control influenced by the COVID-19? Evidence from inspection data - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9015967/
Evaluating the impact of PSC inspectors’ professional profile: a case study of the Spanish Maritime Administration - WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13437-015-0096-y
댓글