Seaways Cover Jan 09 19/12/08 11:04 Page 1

January 2009
p 1-2 FOCUS 19/12/08 10:53 Page 1
Injustice to seafarers
nce again a year starts with a
O truly appalling case of
criminalisation, an attack on
those dedicated servants of
the world economy and trade – the
seafarers. The full array of international
maritime representative organisations
are speaking with one voice in
condemning the judgement of the Court of
Appeal in South Korea for overturning
the innocent verdicts of the District Court
in the Hebei Spirit case and sentencing
Captain Chawla and Chief Officer Chetan
to jail terms. It is little comfort for them
or the industry at large that the
sentences, 18 months and eight months
respectively, are light in comparison to
the 10 years demanded by the Prosecutor
– and as Seaways went to press, there
was no indication as to whether the year
that they have already been detained will
be taken into account.
Our members are rightly outraged by
this verdict (see Letters pp 29-30). The
Institute joins with them in condemning
the criminalisation of any seafarer who
is unfortunate enough to be involved in
an accident. However lest we heap all
our disgust on South Korea, it is worth
remembering that the European Union
has proposed regulations that seek to
criminalise those involved in maritime
accidents; the trial of Captain
Mangouros of the Prestige and others
approaches next year in Spain; Captain
Laptalo of the Coral Sea and his
colleagues have been deported from
Features
Captain’s Column 3-4
The power
of words 5-8
MarNIS:
integrating
navigation
in Europe 9-12
When laws
conflict… 13-15
Seaways January 2009
FOCUS
Greece despite eventually being found
innocent in the ‘drugs in bananas’ case;
France set out to criminalise all and
sundry involved with the Erika; the
Tasman Spirit eight had a torrid time
in Pakistan; and Venezuela held the
master of the Nissos Amorgos for many
months; and these are only the high
profile cases – there are many more as a
recent BIMCO study, which the Institute
supported, established and brought to
the attention of the IMO.
There is growing concern, as there
should be, that this trend to criminalise
seafarers will put off the younger
generation from considering a seafaring
career at a time when there is already a
sizeable shortage of qualified officers in
the world fleet. It is certainly a most
unwelcome and negative factor for the
‘Go to sea’ campaign launched by the
Secretary-General of the IMO recently
(see Nautelex p 28), but there is an even
more serious aspect. Experienced
seafarers will be wise to consider their
future in light of this sustained
disrespect for their profession, and the
natural and man made hazards they face
on a daily basis to keep the world’s trade
flowing. There are still plenty of marine-
related jobs ashore, despite the
economic downturn, and who could
blame them for taking them.
As the Chairman/President of the
International Chamber of Shipping /
International Shipping Federation
(ICS/ISF) said: ‘This incident highlights
Shore-based
pilotage 15-16
Port-state
control
and ISM 21-24
Wind farms
and radar 25-27
the need for the world’s seafaring
nations to stand up and take notice. The
world expects – in fact takes for granted
– that the shipping industry will provide
a seamless, efficient and effective
delivery of goods. Shipowners cannot
therefore remain unresponsive to the
imprisonment of two of their seafarers
who provide this service worldwide.
Without our seafarers and the ships they
serve on, the world would literally come
to a stop. If all of the world’s nations are
to continue to expect the shipping
industry to provide this service, then
equally, and as a minimum, the
seafarers expect to be treated fairly and
with respect.’
There have already been calls to
boycott South Korean goods but the
most effective measure in any of these
cases would be for the major shipping
companies to cease serving the country’s
ports, as the owners of the Coral Sea
bravely did. For this to be effective, the
action has to be concerted. It would, of
course, result in short-term financial
pain for the shipowners – but balance
that against the prospect of laying up
ships due to lack of crew rather than
lack of cargo. A short, sharp shock with
shortages of key commodities, such as
oil, hitting the general public would soon
grab the attention of politicians, the
judiciary, and shoreside industry. In the
meantime, diplomatic efforts for the
Hebei Spirit officers must continue.
Command
Seminar 31-32
Tribute to Julian Parker 33
MARS 17-20
Nautelex
Letters
28
29-30
Conferences 34-35
NI log 35-36
1
p 1-2 FOCUS 19/12/08 10:53 Page 2

SEAWAYS
The International Journal
of The Nautical Institute
ISSN 01 44 1019

Editor
Claire Walsh BA (Hons), MA, CNI
email: clairew@nildram.co.uk

Nautical Institute Chief Executive

Philip Wake MSc, FNI

The Nautical Institute

President
Capt R A Coates FNI
Vice Presidents
Captain J A Robinson DSM FNI NS
Captain M K Barritt MA FNI RN
Captain P Chawla FNI
Captain S Krishnamurthi MNI
Captain R J McCabe FNI
Captain S Tuck FNI
Hon. Treasurer
Captain R B Middleton FNI

All enquiries regarding membership,

Seaways editorial and subscriptions
should be made to:
The Nautical Institute
202 Lambeth Road
London SE1 7LQ
Tel: +44 (0)20 7928 1351
Fax:+44 (0)20 7401 2817
email sec@nautinst.org
The Nautical Institute
Website: www.nautinst.org
and Lloyd’s List Publications sales email:
pubs@nautinst.org
Shipmaster of the Year Award 2008
Now in its eight year, this prestigious award will be presented to a shipmaster nominated by
colleagues on board, or the company ashore, or by others within the maritime industry.
Advertising manager:
It is open to those within the commercial shipping industry who have been actively in command
of a ship during the 2008 calendar year. The nomination may be based upon a particular incident Tony Stein, 12 Braehead, Bo’ness,
within the year or on a longer term record of outstanding professional conduct. West Lothian EH51 0BZ, Scotland;
Nomination form available for download from: www.nautinst.org Tel +44 (0)1506 828800;
Or contact the Chief Executive: sec@nautinst.org for full details. Fax +44 (0)1506 828085;
Deadline for receipt of nominations: 31 March 2009 email tony.r.stein@btinternet.com

Seaways January 2009

2
p 3-4 Captains Col Jan 09 19/12/08 11:20
CAPTAIN’S COLUMN
Lifejackets and
immersion suits
Captain Ivo Jutrovic
MNI
oving from one ship to
M
another, mariners habitually
encounter various different
models of lifejackets – but
even so they frequently do not pay proper
attention to this basic lifesaving item.
Through safety familiarisation on
joining the ship, followed by drills and
training, each crew member has to know
how to don their lifejacket. But many
mariners believe: ‘I have my lifejacket on
so I’m safe’. Is it really as simple as that?
Nearly everybody knows that the
number and distribution of lifejackets on
board is regulated by Solas. Fewer of us
know that their technical characteristics
are prescribed by the Life-Saving
Appliance (LSA) Code. Normally, each
lifejacket should have a declaration,
including approval with reference to the
Solas and LSA Codes.
The LSA Code, Chapter II, 2.2.1.2.4 says
that the lifejacket should be ‘comfortable to
wear’ and 2.2.1.4 says it ‘shall allow the
wearer, to board a survival craft’. I do not
know how this is measured but some
lifejackets are rigid and bulky. Sometimes
during drills, crew members assigned to
prepare lifeboats need to take lifejackets
down to be able to work on the boats.
During boat drills I used to wear my
lifejacket and normally had to do nothing
more than talk on my hand radio, but I still
felt constrained in my actions by some
models. Not to mention difficulties in going
down or climbing up embarcation ladders.
LSA Code, Chapter II, 2.2.3.1.3 says that
the ‘lifejacket light shall be visible over as
great a segment of the upper hemisphere as
is practicable’. Lot of lights are attached on
to the side of the jacket. When the jacket is
Seaways January 2009
Page 1
done up and the mariner is standing during
drill, this places the light somewhere on the
middle of the chest. In the sea that
translates as somewhere under the water
or just on the surface. Some lights are only
attached by a small lanyard and just hang
down while the mariner is standing – these
will be under water if the lifejacket is used
for real.
Those hanging lights which are very
poorly attached are likely to be hooked up
somewhere or lost during abandoning. On
only a few lifejackets have I seen lights
fitted on the most prominent (and most
suitable) place – on top of the shoulders.
There is a similar situation with whistles.
They should be as close as possible to the
mouth – not hanging around the chest.
In view of the above, the recent news
that one of the biggest shipping companies
is introducing lifejackets with radar
reflectors ‘to reduce the number of deaths
caused by man overboard incidents’ comes
as no surprise.
Immersion suits
A step ahead in life-saving after lifejackets,
immersion suits also have some
questionable design features. Requirement
2.3.1.3 of the LSA Code, Chapter II states
that ‘an immersion suit shall permit the
wearer to … 1. climb up and down a
vertical ladder at least five m in length;
and 2. perform normal duties associated
with abandonment’. This is very seldom
met in practice for one reason: the gloves
or fist protection (required by LSA Code
2.3.1.1.3, Chapter II). Only on one or two
ships have I had immersion suits with full,
five-finger, solid rubber gloves
(permanently attached) which enable the
user to work normally with their hands.
Mostly, there is only a thumb piece and
four fingers together, like a mitten, or
thumb, index finger and three fingers. But
the main problem is that such ‘gloves’ are
made of the same material as the
immersion suit, usually to fit large, even
huge fists: your hand slips around inside
and the reliable use of your arms is not
possible. Do I need to say that some
models have lights and whistles misplaced
in the same way as some lifejackets?
Practice
I took the immersion suit I have in the
cabin (it is the type with thumb, index
finger and mitten for the other three
fingers) and tried wearing it. Putting it on
was easy (as it should be) but it has a
whistle and light which might suggest that
it should be used without a lifejacket – but
the buoyancy support would be too small?
Just as a test, I tried to put the lifejacket
on too and found it difficult to cross the
straps behind my back and make a knot
over the front. (The straps were very
slippery while handled through suit’s
‘gloves’). Then I tried (successfully) to use
the whistle. Activation of the lifejacket
light needed several attempts, the light
slipping from my hands. Next, I tried to
operate my normal hand radio: switch
on/off – OK, control volume – OK, change
channels – difficult, change battery –
impossible. Results with GMDSS hand
radio: switch on/off – OK, control volume –
difficult, change channels – satisfactory,
change battery – OK. Due to the material
Seaways is posted to all Institute members.
The subscription rate to others is £70 pa.
Opinions expressed in articles and letters
are those of the authors only.
The Nautical Institute is a company limited
by guarantee No. 2570030 and a registered
charity in the UK No 1004265.
© 2009 The Nautical Institute
ISSN 0144-1019.
Printed in England by O’Sullivan
Communications, Southall.
Typeset by Tradeset Ltd, Eastcote, Pinner
3
p 3-4 Captains Col Jan 09 19/12/08 11:20
the immersion suit was made of, both
radios were very slippery in my hands and
I lost them a few times. While testing the
radios, the straps fell down from the front
side because the knot I made was not tight
enough (it was not possible to tie it, again
due to the nature of the immersion suit
material).
I did not try to operate the EPIRB and
SART but comparing the layout of their
controls with those on the radios, I know
the outcome would be similar. Also, I did
not try to climb the embarcation ladder, but
I can say that such an activity would be very
difficult, even dangerous. It does not matter
whether ladders are five m, less or more –
anyone who can climb two m can climb the
next 20 m if he is able to hold on to the
ladder properly.
Solas Chapter III, 7.3 requires
immersion suits for ‘every person assigned
to crew the rescue boat or assigned to the
marine evacuation system party’. Those
people have already serious and
complicated tasks – imagine them
constrained or disabled by their immersion
suits from using their hand radios. Not to
mention the crew in the rescue boat who
have to operate a release hook, start and
control an outboard engine – sometimes
4
Page 2
Feature
even repair it – take a distressed person
from the water, occasionally give first aid,
and connect the lifting hook – with
oversized slippery ‘gloves’ with only two
‘fingers’.
Storage
Again according to Solas, lifejackets and
immersion suits have to be placed in each
cabin, with additional ones on the bridge,
in the engine room and on remote areas,
for people working away from the
accommodation. Usually, there are three
or four lifejackets and immersion suits in
the engine room, even on ships with 10 or
more engineers working there during the
day. In the event of abandoning ship, the
first few (lucky) people will take what is
available and proceed to the boat stations.
The remaining ones will have first to go to
their cabins to take jackets and suits and
then go back to the boat station. In the
‘worst case scenario’, the chief engineer
would have to go from the bottom of the
engine room to his cabin and back to the
boat station. On my present vessel that
means: 11 decks or 44 m up and then three
decks back down. In case of an emergency,
without an elevator, with a possible heavy
list and without lighting inside
accommodation, this could be very
difficult, maybe impossible. If there is a
fire in the accommodation, a large number
of the crew could remain without basic life-
saving appliances.
Because of that, lifejackets and
immersion suits for all crew should be
permanently stowed on boat stations
(preferably in fire-proof boxes) or lockers
with direct access from open deck. In
addition, they should be on the bridge, in
the engine room and on remote areas as per
present requirement.
Finally…
It is not new that the shipping industry
learns from its mistakes. Looking at
hydrostatic release units on lifeboats, and
the number of unfortunate deaths
associated with these, it is a pity that the
alarm is sounded only when the number of
deaths becomes ‘significant’. Is it not time
to change our views on lifejackets and
immersion suits? Do we need one Titanic
scale disaster before the number of near-
misses, accident and fatalities associated
with poor or incorrect design of lifejackets
and immersion suits becomes ‘significant’?
Seaways January 2009
p 5-8 The Power of Words 19/12/08 00:12
The power of words
The Nautical Institute’s publications
Bridget Hogan
Publisher
In this article, the Institute’s new Publisher
gives an overview of the vital and dynamic
relationship between the Institute, its
books and readers.
eafarers are a garrulous lot and
S
generous too, always eager to
share experiences and best
practice. So it wasn’t long into
the history of The Nautical Institute that
books started to appear documenting ways
of getting the job done properly.
Go to an Institute-run event, be it a
branch meeting or a large conference, and
you can be sure that the conversation will
turn to the quality of the training that
seafarers serving today receive –
particularly officers.
To further enhance that training and
the understanding of nautical disciplines,
the Institute has long published books.
Many of these have become the de facto
industry standard – titles like Bulk
Carrier Practice, The Shiphandler’s
Guide, Tug Use in Port, The Mariner’s
Role in Collecting Evidence and The
Shipmaster’s Business Companion.
It has been suggested that the primary
function of professional associations is to
support training, encourage members to
gain qualifications and provide help to
keep them up to date of current knowledge
and experiences. Indeed, the principal
objective of the NI, when it was formally
constituted in 1972, was ‘to promote high
standards of knowledge, competence and
qualification amongst those in control of
seagoing craft’.
What better way than with
publications? Through this process
employers gain value by employing
Seaways January 2009
Page 1
competent people, while individuals add to
their value by demonstrating they have
met professional standards and are willing
to keep themselves informed of current
affairs through continuing professional
development. And the Institute benefits
by embracing the commitment of those
who wish to contribute to the development
of their discipline.
The aim is to keep the titles as relevant
as possible although some 300 titles have
been published over the last 30 years, only
about 100 are in circulation at any time.
There is constant review of material and
the need to keep editions up to date.
The Nautical Institute aims to provide,
through its publications, valuable,
essential advice and resources for today’s
maritime professional. There are some 200
publishers of any size with maritime
publications circulating in the industry,
although this narrows to about 30 when
looking at those that might be in direct
competition with the material produced by
the Institute. In fact, we try not to compete
too closely with others as the market is
small to begin with. Our interest is in the
supply of books that are not out there now
– to fill any gaps that might exist.
In addition, the principal criterion is
that the active seafarer should be
prioritised. Sometimes a book is published
that may seem similar to another on the
market: the difference is that our
publications tend to be more practical in
approach, whereas other publishers may
be aiming at different sectors: shipbuilders
or naval architects, for instance.
This has been true since the beginnings
of the NI publishing venture in 1980, when
the-then Secretary of the Institute, Julian
Parker, drove through this new approach.
He summed up the aim of the publishing
arm as presenting information in a way
that was ‘more acceptable to the
practitioner’. He said it should promote
new knowledge and take opportunities to
publish material which transcended
existing boundaries.
There are several NI books that fit into
these categories, including The Nautical
Institute on Command, The Ship
Handler’s Guide, the Maritime Futures
series and The Mariner’s Role in
Collecting Evidence. This approach is still
valid today.
So many ideas
After 30 years, the Institute has acquired a
considerable amount of valuable material,
some of which now needs updating, but
which will still be useful to trainee officers
and surveyors. It is a continuing task to
identify which books are suitable for new
editions and who could be an author for
them, should the original one not wish to
take on the task of revision.
At the same time the scope for
generating new titles is considerable.
There is a constant stream of ideas – the
publisher receives new suggestions almost
daily. This is hugely encouraging. There
is a thirst for knowledge – particularly
from NI members.
It might be instructive to explain how
the process of book publishing is dealt with
by the Institute from the time a book is
first considered to publication. Ideas come
The industry’s choice
The international shipping group
Exmar Shipmanagement has
selected the following NI books
for its mandatory shipboard
libraries:
● Bridge Watchkeeping
● The Mariner's Role in
Collecting Evidence
● Bridge Team Management
● Integrating Bridge Systems
vol 1 : Radar and AIS
● Maritime Security
● The Mariner's Guide to
Marine Insurance
Non-mandatory Library
● Watchkeeping Safety and
Cargo Management in Port
● Managing Risk in Shipping
● The Shiphandler's Guide
5
p 5-8 The Power of Words 19/12/08 00:12
in a number of ways. Sometimes it is
obvious that new regulations from the IMO
or an industry authority will need
interpretation in a practical way so that
those that actually have to work it out in
everyday operations understand any new
role or changes brought about.
An example of this is Cracking the
Code, by various authors under the overall
direction of former President Dr Phil
Anderson, designed to be the most
comprehensive survey into the
International Safety Management (ISM)
Code. It was a timely volume that provided
insight, understanding and the tools to
really make a difference. It became
essential reading for those responsible for
safety management in shipping – ashore
and afloat – and showed how good safety
management is good for business.
The NI theme that safety habits can be
developed through training and awareness
was clearly central to the development of
this book.
Sometimes it is industry trends that
might prompt an idea – whether this comes
from inside the NI, from committees,
branches or individual members or from
external sources. Then the publisher has a
lively correspondence with many people
who are generous with their ideas.
The innovatory Maritime Futures
series would fit into this category of
industry trends. The series is being
developed with the idea of getting ahead of
The instructor’s
choice
Captain Marc Van der Voort MNI,
former instructor of the River
Scheldt Pilots; captain/instructor
on tall-ship square riggers; and
instructor at the Antwerp
Maritime Academy uses the
following NI books in his courses:
● Pilotage and Shiphandling
● Marine Pilot Safety
● Tug Use in Port
● Bridge Team Management
● Ship Bridge Simulators
● Manoeuvring Single Screw
Vessels fitted with
Controllable Pitch Propellers
in Confined Waters
● Squat Interaction
Manoeuvring
● Square Rig Seamanship
● Square Rig Handbook
6
Page 2
Feature
changes in the industry and informing
mariners about what they can expect to
deal with. The most recent of these was
Radar and AIS – volume one in the
Integrated Bridge Systems series.
Written by Dr Andy Norris this, with its
companion volume on positioning, provides
a comprehensive look at recent and future
developments in this important area. As
Captain Rob McCabe, Vice-President of the
NI, said at the book’s launch: ‘What we are
trying to do is dispel the mystique which
has surrounded the navigator’s craft and
open awareness of new ways of working.’
These new ways have to be explained so
that operators can understand them.
Readable presentation is essential.
Once an idea has been proposed, it is
discussed internally within the NI and,
especially if it is very technical or
specialist, externally with others in the
membership or industry. If there is
agreement that the topic is valid, work
then has to be undertaken to ensure it is
viable commercially. However, there have
been instances where the Institute has
considered a publication so essential that
it has gone ahead, even though it was felt
to have a limited appeal. As electronic
publishing gains ground, it is likely that
some of these decisions will be easier to
make in the future.
Most of the books do have wide appeal,
however, and the decision to proceed is
easy, once it is known for sure that the NI
will not be duplicating existing
publications. The remit for publications is
that they need to be educational in nature,
so this has to be considered too.
The right author
Once a subject is declared to be of interest,
the next stage is to find a suitable author.
Sometimes this is straightforward –
whoever has put forward the idea may be
willing to write it too. Sometimes this isn’t
the case and so the search is on. Since our
books have a good reputation, there are
many people who are willing to consider
adding to the portfolio.
The writing stage can take anything up
to two years, and sometimes longer in the
case of very large books. Even slim
volumes can be exacting – and most
authors are working full time in the
industry too. The dedication of NI authors
is second to none and once the copy is
returned to NI HQ, another process starts.
This is the refereeing. While the book is
underway, a list of experts on the topic is
drawn up and they are contacted to see if
they will help review the work.
Let’s take an example of a recent book
– Managing Collision Avoidance at Sea
by Julian Parker and Captain Gilbert Lee.
It examines the ways watchkeeping
officers make decisions. Although there
were some who might have felt that the
subject was already well documented, and
that effective training programmes were in
existence throughout the world, the
authors detected the need for more work
on the topic. Several industry
representatives thought there was anxiety
and sometimes confusion on the bridge,
which needed to be addressed.
When the first draft of the book went
out to a group of referees, action was
taken on their recommendations. The
consensus was for a simpler book than
that originally presented. The
recommendation was to deal with
principles and practice, which in turn
meant restructuring and rewriting it in
what was thought a more logical way.
There were many useful comments and the
authors made every effort to include them
in the new format.
Some books deal with specific areas of
training and professional development.
Examples of these are legion, from The
Shipmaster’s Business Companion by
Captain Malcolm Maclachlan to The DP
Operator’s Handbook by David Bray.
The Shipmaster’s Business
Companion is now recognised as a major
reference work and is recommended by the
UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency
(MCA). The author is energetic in keeping
the work up to date, including feedback
from his students, based on questions they
are asked in exams.
Even though it is not written as a legal
textbook, lawyers find the book useful –
and this is another illustration of the wide
appeal of NI publications. Many find their
way into the offices of people who might
not have been considered as readers in the
first instance.
The DP Operator’s Handbook fulfils
another function. This is not to replace
specific manuals or company instructions
– indeed, it is not a beginner’s book at all –
but it offers help with operational
functions, bridge management and the
correct ways to setup, monitor and test
equipment. It takes into account the
growing importance of DP outside the
offshore industry, bringing in dredging
vessels and cruise ships too.
Then there are the major reference
works. One example Ship Survey and
Audit Companion by Walter Verloesem.
When this manuscript was evaluated by
two independent marine surveyors, they
both remarked on how useful the book
Seaways January 2009
p 5-8 The Power of Words 19/12/08 00:12
What the reviewers
say…
‘Professional congratulations to
The Nautical Institute, which has
commissioned a series of
instructional books on integrated
bridge systems in an effort to
demystify them and build bridges
between designers and users’:
Lloyd’s List on Radar and AIS,
July 2008
‘Published to the usual very high
standard of Nautical Institute
texts’: Ships and Shipping, on
Tug Use Offshore, November
2008
‘It is, like most Nautical Institute
publications, a “must read” for
anyone responsible for ships
anywhere’: Work Boat World
on The Mariner’s Role in
Collecting Evidence November
2008
‘The whole book is written with a
broad experience and is
knowledge sharing on every
page… If you get involved with
DP operations: very much worth
reading’: The Art of Dredging on
DP Operator’s Handbook,
October, 2008
‘It is to be hoped that Gary
Ritchie’s book will provide a
valuable aid for safer operations
in this sector’: Nautilus UK
Telegraph on Offshore Supply
Vessels, June 2008
‘Well regarded work’: Ships and
Shipping on The Mariner’s
Guide to Marine
Communications, March 2008
‘A very valuable work that
should be read and very carefully
digested by all who go to sea’:
Ausmarine on Managing
Collision Avoidance at Sea,
April 2008
‘Timely and eminently practical’:
Fairplay on Managing
Collision Avoidance at Sea
Seaways January 2009
Page 3
Feature
‘Another excellent and timely
publication from the prolific and
very sound Nautical Institute’:
Ships and Shipping on
Maritime Security, August 2008
‘It can be taken as read that
anything published by the NI will
be first class’: Ausmarine on The
Naval Handbook for Survivors,
January 2008
‘I recommend Safety
Management and its Maritime
Application to safety
professionals and those
responsible for safety within the
organisation. It is a good
reference for teaching and
calculating safety risk’: Jerry
Aspland, ex President of the
California Maritime Academy,
in SNAME News
‘Clearly structured and easily
understandable, this volume
should prove useful to both
students being introduced to the
subject for the first time, and
experienced operators seeking
greater awareness of
complementary processes’: The
Naval Architect on Safety
Management and its Maritime
Application, October 2007
‘Accessible, informative and
memorably presented, the book is
both authoritative and eminently
useable at all levels of the
industry’ International Tug and
Salvage on Safety Management
and its Maritime Application,
September/October 2007
‘The 10th edition of Principles of
Navigation Vol 1 should be read
by everyone connected with the
shipping industry: charters,
brokers, insurance and P&I
people. It will provide an insight
into what really goes on when a
cargo is transported from A to B
by ship: Fairplay December 2008.
would have been to them when starting
out. Now the NI has made available to
aspiring surveyors extensive examples of
checklists, covering all aspects of ship
conditions, to ensure that items are not
overlooked by busy surveyors.
The author makes painstaking efforts
to convey to others, setting out his
accumulated experience and wisdom
gained from surveying ships and cargo, to
explain precisely what to look for to
establish the actual condition at the time.
Its appeal is wide, as is so often the case
with the NI’s practical works: it is also
useful to sea staff, who can use it to make
sure that all relevant maintenance and
management is carried out, thus earning a
clean bill of health from surveyors.
In command
The authoritative Command series of
books were born out of the NI’s Command
seminars and these continue to have an
enduring popularity, long after the
seminars have finished. Each seminar is
organised with local branches and the
value of this worldwide network of
maritime professionals with the vision and
energy to engage actively in the Institute’s
work cannot be overemphasised. Thanks
to this kind of input, the NI’s Command
series will continue to have the freshest
and most relevant contributions from a
wide representation of the industry.
Four years ago the Institute was
awarded the contract to publish eight of
the Royal Navy’s navigation and
seamanship reference titles – another of
Julian Parker’s major achievements. Both
of the Navigation Manuals have now
been published by the NI and this year
(2009) will see publication of another
major volume, on Seamanship.
For the future there are exciting
possibilities for reaching out to those who
are interested in our publications in a
variety of ways that are not restricted to
the printed word. We have already looked
at digital delivery of our works and have
developed DVDs for a number of titles.
So far, the market seems to favour the
printed word, but the market is changing
rapidly and the Institute, together with
other major maritime publishers is at the
forefront of developing new delivery
methods and industry standards.
7
p 5-8 The Power of Words 19/12/08 00:12
The Sweden Branch
promotes NI books
An initiative by the Sweden Branch saw a
variety of the Institute’s books exhibited at
Sweden’s largest book fair, in Gothenburg.
The initiative was led by Captain Jeanette
Nihlén MNI, a branch steering committee
member, who was keen to target those
attending who had an interest in marine.
Part of the exhibition included an area
given over to shipping literature and
magazines under the banner
‘Sjöfartsmontern’. Jeanette took the
opportunity to make a presentation about
the Insititute to students, mariners,
lecturers and others who were visiting the
book fair. She arranged for the book fair
organisers to display representative books
from the Publications List.
The NI contribution was part of a
showcase sponsored, by the Sjöfartens
Kultur Sällskap, the Swedish Shipping
Culture Society. Jeanette’s slot was an
hour on the stand on Saturday at noon.
She gathered a number of interested
people round her and used the opportunity
to give a summary of the NI, its purpose
and activities, introducing Seaways, the
Alert! bulletin and then the other
publications, with 12 books chosen to
illustrate the Institute’s work in promoting
leadership, seamanship, safety and
security, the human element and
management. ‘These are good examples of
8
Page 4
what the NI stands for,’ Jeanette said.
Particular attention was paid to titles such
as Leadership Throughout by Richard
Jeffery and Richard Cahill’s series on
strandings, collisions and disasters, ‘still
very much in the news these days,’
observed Jeanette. Another book that drew
attention was Managing Collision
Avoidance at Sea by Gilbert Lee and
Julian Parker.
There was lively interest in the books
afterwards from a number of companies
including Breakwater Publishing,
Scandinavian Shipping Gazette, GVA
Consultants Offshore, Högskolan Väst
University, Callenberg Engineering, Stena
Bulk, Jure Sjofart, freelance journalists
and some old friends. The book fair itself
was a success, with over 101,000 visitors.
About 950 exhibitors were represented at
the exhibition, together with nearly 790
writers and lecturers from some 20
countries.
The NI books were displayed over two
days and attracted a lot of attention: one
visitor even asked to buy them all
immediately. Publication lists and
membership applications were distributed,
too. ‘I hope this event will show we have
the publications to help the transition from
officer graduation into further career
development,’ Jeanette said.
For your diaries
2009 January
(20) UK, North of Scotland Branch, Shell
Woodbank, Aberdeen, Ladies Night;
Tel: 01339 741285 email:
jeff.gaskin@orange.net
(20) UK, SW England Branch - Royal Plymouth
Corinthian Yacht Club, Plymouth, Evening
Meeting - Simulation to Improve Maritime
Safety; Tel: 01752 232466
email: pwright@plymouth.ac.uk
2009 February
(10-11) Finland, Naantali Spa Hotel, Turku,
Mayday Mayday Mayday - Maritime Search
and Rescue; Tel: +358 2 281 3328
email: paivi.soderholm@utu.fi
(17) UK, North of Scotland Branch, Marine
Operations Centre, North Pier, Aberdeen,
Evening Meeting - Aberdeen Harbour -
future plans and developments; Tel: 01339
741285 email: jeff.gaskin@orange.net
(25-26) UK, RINA, 10 Upper Belgrave Street,
London, SW1X 8BQ, Human Factors in Ship
Design and Operation; Tel: +44(0) 20 7235
4622 email: conference@rina.org.uk
(25-26) Greece, Athens, The Ship
Management Conference; Tel: +44 (0) 207
981 2503 email: jkorfanty@acius.net
2009 March
(07) UK, North of Scotland Branch, Mariners
Dinner Dance; Tel: 01339 741285
email: jeff.gaskin@orange.net
2009 April
(21) UK, North of Scotland Branch, Shell
Woodbank, Aberdeen, Evening Meeting -
Four Scotia’s 100 years of service to
science; Tel: 01339 741285
email: jeff.gaskin@orange.net
2009 May
(19) UK, North of Scotland Branch, Shell
Woodbank, Aberdeen, Annual General
Meeting; Tel: 01339 741285
email: jeff.gaskin@orange.net
(19-20) The Netherlands, Amsterdam Hilton
Hotel, Tugnology '09; Tel: +44 (0)1225
868821 email: tugnology@tugandsalvage.com
2009 June
(17-19) Poland, Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia
Maritime University, Poland, TRANSNAV 2009
- Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea
Transportation; email: transnav@am.gdynia.pl
(30-01) UK, Liverpool, 2nd European Short
Sea Congress; Tel: +44 20 7369 1656
email: enquiries@navigateevents.com
Seaways January 2009
p 9-12 MarNIS 19/12/08 00:13 Page 1

