Making shipping safer and the seas cleaner

Statistics indicate that well over 70% of the marine accidents relate to human error or omission. The recent accident of M.T. Golden Gate on 14th August 2002 spilling 1800 tons crude in harbour and M.T. Tasman Spirit in August 2003, spilling 30,000 tons of crude oil and causing devastation of our beaches, marine life and environment are said to be due to element of human error.
The enquiry report precisely said to have established human error, but on whose part, can't be debated or divulged as the document has yet to be made Public document.
Unfortunately we have not learned any lessons from these debacles and due to unawareness of Maritime Law and not being signatory to CLC/Civil Liability Convention at that time, nor member of fund-92, have not been able to recover compensation from owners and their underwriters. In a similar accident case of ERICA Italian classification society RINA has been sued alongwith flag state Malta.
The tribunal in Paris has not allowed immunity to RINA. The argument made that RINA and flag state are so closely inter-twined in issuing statuary certificate to the vessel, irrespective of authority delegated. The owners of ERIKA and their insurers will not be able to escape as judgement is due soon, unlike owners of Tasman Spirit their insurers, classification society and flag state are virtually free of any liability upto date.
Thus training in conjunction with documented procedures and checklists can improve human performance and help to reduce accidents. In the words of the Secretary General of IMO "We sometimes forget that regulations can only be effective if they are properly implemented, and this can only be done by skilled people".
Similarly trained and competent seafarers are required to make the best use of advances in ship technology to ensure the highest possible degree of operational safety and protection of the marine environment.
The international convention on standards of training, Certification and Watch keeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW'78) was the first IMO initiative in the field of training. It was a good starting point but it had no reference to quality control and above all it had no teeth. That is to say it had no means to ensure compliance. The amendments in 1995 make the convention more effective.
The amended version is commonly referred to as STCW 95. Significantly at about the same time IMO (also developed the SOLAS-ISM code. The two instruments are complimentary to each other in introducing the new regime of quality standards systems.
International treaties and conventions can only become effective when they are implemented. The process of implementation requires 3 (three) essential ingredients.
They are:
1. National legislation to provide for the power and jurisdiction
2. An administration (well trained and competent) to execute or monitor the execution: and
3. Documented procedures for the administration to act upon.
Most IMO conventions have provisions allowing the administration to recognise and employ the services of organisations (a reference to the classification societies). This delegation relates to functions only; responsibility still rests with the administration.
STCW is one of the few conventions which does not provide any scope to recognise an organisation. In other words there is no role for separate organisations such as classification societies. However, the convention does make reference to non-governmental agencies or entities which is further expanded in Code A-1/6.7 under the heading "Training and Assessment within an Institution."
The paramount statement in respect of training and assessment is given in Reg 1/6 "Each party shall ensure that the training and assessment of seafarers, as required under the convention, are administered, supervised and monitored in accordance with the provisions of Section A-1/6 of the STCW Code". This requires a total commitment on the part of the administration.
Where training institutes are authorised by the administration to conduct any part of the training and assessment, they shall be supervised and monitored by the administration. An example of delegation of function but not responsibility. STCW'95 requires that "Each party shall ensure that all training, assessment, certification and revalidation activities carried out by non-governmental agencies or entities under its authority are continuously monitored through a quality standards system."
This clearly requires the administration to supervise and monitor the quality standards system implemented by the training institutes. It does not rule out the scope for the training institutes to take voluntary (but not mandatory) QA schemes such as ISO 9002.
The important thing to note here is that whether the training institute has gone for a separate quality certification or not, the administration will have to meet its obligations under STCW'95 to administer, supervise and monitor the training and assessment of its seafarers as referred to in Reg 1/6 and 1/8.
Such arrangements would be particularly suitable for the short and specialised training programmes covered in chapters V and VI which are related to purely vocational training and maritime related skills.
This is not the case with the contents of chapters II and III (except 11/43 and III/4) which are far more broadly based education and training and include the underpinning knowledge necessary to fully meet the convention requirements.
In this case the supervision and monitoring should not only be carried out by the maritime administration but also by the relevant education authority such as university or a technical education board.
In the UK the conduct of education, training and assessment covering the main education and training leading to a Certificate of Competency (Reg II III) are jointly supervised by the MSA (Administration) and EDEXCEL/SQA. This meets the requirements of the QSS so far they relate to training institutes.
Now let us focus our attention on QSS for the administration itself. Reg 1/8.2 states "where governmental agencies or entities perform such activities, there shall be a quality standards system." For the first time an international instrument insists on a quality standards system (QSS) on the part of the administration to be evaluated, monitored and audited by a competent independent body or persons.
What does it imply? It is certainly not making any reference to a classification society simply because the society itself is supposed to be audited by the administration. It must not turn out as scratching each other's back.
There are two main ways of achieving a QSS for the administration. 1 to go for the ISO 9002 through the national standards institute 2. The other is for the Government to appoint a panel of competent persons, who are not associated or connected with the administration in carrying out its obligations under the STCW, to carry out periodical (not exceeding 5 years) inspection and audit to ensure that a QSS is maintained.
In the UK, for example, the requirement for QSS on the part of the administration is met by the MSA maintaining the ISO 9002 under the watchful eyes of the BSI (British Standards Institute).
