safety campaign - ampi.org.au...solas convention. solas regulation v/23 and associated supporting...
TRANSCRIPT
-
S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N
2 0 2 0
-
CONTENTS
2 Near miss on a
Pilot Ladder
Beliefs
3 Foreword
4 Participants
5 Vessel Type
6 Means of Transfer
7-9 Non-Compliance
by Type of Defect
10 Required Boarding
Arrangements for
Pilot
11 IMPA Officers
and Secretariat
I N T R O D U C T I O N
22 I N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O NI N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O N
IMPA represents the international community of pilots. We use the resources of our membership to promote effective safety outcomes in pilotage as an essential public service.
N E A R M I S S O N A P I L O T L A D D E R
The 1st of October is always an important date for me as it marks the start of the IMPA Pilot ladder survey, this year was a marked with my own near miss on a Pilot ladder when one of the side ropes parted above my head just as I was about to place my hand on it.
It was day light, 20 miles out in the Southern North Sea hanging on one side rope 5 mtrs above the sea. I heard a shout from the deck hand below me “Hang on we are coming
Ladder liberally splattered with ‘red lead’ paint which should
have immediately condemned it.
back in”, my thoughts at the time was “up or down”. I decided to climb down carefully to the Pilot boat. The deck hand assisted me back on board and the skill of the Launch Coxswain in manoeuvring the Pilot boat back alongside prevented a serious outcome. Hanging on one side rope above the North Sea certainly highlights the danger of our job but also the importance of the data gathered in the IMPA annual survey.
Captain Hywel J Pugh
The public interest is best served by a fully regulated and cohesive pilotage service free of commercial pressure.
There is no substitute for the presence of a qualified pilot on the bridge.
IMO is the prime authority in matters concerning safety of international shipping.
All states should adopt a responsible approach based on proven safety strategies in establishing their own regulations, standards and procedures with respect to pilotage.
Existing and emerging information technologies are capable of enhancing on-board decision making by the maritime pilot.
B E L I E F S
1
2
3
4
5
-
P I L O T L A D D E R S A F E T Y S U R V E Y 2 0 2 0
33S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0
Minimum acceptable standards related to maritime safety are prescribed by the SOLAS Convention. SOLAS regulation V/23 and associated supporting IMO Assembly Resolution A.1045(27) as amended by Resolution 1108(29) and MSC.1/Circ.1428 specifically address pilot ladders. These standards have been adopted by IMO and, by association all Maritime Nations and all Non-Governmental Maritime Organisations.
Annual IMPA Pilot Ladder Surveys repeatedly demonstrate a consistent level of non-compliance with SOLAS regulation V/23. The 2020 survey returned a record number of reports; disappointingly results remain broadly in line with previous surveys. Furthermore, lives are still being lost.
Every year pilots are killed whilst embarking or disembarking via pilot ladders. One particular death this year highlights the persistent indifference of the industry as a major causal factor. A pilot fell to his death trying to board a ship which presented a proscribed pilot boarding arrangement. Many pilots question why this ship was allowed to trade.
Regrettably, we continue to find an unacceptable proportion of the world’s maritime fleet failing to provide safe pilot boarding arrangements. Would such a non-compliance rate with
respect to fire extinguishers in an office be acceptable? Would a similar rate of non-compliance for lifesaving appliances on a vessel be tolerable? We all take considerable measures to avoid having to use firefighting and lifesaving appliances, yet rightly insist that they must meet Convention requirements. Why then, with regard to pilot ladders, which we expect to be used on a daily basis, is the maritime industry so heedless? It is not uncommon for a pilot, having refused a non-compliant ladder, to be then offered a compliant ladder that the Master normally keeps to one side for Port Sate Control inspections.
Sadly, the maritime industry repeatedly fails to implement its own agreed minimum standards. The adoption of IMO Resolutions is not “job done!” It is “job started!” All stakeholders should must ensure that the recommendations and guidelines in Resolutions and circulars are
adhered to.