Integrating maritime
navigation in Europe
MarNIS: Maritime Navigation Information Services

Cas Willens Strategic objectives

Project Manager ■ Better observation of all rules and a
better follow-up of the maritime traffic,
DVS Centre for Transport and Navigation through:
The Netherlands ● Screening all elements and data
required from a ship while it is still
navigating towards the port.
MarNIS is a European Commission (EC) integrated research Communication by the ship to the relevant
office onshore of all the required data for
project, bringing together a wide spectrum of 50
the application of ISM, ISPS, ILO and other
experienced partners to develop maritime navigation and codes and conventions, plus customs,
information services on a pan–European basis. health, immigration and identity rules and
At its heart is the creation of an information exchange certificates of competence checks;
● Enhanced use of tracking technology,
structure. Coherence, transparency and efficiency will be such as AIS, to improve the efficiency of
provided through simplifying of reporting requirements traffic monitoring and control of
and improving interoperability between different members’ operations, allowing the provision of better
services such as emergency tugs, oil
state and private systems. pollution combating vessels, salvage
There are certain phrases that crop up throughout the capabilities and assistance in allocating
project’s documentation: early reporting; buying time; a ships to safe havens. This will enable
neighbouring countries to share maritime-
no-blame culture; reporting once to authorities; reducing
control public services resources better,
risks; reducing the administrative burden; improving and even pool control efforts;
safety; improving the efficiency of remedial services: these ● Developing proposals for the
standardisation and harmonisation of a
are key to the concept of MarNIS.
European network for the safety and
routeing of ships at sea, maritime weather
information. Additionally, updating ships’
he objectives of maritime safety, waters and the facilitation of trade through

