|
WCB Stability Guideline Industry Meeting Summary
Facilitated by the Fish Safe Advisory Committee
Co Chairs: Gina Johansen and Bruce Logan
Presenters:
Shane Neifer, Workers Compensation Board
Jim Lawson, Transport Canada
Grant Brandlmayr, Robert Allan Ltd.
(Attendance List attached)
Morning Session
1. Introduction and Overview
Gina provided introductory comments that explained the role of the Fish Safe Advisory Committee and the vision of Fish Safe to develop a long term industry safety and health plan.
The Fish Safe program coordinated the industry meeting to create a forum for industry to offer advice to WCB on the implementation of their stability guideline. Bruce introduced himself and his role as Union Safety Director as well as co-chair of the Fishing Vessel Safety Committee for the Canadian Marine Advisory Council. He also provided information on the work and principles that the Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters is providing on the Fishing Regulatory Reform for Transport Canada.
2. Stability Requirements - Existing and Under Development
(a) Transport Canada (TC)
Jim Lawson, Regional Director from Transport Canada Marine gave a brief update in regard to the proposed TC Stability Regulation.
Jim advised that transport Canada is and intends to continue working with WCB to ensure that the Stability regs harmonize.
TC's goal is to provide regs that work, are efficient and affordable. TC is looking at enforcing compliance on existing regs for herring and capelin. New regs that will require all vessels to undergo a stability assessment are planned to roll out in Dec. 2006. Jim encouraged fishermen to attend the outreach sessions planned for the West Coast on April 25 in Vancouver, April 27th in Campbell River and April 29th in Prince Rupert. Jim fielded questions from the audience that included:
- Concern that WCB and TC do not have a letter of intent to work together and that either party could not guarantee that there would be a harmonization of the regulations around stability. WCB did advise that adherence to their guideline as it stands would more than meet the proposed requirements of Transport Canada but meeting the proposed TC regulation may not be enough to meet the requirements of the WCB guideline. Shane affirmed that it is the goal of WCB that a vessel owner will only have to go through the stability assessment process once to comply with both requirements.
- To date no existing or proposed regulations are in conflict but one may have added requirements as in the case of immersion suits required by WCB on all fishing vessels but by TC only on vessels of certain size.
- It is a real concern for the industry that it appears that WCB's proposed guideline implies that every vessel will need to have an incline test while the TC proposed reg will allow for a roll period test on some vessels - the question of jurisdiction and authority and creating more bureaucracy needs to be addressed
Jim reinforced that TC has the responsibility for Canadian Steamship Inspection irregardless of what other requirements might be made by insurance companies or WCB.
- It was also noted that vessels with existing stability books will be reviewed and unless there are any major modifications should suffice for TC but WCB will require instructions to be created for the crew based on the existing stability book.
- The WCB stability guideline is already in effect and the implementation of the guideline with direction from industry is the purpose of today's meeting
- Comments were made in regard to these requirements costing fishermen right out of the industry and that regulations alone will not make vessels safe.
- The point of who should be responsible for the inherent stability of the vessel was questioned and it was suggested that shipyards and designers have responsibility and not just the owner but it was pointed out that in a legal setting owners are liable regardless who else takes responsibility and regardless of the fact that he has no control over the operation of the vessel when it is at sea with a master and crew.
- It was also pointed out that the current certification offered by TC is poorly lacking in stability content even at the higher levels. This is a concern for vessel owners who rely on hiring certified masters and are then found liable for their actions.
- Industry questioned the current inability of TC to enforce the existing stability regulations on herring and Jim cited resource challenges and that TC and DFO are putting more focus on ensuring compliance.
Additional Comments:
All the stability tests in the world will not prevent irresponsible or unknowing operators from pushing even the best vessel beyond her limits, education of the masters is key here and not developing another level of inspection bureaucracy on the boats.
(b) WCB
"Why a Guideline" presentation by Shane Neifer - WCB (attached)
This presentation explained the rational for implementing a guideline around the stability of a vessel.
Shane explained both the human and financial cost to the industry and how every stability coroner's inquest for the last 30 years has recommended better stability monitoring and education for fishing vessels. WCB has requirements in their existing regulations around stability and the guideline has been prepared to bring some consistency into the enforcement of the reg. as WCB could be liable for not enforcing it.
The guideline requires instructions to be available to the crew on the stability limitations of the vessel. This should include a quick reference for different operating conditions and loads. These instructions are to be based on valid stability data and the WCB suggests that the only way to get the data for vessels of closed construction is to create the instructions is through an incline experiment. This would be a huge undertaking and WCB wants industry's input into developing a practical implementation plan that takes into consideration the time frame needed, education, financial incentives, etc.
