When a PSC officer finds a deficiency on your vessel, the first question isn't "what went wrong?" It's "who was responsible for making sure this didn't happen?" If nobody can answer clearly—or if the answer is "everyone"—the inspection goes deeper. The ISM Code doesn't just require safe operations. It requires documented ownership of every safety function, from the boardroom to the bridge. Companies with vague accountability structures don't just fail audits—they create the conditions where failures repeat. In 2024 alone, the USCG issued 82 detentions across 8,711 SOLAS exams, with SMS implementation failures ranking among the top finding categories. Marine Inspection software gives vessel operators the tools to sign up and build clear accountability workflows that assign, track, and verify every compliance responsibility from shore to ship—so when an inspector asks "who owns this?", your system answers instantly.
82
USCG Detentions in 2024
SMS failures among the leading deficiency categories
2x
Under-Performing Ships
Nearly doubled year-over-year per Tokyo MOU 2024
12 mo
Internal Audit Cycle
ISM Code maximum interval between required audits
The ISM Accountability Chain: Who Owns What
The ISM Code establishes a clear chain of accountability that PSC inspectors and ISM auditors verify during every examination. When any link in this chain is weak—unclear responsibilities, missing documentation, or disconnected shore-to-ship communication—the entire Safety Management System is considered ineffective. Marine Inspection software maps this chain digitally, so every role, responsibility, and action is assigned, tracked, and auditable in one platform.
ISM Accountability Chain: Roles Inspectors Verify
Company Management
ISM Code Section 3
Define safety and environmental policy
Provide adequate resources and shore-based support
Ensure SMS is developed, implemented, and maintained
Audit risk if missing: DOC revocation, fleet-wide operational restrictions
Designated Person Ashore (DPA)
ISM Code Section 4
Monitor safety and pollution prevention for each vessel
Direct access to highest level of management
Verify SMS implementation and report non-conformities
Audit risk if missing: Major non-conformity, immediate corrective action required
Master (Captain)
ISM Code Section 5
Overriding authority on safety and pollution prevention
Implement SMS onboard and motivate crew compliance
Report deficiencies to shore-based management
Audit risk if missing: Vessel detention, SMC withdrawal
Ship Officers & Crew
ISM Code Section 6
Execute operational procedures as documented in SMS
Report non-conformities, hazards, and near-misses
Participate in drills, training, and emergency preparedness
Audit risk if missing: Crew unable to demonstrate SMS familiarity during interviews
Marine Inspection makes this chain visible and actionable. Every task assignment, corrective action, and compliance check is tied to a specific person with a deadline and verification step. Schedule a demo to see how role-based accountability tracking works—our team will show you how the platform maps your governance structure into auditable compliance workflows in under 20 minutes.
3 Governance Failures That Trigger Detentions
Inspectors don't just check equipment and records. They assess whether your management system actually functions—whether accountability is real or just documented. Here are the three governance failures that most frequently escalate routine inspections into detentions.
01
DPA Exists on Paper Only
The Designated Person Ashore is named in the SMS but has no documented communication with vessels, no evidence of monitoring safety performance, and no record of reporting to senior management. Inspectors verify DPA activity through communication logs and corrective action records.
Marine Inspection fix: Automated DPA dashboards show real-time vessel compliance status, communication logs, and non-conformity tracking—creating continuous evidence of active DPA oversight.
02
Corrective Actions Without Closure Verification
Deficiencies are identified and actions are assigned, but there's no documented verification that corrections were actually completed and effective. Open corrective actions with passed deadlines signal a governance breakdown to auditors.
Marine Inspection fix: Finding-to-closure workflows require photographic evidence, responsible person sign-off, and verification approval before any corrective action can be marked complete.
03
Shore Office Disconnected From Shipboard Reality
Company management cannot demonstrate awareness of vessel conditions. Internal audit findings don't reach decision-makers. The ISM Code explicitly prohibits blanket statements placing all responsibility on the Master while the company abdicates shore-side support obligations.
Marine Inspection fix: Shore-to-ship visibility with real-time compliance dashboards, automated alerts for overdue items, and fleet-wide audit status visible to management at every level.
Build Inspection-Ready Governance in Your Fleet
Marine Inspection assigns every compliance task to a specific person with a deadline, tracks completion with evidence, and gives shore management real-time visibility—so your accountability chain is always audit-proof.
Expert Review: Governance Is What Separates Compliant Fleets From Detained Vessels
Industry Analysis
The Tokyo MOU's 2024 annual report revealed that under-performing ships nearly doubled compared to the previous year—and the non-compliance wasn't concentrated in any single deficiency area. It was spread across operational practices broadly, pointing to systemic management failures rather than isolated equipment issues. This is a governance problem, not an equipment problem.
The USCG has been equally direct. Their Enhanced Exam Program now uses data analysis to evaluate risk patterns before inspectors even board a vessel. Companies with fragmented management systems—where shore and ship operate in silos—are increasingly visible to these targeting algorithms. The ISM Code is explicit that companies cannot place blanket responsibility on the Master while abdicating their own obligation to provide shore-based support, resources, and active oversight.