T efficiency, security and protection

of the environment
inextricably linked. The EC has
identified ways to promote these in a green
paper, ‘Towards a future maritime policy
are
for the Union’, including the provision of
coherent, transparent, efficient and
simplified solutions to support cooperation,
interoperability and consistency between
member states, systems and sectors.
To put this in context, 90 per cent of the
European Union’s (EU) external trade and
more than 40 per cent of internal trade is
transported by sea, while Europe has 40
per cent of the world fleet. This
emphasises the importance of the
continued efficiency of ports, the effective
management of vessel traffic in coastal
Seaways January 2009
cooperation and harmonisation.
The EC is promoting E-Maritime, a
grouping of services and systems within
the maritime sector. It is intended to
improve the exchange of information and
services and to provide the infrastructure
to meet the requirements of ship- and
shore-based stakeholders: owners,
operators, mariners, agents, maritime
authorities – including search and rescue,
coastal and port-related activities, like
customs and immigration, and commercial
parties within the port sector. Its aim is to
secure Europe’s position as a leading
player in international transport modes.
MarNIS is an EC co-funded sixth
Framework project within E-Maritime.
electronic navigation charts and other
shore-to-ship services using modern
telecommunications means providing
timely corrections when required.
■ Better management of the ship, its
cargo and crew, through:
● Allowing for the use of two-way
communication (ship to shore and vice
versa) to enable better preparation of
unloading-loading operations, planning
transport logistics, supplies to the ship,
crew change, etc.
Automatic updates
MarNIS will result in a system in which the
master will be required to report only
once, all other updates being fed
automatically into the information
9
p 9-12 MarNIS 19/12/08 00:13 Page 2
messaging structure and passed on to the
relevant authorities. Early reporting leads
to improved planning for ports and related
nautical services, through enhanced traffic
organisation services and the integral
traffic plan. A messaging structure
designed to involve all authorities, not only
maritime, is under development so that the
passage of a ship may be as safe, efficient
and environmentally sound as possible.
Through an innovative use of resources
and technologies, shore-based operators
will be able to monitor and provide the
appropriate level of assistance wherever
the ship may be located in the coastal
waters, shifting the emphasis from
remedial to proactive services. With the
identification of high-risk vessels,
appropriate measures may be taken in
order to relieve the threat to the coastline
and oceans.
Information exchange
At the heart of the MarNIS concept is the
information and information exchange
structure. As previously outlined, all
processes can begin from the single report
from the master and/or agent.
■ Vessel and agent: Under current
regulations, the master is faced with a
tremendous reporting burden, often having
to send the same information on numerous
occasions to numerous different
authorities. In MarNIS, the master is
required to report once through the port
notification to the destination port or
anchorage. All relevant authorities and
services are then provided with the
information they require through the
National Single Window (NSW).
▲ The VTS centre of the Port of Lisbon gave technical support to the MarNIS demonstrator and the trials with
the MarNIS portable pilot unit (POADSS).
10
Feature
■ Authorities: There are many
authorities that require information, from
port, coastal, search and rescue and
pollution to security, customs,
immigration, health and border control.
Each currently makes use of its own
system of maritime information
management and would benefit from
increased access to data and inter-
operability that MarNIS will provide.
SafeSeaNet++ (SSN++) MarNIS
envisages an expansion and strengthening
of the role of the SafeSeaNet reporting
system (SSN) into SSN++, providing a
more efficient service leading to added
value by notifying coastal authorities about
ships likely to pass through their areas of
jurisdiction as well as consolidating
reports to all authorities. Connections to
the NSW and the SSN++ core, as the
central server system, will consist of an
European Index Server (EIS), request and
response (R and R) server, voyage plan
server, AIS repository, long range
identification and tracking (LRIT)
database, retrieval of information and
SITREPS (situation reports) on lost
containers, ongoing SAR operations and
update of estimated time of arrival (ETA)
messages. In addition to dedicated
databases SSN++ will also have access to
reference databases such as Equasis. The
SSN++ portal consists of the NSW as the
gateway for users to provide and receive
the information.
NSW and SafeSeaNet++
At the heart of the MarNIS concept is the
creation of a national single window
(NSW) for electronically storing and
distributing details of transiting vessels on
the basis of once only reporting and state
of the art tracking technology. These are
then available for vessel traffic
management and port entry, as well as
pollution control and search and rescue.
Customs, immigration and security
authorities could also have access to the
information.
Once a notification from the master
and/or agent is transferred to the NSW, all
required processes can begin. The master
and/or agent is required to report each
data element only once.
The NSW will process and redistribute
the obtained information to the relevant
authorities and the enhanced SafeSeaNet
(SSN++) will have an extended role as
request and response server and provider
of more operational and reference
information for the users.
MOS Centre
Maritime Operational Services Centre
(MOS) is a new concept, designed to provide
routine, enforcement, preventive and
remedial services in the search and rescue
area and provision of response services.
MOS combines services such as SAR,
VTS, enforcement, oil pollution response,
risk determination and maritime
assistance services (MAS). MOS will
improve the effectiveness of these
services and consequently their safety,
with operators sharing the same
information and equipment and
cooperating in performing their tasks; the
‘under one roof’ principle.
MarNIS has defined and is promoting
the flag state remote support service: the
flag state provides support when a ship is
in need of assistance outside EC waters
and when there is a threat to the marine
environment. The most important benefit
from the remote support concept is the
anticipated ability to limit marine pollution
in relation to accidents at sea, by providing
rapid advice to those onboard, and by
decreasing the time-span between accident
and external mitigation.
The enhanced traffic image in a MOS
centre is integrated, using and sharing not
only different information sources such as
the LRIT data, but also satellite-based
information systems like synthetic
aperture radar for ship and spill detection
and Space-AIS. Web mapping services can
be used as an overlay on the traffic image
of a MOS centre to present real-time
meteorological and hydrological data, oil
spills and information from drift
simulation models, or the risk values of the
MarNIS risk calculations.
Seaways January 2009
p 9-12 MarNIS 19/12/08 00:13 Page 3
Alert ships. The EC project Embarc,
under the fifth Framework programme,
found that 20 per cent of ships account for
67 per cent of the risks. If those 20 per cent
could be identified, they could be
monitored in order to reduce the threat
they may pose. MarNIS has developed a
very useful pro-active tool to identify this
category of vessels, the ‘alert ships’. The
principle of an ‘alert ship’ is to notify a
MOS operator that a vessel has exceeded a
threshold in risk.
The risk is calculated on the basis of a
set of parameters such as the state of the
vessel, its age, the cargo, the number of
crew and passengers and the
meteorological conditions, as well as the
position of the vessel relative to the coast.
In case of an alert value larger than a
predefined threshold, the MOS operator is
alerted and the vessel can be designated
by the competent authority to become a
high-risk ship for special measures.
Voyage plan server. MarNIS has also
developed a voyage plan server, which can
predict the voyage plan of a ship based on
the port of departure and the port of
destination, from the port departure
notification. Based on the ship type and
ship size, the probable route will be
determined, combined with the positions of
the crossing points where the ship will
enter or leave a MOS area and the
expected times of passing. Thus, the
server delivers a list of expected time of
passing for each adjacent MOS area.
Within this perspective the voyage
server can be used by a MOS for
intervening in case of high risk; for
example to prescribe a minimum distance
from the coast.
Calculated time of arrival (CTA server).
There is a huge potential for using the
extended weather forecasts in combination
with the actual conditions for a specific ship
and a specific voyage. MarNIS wants to
prove that a so-called ‘CTA server’ (CTA=
calculated time of arrival) would be
beneficial for the maritime community. The
basic idea is to give all ships access to a
reliable tool for visualising the weather
forecast and accurate expected time of
arrival (ETA) calculations. The CTA server
is a proactive system that could alert the
master to events in respect to weather and
give accurate calculations based on an
intelligent mixture of the best possible
METOC information from shore and the
master’s best experience on how to handle
the ship in bad weather.
Seaways January 2009
Feature
Vessel traffic management
Harbour masters and port authorities of
medium size and smaller ports face a
growing administrative burden: increasing
traffic and business, and a society that
demands transparent policy and
responsible decision-making.
In order to support their self-
assessment of needs for traffic measures
and provide a risk assessment for
maritime safety in their area, a port
assessment toolkit has been developed as
part of MarNIS. This is built up in four
modules. The first consists of a
sophisticated checklist, providing an
overview report of the port area in all its
aspects and relevant parameters. A second
module will help to execute a risk
assessment. Then, based on defined risk
control options the third module provides
strategic advice. A fourth module will
execute a quantitative risk assessment,
followed by a cost benefit analysis,
providing an opportunity to assess
investments in VTM and safety measures
versus the ‘costs’ of maritime accidents
and incidents.
MarNIS has also developed a new
generation of portable pilot unit, the port
operations and approach decision support
system (POADSS). POADSS is designed for
vessels whose dimensions reach the
maximum limits of the minimum
dimensions of the fairway. POADSS has
three-dimensional position information
and is to be used in conjunction with a
dynamic under-keel clearance model
(DUKC). This model determines and
predicts the dynamic under-keel clearance
during the passage by using parameters of
the particular vessel and meteorological,
wave, tide, current and water density data
for the specific area.
By using the POADSS, the maximum
draught could be considerably increased
and/or tidal windows widened, without
▲ The core elements of MarNIS architecture
compromising the safety of the vessel or
the safety and efficiency of other traffic.
The commercial benefits of the
introduction of this method of dynamic
passage planning for the shipping industry
in general are evident.
Functional architecture
The maritime sector includes many
parties, including national authorities, port
authorities, vessel owners, masters and
other mariners and providers of nautical
services. Safety, efficiency and
environmental protection depend to a large
extend on interaction between these
parties across national and organisational
borders.
The MarNIS framework architecture
describes generic solutions, which can be
used in all maritime areas of Europe. The
functional architecture does not depend on
the actual organisation of all maritime
stakeholders, as this may vary in different
regions, countries and ports. Rather, it
focuses on the core responsibilities that
have to be handled everywhere, due to
international agreements and regulations.
The architecture combines responsibilities
into generic roles that can be played by
different stakeholders and organisations.
It specifies the maritime processes and the
generic tasks executed by these roles and
the working procedures involving
interactions between roles.
Overall the MarNIS project addresses
practices and solutions for the year 2012
and beyond. New international agree-
ments, rules and regulations are proposed
in the project, and the adoption of new
technology is foreseen. However, the
responsibilities of the stakeholders will
remain even as the changed premises
enable new solutions and practices. The
MarNIS architecture will enable the new
solutions and benefits, leading us to the
basis of the MarNIS concept.
11
p 9-12 MarNIS 19/12/08 00:13 Page 4

MarNIS delivery:
a progress report
MarNIS had its first full
demonstration in Genoa, Italy, 23 to
25 September 2008, where the
complete MarNIS concept was
presented, followed by another in
Lisbon in October that management
focused on ports.
The aim was to present the main
findings from the project,
demonstrating not only the individual
elements but emphasising the
interaction and interoperability of the
Maritime Information Management
(MIM) and Maritime Operational
Services (MOS) concepts. We wanted
to provide the audience with a
complete picture of what MarNIS
could mean for maritime authorities
and administrations, as well as the
▲ Two MOS operators on stage in Genoa during one of the scenario-demonstrators
shipping community at large, in the
years 2012-2020, with particular
Directives but also with respect to cooperation with IMO, IALA and
focus on maritime safety, efficiency
consultation with bodies such as IMO; e-Navigation.
and protection of the environment.
● The need for participants to go Further to the demonstration,
Participants ranged from
back to their member states and several research reports are due to
representatives of DGTREN (the EC
promote and encourage MarNIS be submitted to the EC as formal
directorate responsibly for
within their own administrations, as deliverables. Related to this, reports
transport); maritime administrations
being part of the overall goal of E- are being drafted on policy
(coastal and port) of various member
Maritime; recommendations, legal implications
states, at both policy and operational
● The results of MarNIS have and a proposal for an implementation
level; professional organisations
consequences beyond the EU and plan.
representing specific groups such as
were considered as of utmost Liaison between the MarNIS
harbour masters, shipmasters, pilots
relevance to international initiatives
etc; representatives from project IMO e-Navigation and IALA
such as e-Navigation.
international organisations and from initiatives are currently underway.
It was emphasised that the EU
other European projects and It is considered that certain
cannot, and should not, go forward
initiatives. aspects of MarNIS can complement
alone in further developments of
the work of the IMO on a global
MarNIS: due attention has to be paid
Preliminary conclusions to the IMO if much of what MarNIS is
approach for the development of e-
The participants were enthusiastic Navigation.
proposing is to be successful in
about the message and content of the achieving international recognition Cas Willens
programme. It was notable that the ■ There are 46 partners in the
and, importantly, not creating conflict
representatives of DGTREN all with initiatives in other areas of the MarNIS project, ranging from the UK
considered MarNIS not just a step in world, so that shipping is not Maritime and Coastguard Agency and
the right direction but worthy of confronted with different and varying Swedish and Norwegian maritime
support in the coming period with solutions. [■ See also pp13-15: Editor] administrations to organisations such
respect to implementation. There are Of particular note was the value as the Port of Rotterdam, University
a number of issues that stood out: attached to the architecture as of Strathclyde, QinetiQ, Kongsberg
● The need to further address the developed in MarNIS: it was agreed and Transas. For a full list and more
legislation, not only in terms of that this be progressed and promoted information about MarNIS, go to
reporting requirements in current EU on a wider stage, including www.marnis.org/home.asp

Seaways January 2009

12
p13-16 When law conflicts 19/12/08 11:21
When laws conflict…
what do you do?
Dr Aleka Sheppard
Director, London
Shipping Law Centre
Sir Michael Wood
Barrister
What do you do when faced with two
apparently conflicting laws? Which law
should apply? Who should make the law
in a complex, global industry and how
should it be implemented effectively?
What should be the relationship between
regulations and rules at international level
and those adopted regionally? Which law
should apply when there is conflict
between international treaties and regional
laws? Which courts or tribunals would
have competent jurisdiction to decide
disputes? How should differences
between court decisions be reconciled to
enhance certainty in the law?
These questions are becoming
increasingly important for the shipping
industry as legislation enacted and
supported by nation states, groups of
states and multistate organisations
inevitably produces uncertainty, a lack of
harmonisation and conflict of laws.
The issues arising were addressed at
the 10th Cadwallader Memorial Lecture,
organised by the London Shipping Law
Centre at IMO headquarters in London in
October 2008.
The Centre’s Founding Director, Dr
Aleka Mandaraka Sheppard, posed a
series of key questions to 500 delegates
from the shipping industry and the legal
and other marine professions. This article
features one of the responses, from Sir
Michael Wood a barrister at 20 Essex
Street Chambers and Senior Fellow,
Lauterpacht Centre for International Law,
Cambridge.
Seaways January 2009
Page 1
e may ask, but perhaps not
W
be able to answer, all of the
following questions:
● Who are the lawmakers in this complex,
global industry?
● How can the law be effectively
implemented?
● What is the relationship between
regulations and rules at international level
and those adopted regionally?
● Which law should apply when there is a
conflict between international treaties and
regional laws?
● Which courts or tribunals would have
competent jurisdiction to decide a dispute?
● Supposing the court or tribunal gets it
wrong, what then? Which court should
determine the issue definitively? Does such
a court exist?’
Two areas underpin the subject for our
debate: legal certainty and harmonisation
of law.
First and foremost, we need an agreed
set of coherent rules applicable to cross-
border international shipping. No one
would dispute that legal certainty is
essential to the delivery of justice; but it is
equally important that the right balance
must be struck.
Such logic can be traced back, even to
the classical period of Athens. When the
Athenians were considering how to punish
a rebellious ally, it was debated, in the
Assembly, whether or not to uphold an old
rigid law for the sake of legal certainty;
this provided punishment by killing, and
would result in the slaughter of the entire
male population of the ally. However,
common sense prevailed; the Athenian
legislators looked at the big picture for
Athens’ benefit and changed the harsh law.
Insisting on a rigid application of law,
irrespective of effect, is tantamount to
looking at laws through narrow lenses. For
legal rules to work, account must be taken
of the context in which they are
implemented. For example, the EU
Directive on Ship-Source Pollution
conflicts with the context of international
law.
This is compounded by the recent,
equivocal, decision of the European Court
of Justice (ECJ), on questions referred to it
by the English High Court. The ECJ
decided it could not assess the validity of
the Directive in relation to Marpol, because
the European Community is not a party to
Marpol – notwithstanding that its members
are. Having reached that decision, the ECJ,
nevertheless, proceeded to interpret the
term, ‘serious negligence’, in Article 4 of
the Directive, as a ‘patent breach of the
duty of care’. This test is still lower than
the test provided by Marpol.
Such law is hardly consistent with legal
certainty and it does not assist the
development of coherent rules, since EU
members will, inevitably, be bound by two
conflicting laws, the EU Directive and
Marpol: which law should apply?
By analogy to the Athenian example,
would enforcement of this Directive not
result in the ‘slaughter’ of the seafaring
profession? Let us shift our focus to the big
picture when making laws.
As to harmonisation, it aims at a
consistent body of law through the
establishment of common standards
across national borders. In shipping, such
a body broadly exists.
Provided there is no conflict between
regional and international legislation,
governments should implement
international conventions and principles.
Only then can the law be enforced
consistently for ship safety and
environmental protection as well as fair
compensation to victims of accidents. Only
then would we know which law should
apply.
Close cooperation between regional
legislators and the IMO is imperative for
the exchange of knowledge in order to
achieve uniformity of maritime law.
Aleka Sheppard
■ Michael Wood comments: ‘The
subject matter for this debate seems to put
the spotlight on the IMO. Is it really as
effective as we like to believe? If it is, why
do states, why in particular does the EU,
sometimes feel the need to go further and
13
p13-16 When law conflicts 19/12/08 11:21
faster? Is it ‘just’ a problem of uneven,
even inadequate enforcement by flag
states? Would the relationship be easier if
the EU were a member of IMO? Would all
have been well in Intertanko if the
Community had been a party to Marpol?
Before offering some comments on
questions relating to courts and tribunals,
I want to answer the general question
about conflicting laws. The answer, it
seems to me, is rather straightforward, at
least from a lawyer’s perspective. You
must obey all of the law, under whatever
legal system it may be, that is applicable to
you. This may be one or more domestic
legal systems, EU law, as well as any
public international law that is applicable
directly or through one or more domestic
legal systems. Where it is not possible to
do so (and I believe such cases are likely to
be rare), the problem is essentially a
political one, to be solved through political
channels.
It is in the nature of the shipping
business that it is constantly falling under
different legal systems. But it is not unique
in this respect. The same is true of almost
any large business activity in today’s
world. Each legal system will have its own
dispute settlement mechanisms, typically
the courts, which will work more or less
well. And most legal systems have a
supreme court or courts that keep the legal
system in order, as it were. That is true of
national legal systems, such as the law of
England and Wales. It is true of EU law. It
is not true of public international law,
except in limited cases, such as the World
Trade Organisation.
Useful proliferation
In the modern international law of the sea
we have what is frequently called a
‘proliferation’ of international courts and
tribunals. They only have jurisdiction over
part of the law, and generally only between
states (including for this purpose the
European Community). Proliferation is a
relatively new phenomenon: it really only
took off in the 1990s. Some people profess
to be concerned – dire consequences are
predicted for the coherence of the
international legal system if international
courts come to differing views about the
law. There is no supreme court of
international law, so the law will be forever
fractured. This concern has led some
(including a former President of the
International Court of Justice (ICJ)) to
propose that the International Court in
The Hague should be given an appellate
role. That is unrealistic – states are
unlikely to agree – and, in my view, quite
14
Page 2
Feature
unnecessary. In fact, those who express
concern can point to only one serious
conflict of views, between the ICJ and the
International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia. It concerned the nature
of the control that a state or high state
official had to have over non-state actors
before bearing responsibility for their
wrongful acts. The context was quite
different: state responsibility in the one
case; individual criminal responsibility in
the other.
In my view, the ‘proliferation’ of
international courts and tribunals is a
good thing on balance – and not only for
lawyers. For shipping interests there is the
possibility, in certain circumstances, of
bringing a direct action on the
international plane. Under the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
which now has 157 parties (including the
European Community) shipowners can
have recourse to the International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in
Hamburg, in particular to secure the
prompt release of a ship and its crew.
There have been a number of cases; in the
most recent case, Japan successfully took
action against Russia over the detention of
fishing vessels in the Russian far east. And
businesses may be able to bring actions
under the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR), as well as under
investment protection treaties.
Which court decides?
The short answer to the question about
which court is the court that decides an
issue definitively is: the highest court of
the legal system concerned (where there is
such a court), such as the ECJ for the EU
law. In the case of the public international
law of the sea there is no such court,
though decisions of the ICJ and of ITLOS
are likely to be accorded great weight.
While there is no system of binding
precedent in international law, courts
naturally pay high regard to their own
previous decisions; and I believe there is a
growing sense of mutual judicial respect
among international courts and tribunals.
The main problem is that there is quite
often no court with jurisdiction, and even
more frequently, no state willing to take on
and shoulder the burden of initiating legal
proceedings against another state. The
burden can be a considerable one, both in
political terms and in terms of resources.
International litigation can also take a long
time, and in the meantime the problem
remains unresolved. Litigation may
concentrate the mind and encourage a
solution; but it may have the opposite
effect; hardening positions, and distracting
attention.
And if a court ‘gets it wrong’? That, of
course, is always a risk with any litigation.
And that risk is another factor which states
will weigh before commencing proceedings
– things are likely to be very difficult if a
court gets it wrong. One can always try
again, and persuade the court (or
sometimes another court) to rethink its
position or distinguish the earlier case,
narrowing its effects. At the end of the day,
it may be possible to change the legal
position through legislation; in the
international system, through the adoption
of a new convention. This is what happened
after the World Court’s famous Lotus
judgment in 1927 about jurisdiction, which
was reversed in 1952 by the Brussels
Convention. But such action requires
political will, which is not always present.
EU: hero or villain?
Is the EU the villain of the piece? To some
extent it is, or at least it is widely seen to
be. There seems to be a tendency in
Brussels to react, in haste and without
much reflection, to the latest shipping
disaster – or to seize on the latest incident
to push through proposals that have been
on the stocks for some time, proposals
whose purpose often seems to be to secure
more power for Brussels. There is a
tendency to blame what is seen as an ‘out-
of date’ Law of the Sea Convention for
failure to act ahead of time. There is a
tendency to claim that all wisdom lies in
Brussels and to have little regard to the
rest of the world.
But this is a bit of a caricature. The
Commission, and the European
Parliament, may sometimes be guilty and
their views are obviously very influential.
But it is ultimately the Council of Ministers
that has to approve the proposals in this
field: in other words, the national
governments. And at that level the
pressures to maintain the basic framework
of the international law of the sea are
considerable. Of course, there may be
different views among the 27 member
states as to what the international law of
the sea requires. Not all of them are major
shipping nations; their interests differ.
Pressure groups and public opinion differ.
But perhaps on the whole the EU has,
despite the alarms, not done as badly as its
reputation among law of the sea
community would lead one to suppose.
However, the EU needs to explain its
position better perhaps. I attended a
conference earlier this year in Singapore
where almost all participants, and
Seaways January 2009
p13-16 When law conflicts 19/12/08 11:21
especially the Americans, were attacking
the EU for its assaults upon freedom of
navigation. There were answers to most of
the criticisms: often what was being
attacked were proposals that had not, or
not yet, been adopted. But there was no
one from Brussels to explain themselves.
One recurring theme in Brussels, and
indeed at the IMO, is the inadequacy and
unevenness of enforcement, especially by
some flag states. This is being addressed,
but the problem seems pretty intractable.
That lies behind many of the proposals for
exorbitant port and coastal state
jurisdiction. Another problem is the
slowness of the traditional procedures for
the adoption and entry into force of
international conventions. It can be so
much quicker to adopt Community
legislation. There is considerable force in
these two points.
A third theme in Brussels, as I have
said, is that the 1982 Law of the Sea
Convention, negotiated some 30 years ago,
is outmoded. This is a misguided view. The
balances struck in the package deals of the
1970s have stood the test of time. For the
most part they are flexible and open-ended,
looking forward to the future development
of international rules and standards. The
rules in the Convention can even be
adjusted at the margins through new
agreements and uniform practices. But
these need to go with the grain of the
Convention. Moves to amend the
Convention’s regime for shipping would be
unlikely to succeed or to lead to a better
regime; and we could well see other parts
of the Convention unravel. And unilateral
attempts to change international law in this
field are equally if not more hazardous.
If Europe does what seems good to
Europe, we may quickly find other states
and other regions taking action which
seems good to them but which is gravely
harmful to shipping around the world.
■ The debate was chaired by IMO
Secretary-General Efthimios Mitropoulos
Hon FNI. He reminded his audience that
today shipping was a safe and secure
mode of transport – and this reflected
international cooperation over many years,
with IMO making an invaluable
contribution.
Decisions within the IMO were taken by
consensus, Mr Mitropoulos said ‘if 51 per
cent of nations vote for a measure and 49
per cent against it, it will not work. We
have to have consensus. The shipping
industry has no alternative to creating law
at an international level. The framework
is in place but it needs action at
national level.’
Seaways January 2009
Page 3
Shore-based
pilotage
Karl Bruno and
Margareta Lützhöft
MNI
Human Factors, Shipping
and Marine Technology,
Chalmers University of
Technology, Sweden
When shore-based pilotage is discussed,
there is often a tendency to talk about the
issue only in terms of new technology, as
if piloting ships from the shore were just a
matter of implementing technology that is
powerful enough for the task. Such an
approach is likely to be not only inefficient,
but counterproductive. At heart, piloting is
human work and discussions of
technology are largely irrelevant until the
roles of the humans in the system are
defined.
This article looks at these issues,
taking a recent preliminary study
commissioned by the Swedish Maritime
Administration (SMA) to clarify
definitions, technical and operational
limitations, as a starting point.
hat, exactly, is shore-based
W pilotage? The title is, as we
will see, somewhat mislead-
ing. It seems to imply that it
is the provision of navigational assistance
equal to that normally given by an onboard
pilot, supplied instead from the shore. But
although shore-based pilotage is about
providing navigational assistance from the
shore, it can never be equal to the pilotage
carried out by an onboard pilot, nor can it
replace all normal piloting.
There is no single, clear definition of
shore-based pilotage but one commonly
used comes from the International
Maritime Pilots’ Association and the
European Maritime Pilots’ Association.
This states:
[Shore-based pilotage is] an act of
pilotage carried out in a designated
area by a Pilot licenced for that area
from a position other than on board the
vessel concerned to conduct the safe
navigation of that vessel.
According to this definition, shore-based
pilotage is piloting carried out by a licenced
pilot but from a position that is not on
board the vessel that is subject to the
piloting. To some extent, this type of
service already exists in several European
ports. If weather conditions prevent pilots
from boarding at the regular boarding
point, certain vessels can be remotely
guided to calmer waters – where a pilot can
board – with the aid of radio instructions
from a shore-based pilot, who uses radar to
monitor the progress of the ship.
This is not a replacement for regular
piloting. The service is only offered to
vessels that fulfil certain requirements on
length and draught, and the master, the
pilot and the port authority must all agree
that the remote pilotage can be carried out
safely. Furthermore, shore-based pilotage
is provided only for a short distance and
offered only when the alternative is for the
vessel to wait for better weather.
This rather simple form of shore-based
pilotage seems to work well for its purpose
– to enable a limited flow of traffic, even in
severe weather conditions. But some argue
that shore-based pilotage need not be
limited to a backup solution. A common
argument is that since commercial air
traffic operates successfully under ground-
based control, it should also be possible to
control maritime traffic safely and
efficiently from the shore. However looking
closer, there seems to be little substance to
this analogy.
A study by the SMA, carried out to
examine whether experience from aviation
could be applied to shipping, found that the
domains had little of relevance in common.
First, there is a much higher degree of
global standardisation within commercial
aviation. Formal international standards
govern the layout and design of airports
and the navigational procedures used. A
consequence of this is that flight crews
generally do not need special knowledge of
local conditions. In shipping, conversely,
no two fairways are the same and local
15
p13-16 When law conflicts 19/12/08 11:21 Page 4

