QUESTION 2.2.3

Master's review of the Safety Management System

Oil, Chemical, LPG, LNGDocumentation

What is being checked

The inspector is checking whether the Master can navigate and critically evaluate the SMS, completes reviews at the company frequency and sends actionable conclusions to shore management for response and improvement.

Ready onboard

0/7 complete

PROCEDUREThe SMS defines review frequency, agenda, submission method and company response time.TIMELINESSMaster's reviews have been completed at the prescribed interval, at least annually where required.FULL SCOPEThe review addresses audits, incidents, defects, drills, risk controls, crew feedback and suitability of procedures.SPECIFICITYComments identify ship-specific weaknesses and proposed improvement rather than stating only that the SMS is satisfactory.CREW INPUTOfficers and ratings have a practical route to raise SMS difficulties for the review.COMPANY RESPONSEShore management has acknowledged, answered and tracked recommendations.MASTER KNOWLEDGEThe Master can promptly locate critical procedures and explain the most recent review conclusions.

Practice questions

Answer aloud, then open the preparation point.

1What material weakness did your last Master's review identify?

Describe a specific shipboard issue, evidence considered, recommendation made and company response.

2How do crew comments enter the review?

Show the meeting, feedback, safety-committee or reporting route used and how submissions are evaluated.

3What happens when the company rejects a recommendation?

Retain the response, understand its reasoning, manage any continuing risk and escalate further if safety remains affected.

4Show how the review improved one procedure or onboard practice.

Trace the recommendation through company decision, revision or instruction, implementation and effectiveness check.

5How quickly can you locate an unfamiliar procedure during an emergency?

Demonstrate the actual document system, revision status, backup access and search route.

Where an observation may arise

GENERIC REVIEW

The review is a tick-box statement with no critical assessment or ship-specific evidence.

OVERDUE

A review was not completed within the company interval.

INCOMPLETE AGENDA

Required subjects or departmental input are missing.

NO RESPONSE

Recommendations were submitted but shore management did not acknowledge or address them.

ACCESS

The Master cannot efficiently navigate the SMS or identify the current revision.

NO IMPROVEMENT

Repeated concerns appear across reviews without decision, action or escalation.

Master's practical note

A credible review should contain at least one uncomfortable operational conclusion. Repeatedly reporting that everything is satisfactory suggests the review is administrative rather than diagnostic.

Equipment boundary and references

Equipment boundary: Use the company review format, but do not let the format restrict reporting of a material ship-specific weakness. Protected or security-sensitive details should follow controlled reporting channels.

References

OCIMF SIRE 2.0 Question Library Part 1, Version 1.0, Question 2.2.3
ISM Code sections 5 and 12
IACS Recommendation No. 41, Guidance for IACS Auditors to the ISM Code

Last reviewed: 2026-09-09