Marine Inspection's platform addresses this directly by creating a single system of record where every compliance responsibility is assigned, tracked, and verified with evidence. When inspectors examine your governance structure, they find documented proof that accountability flows from company management through the DPA to the Master and crew—and back up again through reporting, corrective actions, and management review. That's what functioning governance looks like, and it's what operators who sign up for Marine Inspection demonstrate during every audit.
How Marine Inspection Builds Governance Into Daily Operations
Strong governance doesn't come from writing better policy documents. It comes from systems that make accountability unavoidable in daily operations. Marine Inspection embeds governance into every workflow so compliance ownership is clear, tracked, and verifiable without adding administrative burden to your crew.
Marine Inspection Governance Capabilities
Role-Based Task Assignment
Every maintenance task, inspection checklist, and corrective action is assigned to a named person with a clear deadline. No task exists without an owner.
Automated Escalation Alerts
Overdue tasks automatically escalate to the next management level. DPA and shore management receive alerts before deadlines pass—not after.
Corrective Action Closure Chains
Every finding links to assigned action, responsible person, evidence of completion, and verification sign-off. Auditors see a complete governance trail.
Shore-to-Ship Compliance Dashboards
Company management and DPA see real-time fleet compliance status. Internal audit findings, open items, and vessel readiness visible from a single screen.
Audit-Ready Evidence Generation
Every action carries a tamper-proof timestamp and user attribution. When inspectors ask for evidence of governance, the system produces it instantly.
Internal Audit Management
Schedule, conduct, and document internal audits within the platform. Findings auto-generate corrective action workflows with ownership and deadlines.
Fleet managers running multiple vessels find that scheduling a demo reveals governance gaps they didn't know existed—our team walks through your current compliance structure and shows exactly where Marine Inspection closes accountability gaps before your next inspection.
Conclusion
Governance isn't a section in your SMS manual—it's the system that determines whether your SMS actually works. Every PSC inspection and ISM audit tests whether accountability is real: whether tasks have owners, whether corrective actions close, whether shore management knows what's happening on their vessels, and whether the DPA is actively monitoring compliance or just named on a document. Marine Inspection makes governance operational by embedding accountability into every compliance workflow your fleet runs daily. Create your free account now and start assigning, tracking, and verifying every compliance responsibility across your fleet—so your governance structure holds up under any inspection, at any port, at any time.
Put Accountability Into Every Compliance Workflow
Marine Inspection gives fleet operators role-based task tracking, automated escalation, corrective action closure chains, and real-time shore-to-ship dashboards—so your governance structure is always inspection-ready.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does governance mean in the context of marine inspections?
Governance in marine inspections refers to the structured framework of roles, responsibilities, and accountability that ensures compliance activities are owned, executed, and verified. Under the ISM Code, this includes company management defining safety policy, the DPA monitoring compliance, the Master implementing the SMS onboard, and crew executing procedures. Marine Inspection software maps this entire governance chain digitally—assigning every task to a named person with deadlines and verification requirements.
What is the Designated Person Ashore (DPA) and why do inspectors verify their activity?
The DPA is required by ISM Code Section 4 to monitor safety and pollution prevention for each vessel, with direct access to the highest level of company management. Inspectors verify DPA activity because a DPA who exists only on paper—with no documented vessel communication, monitoring records, or non-conformity reporting—indicates the SMS is not functioning effectively. Marine Inspection provides DPA dashboards showing real-time compliance status, communication logs, and corrective action oversight across the fleet.
How does poor accountability lead to vessel detention?
Poor accountability leads to detention when inspectors find that deficiencies repeat because no one owns the corrective action process, or when corrective actions are assigned but never verified as complete. Under the ISM Code, the lack of effective and systematic implementation is itself classified as a major non-conformity—which can prevent a vessel from sailing. Marine Inspection prevents this by requiring evidence-based closure verification for every corrective action and escalating overdue items automatically.
Can Marine Inspection help manage internal audit requirements under the ISM Code?
Yes. The ISM Code requires internal safety audits onboard and ashore at intervals not exceeding 12 months. Marine Inspection lets you schedule, conduct, and document internal audits within the platform. Audit findings automatically generate corrective action workflows with assigned owners, deadlines, and verification steps—creating the complete governance trail that external auditors and PSC officers verify during examinations.
How quickly can Marine Inspection improve governance across a fleet?
Most fleet operators see measurable governance improvements within 4-6 weeks. Week 1-2 covers platform setup with role-based task assignment and corrective action workflows. Week 3-4 activates shore-to-ship compliance dashboards and automated escalation alerts. By week 6, DPA monitoring, internal audit management, and fleet-wide accountability tracking are fully operational—giving your governance structure documented evidence of functioning before your next scheduled audit.
