Port Information Sharing

admin

Administrator

Registered: 2022-11-07

Prince Rupert, Canada - 18318 “Food temperature”

* Root Cause
According to the Master’s explanations, the temperature of the two cold provision rooms during inspection was as follow; meat room -14°C and fish room -12°C as reported by Chief cook, who is with 3rd Officer in attendance during inspection in the galley going to provision room, There was no senior officer or engineer in attendance to explain the situation of the reefer machine to the PSCO so the deficiency had been written down. Also, the Master called the attention of Engine Department only after the PSCO has disembarked. Upon checking of the reefer compressor machine, it was found out that it was running normally and during inspection the automatic defrosting cycle mode was in operation that’s why the temperature of Meat & Fish room was not within normal range.

* Corrections undertaken
The Master prepared the explanations and submitted the report to the PSCO, by e-mail, asking for the rectification of this deficiency. However, the inspector had replied as quoted below:

<<<QUOTE>>>
Dear Captain,
Usual practice with closing the deficiencies is as follow:
1.    If the deficiency is rectified prior PSCO leaves vessel, PSCO may records this fact writing code “10” on Form B,
2.    If the deficiency is rectified after PSCO leaves vessel:

* Master may inform PSCO of rectified deficiency and PSCO will acknowledge this fact by replying to email,

* the PSCO on next PSC inspection will check if there are any outstanding deficiencies,
b.    If the Master / Owner wish to write code “10” on Form B, then
-      the request shall be sent to the office which conducted PSC inspection,

* PSCO will physically attend the vessel and to check rectified deficiency/deficiencies and write the code “10” on Form B,
*  There is the fee payable for this “re-inspection” plus any travel expense and overtime should they occur;
<<<UNQUOTE>>>

Reminders:
We would like to take this opportunity to remind all Masters that the attendance of senior staffs during PSC inspection are very essential in order to prevent or minimize the deficiency from PSC inspections. Sighting the above, where only the Chief Cook and 3rd Officer were attending the inspection, the deficiency of the fish and meet room could have been prevented if the Chief Engineer or 1AE was there to show to the inspector that the defrost function of cold provision reefer machine was activated in the control panel as the cause why the temperature is being out of normal range. Moreover, the attendance of Master and Senior Staffs will give a good impression to the PSCO which, in turn, make him feel assured that the inspection will be conducted soundly & smoothly.

Please be reminded further that once the non-detainable deficiency is written down and not been rectified before the PSC disembarks from the ship, it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to close the deficiency without the physical attendance of the inspector, and the Action Taken-10 can no longer be depicted in the PSC Form-B unless a follow-up inspection is requested by Master or by the Company. The follow-up inspection, normally, had a corresponding FEE (same as applying for a Class Surveyor) so it will be an additional cost to the Owners. Therefore, it is advisable that Master, or any senior staffs in attendance, must closely observe the inspection proceedings, and once the PSCO had pointed out any item that might be raised as deficiency, please discuss the rectification immediately without waiting for the PSCO to write the facts. Some PSCO will still write down his findings even if the deficiency had been rectified by the crew, but in this case, he will also write the Action Taken-10 in the PSC Form-B so deficiency is officially rectified and no pending issue which is favorable to the ship and to Owners.