Comments from participants included:
- Concern that the DFO regs around length restriction create safety issues and that DFO should be working with TC and WCB to ensure that there is consistency.
- Education was noted as a number one priority to ensure that all on board understand their responsibility and the issues around safety. An educated skipper will not take out an unsafe vessel. It was suggested that the crew should take responsibility for their own immersion suits and their maintenance. Concern was expressed again for the quality of the TC certification for Fishing Masters as an example was given of several attendees at a course being pushed through without meeting the requirements.
- It was noted that any instructions that are developed around stability should be meaningful and direct and not allow for phrases such as: " a fisherman may not.....it should read "must not". Instructions must also take into consideration those with literacy problems.
- It was suggested that the statistics presented and based on TSB reports be weighted against the number of vessels and would provide a more accurate picture. In general data on vessel incidents is not collected in a format that is useful for the industry, ie; gear types are rarely noted.
- Concern for the lack of DFO involvement in this process was mentioned again and it was explained that the length restriction issues were a national problem and the timing may be good for industry to get together and make recommendations to DFO on policies. Gina explained that she had met with DFO some time ago to discuss this and DFO licencing said that policies can be changed at the direction of the industry through the industry managers - although the way that licences have been created and the resulting value based on length could create other issues.
- Gina circulated a sheet for volunteers to form a committee to work on the DFO licence restriction issue.
- Comments were made again on how far regulations should go in trying to make vessels idiot proof at a substantial cost to the industry vs providing better education on stability and what affects the stability of a vessel. Education is required first to bring everyone to a level of understanding about stability in essence to motivate them individually to learn more and to understand why it is important to have stability data and instructions on board. You don't know what you don't know.
- It was also recommended that the Federal Government pay for stability testing of vessels and that inspectors have some fishing background.
- A question on what other tools might be available to fishermen to monitor stability was discussed: software is available through Naval Architects and some is under development to monitor trim and provide advance alerts on board.
- The issue of whether testing all vessels is really useful or doable considering the human error factor in vessel casualties and the lack of resources available to actually complete the task - both the cost to the industry and the resources needed by government to implement the regulation. Money for education and compensation has been promised in the past. There was some indication from WCB and TC that there could be some financial incentives available to assist with implementation.
3. Documentation and the Guideline
Stability Data: Incline & Roll Period Testing
Presentation by Grant Brandlmayr, Naval Architect to provide a general idea of what data is produced from these two experiments.
- Roll period test provides an approximate level of stability and only provides one value: GM (center of gravity). This is a quick test. It does not provide information on trim, freeboard or range of stability under differing conditions.
- Incline Experiment is more accurate and provides all the data required to measure a vessel's stability under varying conditions.
- It was noted that a vessel could pass a roll period test and not an incline experiment and that hull design such as hard chines add complexity to the results of a roll period test. A roll period test could also be used as a tool to indicate whether a vessel's stability was changing over time.
- An incline experiment will take about 4-6 hours and the development of the stability book up to a week. The cost of this process is said to range from 2-15k depending on the vessel.
- The accuracy of stability book is dependant on not only the incline experiment but also the information provided to the Naval Architect by the master/owner on the specifics of the vessel operation.
Afternoon Session
4. Documenting the Industry's Recommendations in regard to WCB's Stability Guideline Implementation Plan
The afternoon session was set up in a workshop style forum to provide the industry an opportunity to have their input documented under 6 main headings:
Education, Risk Criteria, Stability Documentation, On Board Instructions, Integration and Financial Incentives.
This input along with the meeting summaries from previous Fish Safe Advisory Committee meetings dealing with stability will be used to draft an implementation plan that will be reviewed by industry at the next meeting.
It was a very interactive discussion and the following recommendations were noted:
Education
(What type of education should be made available to industry)
- Fishermen need education around stability risk factors first to be able to understand why they need a regulation in the first place- a suggestion that 80% of fishing accidents are linked to human error suggests that a regulation alone will not suffice..
- Provide orientation to Naval Architects on the fishing industry
- Provide orientation to WCB and other inspectors to foster a better understanding of the fishing industry
- Educate DFO on the consequences of their policies/regs on safety
- Education needs to be portable and not limited to attendance in an institution
- Pre-sailing checklist should be used
- Courses have to be accessible and available where fishermen live
- Should be mandatory - because people don't know what they don't know
- Financial incentives should be available to fishermen in order to take a course
- Tie into fishermen's registration cards
- Should include all levels of fishermen, small and big vessels
- Phased approach: train fishermen, fishermen train crew
- No sea time should be required for taking a course
- Include changing attitudes in the curriculum
- Use tools such as models and video presentations known to be effective in promoting adult learning
- Courses should be applicable for credit in TC courses
- Should reflect real situations
- Should incorporate adult education principals
- Fishermen training fishermen is preferred - mentoring
- Fishermen trainers should meet same standards as required for adult education
- Concern that existing TC courses do not produce proficient skippers
- Grandfather clause?
