Operational Excellence through Leadership and Compliance

Maritime Compliance Report

Welcome. Staying in compliance takes dedication, diligence and strong leadership skills to stay on top of all the requirements which seem to keep coming at a rapid pace. With this blog I hope to provide visitors with content that will help them in their daily work of staying in compliance. I hope you find it a resource worthy of your time and I look forward to your feedback, questions, comments and concerns. Thanks for stopping by. To avoid missing critical updates, don’t forget to sign up by clicking the white envelope in the blue toolbar below.

BP Indictments and Subchapter M

 As I read the indictment of two BP officials, Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine, on 11 counts of seaman's manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter, I couldn't help but think about Subchapter M and the future of the towing vessel industry. Mr. Vidrine and Kaluza were Well Sight Leaders on the Deepwater Horizon rig the day of the explosion which resulted in the deaths of 11 people. According to the indictment, these Well Sight Leaders were responsible for, among other things, "supervising the implementation of BP's drilling plan." To draw an analogy, under Subchapter M, should a company operate under a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS), the captain will be responsible for "supervising the implementation of the company TSMS."

The indictment explains that Vidrine and Kaluza were grossly negligent in their duties for not doing what they were supposed to do, specifically: failing to call the BP engineers ashore during the negative testing about the multiple readings that the well was not secure, failing to adequately account for those abnormal readings, and for accepting a nonsensical explanation for those readings. They were not following the plan, and an explosion resulted in many deaths.

A few years back the towing industry experienced a number of accidents when tows hit bridges. Bridge transit procedures were added to many safety management systems. The idea is, as with any written safety plan, if you follow it you will minimize the risk of human error. Many captains that I talk to can't explain the bridge transit procedures. Many protest that they don't need some book to tell them how to drive a boat. But what if one day a captain fails to account for wind and leeway on a big tow, and as a result he takes the bridge out and cars drive into the river? I'm sure Mr. Vidrine and Kaluza relied on their experience as well, and did not think that the rig would blow up, but it did. Had they followed the plan, perhaps those people would not have died, and they might not be looking at jail time.

If your towing company chooses a TSMS for Subchapter M, take the opportunity to make sure you have the best possible procedures and that your captains know they must follow them at all times. As a wise man once said, smart people learn from their mistakes, but really smart people learn from other people's mistakes.
  4105 Hits

International WorkBoat Show

 The International WorkBoat Show in New Orleans is fast approaching. It is being held in the New Orleans Convention Center from December 5-7. If you are interested in learning the latest about regulations and compliance and you are planning on investing in the conference sessions, I'd like to bring two sessions to your attention:

Wednesday December 5, 2012 from 4:00 – 5:30pm I will be participating in a conference session moderated by retired RADM Whitehead on: "Choosing a Compliance Option for Towing Vessel Regulations: What You Need to Know."

Friday December 7, 2012 from 1:00 – 2:00pm I will be conducting an hour-long session: "Culture of Compliance" where I will go in depth on my comprehensive model for maritime compliance management. 

If you have specific questions, please come by our booth: 2757 and visit with us. We look forward to seeing you all there!
  4019 Hits

Maritime Compliance Management Model Explained

On a recent visit to Greece I was invited to speak at the Safety4Sea conference in Athens to an audience of almost 400 attendees. I took the opportunity to introduce my Maritime Compliance Management Model. Click on the picture to watch the short video:


[embed=videolink]{"video":"http://youtu.be/e4lfqE7bPvM","width":"640","height":"360"}[/embed] 

  3797 Hits

Resources for Uninspected Towing Vessel Operators

There are still a significant number of towing vessel that have not been examined under the Coast Guard's Bridging Program. As the Coast Guard trains more examiners and becomes more proficient in conducting uninspected towing vessel (UTV) exams, the bar for operators is steadily rising. In their continuing effort to help the industry demonstrate full compliance the Coast Guard has published a new edition of "United States Coast Guard Requirements for Uninspected Towing Vessels." This is the best comprehensive reference for a particular class of vessel that has ever been published by the Coast Guard. In addition to the excellent explanation of the regulations, there are useful appendixes which include frequently asked questions, and a collection of those ever-elusive Policy Letters which contain a wealth of information. Whether your company is still struggling to get their vessels examined, or you consider yourself an expert on the topic, this publication deserves a serious look. There is something for even the most experienced among us to learn.

Additionally, a client of mine recently returned for the UTV examiner course at the Coast Guard Training Center in Yorktown, VA. The week-long course is mainly for Coast Guard personnel, but a number of seats are dedicated for industry personnel. The course was reportedly, very informative and the binder of training material I reviewed contained a great deal of useful information. My client said one of the most important things that he got out of the course was to witness the Coast Guard's approach compliance which was a real eye opener. If you can get into one of these courses it will definitely be worth the trip. 

  3617 Hits

Culture of Compliance

 After many years of being involved with compliance issues for the maritime industry, I have developed a comprehensive model on how to manage compliance. If you would like to learn about this methodology which will help you develop confidence and peace of mind regarding compliance, you should make it a point to try to attend one of these conference sessions where I will be presenting the model:

Wednesday October 3, 2012 – Athens, Greece; Safety4Sea Forum; 2:00pm – 3:30pm "Culture of Compliance"

Friday December 7, 2012 – New Orleans, LA; International Workboat Show; 1:00pm – 2:00pm; "Culture of Compliance"

Additionally, if you are in the towboat business, there will be an important panel discussion at the Workboat Show, on whether to choose the Coast Guard option or third party TSMS option for inspection compliance under Subchapter M:

Wednesday December, 5, 2012 – International Workboat Show; New Orleans, LA; 4:00pm -5:30pm; "Choosing a Compliance Option for Towing Vessel Regulations: What You Need to Know"

I will be on this panel which will be moderated by retired RADM Joel Whitehead.