Feature
conditions vary significantly between These results indicate that shore-based flight crews work so well, it is possible that
ports. Furthermore, ships are of necessity pilotage would be likely to be feasible for the methods used in aviation to achieve
navigated in much closer proximity to certain ships. If a significant portion of the this could also be put to use in the
obstacles than are aircraft. Thus, vessels obliged to take a pilot today would maritime domain. It is an issue that
knowledge of local conditions is a do just as well without, those vessels could deserves further investigation.
prerequisite for safe fairway navigation. be assisted from the shore. Following that
Nevertheless, the fact that it is possible scenario, in one sense not taking a pilot Further investigation
to provide a form of shore-based pilotage might even benefit safety, as it eliminates Our study also suggested a way forward, in
in bad weather suggests that it should also the risk of the pilot and the master failing which communication and trust take a
be possible to do so when the weather is to establish a working relationship, and a prominent position. The first step is to
good. But what such a service might entail, subsequent negative working climate on define what would constitute a successful
how it should be done and what is needed the bridge. And even if the statement about trial. This must be followed by stepwise
to do it are clearly not simple questions. doing ’just as well’ without the pilot is an partial simulations with complexity
In order to clarify some of these issues, exaggeration, it might still be possible to gradually added.
we were asked by the Swedish Maritime provide shore-based assistance to some These results were presented and
Administration to perform a pilot study, vessels without compromising safety, at considered at the NI Swedish Branch 2008
interviewing active pilots and vessel traffic least in simpler fairways. autumn meeting, to further validate
service operators at the port of It is clear, however, that the issues of whether our thoughts were on the right
Gothenburg, Sweden. The interviews were communication and trust have to be track. Also participating in the meeting
carried out in the form of focus groups, a resolved first. Standardised communication was Johan Franson from the Swedish
type of group interview where the routines are necessary to handle different Maritime Inspectorate. The discussion
participants are encouraged to discuss a language skills and generally facilitate after the meeting confirmed most of our
specified topic. In this case, the topic was: communication between the crew and the results. Many of the opinions from the
’What are the distinguishing features of a shore-based operator. Furthermore, it is focus groups were restated and the
successful ship assistance?’ The vital that the crew and the shore-based participants added more food for thought
participants were asked to approach this operator trust each other. During on the subject.
question from their own perspective; the conventional piloting, this trust is To summarise our findings, it can be
pilots from a ship-centred, piloting, established in person – when the pilot comes said with some certainty that shore-based
perspective; and the VTS operators from a aboard – an option that for obvious reasons pilotage will not replace normal piloting. It
shore-based perspective. does not exist in shore-based pilotage. cannot be used in all ports, in all fairways
When it comes to these matters, or with all ships. But for some ships in
perhaps there are lessons to be learned some fairways, it could be both possible
Rapport with crew from aviation after all. Communication and beneficial. Before any such
One of the most notable results was the
between aircraft and the ground is implementation can be undertaken,
importance pilots attribute to establishing
standardised worldwide, and lack of trust however, it is of the utmost importance to
good rapport with the regular crew of the
between air traffic controllers and flight define the role of the humans in the system
vessel to be piloted. This was considered to
crew is not a serious issue. And as clearly. Communication and trust are
be a prerequisite for all successful
communication and the establishment of central concepts here, and these must be
operations. Pilots also commented that
trust between air traffic controllers and studied further.
good relations with the crew enabled pilots
to find their own role within the bridge
team, and that this role was not always
that of navigational advisor. Rather, with a
well-prepared crew, the pilot could end up
in a more passive role, supporting the
crew’s own decisions rather than helping
to make them. This view was supported by
the VTS operators, who said that from
their point of view, a significant
percentage of the ships trading in the port
of Gothenburg were so well equipped and
had such competent crews that they would
do just as well without a pilot onboard.
Another point, discussed by both focus
groups, was that many of the regular
crews were lacking in knowledge about the
VTS system and the role of VTS –
including knowledge of the training and
competence of operators – and that this
could lead to insecurity and a lack of trust.
The VTS operators believed that this lack
of trust was in part related to the lack of
standardised communication routines.
Seaways January 2009
16
p17-20 MARS Jan 09.qxd 19/12/08 00:14 Page 1
The Nautical Institute
Marine Accident Reporting Scheme
MARS Report No 195
MARS 200901
Fire in palm seed cake cargo
Official report: Adapted from Australian Transport Safety
Bureau (ATSB) Transport safety investigation report -
Marine occurrence investigation no. 250
A dry bulk carrier was chartered to load a cargo of palm
kernel expeller (PKE: see Editor’s note, p 19) in bulk from a
far eastern port for Australia. Before arrival at the load port,
the master received by email the analysis report for the
proposed cargo, declaring an oil content of 8.89 per cent and a
moisture content of 7.93 per cent.
After consulting the Bulk Cargo (BC) Code, the master
determined that the cargo was non-hazardous seed cake and
therefore could be carried on board the ship. (The shipper had
also provided the master with a certificate similarly stating
that the cargo was ‘non-hazardous seed cake’.)
Cargoes such as PKE are routinely fumigated en route to
their destination port in order to destroy any pests that may
be present in, or introduced, to the cargo. The fumigant used
on board this vessel was aluminium phosphide, which
produces phosphine gas when it reacts with the moisture in
the cargo hold atmosphere.
Before the loading was completed a fumigation contractor
added fumigant to each cargo hold at a rate of two grams of
phosphine per cubic metre of cargo. The plan was to place
socks containing aluminium phosphide tablets on the surface
of each cargo hold. However, as it was raining at the time, the
socks were buried in the cargo in an attempt to protect the
fumigant from the rain.
The contractor who carried out the fumigation of the cargo
provided the master with documentation that named the
fumigant, defined the dosage rate, outlined the fumigation
plan and the safety precautions to be followed during the
voyage including when the cargo holds were to be ventilated.
However, the correct method of application was not properly
communicated.
The cargo hold hatch covers and ventilators were then
closed. The ventilators were also wrapped in plastic and taped
to ensure that the fumigant did not escape.
The day after sailing, the crew observed black smoke
coming from no. 3 cargo hold, between the hatch coaming and
the hatch cover. The master was informed and he instructed
the crew to seal the cargo hold hatch covers with duct tape. He
also reported the suspected cargo fire to the ship’s manager
and charterer.
The manager and the master discussed contingency plans
that included diverting the ship to a place of refuge but, under
Seaways January 2009
January 2009
advice from a contracted expert, it was decided to continue
the voyage, with the ship sending regular reports of cargo
temperatures at varying depths, concentration of carbon
monoxide and oxygen for each hold.
The maximum cargo temperature measured was 44°C at a
depth of 7.5 m in no. 3 cargo hold. As the temperatures were
not increasing significantly, the consultant advised the master
that it was safe for the ship to continue its voyage. The
authorities at the port of destination were also advised about
the suspected fire in the particular cargo hold.
On arrival off the port, an expert and two firefighters
boarded the vessel along with the pilot. Observations
confirmed the possible existence of a fire and, on berthing,
more firefighters boarded the ship and rigged fires hoses.
When the no. 3 hatch cover was opened, only two small areas
of the cargo’s surface, each less than two m in diameter, were
smouldering. A small amount of water was sprayed on to each
of the smouldering areas and the hold was thoroughly
inspected to make sure there were no other hot spots. Soon
afterwards, the two pockets of smouldering cargo were
removed from the hold with a grab and placed on the wharf.
The cargo was then spread out and hosed down to ensure that
the smouldering material was extinguished. After the fire was
declared extinguished, the ship proceeded to discharge the
remainder of the cargo.
Both fire-affected areas had burned in a circular pattern
that was centred on the location of a fumigation sock.
However, the fires had not grown in size over the ensuing days
because, as they developed, they had consumed the available
oxygen in the vicinity. It is likely that the amount of oxygen in
the cargo hold atmosphere quickly fell to a level that would
not support flame (below 15 per cent). The fires then slowly
smouldered until the cargo hold hatch covers were opened,
when they were extinguished with water.
▲ Circular pattern of burned cargo
When the fumigation socks were removed from the cargo,
many of them were observed to have become charred.
During its reaction the fumigant, aluminium phosphide,
releases phosphine gas, heat and diphosphine gas. Localised
17
p17-20 MARS Jan 09.qxd 19/12/08 00:14 Page 2
high concentrations of phosphine and diphosphine gases are
likely if the reaction occurs too quickly; if too much fumigant
is placed in the packaging; or if the packaging does not allow
the gases to escape quickly enough. Furthermore, there will
be localised ‘hot spots’ if the heat produced as a result of the
reaction is slow to dissipate. As the socks containing the
fumigant were buried in the cargo, the surrounding cargo
would have slowed the dissipation of heat from the reacting
fumigant tablets.
Pure phosphine gas has an auto-ignition temperature
greater than 100°C. However, diphosphine gas has an auto-
ignition temperature of about 90 to 100°C. As a result, it is
likely that the local temperature rose to a level above the auto-
ignition temperature of the diphosphine gas and that the gas
subsequently ignited.
Root cause/contributory factors
1. The fumigation contractor buried the socks containing the
fumigant in the cargo in an attempt to protect them from the
rain;
2. The fumigation contractor and ship’s crew did not
sufficiently consider the risks associated with burying the
aluminium phosphide fumigant in the cargo, especially that of
heat build-up around each sock and auto-ignition of
diphosphine.
Lessons learned
1. Shipowners, operators, masters and fumigation
contractors should consider the safety implications of using
aluminium phosphide;
2. The vessel must be given sufficient information to enable
the ship’s crew to effectively supervise the application of the
aluminium phosphide fumigant.
MARS 200902
Seed cake loading violation
A bulk consignment of hazardous palm kernel expeller (PKE)
was shipped on a vessel in violation of regulations, and
despite being specifically excluded in the charter party, due to
a combination of negligence on the part of the master, an
ambiguous agreement between owner and charterer and a
misleading certificate provided by the shipper. The ship was
not designed or fitted for the carriage of this dangerous
commodity; did not possess the required certificates and
proper documentation; and the ship’s crew failed to observe
the necessary safety procedures for the cargo properly. The
matter came to light only at the discharge port when the port
state control inspector requested to see all the relevant
documents and records.
Even though PKE was excluded in the charter party,
owners agreed to load, subject to the shipper supporting his
claim that the cargo was ‘non-hazardous’ seed cake listed in
group C of the BC code, by providing a certificate from the
competent authority. An independent surveyor was appointed
by the owners to supervise the operation. The master was
informed of these intentions and arrangements.
As per the laboratory analysis results provided onboard,
the consignment conformed to UN 1386 seed cake (b) UN
Class 4.2, and the attending owner’s surveyor confirmed this.
However, despite clear evidence that the cargo was
18
dangerous, the shipper misdeclared it on his certificate by
simply stating that it was ‘non-hazardous’.
The master failed to note the different categories of seed
cake as listed in the BC Code. He also failed to appreciate that
ship’s certificate of fitness did not permit the vessel to load the
cargo being shipped. It was further observed that the crew had
not properly documented hold temperature records, having
written them on scrap pads and not in the deck logbooks.
It is the master’s responsibility to verify that the vessel is
properly certified and equipped for carrying any intended
cargo as soon as he is told about it by the charterers or
owners. The BC Code, IMDG Code, BLU Code (for
loading/unloading bulk cargoes), the ship’s certificate of
fitness and the charter party must be referred to every time a
cargo loading is planned and the company informed of any
doubts or commercial pressure from charterers.
Editor’s note: The Bulk Cargo (BC) Code lists palm kernel
along with some 30 other commodities under the generic
term ‘seed cake’, which is the byproduct after the removal
of oil from any oil-bearing seed or cereal by mechanical
crushing or by a process known as solvent extraction.
Regardless of the manufacturing process used, seed cake
contains residual oil and moisture and tends to oxidise and
self-heat. The product obtained from solvent extraction,
while containing relatively less oil and moisture, is also
prone to self-heat, and has an additional hazard arising
from residual flammable solvent mixed in the cargo.
Depending on its extraction process, oil and moisture
content, seed cake is categorised under three types in
the BC Code:
1. Seed cake containing vegetable oil UN no. 1386 – group
B, IMDG class 4.2 a) mechanically expelled, containing
more than 10 per cent oil or more than 20 per cent oil and
moisture combined; and b) solvent extracted seeds,
containing not more than 10 per cent oil and when the
amount of moisture is higher than 10 per cent, not more
than 20 per cent of oil and moisture combined.
2. Seed cake UN no. 2217 – group B, IMDG class 4.2,
residue after solvent extraction, which contains not more
than 1.5 per cent oil and not more than 11 per cent
moisture.
3. Seed cake (non–hazardous, group C), which poses a low
fire risk and no particular hazards. There are no special
precautions required for the carriage of this group of
products.
For both the group B cargoes (UN 1386 and UN 2217), the
BC Code lists the following hazards: May self-heat slowly
and, if wet or containing an excessive proportion of un-
oxidised oil, ignite spontaneously. Liable to oxidise,
causing subsequent reduction of oxygen in the cargo
space. Carbon dioxide may also be produced.
The Code also gives detailed information on pre-shipment
documentation, precautions and in-transit care.
■ Additional information from BIMCO: At the IMO’s sub-
committee on dangerous goods, DSC 9 (2004), BIMCO made a
submission which requested the sub-committee to clarify the
definition of the seed cake entry, UN 1386 (b) in the BC Code,
as well as the certificate requirements pertaining to the non-
hazardous seed cake entry. The above two issues, which
Seaways January 2009
p17-20 MARS Jan 09.qxd 19/12/08 00:14 Page 3
remain outstanding, were referred at this session to the
working group tasked to look into the BC Code amendments
and its mandatory application.
BIMCO members had problems interpreting the above
definition. Hence, at this working group, BIMCO requested
that a clear interpretation, given in the form of an explanatory
note, be inserted into the schedule. BIMCO believes that this
will greatly aid users of the Code in determining whether the
cargo to be carried falls under this schedule.
This was agreed by the working group and was included in
the correspondence group’s terms of reference for the next
DSC session (DSC 12, September 2007). BIMCO accordingly
forwarded an appropriate explanatory note to the
correspondence group for consideration and approval at DSC
12.
BIMCO is happy to report that its submission has finally
been completed and this has culminated in the following:
1. Approval at this sub-committee of BIMCO’s proposed
explanatory note for seed cake UN 1386(b) which will help BC
code users understand better the description required under
the schedule.
For ease of reference, the description of seed cake entry
UN 1386 (b) is appended below together with the approved
explanatory note:
‘Seed cake, containing vegetable oil UN 1386
(b) solvent extraction and expelled seeds, containing
not more than 10 per cent of oil and when the amount of
moisture is higher than 10 per cent, not more than 20 per
cent of oil and moisture combined.
This entry covers the following:
.1) all solvent extracted and expelled seed cakes
containing not more than 10 per cent oil, and not more than 10
per cent moisture; and
.2) all solvent extracted and expelled seed cakes
containing not more than 10 per cent oil and moisture content
higher than 10 per cent, in which case, the oil and moisture
combined must not exceed 20 per cent.’
2. All seed cake schedules will have a graph depiction
showing the range of oil and moisture content applicable
under their respective schedule.
3. Approval of the final BIMCO amendments to the non-
hazardous seed cake schedule based on discussion held in the
correspondence group. Upon adoption of the revised
mandatory BC Code, the provisions of this schedule will apply
only to solvent extracted rape seed meal, pellets, soya bean
meal, cotton seed meal and sunflower seed meal, containing
not more than 4 per cent oil and 15 per cent oil and moisture
combined and being substantially free from flammable
solvents.
MARS 200903
Traffic hazards off Singapore
There are routine transgressions of Colregs Rule no.10 (traffic
separation schemes) in the Singapore Straits. On arrival at
Tanjung Pelepas, I noted that due to the number of vessels at
anchor in the inshore traffic zone north of the westbound lane
(Singapore Western Boarding Ground Alpha (WBGA) to
Seaways January 2009
Tanjung Piai (BA Chart 4038), the inshore traffic zone is
effectively closed to larger vessels proceeding eastbound from
Tanjung Pelepas and Singapore.
Many vessels occupy the Tanjung Pelepas general
anchorage and the inshore zone to the south of this, as well as
the anchorage area to the south and east of Johor Bahru port
limits. The area of anchored vessels actually extends into the
westbound traffic lane. Accordingly, vessels that transit
eastbound between Tanjung Pelepas and Singapore WBGA
routinely call the vessel traffic information system (VTIS) and
request to proceed the wrong way eastbound against the
traffic flow in the westbound lane. This situation inevitably
leads to head on encounters with westbound traffic and
alterations of course by each vessel to port, so that eastbound
vessels occupy the northern limits of the lane and westbound
vessels move towards the centre of the lane. My point is that,
in following this seemingly routine procedure, if a vessel
should be involved in any incident, the legal repercussions
would be particularly great for the eastbound vessel. Note that
vessels undertaking this procedure are without pilots
onboard.
It would be prudent for masters of eastbound vessels
between Tanjung Pelepas and Singapore to plan the passage
only after carefully scanning the main strait by ECDIS/radar.
Should the inshore traffic zone appear congested, then instead
of risking a hazardous direct passage of some six miles to
WBGA, it would be safer to follow the TSS by crossing the
west bound lane, entering the east bound lane, going south of
‘Delta’ buoy and Takong Kecil beacon and exiting at Raffles
light house in order to rejoin the west bound lane – in all some
37 miles of steaming.
▲ Singapore traffic zones
Editor’s note: The convenience of a direct course and a
shorter transit time must not justify the selection of a route
that plainly contravenes the Colregs. If the volume of
eastbound traffic between TPP and Singapore justifies it,
shipping lines and agents may take up the issue with the
authorities of both the ports to ensure that anchorage area
limits are clearly marked and complied with and that a
clear corridor is available for safe eastbound transits
through the inshore zone.
19
p17-20 MARS Jan 09.qxd 19/12/08 00:14 Page 4