It was also noted that education used to be accomplished on board but that the business of fishing has become just that; no time at sea, desperation to earn a living, less fishermen, less money, less crew available and no longer a way of life. As a result there is not the same opportunity to provide "at sea mentoring". For that reason education and training become even more important.
All agreed that education should be the number one priority and be developed and implemented prior to enforcement of a stability regulation. It is clear that outside of the TC required courses, which are considered training and certification and not education and awareness, education has never been provided for the industry in a manner that has been effective.
Based on the fact that capsizings continue to occur on vessels required under regulation to have stability tests, it appears that a regulation in itself will not prevent accidents. It is the understanding brought through education that will make the difference.
Secondly, after bringing the general population up to a general understanding of stability and what it means on their vessel it will make more sense and be easier to motivate people to make adjustments, ie; telling someone what they need to do is less successful than inspiring in them the desire to do it.
Financial Incentives
(What assistance should be made available to facilitate this process)
- Payment for attendance in a stability course
- Qualified/Trained skippers paid to teach
- Disincentives for those who do not live up to standards
- Premium break from insurance companies
- Experience Rating or lower rates from WCB
- DFO to lower licence fees
- Feds to pay for the implementation of the new regulation
- Compensation for vessels that have to leave the industry
- Apply for funding to develop stability educational program
- FAO IMO Grants
- Funding proposal to find the most cost effective way to produce stability documents
- Coordinate the documentation of gear weights (nets, equipment for a database reference for Naval Architects)
- Government funding for shipyards and Naval Architects to lower costs to fishermen
- Follow up with Transport Canada on available funding
- WCB to come up with incentive funding
Recommended Cost Efficiencies:
- Coordinate testing of similar hulls
- Coordinate timing of testing with quadrennial Canadian Steamship Inspections
- Utilize student naval architects to reduce costs of testing
Integration
(Who should be included in this process to ensure regulations harmonize)
- Where is the government on enforcement of already existing regs and responsibility for safety (removal of Coast Guard patrols, lighthouses, etc)
- Need to improve weather forecasting
- Improve support systems so that the onus is not just on the vessel owner
- Transport Canada and education providers need to incorporate adult education principles into existing and any new courses
- DFO must take safety into consideration in their fisheries management policies and regs: weed line, length restrictions, trap extensions, etc.
- There should be no instance where a fishing vessel meets TC regs and does not meet WCB regs - there must be harmonization and a common sense approach
- The MOU between TC and WCB must be practiced and not just preached
- DFO must become more involved with TC and WCB to ensure some continuity in safety regs.
Risk Criteria
(How can high risk vessels be determined?)
- Vessels that have changed gear types - modified vessels
- Research needs to be done how many vessels need stability docs
- To harmonize with TC proposed criteria, not to require more
- Vessels that fish during the worst weather (Dec-March)
- Area of operation (waters)
- Size of vessel
- WCB regs should not require more than TC regs
- Changes should be made so that this does not happen
- A risk criteria should allow for exemptions
Stability Documentation
(What type of information/design would make stability documentation more practical to the fishing industry?)
- Naval Architects should provide uniform documents
- A template could be developed for Naval Architects for use in the fishing industry
- Pictures to identify vessel specifics
- Colours used to identify risk or load condition
- The format of the information should be able to vary (computer software) as long as the information is the same
- Must be specific to each individual boat and its operation
On Board Instructions
(What type of instructions would be useful for providing skippers and crew with an "at a glance" view of stability limitations on their vessel?).
- Posted instructions on vessel operations
- Mandatory Safety Drills (muster list)
- Examples of Matrix sheets from Wolfson report that document conditions at a glance
- Include stability information in safety guides
- Skipper should have responsibility for giving instructions
- Instructions should be documented
The meeting concluded with Gina quoting from the UK Wolfson -Research Project: Simplified Presentation of FV Stability Information - Phase 1
and encouraged all participants to take this report's recommendation to heart in this process:
"It is apparent that fishermen resent, and frequently reject, attempts to introduce safety legislation to their industry. The emphasis of any method introduced should be to provide information with which the fishermen are able to improve their assessment of their level of safety. It must be information that they understand and respect, or it will be ignored."
Participants were encouraged to continue to have input though email correspondence or by calling Gina. The next Fish Safe Advisory Committee meeting is tentatively scheduled for the week of May 30, 2005.
.
Meeting concluded at 4:00 pm
|