Keeping mariners safe should not be seen as an optional extra in a modern maritime industry. Ship’s Masters, Owners and all regulatory bodies have their part to play. All the photographs of non-compliant arrangements in this report were taken by pilots during the short period of the survey, all of
them have had the approval of the Master, Shipowner, Flag State, Port State
and Classification Society.
I M PA S a f e t y S u r v e y 2 0 2 0
-
PA R T I C I PA N T S
The chart below shows 6,394 returns from participating IMPA members which have been grouped into 6 geographical areas.
44
TOTAL NONNON
COUNTRY RETURNS
COMPLIANT COMPLIANT
COMPLIANTAS %
Africa 173 154 19 10.98
Asia / Oceania 912 817 95 10.42
Europe 1718 1366 352 20.49
Middle East 31 13 18 58.06
North America 415 338 77 18.55
South America 3145 2932 213 6.77
TOTAL 6394 5620 774 12.11
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O NI N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O N
Compliant Non-compliant
3000
2750
2500
2250
2000
1750
1500
1250
1000
750
500
250
0
Africa Asia / Oceania Europe Middle East North America South America
213338
7713 18
1366
352
817
95
154
19
2932
COMPLIANCE AND NON-COMPLIANCE BY REGION
-
V E S S E L T Y P E
The following chart shows a breakdown of all returns by vessel type.
55
TOTALNON
NONVESSEL TYPE NUMBER OF COMPLIANT
COMPLIANT COMPLIANT
VESSELS AS %
General Cargo 864 741 123 14.24
Oil Tanker 1094 991 103 9.41
Ro/Ro 251 218 33 13.15
Passenger 70 55 15 21.43
Container 1679 1485 194 11.55
Gas Tanker 234 203 31 13.25
Reefer 26 21 5 19.23
Fishing 13 11 2 15.38
Bulkcarrier 1414 1246 168 11.88
Chemical Tanker 301 253 48 15.95
Car Carrier 108 100 8 7.41
Rig Supply Vessel 51 47 4 7.84
Other (E.G. Navy) 330 282 48 14.55
S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0
COMPLIANCE AND NON-COMPLIANCE BY VESSEL TYPE
Oth
er (
E.G
. Nav
y)
1250
1500
1000
750741
123
991
194203
168
253
48100
847
4
282
4831 21 5 211
103
218
33 55 15
1485
1246
500
250
0
Rig
Supp
ly V
esse
l
Car
Car
rier
Che
mic
al T
anke
r
Bulk
Car
rier
Fish
ing
Reef
er
Gas
Tan
ker
Cont
aine
r
Pass
enge
r
Ro /
Ro
Oil
Tank
er
Gen
eral
Car
go
Compliant Non-compliant
-
M E A N S O F T R A N S F E R
The following chart shows a breakdown of all returns by means of transfer.
66
MEANS OF TOTAL NONNON
TRANSFER NUMBER COMPLIANT
COMPLIANT COMPLIANT
AS %
Pilot Ladder 3920 3456 464 11.84
Combination 1685 1443 242 14.36
Side Door and 525 467 58 11.05Pilot Ladder
Gangway 126 119 7 5.56
Helicopter 92 89 3 3.26
Deck to Deck 127 112 15 11.81
TOTAL 6475 5686 789
COMPLIANCE AND NON-COMPLIANCE BY MEANS OF TRANSFER
Compliant Non-compliant
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O NI N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O N
3500
3250
3000
2750
2500
2250
2000
1750
1500
1250
1000
750
500
250
0
Pilot Ladder Combination Side Door and
Pilot Ladder
Gangway Helicopter Deck to Deck
3456
464
242
467
58 119 7 389 112 15
1443
-
N O N - C O M P L I A N C EB Y T Y P E O F D E F E C T
The first pie chart shows the percentage of the defects that were reported and not reported to the Authority. The second pie chart shows non-compliance by type of defect. Both the number and percentage are shown.