MARS 200904 What went right

Crude oil leak from COW system A pre-operation meeting was held and sufficient members of
staff were placed to monitor the operation. This led to an early
A release of crude oil occurred during the pressure testing of the
detection of the leakage, quick response and averted a
crude oil washing (COW) system prior to arrival at the discharge
pollution incident.
port. The vessel was on her maiden voyage and this was the first
occasion that the system had been operated by the crew since Lessons learned
the commissioning test by shipyard personnel during sea trials. 1. Close inspection of the vessel’s cargo transfer system,
The incident including the crude oil washing line, must be carried out by
ship’s staff following delivery by the shipyard and valve
After sailing from the load port, the crew isolated the COW
orientation observed.
system cargo oil heater by rotating the spectacle blanks to
ensure no oil could enter the heater. Just before arrival at the 2. Where possible, all cargo pipelines should be pressure
discharge port, pressure-testing of the COW line began, using tested with water prior to first load port to establish that
cargo oil and the stripping pump. As the COW line was slowly pipeline integrity is as expected and leak free.
pressurised, a crew member noticed an oil leak in the
Corrective actions
pumproom where the heater was located. The operation was
suspended immediately and a clean-up operation was quickly 1. Fleet and ship management team should clearly establish
completed without any environmental pollution. priority tasks in preparing the ship for first loading and
discharging to minimise the risk of pollution.
What went wrong
2. Company procedures are to be improved to ensure
During the ship’s construction, the COW system’s cargo oil
appropriate planning and risk management processes are
heater outlet pipe was provided with a connection to accept a
completed. A checklist of critical pre- and post-delivery tasks
temperature probe. Due to a mismatch between the threads of
to be completed will be made available within the management
the connection and the probe, an additional connection with
system.
the correct thread to which the temperature probe was fitted
was made by the yard. The original redundant fitting was
however left in place, but was not shown in the COW system
drawings and data. Its isolating cock, which did not have any
position indicator, inadvertently remained in the open
position. The investigation also revealed that the planning
process did not include a proper assessment of the risks and
no risk assessment was documented.
Root cause
Lack of planning was determined to be the root cause of this
incident in that there was a lack of appreciation that the ship
sailed from the shipyard with an unknown flaw in the cargo
piping system that could potentially compromise ▲ Close-up view showing redundant probe connector with isolating cock
environmental safety. and second probe connector in use.

MARS: You can make a difference!

Can you save a life, prevent injury, or contribute to a more effective shipping community?
Everyone makes mistakes or has near misses but by contributing reports about these events to
MARS, you can help others learn from your experiences. Reports concerning navigation, cargo,
engineering, ISM management, mooring, leadership, ship design, training or any other aspect of
operations are always welcome.

MARS is strictly confidential and can help so many – please contribute.

Editor: Captain Shridhar Nivas MNI

lin RS ars

Email: mars@nautinst.org or MARS, c/o The Nautical Institute,

on A /m
se e M rg

202 Lambeth Road, London SE1 7LQ, UK

ba th t.o

The Nautical Institute gratefully acknowledges sponsorship provided by:

ta h ns
da arc uti

North of England P&I Club, The Swedish Club, UK P&I Club,

Se .na
w

The Marine Society and Sea Cadets, Britannia P&I Club,

w
w

Lloyd’s Register-Fairplay, Safety at Sea, Sail Training International

Seaways January 2009

20
p21-24 Port State Control + ISM 19/12/08 00:14 Page 1

Port state control and ISM

2: Measuring the effectiveness of the ISM Code

Captain Donal Linehan FNI Societies (IACS) felt that its data could not
contribute usefully to the specific objective
Poseidon Maritime Projects of determining the overall effectiveness of
the ISM Code in the shipping industry as a
whole, due to the changing nature of the
In the second part of his overview of port state control and data during the period under
ISM, Donal Linehan concentrates on the effectiveness of the consideration. The P&I clubs’ data was
also noted to be of limited value in
ISM Code and in particular, on the role of the designated
assisting the IEG meet its objectives.
person (DP) and the safety management system (SMS). There were 2,959 responses received
Part 1 appeared in the December 2008 issue of Seaways. from seafarers; there were responses from
32 administrations; 89 shore-based
Both parts are based on Captain Linehan’s presentations to
responses and 39 company responses. The
the recent Command Seminars in Panama (September) and IEG concluded that the overwhelming
Glasgow (October). majority of the responses were supportive
of the ISM Code. There was a short
reference in the text of the study which
SM (International Safety Management) defined as the shipowner or any person,

I
Code is the international standard for
the safe management and operation of
ships, setting rules for the organisation
of company management in relation to
safety and pollution prevention and for the
implementation of a safety management
system. The operating/managing company,
when satisfactorily verified by flag state(s),
is issued with a DOC (document of
compliance) and the ship(s) when achieved
verifiable compliance is/are issued with a
safety management certificate (SMC).
The ISM Code came into force on 1 July
1998 for passenger ships, tankers and bulk
carriers (as defined in Solas). On 1 July
2002 it became mandatory for a wider range
of cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and
over, including mobile offshore drilling rigs.
ISM is mandatory in accordance with
Solas Chapter IX and applies to safety
management whereas ISO 9001:2000, for
example, is not mandatory and is customer
orientated based on an organisation’s
quality management system (QMS).
There may well be interpretations of
corresponding clauses between ISM and
QMS. The International Ship and Port
Security (ISPS) Code is not aligned to the
ISM Code.
ISM objectives
The Code establishes safety management
objectives and requires a safety
management system (SMS) to be
established by ‘the company’, which is
Seaways January 2009
such as the manager or bareboat
charterer, who has assumed responsibility
for operation of the ship. The company is
then required to establish and implement a
policy for achieving these objectives. This
includes providing the necessary resources
and shore-based support. Every company
is expected to designate a person or
persons ashore having direct access to the
highest level of management. The
procedures required by the Code should be
documented and compiled in a safety
management manual, a copy of which
should be kept on board.
Independent expert group
In 2002, four years after the introduction of
the ISM Code, the IMO established an
independent expert group (IEG)
comprising representatives from 11 NGOs,
five member states and the NI in order to
study the impact of the ISM Code and its
effectiveness. In November 2005 the IEG
presented a report to IMO Secretariat.
MSC 81/17/1, Role of the Human Element,
was submitted by IMO Secretariat in
December 2005 and is a shortened version
of the main study.
The paper did not claim to be a
representative sample across the industry;
nevertheless it was the IEG’s considered
opinion that their report represented a
model of collective experience from among
those that supported the Code. The
International Association of Classification
identified that 50 per cent of the 39
companies reported that the DP was the
main driving force behind successful
implementation of ISM; and 25 per cent
said that top management drove it.
The IEG made a number of
recommendations: one was that a further
study should be undertaken at a later date
specifically to examine the relationship
between PSC and ISM.
PMoU CIC
More recently, between September and
November 2007, there was a concentrated
inspection campaign (CIC) on the ISM
when the Paris Memorandum of
Understanding (PMoU) carried out 5,427
inspections on 5,120 ships throughout the
region. Ships were targeted in the normal
manner during PSC and 176 inspections
resulted in a detention where one or more
major non-conformity (MNC) was found.
The most common were in the areas of
‘effective maintenance of the ship and
equipment’, ‘emergency preparedness’ and
‘reports of non-conformities and accident
occurrences’. The PMoU stated in its
preliminary findings that it is a matter of
serious concern that almost one in five of
the CIC inspections showed ISM
deficiencies.
According to a PMoU press release, it
would appear from the overall results of the
CIC, and after taking account of some of the
serious problems that were encountered in
general, that the ISM system is starting to
21
p21-24 Port State Control + ISM 19/12/08
The ISM Code, DP and master
■ Paragraph 4 of the Code preamble
recognises that no two shipping
companies or shipowners are the
same and that ships operate under a
wide range of different conditions.
The Code is based on general
principles and objectives.
■ Paragraph 5 of the preamble
states the Code is expressed in broad
terms so that it can have a
widespread application. Clearly
different levels of management,
whether shore-based or at sea, will
require varying levels of knowledge
and awareness.
■ Elements of the Code
1. General
2. Safety and Environmental
Protection (two sections: the
company should...)
3. Company responsibility and
authority (3.3 resources to enable DP
to carry out duties)
4. Designated person (the DP is the
work onboard ships and that shipowners
and crews on board understand the system
and are implementing it. The average
detention rate during the campaign was 5.4
per cent. The worst performing flags, with
an average detention rate of 16.2 per cent
were Albania, Comoros, Cook Islands, DPR
Korea (North); Sierra Leone, Slovakia, St
Vincent & Grenadines and Syria. The best
performing flags, with zero detentions, were
Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bermuda, China,
Denmark, Faroe Islands, Finland, France,
Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, Isle of Man,
Philippines, Spain, Thailand and USA.
The PMoU said that it would continue to
monitor the implementation of the
management systems to ensure that the
requirements contained in the ISM Code
were complied with. This was the third
PMoU CIC on the ISM and carried out
jointly with the Tokyo MoU.
The overall comparison between the
findings of PMoU and Tokyo MoUs’ CIC
appear to give a similar picture regarding
the results of the effectiveness on
implementation of the ISM on board ships
and the concern regarding ISM related
deficiencies as described above whereas
the IMO IEG have applied a different
approach through direct polling of
interested parties within the industry and
22
00:14 Page 2
Feature
link- Refer also to MSC-
MEPC.7/Circ.6 - Guidance on DP)
5. Master’s responsibility and
authority (includes review of SMS
and Resolution A.443). The interval
and format requirement for the
master’s review of the SMS varies
from company to company and flag to
flag.
6. Resources and personnel (seven
sections – the company should…)
7. Shipboard operations (the
company should…)
8. Emergency preparedness (three
sections: the company or SMS
should…)
9. Reports and analysis of NC’s
accidents and hazardous occurrences
(the SMS or company should…)
10.Maintenance (three of the four
sections: the company should…)
11.Documentation
12.Company verification, review and
evaluation
therefore it would not be appropriate to
attempt to compare the respective PSC and
IMO IEG findings.
Designated Person
Section 4 of the ISM Code states that the
DP is to ensure the safe operation of each
ship and provide a link between the
Company and those on board, every
Company, as appropriate, should
designate a person or persons ashore
having direct access to the highest level of
management. The responsibility and
authority of the designated person or
persons should include monitoring the
safety and pollution prevention aspects of
the operation of each ship and ensuring
that adequate resources and shore-based
are applied as required.
While it may appear obvious to many,
however, the Code itself does not specify
the qualifications or experience the DP
should have, nor the position the DP
should occupy within a company’s
organisation. MSC-MEPC.7/Circ.6 (October
2007) is a guideline:
■ Qualifications: minimum third-level
qualification in relevant field of
management, engineering or physical
science. STCW qualification as certified
ship officer and seagoing experience or
other formal education combined with not
less than three years practical experience.
■ Training: ISM Code; mandatory rules
and regulations; applicable codes,
guidelines and standards as appropriate;
assessment techniques, technical or
operational aspects of safety management;
shipping and shipboard operations;
effective communications.
■ Experience: to present ISM matters to
highest level of management and gain
sustained support; determine the SMS
elements meet the ISM Code requirements;
to determine effectiveness of SMS through
auditing and management review; to
determine the safe practices recommended
by IMO, administrations, classification
societies and other bodies and maritime
industry bodies to promote safety culture.
Able to analyse data and apply lessons
learned.
■ Company: to provide the training and
provide documentary evidence that the DP
has the relevant qualification, training and
experience to undertake duties of the DP.
● Most, if not all, flag states will have
regulations giving force to the ISM into
domestic legislation, with some
administrations more detailed and onerous
than others in the application of how the
Code should be applied by their
companies. There may also be guidelines,
sometimes in the form of marine advice or
notices from flag administration to
companies with ships on flag, ISM
auditors, surveyors and ROs.
PSC inspection procedures
PSC does not have the authority to
withdraw or remove convention
certificates or documentation during PSC.
That responsibility remains with the flag
state. PSCs carry out inspections and do
not perform surveys or ISM
verification/audits. During an initial
inspection, PSC will check that the ISM
certification is in the correct format,
reflecting the ship type and with required
verifications and endorsements made to
the certificates. ‘Clear grounds’ for a more
detailed inspection include absence or
inaccurate certification or detainable
deficiencies in other areas. Many non-
detainable deficiencies may also be
evidence of a deficient management
system and give rise to ‘clear grounds’.
PSC officers should not normally
scrutinise the contents of any non-
conformity notes or the results of internal
audits.
● Examples of ‘clear grounds’ are listed
in Annex III of the EU Directive and
Seaways January 2009
p21-24 Port State Control + ISM 19/12/08
Section 3.2 of the IMO booklet on PSC
procedures.
Depending on seriousness, the ISM/SMS
areas that may warrant detention by PSC
are:
■ ISM certificates not on board:
detention, then release and banning
procedure may be applied in accordance
with section 3.10.4 of the Paris MOU,
Article 9a of the EU Council Directive
95/21/EC as amended by the Directive
98/25/EC;
■ Company on the DOC not the same as
on the SMC;
■ Safety management documentation
not on board;
■ Relevant safety information not in a
working language or language
understood by the crew (SMS may not
be in a language understood by the
PSCO);
■ Senior officers unable to identify
operator and role of the DP (the ISM
Code or guidance does not require that
the DP be directly contactable. There
may well be a company or flag
requirement for contacting him or her.
The master should know the identity
and the role of the DP. Other senior
officers should be aware of their identity
and role. The DP may not even have a
role to play in an emergency. The master
should be able to explain to PSC the
route on non-conformities that the DP
should be dealing with. The designated
person may be regarded by the company
as the ‘manager’ of the system).
■ No procedures to contact the
company in emergency situations (8.3
requires company to respond at any
time to hazards, accidents and
emergency situations involving its
ships. Contact information may be
found in the SOPEP manual as
referenced in the SM manual and the
person or persons that are directly
contactable cannot always be expected
to be found on a typed note on a notice
board. As stated above, that person or
persons does not have to be the DP –
that is for the company and possibly
flag to decide);
■ Drills have not been carried out
according to programme;
■ New crew members are not familiar
with their duties in the SMS (also STCW
I/14);
■ Master’s overriding authority not
documented and unaware of his/her
authority (5.2 as appropriate to make
decisions regarding safety and
pollution prevention. Resolution A 443);
Seaways January 2009
00:14 Page 3
Feature
■ No records of maintenance kept or no
evidence of maintenance being carried
out as indicated in the records.
Circulars and resolutions
IMO circulars and resolutions are general
guidelines with recommendations to bring
matters of technical interest to the
attention of the various parties.
Administrations are invited if not expected
to apply those recommendations not
necessarily into their respective laws but
certainly into their own guidelines on the
application of for example the ISM and
bring them to the attention of interested
parties such as their owners, companies
and ISM auditors. They will be of interest
to many such ROs; classification societies;
professional bodies; port authorities;
banks, which provide mortgages;
insurance companies; P&I clubs, which
Abridged CIC questionnaire
■ Part A: Before physical
inspection
1. Is the safety management
documentation on board (certificates,
manuals)?
2. Is there evidence that the master
has carried out the review of the
SMS?
3. Can senior officers identify the
‘designated person’?
4. Have the procedures for
establishing and maintaining contact
with shore management in an
emergency been tested?
5. Have the procedures to report
non-conformities, accidents and
hazardous occurrences been
followed?
6. Does the ship’s SMS have a
maintenance routine which includes
the testing of stand by equipment and
critical equipment/systems and are
records available?
■ Part B – After physical inspec-
tion/practical demonstrations
7. Is relevant documentation
regarding the SMS in a working
language or languages understood by
the ship’s personnel?
8. Are programmes for drills and
exercises to prepare for emergency
actions available on board and are
records available?
9. Is there evidence of an effective
maintenance system?
provide cover; charterers who hire ships;
and shipbuilders. Many of these bodies
may already belong to organisations that
have NGOs or IGOs status at IMO and
therefore will already have access to IMO
documents – and indeed may have
cooperated or even chaired groups to
develop much IMO documentation.
New inspection regime
(NIR)
The proposed recast of the European
Union Directive on Port State Control is
expected to be completed in 2009 together
with amendments to the PMoU text to
accommodate the new inspection regime
(NIR). There will also be other relevant
maritime directives, thereby creating a
legal framework for the EU member states.
This matter is actively under consideration
at EU Commission level and
10. Are introduction/familiarisation
procedures for crew members carried
out in accordance with documented
procedures?
11. Are the crew members able to
communicate effectively in the
execution of their duties related to
the SMS?
12. Is there evidence of repetitive
deficiencies from previous PSC-
inspections?
■ Relevant references
ISM Code 2002 including preamble,
paragraphs 2, 4 and 5; Section 4;
Section 5;
● Resolution MSC.273 (85)
amendments to the ISM Code adopted
in December 2008; should enter into
force on 1 July 2010.
● MSC-MEPC.7/Circ.5 introduced in
October 2007: Guidelines for the
Operational Implementation of the
ISM Code;
● MSC-MEPC.7/Circ.6 introduced in
October 2007 Guidelines on Training
and Experience for the Designated
Person;
● MSC/Circ. 1093 (to prevent
accidents with lifeboats and periodic
servicing and ISM);
● MSC/Circ. 1059 (Procedures
concerning MNC).
23
p21-24 Port State Control + ISM 19/12/08
implementation has yet to be promulgated.
The NIR will be more risk-based,
targeting with stricter enforcement in
substandard ships, resulting in less
frequency of inspections on good
operators. It is expected that high-risk
ships will be eligible for periodic
inspections every five to six months with
standard-risk ships every 10-12 months
and low-risk ships every 24-36 months. The
high-risk ships will be subject to a more
rigorous inspection regime. Included in the
targeting will be poor performing
owners/operators.
It is generally recognised that shippers
and charterers play an important and
influencing role in the maritime industry.
Charterers may contract for the majority
of cargo space on ships and generally have
control over vessel selection and probably
the condition of the vessel they choose to
hire. There are cases where charterers
and receiving terminals, particularly in
respect of liquid, gas and certain solid bulk
cargoes, will have a vetting process that
examines whether the vessel complies with
international standards before entering
into contract, though the application and
effectiveness sometimes depends on the
particular charterer and sometimes the
24
00:14 Page 4
Feature
market conditions.
Such efforts to ensure a vessel meets
international standards before making a
chartering decision assist PSC in
combating substandard practices in
shipping. While the owner/operators will
be brought into the risk equation, there
has been no effective consideration given
to charterers’ risk profile under the NIR.
Ships will be listed as priority 1 (must be
inspected) or priority 2 (may be inspected).
The PMoU, together with EMSA, are
developing an integrated hybrid database
to take the place of the current SIReNaC.
No more favourable
treatment: clarification
The edited version of the first part of my
article, (December 2008) contained a
misunderstanding about ILO 147 (p16)
which I should like to clarify.
Compatible levels of safety must also be
applied to ships below convention size or
to ships that are not parties to the relevant
instruments (see below). This is referred
to as the principle of ‘no more favourable
treatment’ and it permits PSC to apply the
general standards as opposed to specific
regulations. An example of a relevant
instrument not ratified by a state (flag) of
a ship to be inspected is ILO 147 or the 147
Protocol of 1996. Another would be
Protocol 88 to the Solas 74 Convention.
Ships under certain tonnage do not have to
comply with certain regulations, or more to
the point, ships of specified tonnages and
above and/or ship types are required to
comply with the relevant instruments and
the relevant amendments. The PMoU
relevant instrument as amended at time of
writing are:
● Load Line 66 Convention and LL
Protocol 1988;
● Solas 74 and Protocols 78 & 88;
● Marpol 73/74;
● STCW 78 as amended;
● Colregs 72;
● Tonnage 69;
● ILO 147 (minimum standards) and
Protocol 1996;
● Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage
(CLC) 1992;
● Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling
Systems (AFS) on ships.
■ The unabridged version of 17 pages
with superscript references is available
from Donal Linehan on request to
info@maritimeprojects.ie
Seaways January 2009
p25-27 Wind Farms + Radar 19/12/08 00:15 Page 1

