Inspections and audits

The inspection window set by the ship risk profile and the grounds that force an inspection (EU Directive 2009/16)

EU Directive 2009/16 and Annex I use the ship risk profile to set inspection priority, frequency and scope. The date a ship becomes eligible for inspection differs from the maximum interval before inspection is required.

Application timing: This article includes the framework amended by EU 2024/3099. The national transposition deadline is 2027-07-06. As of 2026-09-28, do not assume every port applies the amended procedures identically. For an inspection, detention or appeal, check the port State’s implementing law and competent authority guidance.

One profile sets three things

All ships calling at a port or anchorage of a Member State shall, in the inspection database, be attributed a ship risk profile which determines their respective priority for inspection, the intervals between the inspections and the scope of inspections.

Priority for inspection, the intervals between inspections, and the scope of inspections. A poor profile does not just bring inspectors more often; it widens what they look at when they come.

Three strands of parameters build the profile. Generic parameters from type, age, flag, recognised organisations involved and company performance. Historical parameters from the number of deficiencies and detentions over a given period. Environmental parameters from the number of deficiencies relating to the pollution prevention conventions.

That company performance sits among the generic parameters carries weight in practice. The route by which one ship’s history reaches the company’s other ships is inside the text.

Article 10(2) names deficiencies relating to MARPOL 73/78, AFS 2001, BWM, CLC 92, Bunkers 2001, Nairobi and Hong Kong conventions as environmental parameters. Do not treat a CII rating as an automatic input to this list.

Inspection eligibility and the maximum interval are separate dates

The interval between periodic inspections of high risk ships shall not exceed six months. The interval between periodic inspections of ships of other risk profiles shall increase as the risk decreases.

Annex I resolves that sentence into figures per profile, and the figures come in pairs: the point at which the ship becomes eligible for inspection, and the ceiling that must not be passed.

Risk profile	Eligible from	Ceiling since last inspection	Window
High risk	The fifth month	Six months	One month
Standard risk	The 10th month	12 months	Two months
Low risk	The 24th month	36 months	12 months

The window narrows as risk rises. A high risk ship draws an inspection within a month of becoming eligible; a low risk ship still has a year of slack after it becomes eligible. What is being counted also matters: the last inspection within the Union or the Paris MoU region, not in EU ports alone.

A separate set of grounds leaves no discretion

Annex I splits the grounds into two groups. The first is shall be inspected: inspected regardless of the period since the last periodic inspection.

Ships suspended or withdrawn from class for safety reasons since the last inspection
Ships that have been the subject of a report or notification by another Member State
Ships that cannot be identified in the inspection database
Ships involved in a collision, grounding or stranding on their way to the port
Ships accused of an alleged violation of the provisions on discharge of harmful substances or effluents
Ships that have manoeuvred in an erratic or unsafe manner, not following IMO routing measures or safe navigation practices
Ships previously banned, on the first inspection after the refusal of access order is lifted
Ships involved in a severe incident such as a major fire on board, engine breakdown or a fatal accident

The second group is left to the inspector’s judgement

The second group is may be subject to inspection. The inspection is permitted, and the decision is left to the professional judgement of the competent authority. A few items on that list are easy to land on in practice.

Ships which have been the subject of a report or complaint, including an onshore complaint, by the master, a crew member, or any person or organisation with a legitimate interest in the safe operation of the ship, on-board living and working conditions or the prevention of pollution, unless the Member State concerned deems the report or complaint to be manifestly unfounded.

Who may raise it includes the master and a crew member, and an onshore complaint is inside the scope. What falls outside is only what the Member State deems manifestly unfounded.

Two more items connect straight to rectification status: ships reported with an ISM deficiency still outstanding three months after it was issued, and ships previously detained more than three months ago. And one more attaches.

Ships for which a plan of action to rectify deficiencies as referred to in Article 19(2a) has been agreed but in respect of which the implementation of that plan has not been checked by an inspector.

A ship that sailed on an agreed plan of action whose implementation an inspector has not yet verified. Leaving that verification outstanding is itself a ground for the next inspection.

Selection comes out in two grades

The competent authority selects ships on their risk profile and on the grounds above, and the result splits into two grades. Ships due for a mandatory inspection are Priority I; ships eligible for inspection are Priority II. The first are selected under the selection scheme; the second may be.

Worth confirming

The passages above come from Directive 2009/16 and its Annex I. The detailed methodology for computing the profile is laid down by the Commission in implementing acts, reflecting the flag State and company performance criteria adopted under the Paris MoU. When and where that ship was last inspected, which band the company performance falls in, and whether any finding has been open for more than three months are where the actual judgement starts.

You can consult the cited source documents

These links lead to the official publishers of the documents discussed here. Match the edition and provisions cited in the article; for EU legislation, also consult the consolidated versions and amendment history on the document page.

EUR-Lex · 32009L0016

Bellbook keeps PSC findings and their rectification status running per ship

An ISM deficiency still open three months after issue is itself a ground that pulls in the next inspection. Bellbook attaches a deadline and a rectification status to each finding and stacks them per ship, so the ones open longest sit at the top of the list.

Start for free