77
TOTAL NUMBER OF NON-COMPLIANT SHIPS IN SURVEY REPORTED 774
Number of defects reported to Authority 96
% of ships reported 12.4
% of ships not reported 87.6
NON-COMPLIANT BY TYPE OF DEFECT TOTAL AS %
Pilot ladder 492 50.51
Bulwark/Deck 228 23.41
Combination 141 14.48
Safety Equipment 113 11.6
TOTAL 974
Pilot Ladder
Bulwark/Deck
Combination
Safety Equipment
DEFECTS REPORTED TO AUTHORITY
NON-COMPLIANCE BY TYPE OF DEFECT
S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0
% of ships not reported
% of ships reported
-
N O N - C O M P L I A N C EB Y T Y P E O F D E F E C T
68
DEFECTS OF PILOT LADDER TOTAL AS %
Not against ship’s hull 69 10.36
Steps not of suitable material 5 0.75
Poorly rigged retrieval line 138 20.72
Steps broken 22 3.3
Steps not equally spaced 29 4.35
Pilot Ladder more than 9 metres 5 0.75
Steps dirty/slippery 29 4.35
Sideropes not of suitable material 8 1.2
Pilot Ladder too far forward/Aft 17 2.55
Steps painted 19 2.85
Incorrect step fittings 34 5.11
No bulwark ladder 7 1.05
Steps not horizontal 121 18.17
Other 163 24.47
TOTAL 666
DEFECTS OF PILOT LADDER
No/faulty handhold stanchions
Ladder not secured properly
Other
DEFECTS OF BULWARK / DECK
DEFECTS OF BULWARK / DECK TOTAL AS %
No/faulty handhold stanchions 44 17.39
Ladder not secured properly 183 72.33
Other 26 10.28
TOTAL 253
Not against ship’s hull
Steps not of suitable material
Poorly rigged retrieval line
Steps broken
Steps not equally spaced
Pilot Ladder more than 9 metres
Steps dirty/slippery
Sideropes not of suitable material
Pilot Ladder too far forward/Aft
Steps painted
Incorrect step fittings
No bulwark ladder
Steps not horizontal
Other
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O NI N T E R N A T I O N A L M A R I T I M E P I L O T S ’ A S S O C I A T I O N
The first pie chart shows the types of defects of the pilot ladder. Both the number and percentage are shown. The second pie chart shows the types of defects of the bulwark / deck arrangements. Both the number and percentage are shown.
-
N O N - C O M P L I A N C EB Y T Y P E O F D E F E C T
99
Inadequate lighting at night
No lifebuoy with self-igniting light
No VHF communication with the bridge
No heaving line
No responsible officer in attendance
Other
COMBINATION DEFECTS TOTAL AS %
Accommodation Ladder not leading aft 2 0.81
Lower platform stanchions / rail incorrect rigged 32 12.96
Accommodation ladder too steep (>45 degrees) 22 8.91
Pilot Ladder not attached 1-5mabove Accommodation Ladder 59 23.89
Lower platform not horizontal 31 12.55
Ladder(s) not secured to ship’s side 51 20.65
Lower platform less than 5 metresabove the sea 26 10.53
Other 24 9.72
TOTAL 247
SAFETY EQUIPMENT DEFECTS TOTAL AS %
Inadequate lighting at night 36 21.43
No lifebuoy with self-igniting light 49 29.17
No VHF communication with the bridge 10 5.95
No heaving line 36 21.43
No responsible officer in attendance 31 18.45
Other 6 3.57
TOTAL 168
COMBINATION DEFECTS
SAFETY EQUIPMENT DEFECTS
Accommodation Ladder not leading aft
Lower platform stanchions / rail incorrect rigged
Accommodation Laddertoo steep (>45 degrees)
Pilot Ladder not attached 1.5m above Accommodation Ladder
Lower platform not horizontal
Ladder(s) not secured to ship’s side
Lower platform less than5 metres above the sea
Other
The first pie chart shows the combination defects. Both the number and percentage are shown. The second pie chart shows the safety equipment defects. Both the number and percentage are shown.