Wind farms and

marine radar: 2
Side lobes or sectored distortions

Captain Dennis Barber to consider is that side lobes are emitted
from antennae. Antennae rotate through
MRIN, FNI 360°, so why do the image distortions only
Marine and Risk appear in limited sectors, usually astern?
Consultants Ltd (Marico They do appear in other directions on
some vessels but they are not something
Marine) that is associated with distortions
throughout the 360° of the antenna’s
rotation. This would be expected if they
are emitted at all times regardless of
where the antenna is pointing.
Another inconsistency is that on
different vessels, interference of the type
described may vary in appearance. Models
of radars are limited in number and, for
deep-sea vessels at least, must, conform to
a common set of standards. As a
n my article ‘Wind farms and marine
some sectors. Some even have no
distortion at all.
The explanation is quite simple. What is
being viewed is not a phenomenon
associated with the radar antenna alone,
but a combination of the antenna and the
structures of the vessel that are erected
nearby. Tubular structures that are
vertical or near vertical produce the most
consistent results. This is because
reflections off their tangential surfaces
create a ‘splaying’ of the radar beam that
in turn creates the effects similar to, but
not due to, side lobes.
In Figure 1, the display is fairly typical.
The most significant distortions are in a
sector on either side of astern and right

I
consequence, many vessels are fitted with astern between the two dashed lines. Other
radar: myth and magic’, published in identical radars. Two vessels with the distortions and spurious echoes can
the October 2008 issue of Seaways, the same model of radar, can however have however be seen along the two dashed
term ‘side lobes’ appeared in relation vastly different display images that may or lines on either side of the vessel in
to distortions visible in one of the images of may not have various levels of distortion in directions slightly forward of the beam.
a radar screen reproduced in the article.
This term is often used to describe
distortions assumed to result from the low-
powered spurious emissions that are
present in every transmission from a radar
antenna. The effect is assumed to be the
continuing reception of signals after an
antenna has passed the direction in azimuth
from which they are apparently received.
The image that results will be familiar
to experienced deck officers and radar
observers; The target is ‘smudged’ on
either side of its true bearing, making it
very difficult to determine the precise
direction of the target. Most observers
become accustomed to it and generally
apply a rule that the true target is in the
centre of the distorted image, which is
usually a stronger target in depth than the
sides of the echo. Figure 1, reproduced
from the first article, is typical of the
phenomenon.
The reality of the phenomenon however
is less obvious and cannot be explained
away by the ‘leaky edge’ that is side lobes.
There are some unexplained
inconsistencies in the theory. The first fact ▲ Figure 1: Radar display of Morven on south side of Kentish Flats wind farm headed 260°

Seaways January 2009

25
p25-27 Wind Farms + Radar 19/12/08 00:15 Page 2

Feature
What makes the phenomenon more
obvious in this case is the wind farm,
where multiple (identical) targets create a
comparison between what should be
possible and what is reality. Note for
example the difference in quality between
targets F5 and C5 in Figure 1. C5 is also
reflected along the starboard line at rC5
and a similar reflection appears on the
port side; B5 is reflected on the port side at
rB5; D4 is distorted as though by side
lobes, but in fact it is due to the same
influence as the reflections along the
starboard dashed line (see Figure 2).
Groupings of targets with identical
radar profiles have made it possible in
images, such as that in Figure 1, to
discover that side lobes appear to be
selective. Many observers have not yet
recognised this and in particular, scientific
studies into radar effects in wind farms
▲ Figure 2 Radar antenna of Morven and associated structures
have apparently not noticed it. In Figure 1
the radar gain is set fairly high. As a
result, true side lobe effects are just visible
noted that during the Kentish Flats trials Wind farms concern
described in my October article, serving It is natural and proper however for
on all targets, namely the small extensions
mariners tended not to be concerned by authorities to be concerned that in wind
on either side of the main echo. The
the phenomenon as most recognised that farms, the phenomenon will obscure
emphasis here is on the word ‘small’. The
targets astern, where the effects are targets to the extent that it could interfere
effect of side lobes should be expected to
usually greatest, represented the smallest with the detection of small craft. As a
be small as antennae are designed to
threat to their own vessel because they result of such concerns, however, there
produce relatively narrow beams.
were already proceeding away from the has been a general assumption that the
Excessively ‘leaky’ antennae would detract
danger. The effect is not just associated effect in wind farms is caused by the wind
from the quality of bearing differentiation
with wind farms – it has long been a turbines themselves. It is not. If it were, the
that is necessary for marine radar.
effect would be consistent on all vessels
Some of the targets however have large familiar sight on most vessels with a signal
and all turbine towers would return a poor
extensions on either side and those that mast abaft the radar antenna, causing
echo. They do not.
are astern are in some cases almost distortions of any target passing through
In the radar trials conducted at Kentish
merging with neighbouring targets. It was the astern sector.
Flats in the Thames Estuary in 2006, 30
per cent of all vessels passing the wind
farm did not experience any interference.
This inconsistency was pursued by the
teams conducting the observations at the
time. They concluded that the interference
was more related to radar antenna
installations and neighbouring structures
onboard than to the wind farms, regardless
of the fact that it was seen that the
returned signals were very strong from
matrix arrays such as were being observed
(see my previous article).
The conclusion was arrived at quickly:
it was found that comparison of the display
with the radar antenna and its
surroundings always revealed reflecting
obstructions in the directions of the
distortions or, as was described in the
earlier article, reflected spurious echoes
from surfaces on the side of the vessel
opposing the direction of the target.
In Figure 1, larger distortions can be
seen mainly astern but also just forward of
the starboard beam. To gain some idea of
what is causing these sectored distortions