Finally let us discuss how the QSS works. The Government Department, Directorate, Agency or Authority has to have a framework document both in respect of its structure as well as its functions, goals and objectives. It has to have a proper recruitment policy spelling out the qualifications and experience required against each post. The role and responsibility at each level must be well defined.
The administration has to identity various functions (related to implementation of STCW) and have documented procedures against each.
Some of these functions are outlined below:
1. Approval of Training institutes in general
2. Approval of Cadet Training programmes
3. Approval of Marine VQ programmes (along with EDEXCEL/SQA)
4. Approval of various short and specialised training courses
5. Approval of watch rating certification.
6. Approval of type rating certification
7. Evaluation of certificates issued abroad for recognition
8. Issue of endorsement to foreign certificates
9. Processing applications for certificates of competency
10. Processing applications for Tanker Endorsement
11. Processing applications for revalidation of certificates.
12. Setting mandatory medical standards
13. Maintenance of records (Data base)
14. Issue of AB Certificates
15. Issue of Ship's Cook certificates.
16. Issue of Safe Manning Documents
17. Approval of Muster lists
18. Issue of Dispensation, issue of endorsement to GMDSS certificates
19. Inquiry and disciplinary measures
20. Inspection (PSC) of ships for STCW compliance.
It is necessary to develop criteria and establish documented procedures for the execution/processing of each of these functions to the satisfaction of the awarding body to have the initial QSS recognised. It will be also necessary to maintain records and documents to demonstrate that the procedures have been followed and that new procedures have been developed where felt necessary to maintain the QSS.
In a similar manner, the training institutes have to develop criteria for initial approval of each of the training programmes and have procedures in place for the operation of the same. At each monitoring inspection by the administration the institute will have to satisfy the administration that the approved training programmes have been conducted strictly in compliance with the criteria and procedure agreed upon.
Let us now take an example of such a training programme; the certificate of Proficiency in Survival craft and rescue Boat. For the approval of such a course of training the administration will require the institute to make a submission covering the following points.
1. Scope (making reference to STCW, SOLAS etc)
2. Objectives (such as taking charge of survival craft.
3. Entry standards (such as age, sea services, basic training etc)
4. Intake limitation (such as facilities, instructor student ratio)
5. Staff qualification (certificates, experience etc and necessity for separate staff for instruction and assessment.
6. Facilities and equipment (whether lake, pool or waterfront available or accessible and how many different launching methods can be demonstrated etc)
7. Conduct of training (combination of lecture, video, practical work etc)
8. Assessment (independent of instruction; or continuous performance evaluation)
9. Certification (format to include correct reference to STCW, reference to approval and authorisation by the administration and contact point of the institute for checking authenticity etc);
10. Maintenance of data-base so that records can be checked. The initial approval by the administration, as well as the maintenance of the QSS, will depend on how closely the procedures have been followed.
Regulations 1/6 and 1/8 make direct references to the quality standards system. There are other regulations which deal with matters which have a direct bearing on the QSS. The maintenance of records commonly referred to as the Data-base is an integral part of the QSS. The STCW makes direct reference to national data-base as it applies to the administration.
There is also reference in Reg 1/14 under "Company responsibility" where the company is required to maintain records of all seafarers employed by the company. The training institutes also will have to maintain records of all seafarers trained or certificated by the institute as a part of QSS.
The QSS referred to in STCW 95 is independent of the ISM code ISO 9000 or ISMA certification. The ISM code largely deals with the human element but refers more directly to the ship and the company whereas STCW has a distinct primary role for the administration.
For a developing country it will probably be best to have a two-tier provision in the legislation such as:
1. The administration may authorise a training institute or center to conduct any of the training programmes required under the convention providing that such training programme shall be evaluated against criteria set by the administration prior to the approval and that the training programme conducted at the approved center shall be supervised and monitored by the administration at period not exceeding 5 years in accordance with the provision of Reg 1/6 and 1/8 of the Convention and the relevant codes attached to the convention.
2. The Ministry of Ports and Shipping may appoint the National Standards Institute or a panel of competent persons, other than those involved in the routine operation of functions related to training, certification, issue of endorsement or maintenance of record to make an independent evaluation to ensure that a quality standards system has been developed with documented procedures for each of the functions and the same is followed and maintained by the administration in respect of functions and activities referred to in Reg 1/6 and 1/8 of the convention and the relevant codes attached to the convention.
The audit shall take into account the audit of the training institutes undertaken by the administration. A copy of the report of such inspection, which shall take place at intervals not exceeding 5 years, shall be forwarded to the organisation."
In concluding I come back to the statement where I said that STCW95 and the ISM code are complementary to each other. Reg 1/14 is the best example where the company responsibility has been explained, especially the requirements relating to familiarisation training. These are common in both instruments. Both instruments are aimed at reducing human error and omission. Proper implementation of both instruments should go a long way in making shipping safer and the seas cleaner.
(The writer is Ex. Additional Secretary and Director General Ports and Shipping Ex. Chairman Gwadar Port, Member Board Port Qasim Authority, Governor World Maritime University Malmao (Sweden) Member (IMO Secretary general's Panel of Experts, London.)