S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0S A F E T Y C A M P A I G N 2 0 2 0
-
RIG
GIN
G F
OR
FR
EEB
OA
RD
SO
F 9
MET
RES
OR
LES
S
HA
ND
HO
LDST
AN
CH
ION
SM
in. D
iam
. 32
mm
Min
.12
0cm
Abo
ve B
ulw
ark
MA
N-R
OPE
S(w
itho
ut k
nots
)M
in. D
iam
. 28
mm
Max
. Dia
m. 3
2m
mIF
REQ
UIR
EDBY
TH
E PI
LOT
SPR
EAD
ERM
in. 1
80
cm L
ong
Min
. 40
cm
31
-35
cm
MA
XIM
UM
9 S
TEPS
Be
twee
n sp
read
ers
5th
STE
P Fr
om
bo
tto
mm
ust
be a
spr
eade
r
6 M
ETR
ES
uno
bstr
ucte
dsh
ip’s
sid
eH
eigh
tRe
quir
ed b
y Pi
lot
SID
E RO
PES
Min
. Dia
m. 1
8m
m
ALL
STE
PSM
ust
rest
fir
mly
agai
nst
ship
’s s
ide
Han
dho
lds
Min
. 70
cmM
ax. 8
0cm
PILO
T L
AD
DER
Mu
st e
xten
dat
leas
t 2
met
res
abov
e lo
wer
plat
form
AC
CO
MM
OD
AT
ION
LA
DD
ERSe
cure
d to
sh
ip’s
sid
e Sh
ou
ld le
ad a
ft
A p
ilot
ladd
erre
qu
ires
a c
limb
of
no
t le
ss t
han
1.5
met
res
and
no
mo
re t
han
9 m
etre
s
The
low
erpl
atfo
rmsh
all b
e a
min
imu
mo
f 5
met
res
abov
e th
e se
a
CO
MB
INA
TIO
N A
RR
AN
GEM
ENT
FOR
SH
IPS
WIT
H A
FREE
BO
AR
D O
F M
OR
ET
HA
N 9
MET
RES
WH
EN N
O S
IDE
DO
OR
AV
AIL
AB
LE
Max
imu
m4
5˚
slo
pe
Low
erpl
atfo
rmh
ori
zon
tal
Reco
mm
ende
d9
met
res
free
boar
d m
ark
0.5
m
2m
2m
STER
N B
OW
Acc
om
mo
dati
on
ladd
er s
ho
uld
be s
ecu
red
tosh
ip’s
sid
e
(Usi
ng
eyep
ad,
mag
net
ic o
rpn
eum
atic
syst
em)
Ladd
er m
ust
be
firm
ly a
ttac
hed
to s
hip
’s s
ide
1.5
met
res
abov
eac
com
mo
dati
on
plat
form
NO
!N
o s
hack
les,
kno
ts o
r sp
lices
NO
!Th
e st
eps
mus
t be
equa
lly s
pace
d
NO
!Th
e st
eps
mus
t be
hori
zont
al a
nd c
hock
sun
der
the
step
s m
ust
beti
ghtl
y se
cure
d
NO
!Sp
read
ers
mus
tno
t be
lash
edbe
twee
n st
eps
NO
!Si
de r
ope
s m
ust
be e
qual
ly s
pace
d
NO
!Th
e st
eps
sho
uld
not
be p
aint
ed,
dirt
y o
r sl
ippe
ry
NO
!Lo
ops
and
tri
ppin
glin
es p
rese
nt a
trip
ping
haz
ard
and
foul
the
Pilo
t La
unch
Han
dho
lds
Min
. 70
cmM
ax. 8
0cm
Min
imum
Cle
aran
ce2
20
cm
Min
. 91
.5cm
Min
. 91
.5cm
Pad
eye
NO
OBSTRUCTIONS
PILO
T L
AD
DER
WIN
CH
REE
L
Min
imum
Cle
aran
ce2
20
cm
Min
imum
91
.5cm
Han
dhol
dsM
in. 7
0cm
Max
. 80c
m
All
pilo
t la
dder
win
ch r
eels
sho
uld
have
a m
eans
of
prev
enti
on
fro
mbe
ing
acci
dent
ally
ope
rate
d.