Seaways January 2009

26
p25-27 Wind Farms + Radar 19/12/08 00:15 Page 3

Feature
one should study the radar of the vessel insulating foam. This is a crude radar
concerned. Figure 2 shows the radar on absorbent material (RAM) that reduced the
board Morven, the observing vessel. occurrence of distortions and spurious
The obstructions cause the distortions reflections after the trial in which the photo
and spurious echoes along the blue dashed that is Figure 1 was taken. More effective
lines in Figure 1. The mast A and its stays RAM is available but can be expensive.
create the high intensity distortions It is necessary to explain why some
between the dashed lines astern in Figure vessels have reduced or non-existent
1; the whip antenna and its stanchion C interference. These vessels were fortunate
cause the distortions and reflections along to be provided with masts that were either
the port dashed line in Figure 1; the whip raked or had sections that were fitted with
antenna and its stanchion B cause the angled deflectors. Clearly in the latter
▲ Figure 3: Radar display of Morven on the north
distortions and reflections along the case, those who fitted such deflectors side of Kentish Flats wind farm with reduced gain
starboard dashed line in Figure 1. Note understood the phenomenon. The result of
that the mast has been wrapped in such angling of surfaces is to deflect incoming signals reflected off obstructions
such as the signal mast upwards and away
from the antenna. Thus passenger vessels
with sleek raked masts experienced little
or no interference. It is suspected that the
C F Spencer & Co Ltd raking was more for aesthetic reasons but
Marine Consultants and Surveyors the benefit of a clean radar display is one
positive spin-off of such lines.
We are seeking an additional surveyor for general ship and During the Morven trials, the gain was
cargo surveying on a worldwide basis, to be based at our offices reduced and the display that is Figure 3
in Banwell, Somerset. This will be a full time salaried post. We was achieved with relative ease. The linear
are seeking a Master Mariner (FG) with tanker and or gas reflections extending to the north-west are
from wind turbine E1 close by on that side.
experience to add to the team already in place. We offer
The ‘spokes’ created by such close
surveying and consultancy to clients in a variety of fields as well
encounters (less than six metres passing
as expert witness testimony in courts. We also supply the
distance) were rapidly rotating around the
Harbour Master and Pilots for the port of Bridgwater. The reflecting surface (the turbine tower) and
appointment could lead to a senior position for the right person. were obvious to the observer as spurious.
Please respond in writing with CV, recent seagoing and Those who are concerned about the
surveying experience, salary expectations to: possibility of eliminating small craft
echoes when reducing gain should
Chris Spencer, C F Spencer & Co Ltd understand that small craft echoes in the
The Old Malt House, West Street, Banwell, Somerset BS29 6DB wind farm were not lost during the
Email chris.spencer@cfspencer.com adjustment. It should also be noted that all
radar controls should always be used
judiciously: that is one of the reasons why
radar observers have extensive training.
The Kentish Flats trials showed that
Don’t give chancers a chance! obstructions as small as a whip antenna
ISPS… Communication… were enough to create distortions. The
Training… Exercises… extent of the distortion was inversely
Awareness… SSP… proportional to the distance of the
Vigilance… Education… obstruction from the radar antenna. More
Systems… Audits… than this however, the trials demonstrated
Verification… Drills… that while wind farms are suspected of
Planning… Testing…
causing excessive interference on radar,
the simple fact that such interference is
selective according to the vessel indicates
that the problem, if it is truly that, is not
with the wind farm so much as the poorly
designed radar antenna installations
aboard many vessels, particularly modern
Get it NOW!
ones. Our experience, however, is that
FERRIBY MARINE most mariners have learned to live with
UK-Singapore– Australia -Canada-Panama-Philippines the consequences. Other routinely
info@ferribygroup.com
www.ferriby-marine.com encountered effects such as sea clutter
Tel ++44(0)1482640232 were often as intense, if not more so, than
Fax ++44(0)1482644423
the alleged wind farm effects.
Seaways January 2009
27
p28 Nautelex Jan 09 19/12/08 00:15 Page 1
Nautelex
David Patraiko FNI
Director of Projects
Go to sea
‘Go to sea,’ a campaign to address the global
shortage of seafarers has been launched by the
IMO in association with the International Labour
Organisation (ILO), the ‘Round Table’ of shipping
organisations – BIMCO, ICS/ISF, INTERCARGO
and INTERTANKO – and the International
Transport Workers’ Federation.
The campaign calls on governments,
industry and international organisations to take
specific actions, within their areas of influence,
to increase the recruitment of seafarers to tackle
the problem. ‘As everyone in shipping is aware,
the global shortage of seafarers, especially
officers, has already reached significant
proportions and is now a source of genuine
concern to all involved in the industry,’ said IMO
Secretary-General Efthimios Mitropoulos,
speaking at the campaign’s launch.
Among specific calls for action in the
campaign document, the shipping industry is
urged to take the lead and do more to promote
itself through the media, in particular the
electronic media. The industry should continue
to support, and endorse campaigns aimed at
improving its image and use some key industry
figures as examples of career progression. It is
also urged to do more to make life on board and
away from home closer to the life enjoyed by
others ashore; to encourage women to work in
the seafaring profession; and to promote the
industry at non maritime-related events.
IMO itself will develop a page on its public
website highlighting the types of career paths
available to seafarers, through links to industry
sites. While on missions abroad, the Secretary-
General will visit maritime and non-maritime
training facilities and seafarer organisations where
practicable, to express support and address both
maritime and non-maritime government
departments to promote shipping and seafaring.
The ILO, which promotes the objective of decent
work for all, has adopted several instruments
directly relevant to the campaign and will support
it in every way possible.
28
Safety Digest Ships account for about half of port-related
The latest issue of the UK MAIB (Marine air pollution, much of it from the vessels'
auxiliary engines. Shutting down a single ship's
Accident Information Branch) Safety Digest is
diesel engines at berth for a day achieves the
now out. Tragically, many of the incidents
same air quality improvements as taking 33,000
covered in it have ended with one or more
cars off southern California roads.
fatalities. In nearly every case, the death(s)
The new ITS shoreside power installation is
resulted from risks being taken unnecessarily
part of a 10-year, nearly $800 million project to
and without recognition.
create thousands of additional jobs and a more
Stephen Meyer, Chief Inspector of Marine
efficient and environmentally friendly container
Accidents, writes: ‘Risk assessments have, to a
terminal at Pier G. The first phases included the
certain extent, become mired in bureaucracy;
shoreside power installation and construction of
they have become paperwork exercises, rather
a new deep-water berth (Berth G232) at the
than life-saving assessments.
southwest end of Pier G.
‘Everything we do at sea is hazardous in one
The project also includes a new electrical
way or another – a few moments’ thought, to
substation added by Southern California Edison
identify the risks of what we are about to do,
to accommodate the increased demand for
would prevent most accidents. But familiarity
electricity at Pier G, since plugged-in ships each
breeds contempt; by the time we have done require as much as six megawatts of power
something a few times, we have lost the sense (enough to power 4,000 homes). As part of its
of danger. We rationalise subconsciously that, ‘green’ lease with the port for the ITS property, ‘K’
because we have always “got away with it”, it Line agreed to retrofit all five of its ships berthing
must be safe. at G232 to accommodate shoreside power.
‘Have this thought in your mind when you ‘This is the Port of Long Beach's first
read the articles in this Digest, and I hope you shoreside power berth – a model for what we
will see what I mean. Alertness to the dangers will be doing at other terminals to improve air
would have prevented many of the accidents. quality,’ said Port Executive Director Richard D.
Then consider whether you, or the people who Steinke. ‘Because of this, all of us and all of our
work with you, have become complacent.’ port neighbours can breathe cleaner air.’
The latest MAIB Safety Digest, as well ‘ITS and ‘K’ Line are proud to partner with the
as others can be downloaded from Port of Long Beach on this important
www.maib.gov.uk environmental project to reduce air pollution
from shipping operations,’ said ITS President
Cold ironing Fumito Kawamata.
Launching a new, ‘green’ era in shipping at the ■ To learn more visit www1.polb.com.
Port of Long Beach on Tuesday, November 11,
2008, the ‘K’ Line container vessel, Long Beach
Bridge, became the port's first ship to plug into
clean electrical power and shut down its diesel
engines at berth for major air quality
improvements.
A commissioning ceremony at the
International Transportation Service (ITS)
terminal marked the completion of an $US 8
million project that installed electrical power
outlets for ships docking at Pier G. Plug-in
shoreside power, also known as ‘cold-ironing’,
allows ships to shut down their auxiliary engines
while the ship is docked, for a 100 percent
reduction of air pollution at berth.
‘Shoreside power is a top environmental
initiative under our Green Port Policy,’ said
Harbor Commission President James C. Hankla.
‘Because many ships burn unclean bunker fuel,
shutting down their engines achieves major air
quality improvements immediately.’ ▲ Cold ironing connection
Seaways January 2009
p29-30 Letters, NI Log Jan 09 19/12/08 00:16
letters
Heibe Spirit sentencing
The decision by the Korean Appeal Court
to find guilty the master and chief officer of
the Hebei Spirit, an anchored VLCC which
was struck by a Samsung Crane Barge,
will surely go down as one of the most
disgraceful examples of a miscarriage of
justice. For Captain Jasprit Chawla and
Chief Officer Syam Chetan to be sentenced
to prison terms and lead from the court in
handcuffs is a disgrace and insult to the
whole shipping industry.
It is hardly surprising that the Indian
seafarers’ unions are up in arms. No
wonder the ITF and its international
membership are questioning whether it is
safe for its members to travel on ships to
Korea. No wonder carriers are considering
future calls at Korean ports. Certainly ship
owners will be reviewing their future
shipbuilding orders in Korean yards.
Having found the Hebei Spirit officers
innocent of all charges at a court hearing
on June 24 this year, it appeared to be an
extraordinary decision made by the
Korean prosecutor to go for appeal on such
an open and shut case.
To then follow this decision by failing to
allow the Hebei Spirit officers to return
home to their loved ones after six months
held in Korea, was to compound the gross
injustice that had been done and was
despite assurances from V Ships that the
officers would return for any future
hearings. The two officers have now been
held in Korea, without the right to leave
the country, for one year
As far as the appeal case itself is
concerned, the reliance placed upon the
Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST)
findings and conclusions, has resulted in
technically flawed, unreliable and unjust
evidence being submitted to the Daejeon
District Court, the Court of Appeal, which
returned its decision today.
In submitting their report, the KMST
has demonstrated both its incompetence
and an obvious desire to find fault with the
officers of the Hebei Spirit. It is also a
matter of fact that in compiling their
report, the KMST has not complied with
the IMO guidelines for consultation with
other parties.
Seaways January 2009
Page 1
This blatant and totally unjustifiable
case of criminalisation of a profession that
we all rely upon for our international trade
must not go unanswered by the
international community and all those in
the shipping industry.
We can only hope that the authorities in
Korea will take immediate steps to restore
the country’s now tarnished image as a
place where all who deal there can expect
justice and respect of human rights.
V Group, Monaco
This is the text of an open letter to
President Lee Myung-bak, President of the
Republic of Korea, from INTERTANKO.
We, the International Association of
Independent Tanker Owners, have noted
with considerable dismay the second
(Appeal) decision of the Korean Maritime
Safety Tribunal (KMST) and its findings of
fault on the part of the two ship’s officers
of the Hebei Spirit; Captain Jasprit
Chawla and Chief Officer, Syam Chetan.
As a responsible and accountable
international shipping association, which
represents over 80 per cent of independent
tanker owner interests worldwide, we first
wish to offer all our sympathy to the people
of Korea who were so badly affected by the
spill of oil which resulted when the
runaway Samsung crane barge struck the
legitimately anchored tanker Hebei Spirit.
We are aware that both Captain Chawla
and Chief Officer Chetan were acquitted in
the Daesan Court of the First Instance in
June this year of all charges of criminal
negligence. We are also aware that this
court judgment is presently under appeal
and understand that the Daesan Court of
Appeal will be giving judgment as early as
Wednesday 10 December.
We are further aware that the first
(Inchon) KMST decision has already been
submitted in evidence in the Daesan Court
of Appeal proceedings, and that it is likely
that the second (Appeal) KMST decision
will also be submitted in evidence in these
proceedings. We are advised that Courts in
Korea attach great weight to KMST
decisions. Noting this, and having
considered in some detail the second
(Appeal) decision of the KMST that is now
before us as well as the first, we believe
them both to be technically flawed and
therefore that they draw unjust
conclusions.
We wish also to express our concern
that the KMST reports have not been
produced in accordance with the
internationally recognised IMO Interim
Guidelines (MSC/Circ 1058) and IMO Code
for the Investigation of Marine Casualties
and Incidents. One of the cornerstones of
this Code is the requirement to cooperate
and consult with all interested parties
before a final report is made.
We therefore urge the Daesan Court of
Appeal to carefully consider all of the
evidence, and in particular the judgment of
the Daesan Court of First Instance, and
not to rely solely on these KMST decisions
when reaching its decision. We also appeal
to the Court to pay full respect to all its
international treaty obligations to
seafarers in rendering its decision. After it
has made a careful and balanced review of
all the evidence, we hope that the Court
will reach a fair and just decision, not just
in the interests of Captain Chawla and
Chief Officer Chetan, but also as a
demonstration to seafarers trading to the
Republic of Korea that they can expect the
highest standards of fair treatment and
justice.
It would be highly regrettable if the
outcome of these proceedings were to
prove detrimental to Korea’s international
reputation and to its status as a tanker
shipping nation, to its shipyards which rely
on business from international tanker
owners and to its refining and chemicals
industry whose oil is delivered by the
international tanker fleet.
INTERTANKO, London
Regarding the Hebei Spirit officers,
Oceans XV has taken a verbal feedback
from 46 Indian officers today and the
following recommendations have come out
as a result of this survey.
1. Indian officers are not keen to visit
South Korean ports, as a protest;
2. They will wear black arm bands if their
vessels do go to South Korea;
3. New Delhi and NCR Seafarers will
29
p29-30 Letters, NI Log Jan 09 19/12/08 00:16
protest outside the South Korea embassy,
to be highlighted in press and media.
4. We request all Indian seafarers not to
purchase any goods, such as cars and TVs,
made in South Korea.
5. We request the CMMI, Nautical
Institute, Institute of Marine Engineers,
training institutes, shipping companies
and any other concerned organisations
based in New Delhi/NCR to form a joint
forum to deal with such cases, now and
later.
Captain Sanjiv Verma MNI, Oceans
XV at sea
Coral Sea
We should not allow our relief at the
acquittal of Captain Laptalo of the Coral
Sea, to be construed as a victory. We in the
marine transportation industry persist in
regarding these arrests as isolated
incidents, but the reality is that
shipmasters are being systematically
targeted by prosecutors. We are all
familiar with the terms ‘racism’ and
‘sexism’. What we are now seeing is
‘professionism’, the systematic targeting of
anyone who commands a merchant ship.
Until we are prepared to give this
obscenity a name, and denounce it,
‘naming and shaming’ those who
perpetrate it, we will not combat it
effectively.
I believe that ‘professionism’ is the
cause of the failure by governments to take
action against the Somali pirates. Once a
group is stigmatised, as are shipmasters,
(and sex-trade workers), it is easy to
justify inaction in their protection from
threat. Would we see such inaction were
200 air travellers, instead of 200 seafarers,
being held hostage?
Captain Alan Knight FNI, Halifax,
Canada
Conning/not conning
The article by Captain Nick Nash
(December 2008 Seaways) provided an
interesting overview of a fresh approach to
bridge resource management. The author
deserves praise for his paper and for
sharing his employers’ bridge team
command and control initiatives (BTCC).
While welcoming the new initiatives, I
have some concerns regarding the
perceived role of the pilot. Captain Nash
acknowledges the pilot’s role as being ‘well
defined by tradition and marine legislation’
but perhaps there is a need to revisit such
in order to prevent the pilot becoming
marginalised.
30
Page 2
Looking at the statute and relevant
case law which clearly define the role of
the pilot: at statute law defines a pilot as
‘any person not belonging to a ship who
has the conduct thereof’. (Ref: Sect 742
MS Act 1894).
● Case law – The Mickleham (1918): The
meaning of the word ‘conduct’ was
considered and concluded that if a ship is
to be conducted by a pilot it ‘does not
mean that she is to be navigated under
his advice: it means that she must be
conducted by him’.
● Case law – The Tactician (1971): When
considering the word ‘conduct’ the judge
stated, ‘It is a cardinal principle that
the pilot is in sole charge of the ship,
and that all directions as to speed,
course, stopping and reversing... are for
the pilot’.
● Case law – Babbs V Press (1971): The
judge decided that ‘a pilot can only act in
such capacity when he has the conduct
of the ship’. Source: www.pilotmag.co.uk
(issue 291, October 2007).
In the UK, in a compulsory pilotage
area, the pilot has the conduct of the
vessel. The challenge therefore, for those
involved in the design of bridge resource
management (BRM), would appear to be:
how to integrate the pilot.
Captain Nash writes: ‘Local pilots play
an important part in our operation, and by
using this system and the conning table,
they are fully integrated into our bridge
team, depending on their involvement from
experience of previous arrivals at that
port.’ Surely pilots should be fully
integrated into the bridge team regardless
of their involvement from experience of
previous arrivals at that port?
If pilots are involved in BRM/BTCC from
the outset, the bridge will, in my view, be a
safer place. Masters, pilots and ships’
officers must work together.
I salute Captain Nash for his excellent
article.
Matthew Winter FNI, Southampton, UK
Colregs: Rule 19
My thanks to Captains Ward and
Sterzhantov for their comments. I
understand the various provisos they
suggest concerning the number of possible
variations to the given scenario (Seaways,
September 2008).
I should point out however, that this
was the situation presented to me as a
hypothetical scenario. So my article dealt
strictly with the facts presented. Obviously,
if other traffic, topographical or
navigational factors were involved then the
flexibility of the Colregs being what they
are, a different solution may have been
called for.
Captain Ward’s comment that AIS
would undoubtedly be a factor today,
which Rule 19 does not take cognisance of,
is an interesting one. In this case, my
correspondent only mentioned they were
container vessels, I assume, to show that
all involved had no restrictions as to
manoeuvring capability.
I simply cannot agree with Captain
Ward’s ‘initial alteration of course of at
least 60° to port’ is the safest action. This
suggestion, put forward as one of the
solutions to the problem initially
presented, is what worried me most and
the reason why I felt the necessity to write
my piece. Altering to port is a flagrant
violation of Rule 19, and as the Rule
requires the vessel ahead to alter to
starboard, presents a dangerous
development. Any movement to port of our
own vessel is just not on, and Captain
Ward’s calculation of the possible CPAs
achieved seems to ignore the required
alteration to starboard of the vessel ahead.
I appreciate that altering towards the
vessel to starboard needs a drastic change
and will still end up with passing close
astern. As I mentioned, if own ship is
concerned about such a close passing
distance then she can slow down and turn.
From a practical point of view, any slowing
will reduce the rate of turn and personally
I would prefer to have maximum
manoeuvrability. But I would be the first to
admit this is purely a subjective
judgment, it is whatever an individual feels
happiest with.
What the vessel abeam will see on her
radar is my echo producing a relative
vector drawing astern. First, Rule 19
requires her to do nothing, but if in the
unlikely event she does feel that a close
quarters situation is developing the Rule
requires her to alter away from a vessel
abeam. Either way it is a safe outcome.
To conclude, I must reiterate that
anything I write concerning Colreg
situations is written strictly within what
the Rules require. As readers may be well
aware I am not a fan of the present system
of collision prevention, but it is, for all its
flaws, the regime our seafarers have to
operate within. To ignore the stipulations
of Rule 19, in a scenario such as this, is
dangerous folly.
Captain Roger Syms FNI, Launceston,
Tasmania, Australia
Seaways January 2009
p31-32 Command Seminar 19/12/08 00:16
Command Seminar 2008:
Glasgow
Philip Wake MSc, FNI
he third of this year’s series of
T Command Seminars took place
aboard the Tall Ship in the heart
of Glasgow, home to many of the
world’s major ship management companies
as well as the Glasgow College of Nautical
Studies. These factors, plus an excellent
line up of presentations, ensured a large
attendance of over 100. The West of
Scotland Branch committee had done a fine
job to put the seminar on and their efforts in
attracting sponsors to support the event (so
as to reduce the cost to delegates) played an
important part in attracting serving
seafarers, ship managers, pilots, surveyors,
naval officers, cadets and others to attend
and contribute.
Our thanks go to all the sponsors (see
box) and particularly the major grant from
Trinity House, London which enabled a
number of serving seafarers and the
cadets to attend. It is generally reckoned
that there are more Designated Persons
per square mile in Glasgow than anywhere
else in the world and it was pleasing to see
and hear a healthy representation of them
at this seminar.
The President opened proceedings with
a brief resume of the seminars already
held in Antwerp and Panama before using
the occasion to present the Fellowship of
the Institute to Captain David Stirling, a
salvage master and consultant, and Vice
Admiral Tim Laurence CB MVO, currently
Head of Defence Estates, MoD UK.
It was perhaps a tall order to task an
Admiral to present the keynote address,
given that the Royal Navy does not have to
apply the ISM Code or employ the
Designated Person process. However,
Admiral Laurence rose to the task with
true professionalism and humour. He
highlighted that all seafarers face the same
Seaways January 2009
Page 1
challenges, whatever the management
structure, and should endeavour to speak
with one voice.
The Institute is uniquely placed for this
representative role and was tackling an
important subject in assessing the subject
of the Command team and the Designated
Person (DP). He advised that the role of
the DP should be defined for non-
emergency operations and should not be
too specific as it is important for the DP to
be able to use initiative in developing
situations. Above all, the DP would require
enthusiasm, willingness and professional
integrity to fulfil the role successfully.
John Adams – Teekay’s Managing
Director in Glasgow – gave a
comprehensive presentation of how his
company implements the ISM Code
effectively in their fleet. He did not deny
that there is a shortage of qualified and
experienced seafarers today and that this
will impact on recruitment to shore jobs in
the future. Quality is needed throughout
the industry and to be effective the DP
must have credibility so that commercial
expediency is not allowed to overrule
safety of operations. He summed up the
attributes of the ideal DP as follows:
● High performer
● Open to feedback
● Walks the talk of ISM
● Leadership skills
● Earns trust and respect
● Accessible to all
● Accountable and part of the team
● Management capability
Master’s responsibilities
The responsibilities of the master to
review the effectiveness of the Safety
Management System (SMS) and to know
and work with the DP to ensure effective
ISM Code implementation were covered by
Captain Donal Linehan. He related this
with the duties of Port State Control (PSC)
and explained that the PSC Inspector will
always deal with the master as the point of
contact with the company rather than the
DP. Commenting that there is a general
low level of review of the SMS, he
explained the process of PSC inspections
and how these are targeted for greater
effect (see this issue pp 21-24 and
Seaways December 2008).
The legal aspects of the Designated
Person’s role were covered by James
Wilson, Senior Partner with Ince & Co, who
pointed out that the language used in the
IMO Convention gives the DP a monitoring,
not line management, role. However, under
UK law the DP shall ensure compliance
with the SMS and as such could be
exposed to criminal prosecution if a
casualty occurs. A defence would be that
the DP had taken all reasonable
precautions and had exercised due
diligence. While there have been no
prosecutions of DPs as yet, he noted that
the company involved in the Cosco Busan
casualty were being indicted in the US for
failures on board. It therefore seemed
more likely that claimants would pursue
the company rather than a person as there
was the prospect of higher damages being
awarded. Pertinent advice about the
importance of accurate paper trails was
offered, both before and after an incident,
and the risks of documented deficiencies
affecting the seaworthiness of the ship.
The contrasting experiences of being
the DP for capsize bulkcarriers and super
Seminar sponsors
Trinity House, London
V Ships
Teekay Shipmanagement
Serco Denholm
Shiptalk Recruitment
Northern Marine Management
Transas
Caledonian MacBrayne
Maersk
Glasgow College of Nautical
Studies
Ince & Co
Marlins
Witherby Seamanship
International
Anglo-Easterm Shipmanagement
Haughton Maritime Ltd
Videotel Marine International
31
p31-32 Command Seminar 19/12/08 00:16
▲ Captain Andy Cook FNI, Chairman, West of Scotland Branch; the President, Captain Donal Linehan FNI,
Philip Wake; Vice Admiral Tim Laurence CB MVO FNI; James Wilson, Partner, Ince & Co; John Adams, MD,
Teekay Shipmanagement.
yachts were presented by Jon Gray. He
corrected the commonly held belief that
the DP is required to be in the company’s
emergency response team: while this is
undoubtedly desirable, it is not required
under Clause 8 of the ISM Code. Jon
supported the view that the DP should not
head the technical or commercial
departments of the company but should be
placed at a high level in the management
structure, with direct access to ships’ staff
and the owner, to deal with problems
irrespective of commercial considerations.
In common with a number of other
speakers, he covered many of the well
known problems within the industry –
manning levels, qualifications and
experience, fatigue, language difficulties,
and the blame culture amongst other
things. He also identified attitude problems
– an assumption that all is OK and a
certain macho image that results in
deficiencies not being reported.
Further presentations looked at the
subject from the perspective of the Royal
Navy, a coastal master, and a deep sea
master. As already noted, the Navy does
not have a Designated Person system but
its command structure is such that there
are clear reporting and oversight systems
in place. It was clear from the masters’
perspectives that the DP is seen as an
essential support between the command
team and the office. For this to be effective
good communications are a pre-requisite
and visits to the ships by the DP and
Directors of the company are particularly
helpful. The point was made that the
32
Page 2
Feature
liaison should be pro-active rather than
reactive. These and the legal issues were
again explored by Dr Phil Anderson in his
thoughtful, case study based presentation
which questions whether the ISM Code has
been hijacked by the lawyers (see
Seaways July 2008).
Each presentation was followed by brief
questions so as to leave plenty of time in
the afternoon for a discussion forum which
lasted for the best part of an hour.
Contributors to this spanned the various
sectors of the industry – DPs, pilots,
masters, surveyors, junior officers, fleet
managers and others. A representative
from the UK Marine Pilots Association
commented that the breakdown of bridge
team management under pilotage is
particularly worrying and that a
combination of fatigue and pressure of
other work prior to arrival means that the
con is frequently handed over to the pilot
as soon as he/she arrives on the bridge. He
offered the opportunity for DPs to
accompany pilots to witness this.
Summing up at the end of the Seminar
the Institute’s Chief Executive drew on the
syndicate work at the Antwerp Command
Seminar and posed the following straw poll
questions:
1. Is having a third party DP desirable?
Can they know enough about the
company?
■ A large majority felt the DP should be
employed directly within the company
2. Does the DP have to be a mariner?
■ There was a clear consensus that the
DP must be a senior mariner to have the
credibility, respect and trust to do the job.
Leadership and management abilities were
also essential.
3. Has the ISM Code and DP role helped
the master?
■ Most felt that it had as they were
employed by companies that have
implemented the spirit as well as the letter
of the Code – in other words, the
management believed that it would
improve the efficiency of the fleet.
4. Does the master really have overriding
authority as stated by the ISM Code?
■ Interestingly, there was a clear division
of opinion on this.
Overall conclusions:
● The command team and the DP must be
a team with excellent liaison and two way
communication.
● The DP’s independence from
commercial pressures is crucial but there
was great doubt as to whether it was the
case in practice.
● Face-to-face and telephone
communications are very important as
there was an appreciation that email
correspondence can be dangerous for a
variety of reasons – not least the tendency
to read and react to them hastily, leading
to misinterpretation.
● The role of the DP should be defined for
non-emergency operations but the DP
should be included in the company’s
emergency response team as he/she should
know the command team best.
● Incident investigation and the lesson
learning process is crucial for an effective
safety management system.
● It was felt that the ISM Code had been
designed to produce the minimum
standard of safety management so
companies should aspire to higher
standards.
● The buck stops with the company when
there is an incident – or at least it should
stop there rather than with the master.
MARINE SOFTWARE
Marine Software programs for Navigation, AIS,
Radar, Loading, Surveying, Pilotage, Tides &
Electronic Charts. For Windows PC, Psion and
Pocket PC computers. All at affordable prices.
All software supplied with free lifetime
worldwide support.
NEW! AIS Receivers, Transponders and PC AIS
Ship Tracker for Harbours and Onboard use.
Mike Harrison MNI
Dolphin Maritime Software Ltd
626 Alston House
White Cross
LANCASTER LA14XF, ENGLAND.
Tel 01524 841946. Fax 01524 841946.
E-Mail: sales@dolphinmaritime.com
Web Site: www.dolphinmaritime.com
Seaways January 2009
p33 Julian Tribute 19/12/08 00:17 Page 1

A tribute to Julian
When Julian Parker finally retired from
The Nautical Institute, the marine industry
turned out in force to pay tribute to him.
It is nearly 40 years since Julian helped
found the Institute, which he served as
its first Secretary and latterly Publisher.
At a luncheon held in Trinity House,
London, last month, distinguished figures
in shipping, together with colleagues and
friends, were on hand to celebrate his
work. They included five Honorary Fellows
and most of the Institute’s Past Presidents.
Apart from Julian’s own, highly
entertaining and generous speech, the
formal highlight was a presentation from
the Institute’s President, Captain Richard
Coates FNI. The following is an extract.

