Chapter 5
Observation
An auditor's opinion as to how the Code should be interpreted.
Sqfqy tlUllUlgellUJnt sy.tem
The Company's interpretation of the ISM Code.
The Code
In formulating the elements of the Code, of which there are 13, the International Maritime Organization has recognised and highlighted in the preamble that no two ship owners or shipping companies are the same and the Code has been written in broad terms (some would say too broad, which is allowing for individuals to interpret it incorrectly). To ensure widespread application the foundation to good safety management is the absolute commitment for implementation ofthe Code from the top. The top in this instance is not only you on board but also the very highest levels of management within companies and we will see how this commitment can be shown graphically when companies' organograms are displayed.
The Code itselfis divided into a preamble and 13 sections and I will attempt to expand on each section as follows:
Preamble
Recognises that no two ship owners or managers are the same and whilst each operate under a wide range of conditions, the Code is based on general principles and objectives.
The emphasis is that the foundation of good ship management is total commitment from the top in all matters ofsafety and pollution prevention is essential.
General
This is divided into four subsections entitled Definitions, Objectives, Application and Functional Requirements for a safety-management system.
The Definitions given are for the ISM Code itself, the Company and the Administration.
The Objectives of the Code are simply those which any well run comp any should try to achieve, namely that risks are assessed, a safe working environment is provided, standards will be continually improved and that all mandatory rules, regulations and industry recommendations are followed.
The Code is Applicable to all ships (after the year 2002).
The Functional requirements of the Code stipulate that the Company must develop and maintain such items as a safety and environmental protection policy and develop instructions and procedures for the safe operation of ships. (This heading, when the numb er of operations on board which relate to safety are considered, is all embracing). The Company must define levels of communication and authority i.e., it 34 THE NAUTICAL INSTITUTE
must produce an organogram for the management structure ashore and afloat. The Comp any must also develop procedures for reporting accidents and non- conformances (see definitions), to prepare for any emergency situations and carry out internal audits and reviews.
The points highlighted under the first sections are very broad based in their definitions. As we move through the following sections of the Code it will be seen how they are expanded but not to such an extent that it does not allow for a degree of interpretation.
Safety and environmental protection policy The Company must establish a policy and then ensure it is imp lemented throughout the organisation, both ashore and afloat. How the policy is implemented and who implements it are described in other sections of the Code.
Company responsibilities and authority
The Code requires that within this heading the Company responsible for the management of the vessel provides the Administration with its full name and details and it must also define and document the levels of management and how the lines of responsibility are interlinked. This will normally take the form of an organogram and a typical simplistic Company organisation could be as follows:-
Board of Directors
I
I
IFleet Manager
I Safety Manager Accounts Manager Operations Manager
Ship Manager (Ops)
I
I
Ship Manager (Ops)
Fleet
I
Technical Manager Ship Manager (Tech)
I
Ship Manager (Tech)
I
Figure 5.7 Typical simplistic company organisation
The Company must also provide adequate resources and support to ensure that the designated person ashore can fulfil hislher duties. It can be seen that the intention ofthis part of the Code is to ensure that corporate responsibility is totally transparent and those that are responsible for all operations are now easily identified.
Designated person(s) ashore (DPA)
This is one of the most important sections of the Code, both for the ship's master and the Company in general. Before discussing the implication ofsection 4 it is important that the text is known:
'To ensure the safe operation of each ship and to 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 ofthe operation of each ship and ensuring that adequate resources and shore- based support are applied, as required".
The key words in this text are "link", "monitoring"
and "adequate resources". The DPA is the link between the master and the Company's Board. If possible, he or she should be removed from the day to day line management of the vessels and not have any budgetary responsibilities for the vessels' running costs.
The DPA must also monitor the safety and pollution prevention aspects of each ship. In practice he/she must be aware of most facets of the ship because the maj ority of operations on board vessels today have a safety or pollution aspect to them.
The DPAmust also ensure adequate resources and shore based support are provided to the vessel, this can encompass the supply of equipment and stores to ensuring sufficient shore management time is allocated.
To illustrate the functions of a DPA the following organogram is shown:
Directors-·---.l DPA
J
Line management Master
(Ship managers! ... _ - - (on board superintendents) management)
Figure 5.2 Functions ola DPA
In the "normal" course of managing a vessel the master, as chairman of the onboard management structure, communicates with the ship managers/
superintendents ashore. They in turn are responsible to the Board of Directors for operating the ship in a safe condition and in line with Board approval concerning running costs.
If a condition arises on board which the master considers unsafe, for example the radar is giving persistent problems or the oily water separator has ceased to function correctly, he would in the first instant approach the respective manager or superintendent requesting action. If this action is not forthcoming and the master is itill concerned he now has the option of approaching the DP A. It is then incumbent upon the DP A to investigate the situation
and bring it to the attention of the Board of Directors.
If, in the examples given, additional monies above Board approved figures are required, the Board will then have to approve or otherwise any additional expenditure. If they make the decision to veto the masters/DP A's recommendations then, if an incident occurs in the future, it can now be proved the responsibility rested with the highest level of management within the Company.
The position of the DP A can now be seen to be extremely important within any Company, not only to protect the master's interests but also to ensure that the Board ofDirectors is kept fully aware. Make certain you know who the DPA is within your Company.
:Master's responsibility and authority
Section 5 is divided into two parts. Part 1 requires the Company to "define and document" the master's responsibility regarding implementing the policy, motivating the crew to observing their policy, issuing orders and instructions, verifying that special requirements are observed and reviewing the Safety Management System (SMS) and reporting any deficiencies to the shore based management. Three of these five subsections are self-explanatory i.e., implementing the policy, issuing orders and verifying special requirements. The remaining two sections are worthy of an explanation.
Motivating the crew
How is this done? Remember, in the ISM regime, objective evidence is required. Safety and management meetings are held on a regular basis on well managed vessels. Each of these meetings will consist of representatives from thejunior officers and the ratings and will be minuted. Members of the committee should be encouraged to pass on to their shipmates the dialogue of the meetings. Safety drills are held with post drill discussion afterwards, when all crew members should participate. Again, these discussions should be recorded by the safety officer.
Safety videos are shown and their contents discussed.
Heads of departments, when giving out work schedules, will discuss what personal protection equipment is required and presumably the safety implication involved when the work is being carried out. When crew members do not adhere to Company requirements regarding P.P E. then disciplinary action is taken. All these factors can ably demonstrate to an auditor that you "motivate the crew".
Reviewing the safety management system How this is achieved is entirely dependent upon the master and the Company. It can be as simple as a sentence in the Safety Minutes that the system has been reviewed or acheckliitwhich shows clearly what sections have been scrutinised The important point is that the system isn't "carved in stone". It is, in fact, or should be, a "living, breathing" set of documents and it is only by the input of both shore and ship based management will it really work.
The second part ofsection 5 requires the Company to ensure that a statement is embodied in the SMS giving the master clear and unambiguous authority to take whatever steps he deems necessary in respect of safety and pollution prevention. Be sure you are aware of this statement and where it is within your S.M. S.