The
brak
e an
d lo
ck m
ust
be
ope
rati
ve o
n m
anua
lly o
pera
ted
win
ches
.
Pow
er w
inch
es m
ust
have
an
ope
rati
ve s
afet
y de
vice
to
lock
th
e w
inch
in p
osi
tio
n.
Side
ope
ning
Ship
’s s
ide
doo
rsus
ed f
or
tran
sfer
sho
uld
not
ope
no
utw
ard
Min
imum
Cle
aran
ce2
20
cm
Min
imum
91
.5cm
75
cm7
5cm
Han
dho
lds
Min
. 70
cmM
ax. 8
0cm
Han
dho
ld s
tan
chio
ns
rigi
dly
secu
red
to d
eck
Life
buoy
wit
hse
lf-i
gnit
ing
ligh
t
Bu
lwar
k &
Pilo
t la
dder
secu
red
to d
eck
stro
ng
poin
ts
Resp
on
sibl
e O
ffic
erin
co
nta
ct w
ith
bri
dge
REQ
UIR
ED B
OA
RD
ING
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
TS
FOR
PIL
OT
In a
cco
rdan
ce w
ith
SO
LAS
Regu
lati
on
V/2
3 &
IMO
Res
olu
tio
n A
.10
45
(27
)
INT
ERN
AT
ION
AL
MA
RIT
IME
PILO
TS’
ASS
OC
IAT
ION
H.Q
.S.“
Wel
lingt
on
”Te
mpl
e St
airs
,Vic
tori
a Em
ban
kmen
t,Lo
ndo
n W
C2
R 2
PN T
el:+
44
(0
)20
72
40
39
73
Fax
:+4
4 (
0)2
0 7
21
0 3
51
8 E
mai
l:o
ffic
e@im
pah
q.o
rgTh
is d
ocu
men
t an
d al
l IM
O P
ilot-
rela
ted
docu
men
ts a
re a
vaila
ble
for
dow
nlo
ad a
t:h
ttp:
//w
ww
.impa
hq
.org
A B C
REQ
UIR
ED B
OA
RD
ING
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
TS
FOR
PIL
OT
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith
SOLA
S Re
gula
tion
V/2
3 &
IMO
Res
olut
ion
A.1
045(
27)
INT
ERN
AT
ION
AL
MA
RIT
IME
PILO
TS’
ASS
OC
IAT
ION
H.Q
.S. “
Wel
lingt
on” T
empl
e St
airs
, Vic
tori
a Em
bank
men
t, Lo
ndon
WC
2R 2
PN
Tel:
+44
(0)
20 7
240
3973
Em
ail:
offi
ce@
impa
hq.o
rgTh
is d
ocum
ent
and
all I
MO
Pilo
t-re
late
d do
cum
ents
are
ava
ilabl
e fo
r do
wnl
oad
at: h
ttp:
//w
ww
.impa
hq.o
rg
-
I M PA O F F I C E R S
President
Captain Simon Pelletier - Canada
Senior Vice President / Treasurer
Captain Jean-Philippe Casanova - France
Vice Presidents
Captain Alvaro Moreno - Panama
Captain Choi, Yeong Sig - Korea
Captain John Pearn - UK
Captain Oumar Dramé - Senegal
Captain Ricardo Falcão - Brazil
I M PA S E C R E TA R I AT
Secretary General
Nick Cutmore
Executive Assistant
Eliane Blanch
T H E I N T E R N AT I O N A LM A R I T I M E P I L O T ’ S A S S O C I AT I O N
-
International Maritime Pilots’ Association (IMPA)HQS Wellington, Temple Stairs, Victoria Embankment, London WC2R 2PNTelephone: +44 20 7240 3973 Email: [email protected] Website: www.impahq.org