▲ Richard Coates presents Julian Parker with his own book.

he capacity of the Institute to the like of Julian again. Few new people wherever he went. Whenever

T work constructively with diverse

partners in the industry is an
important principle, established
at its foundation in 1971. Much of the credit
for that must go to Julian who built many
bridges for the Institute over the years with
his renowned ability to accommodate
others’ points of view, his sense of humour,
and his enthusiasm.
It is also the case that the Institute’s
standing in the industry is a factor in
organisations wishing to work with us, and
here again Julian’s influence in
establishing the Institute as a major
publisher of practical guides in maritime
operations has been crucial.
That venture, begun in a small way
some 35 years ago, has developed from the
Institute’s journal being a section in the
Safety at Sea International publication
to being the highly respected monthly
Seaways with a worldwide distribution to
the membership and major fleets.
Similarly, the Institute’s books range from
monographs on specialist subjects to
major hardbacks which have become
industry standards.
Four years ago the Institute was
awarded the contract to publish eight of
the Royal Navy’s navigation and
seamanship reference titles – another of
Julian’s major achievements.
I doubt that the Institute will ever see
Seaways January 2009
organisations would have the foresight to
take on a young 31 year old and appoint
him a year later to the influential position
of Secretary. He used that influence wisely,
in building the Institute from a UK
membership of about, 1000 to its
worldwide scope today with well over, 6000
members in at least 110 countries and over
40 branches running voluntary
programmes to enhance their members’
knowledge. Over the years he has travelled
widely, making friends and influencing
When I took over from Julian on his
retirement as Secretary, various
people said to me that it would be
very difficult running the Institute
with the ‘old’ boss still on the staff in
a part time role. Having worked with
Julian for three years before the
handover, I was confident that his
professionalism and character would
ensure that difficulties did not occur,
and I am pleased to confirm that was
the case. Not only has the Institute
had the continued benefit of his
publishing expertise these past five
years but I have greatly valued his
advice and support as the Institute
evolves. Along the way there have
been many changes and Julian has
possible he has been accompanied by his
wife, Christine, who has been a wonderful
supporter of his work while juggling the
demands of their family and her own work
as a physiotherapist.
Julian, then, is both fortunate and
unique, and I know he has every intention
of remaining active within the maritime
world in various ways for awhile yet.
Indeed, it is difficult to imagine Julian
being anything other than an active and
enthusiastic advocate for progress.
always been constructive in his input
and ultimately supportive of the way
ahead.
Julian’s contribution to the
Institute in an unbroken time line
from its foundation in 1971 to the
present day has been immeasurable.
He has received richly deserved
recognition in the award of the OBE
and the Lloyd’s List ‘Lifetime
Achievement’ Award as well as an
Honorary Fellowship from Liverpool
John Moores University, but I know
that it is the friendship and respect of
his fellow professionals and
colleagues that mean the most to him,
and in that I join wholeheartedly.
Philip Wake
33
p34-36 Conf, NI Log, People 19/12/08 00:17
conferences
The carriage of cargoes by
sea: SE England seminar
Captain A P Minns MNI
Following the success of its seminar,
‘Undeclared Hazardous Goods: causes and
consequences’, the South East of England
Branch hosted a sequel, to discuss ‘The
safe stuffing, stowage and securing of
cargo transport units on ships’. It was held
at East Malling, Kent, on 12 November
2008 and attracted attendance from
several disciplines in the transport
industry. This was most encouraging and
due in no little part to the generous
sponsorship by the Maritime and
Coastguard Agency (MCA), Norfolk Line
(Dover-Dunkerque Ferries), Stena Line
and the Port of London Authority.
Captain John Garner FNI, Fleet and
Ports Director of P&O Ferries chaired the
meeting and the keynote address was
delivered by Captain John Leach MNI,
General Manager, Global Dangerous Cargo
Special Cargo Management, Maersk Line.
He asked the vital question ‘Is trust
enough?’. He illustrated in detail the chain
of responsibility in the stuffing and
carriage of container cargo, which starts
with the manufacturer, who is responsible
for the classification of dangerous goods
according to the IMDG Code.
The links include the consignor/shipper,
consolidator (aka stuffer) before the
container is presented for shipment. It is
then the carrier’s responsibility for correct
stowage and declaration. If there is a
break in the trust in the chain, there is the
risk of liability of anyone in that chain for
their own failure.
▲ John Garner at the lectern.
34
Page 1
Keith Bradley, Hazardous Goods
Advisor, MCA, gave information about
changes in the IMDG regulations in the
form of Amendment 34-08, which comes in
force on a voluntary basis from 1 January
2009 and is mandatory from 1 January
2010. The significant change is the
mandatory need for training for everyone
involved in the shipping of cargo subject to
IMDG and for training records to be
maintained. Persons under training are
required to work under supervision until
suitably qualified. Changes are to be made
in the categories and the labelling of
marine pollutants.
‘What happens when things go wrong’
was a graphic presentation by Dr Chris
Foster, Principal Member of Dr J H
Burgoyne and Partners, which has the task
of causal investigation into marine
casualties. Many of Chris Foster’s graphic
slides included the results of containers
severely distorted due to decomposition and
extensive contamination within containers
not to mention the severe damage to the
ship in way of the stowage position.
Jim Chubb MNI, BMT Marine and
Offshore Surveys Ltd, shared some of his
experiences. He described with graphic
illustrations the damage caused to
containers by inappropriate stowage of
cargo. Some examples clearly showed a
total lack of understanding of the shipping
process and the rigours of sea transport.
The gross weight of containers is becoming
a common problem. Jim Chubb reported
that 50 per cent of loads are either up to 15
per cent underweight or 20 per cent
overweight. Modern containerships are of
such a magnitude that such weight
discrepencies can mean the difference
between a stable or unstable vessel,
notwithstanding draught considerations.
The matter of the transport of waste
was discussed. The Basel Convention for
the Control of Trans-boundary Movements
of Hazardous Waste and their disposal is
the controlling convention. However, due
consideration is not always applied and
damage occurs. For instance if waste
metals for recycling are not cleaned
beforehand, they can in themselves be
dangerous if dissimilar metals and
contamination is present in the shipment.
There have been recent publicised cases of
UK household waste intended for recycling
being shipped for disposal or landfill
overseas. Perhaps we all need to seek
reassurance from our own local authority
that their waste stream can satisfy audit.
The first speaker of the afternoon, Clive
Savigar, Director of Coleshill Freight
Services Ltd presented us all with a
National Lottery ticket. The first delegate
to obtain a ‘full house’ would be presented
with a bottle of UN 3065 to drink. The
purpose of this very effective strategy was
to illustrate that the lottery is a game of
chance some winners and some losers. The
methods used by some shippers are akin to
a lottery or a gamble. If nothing untoward
happens they win. If it all goes wrong
innocent persons are killed or injured and
they are the losers.
Peregrine Storrs-Fox, Risk Manage-
ment Director, TT Club, gave the insurance
perspective. Up to one in three containers
hold incorrectly stowed cargo but, if cargo
is securely packed, it can survive almost
anything. The cargo must be adequately
prepared for or protected from all the
motional forces likely to be encountered
during carriage, reasonable mishap, such
as rough seas, and climatic changes.
The facts
According to the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE), in 2006/07 the transport
industry reported 34 fatal injuries, 3,285
major injuries (15 per cent from handling,
15 per cent falling from a height) and
429,000 days taken off due to injuries. But
the ‘official’ costs of claims do not reflect
true costs: every £1 spent on insurance hid
as another £8-36 spent on uninsured costs,
such as collateral and reputational
damage, emergency supplies, increased
inspection and maintenance and
production delays.
The loss of a 4,419 TEU container ship
in the English Channel in January 2007
was caused by hull failure in heavy seas.
Analysis showed that there was a weight
mis-declaration of some 1,250 MT. There
were mis-stowed or mis-declared deck
containers. In February 2007, in the Baltic
Sea, heavy seas caused seven 30’
containers to collapse. The maximum
allowable stacking weight had been
Seaways January 2009
p34-36 Conf, NI Log, People 19/12/08 00:17
exceeded. Quite clearly the question was
answered in that every stakeholder pays:
it’s us, individually and corporately.
The South East of England Branch
would like to record our appreciation of all
the speakers who kindly provided their
time experience, and expertise. Our
London
Fatigue – two watch ships
The December technical meeting of the London
Branch, held on HQS Wellington, attracted a
large audience. This included delegates attending
the MSC meeting at the IMO, who had passed up
a free evening reception to participate in the
discussion. David Squire FNI, chaired the panel
of speakers: Michael Grey, Lloyds’ List; Colin
Sandeman, Assistant Director, Bahamas
Maritime Authority; and Eric Murdoch, Chief
Surveyor for Charles Taylor (Standard P&I Club).
David Squire opened by quoting from a recent
Finnish report on a study of the condition of
seafarers, the frequency of fatigue as well as the
effects of shift systems and other background
factors on alertness. Of the 185 seafarers who
responded to the study, 17 per cent had fallen
asleep at least once while keeping watch and the
study showed that the six/six watch system
increased the likelihood of symptoms of
tiredness and therefore also the possible risk of
nodding off compared to other watch systems.
Michael Grey told the audience that other
modes of transport take fatigue very seriously
indeed – road, rail and aviation have strict
regulations designed to prevent fatigue and
mitigate its effect, backed up by legislation.
There has been a modicum of progress on
addressing fatigue at sea, but it needs more
proactive work from the authorities.
Seaways January 2009
Page 2
sponsors provided valuable assistance and
counsel in the planning process.
The prime objective of this seminar was
educational and it was hoped that
delegates left with increased knowledge
and a formalised plan to improve or seek
to improve the safe carriage of cargoes
By the nature of their profession, seafarers
expect to work long hours and have developed
their own solutions to combat fatigue. Copious
amounts of black coffee seems to be favourite.
But it is painfully obvious that the two-watch
system is demonstrably unsustainable. The
industry should consider this in the context of
trying to encourage young people to go to sea.
Michael ended by reiterating that in the 21st
century we should not be operating ships in
such cavalier fashion – we need action now.
Colin Sandeman outlined the current
regulations in Solas and STCW relating to
principles of safe manning, noting that very
little of safe manning refers to operation of the
ship – maintenance, preparation of holds etc –
in addition to navigation duties. Owners who
reflag their vessels should not expect their
manning to be reduced, and, in fact, some flag
states may ask the owner to increase their
manning to comply with their regulations.
However, as most ships are now built with no
spare accommodation, increasing the numbers
may not be possible. Conversely, manning
should only be decreased if trade and
management systems justify it.
Principles for establishing the manning
levels of ships are under review with
implementation planned for 2010 or 2011. Colin
explained there are three contributing domains:
owners’ business model, operational context of
the ship and the human element. Each part has
an assessment and they must integrate with
each other. For the human element, pressure
within container transport units.
■ One great advantage of this electronic
age was that a memory stick with The
Nautical Institute logo was presented to
each delegate. This stick contained
information about the day’s proceedings
for their future reference.
must be maintained on owners/administrators
to ensure a viable safety management system
which gives an accountable attention to crew
welfare.
In his presentation, Eric Murdoch noted that
some of the largest and most expensive claims
have been caused by failures on the bridge and
it will come as no surprise that the majority of
incidents are caused by mistakes rather than
equipment failure – mistakes are not made by
machines, rather they are made by people.
Eric referred to an MCA human element
study which concluded that the most common
causal factors were: incorrect knowledge, skills
and attitudes, failure to appreciate the situation
and failure to take corrective action with the
principal cause of these being training, fatigue
and working stress. Rapid promotion has
produced senior officers with little practical
experience, Eric said. With the present crewing
crisis the maritime industry has now passed the
time where there is a need for additional
engineering safe guards, procedures or
legislation. The industry needs immediate
action to train, develop and improve the people.
Opening the debate from the audience, one
delegate pointed out that the problem was not
with two-watch ships, it was a problem with
two-navigator ships. He quoted statistics from
Norway that ships running aground had
increased by 25 per cent in 2007 and in one out
of seven groundings the OOW had fallen asleep.
And the remedy was to introduce a bridge watch
alarm to keep them awake… Another reported
35
p34-36 Conf, NI Log, People 19/12/08 00:17
that even though his company employed four
navigating officers on their vessels, they still
had a fatigue problem. This was not helped by
the many inspections ships have to undergo
nowadays; a situation exacerbated by some
officious inspectors insisting inspections take
place at any hour, without regard to the welfare
or hours of work of the seafarers.
One of the pilots in the audience said that he
was increasingly finding vessels, particularly
smaller ships, fitted with new technology where
the master had to work even harder, and lost
interest at a critical period of the voyage.
Another delegate said that it was not just about
safety and accidents, but it is about the health
of the seafarer and the lack of rest when in port
due to the increase in inspections. There has
been some success at IMO, but unless
regulations are applied unilaterally, the
health of the seafarer will continue to
be a problem.
One participant pointed out that the two-
watch system could be stopped by EU
regulations. If all signed up to ILO standards
that six/six watchkeeping is illegal as the hours
People
New members
The Membership Committee has nominated
the following for election by Council:
*Signifies members who have rejoined
Members
Ante, E O Captain/Master (Nigeria)
Brown, C R Captain/Pilot (US Gulf (Houston))
Clark, R J Captain/SQE Manager (UK/ Solent)
Counihan, M* Lt Cdr/OC (Ireland NS)
Dickinson, A M Mr/Assistant Gen Sec
(UK/London)
Dolan, T P Captain/Business Develop (US/S
California)
Gupta, P K Captain/Superintendent (Qatar)
Ifesemen, M O O Captain/Marine Supervisor
(Nigeria)
Koesairi, M N Captain/Marine Superint
(Indonesia)
Krosness, B E Mr/Principal Engineer (Norway)
Lewis, V S Mr/Instructor (UK/NE England)
Mugerab, A A Captain/Marine Specialist
(France (North))
O’Brien, R Lt Cdr/OC LE Aisling (Ireland NS)
O’Donnell, T P Commander (Ireland NS)
Rynne, J C Lt Cdr/Staff Officer Planning
(Ireland NS)
Shearer, P D* Captain/Manager (AUS - WA)
Winn, B L Mr/Marine Pilot (AUS - QLD)
36
Page 3
of work could not be complied with, PSC officers
could stop the practice immediately.
Further points raised included: ships are
being made to work harder than before, and
there are too many regulators with no
opposition to this. Can we put commercial
pressure on the companies, through insurance
companies for instance? Can we hit owners in
the pocket through insurers increasing
premiums to those whose vessels are involved in
accidents caused by fatigue? Insurers should
put pressure on owners and have the vessels
declared unseaworthy if the crew is fatigued.
However, statistics are difficult to quantify by
cause and this is the problem in getting fatigue
to be recognised as a cause of accidents. It is
very difficult to monitor and record and we need
legislation which is useable. But legislation is
moving forward, albeit slowly, and is governed
by the speed of IMO regulations. Flag states are
not perfect, but some do detain vessels.
However, if an owner wants to reduce the
manning levels, he will look around for a flag
which will accommodate him.
Yet another delegate proposed the owners by
Associate Members
Armstrong, S L Lieutenant (Ireland NS)
Barret, Elizabeth Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Brunicardi, M Lt/ Navigation Officer (Ireland
NS)
Bugler, A Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Burke, P Lt Cdr/ Legal Officer (Ireland NS)
Burke, T Mr/2nd Officer (Ireland)
Cahalane, D Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Cotter, J R Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Dicker, P Lt/ Gunnery Training Officer (Ireland
NS)
Doherty, P J Lieutenant (Ireland NS)
Fanning, Grace M Lt/ Navigation Officer
(Ireland NS)
Fitzgerald, R Lt/Fishery Officer (Ireland NS)
Harding, J R Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Linehan, S P J Sub Lt/Gunnery Officer (Ireland
NS)
Lynch, R J Sub Lt (Ireland NS)
Malanaphy, R Lt Cdr (Ireland NS)
McCarthy, G A Sub Lt/Navigation Officer
(Ireland NS)
McLaughlin, R Lt/Executive Officer (Ireland
NS)
Murphy, C M Lt/Admin. Officer (Ireland NS)
Nicoll, A Mr/Advocacy Manager (UK/Solent)
O’Donovan, D Sub Lt./ Assistant Op Officer
(Ireland NS)
▲ Left to right: Eric Murdoch, Colin Sandeman and
Michael Grey.
reducing their premiums if they actively combat
fatigue on their vessels.
David Squire closed the proceedings saying
he was encouraged by the input from the
audience and from the panel. Investing in people
rather than the cost of shipping is the way
forward for enlightened owners.
Harry Gale FNI
■ To contribute to the NI Fatigue Forum, visit
www.nautinst.org/fatigue/index.htm
O’Regan, A Lieutenant (Ireland NS)
Power, G Sub Lt/Gunnery Officer (Ireland NS)
Scannell, K Lieutenant (Ireland NS)
Smyth, E J Lt/Watchkeeper (Ireland NS)
Srivastava, A K Mr/Chief Officer (India
(North))
Srivastava, V Mr/Chief Officer (India (North))
Tarrant, M Lieutenant (Ireland NS)
Weldon, J Sub Lt/ Navigation Officer (Ireland
NS)
Associate Members to
Member
Dempsey, B Lt Cdr (Ireland NS)
Hobbins, T Lt Cdr (Ireland NS)
Kavanagh, J R Mr/Manager, MSQ (AUS-QLD)
Kirwan, D Lt Cdr (Ireland NS)
Power, C Lt Cdr (Ireland NS)
Sachs, L-F Mr (France (North))
Witaszewski, S Mr/DPO (Poland)
Student to Associate
Member
Donaldson, S Sub Lt/Watchkeeper (Ireland
NS)
Student
Cochrane, R M Cadet (AUS - NSW)
Seaways January 2009