Also, when at the Workboat Show, please stop by our booth 2757 and say hello.

I look forward to seeing you.
  3729 Hits

Maritime Compliance Management – “Understanding”

 When I was training to become a Coast Guard marine inspector years ago, I noticed the doorway on a crewboat was 28 inches wide. When I looked up the regulation, I found that the door for a passenger compartment is required to be 32 inches wide. The other inspector breaking me in was reluctant to make the owner enlarge the doorway.  All I could imagine was some very large passengers getting stuck in the capsized boat that we had certified.

Some say that regulations are written in blood. To have an effective compliance program, there must be an understanding of the intent of the regulations. Research is often necessary, but some owner/operators don't have the time, manpower, or desire to figure out if a certain regulation applies, or what the intent of the regulation is. As a result, many companies end up "chasing their tails" by relying solely on others' opinions and interpretations.

Compliance is a complicated business, but not an impossible one. Here are a few insider secrets. When a company becomes aware of a regulation, the first step should be to review the applicability in the regulations and ensure the regulation applies and that there are no exceptions. The next step should be to review the policy guidance on the topic. When dealing with the U.S. Coast Guard, policy guidance comes in a number of forms, such as: the Marine Safety Manual; Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circulars (NVICs); Headquarters policy letters; District policy letters; and local Captain of the Port policies. Additionally, the Federal Register can be reviewed for the date the regulation was published because it is footnoted at the end of each regulatory citation. The Federal Register has explanations for the regulations as well as the public comments and the Coast Guard's responses. This provides excellent insight into the intent of the regulations. These resources are all available online these days, so there is no good excuse for not preparing yourself before problems arise. Stay ahead of the curve and, in the words of my old Chief Quartermaster, who thankfully never answered my questions, "Look it up."
  3904 Hits

Maritime Compliance Management – “Acceptance”

 Did you know that vessel owners are required to manage rain run-off? That crewmembers are required to screen their shore-side bosses if they come aboard a vessel? That push-boats are required to have a bell of a certain size in case they anchor or run aground in the fog? This is only the tip of the regulatory iceberg. Some regulations seem so ridiculous that vessel owners have a hard time believing that they could be true, or that they will ever be enforced, or that someone won't come to their senses and make them go away. A common strategy used once a vessel owner becomes aware of a regulation is to call around to some friendly competitors to see what they are doing. They may end up convincing each other to adopt a "wait and see" approach. After all, the Coast Guard always gives 30 days to correct a deficiency, right? Some companies call the Coast Guard to ask about a particular issue, and because the Coast Guard person who answers the phone isn't familiar with the particular requirement, the company may say, "The Coast Guard doesn't even know about this," and use that as an excuse to do little or nothing to comply. This is not good.

Acceptance is the second component to maritime compliance management. This is where the company management "buy-in" discussion has its roots. If the company ignores a regulation, or does something half-way to at least look like it was trying and hope for the best, it will not be perceived as having bought in to the program by its employees.  Captains of vessels are charged with ensuring compliance with the majority of vessel regulations.  From a leadership standpoint, if the captain knows, or perceives, that the company is not taking a regulation or program seriously, why would they?  A basic principle of leadership is, "In order to be a good leader, you must first be a good follower."  That doesn't mean just doing what your boss says.  It applies to following all rules and regulations. If your company is having trouble getting captains to be proactive about compliance issues, examine your own company's attitude toward the regulations. Why would crews put forth an effort if they know the company thinks it's all "crap?" Unless a company accepts a regulation, for better or for worse, it will be plagued with problems over the long term.
  3991 Hits

Maritime Compliance Management – “Awareness”

 I got a ticket within the past year for "running a red light." I never saw the light turn red as I drove through the yellow light traveling under the speed limit. However, the officer issuing me the ticket explained that if any portion of my vehicle remained in the intersection when the light turned red, then that constituted running a red light. I paid the ticket and then did a little research. I now know the legal definition of running a red light in my town. But, why didn't I research that before? Because, I have a general knowledge of traffic rules, I don't have a history of violations, and if I ever get a ticket, I'll just pay it and move on. It's all a matter of risk assessment. What is the risk to my peace of mind and my wallet? The answer is: minimal. There is no reason to proactively manage my compliance with traffic laws. However, when it comes to running my business, the risk is much greater and therefore, I make sure that I am compliant with whatever applicable laws and regulations I become aware of.

Awareness is the first component to maritime compliance management. You can't comply with regulations if you're not aware of them. Some ostriches reading this are thinking, "Exactly!" But we all know how the government feels about "ignorance of the law…" When your business is at risk, you can't afford not to be aware of regulations. There are many sources of information these days. There is really no good excuse for not being aware of all the regulations coming at a fast rate. It should be someone's job in the organization to subscribe to newsletters and check the appropriate websites to stay on top of all the latest developments. For example, the North American ECA goes into effect on Wednesday, August 1, 2012. Accordingly, the Coast Guard has published a10-page policy letter and a 16-page job aid for Coast Guard inspectors to make sure vessel companies are compliant. Vessel companies should make it a point to study those two documents. Don't manage your vessel compliance the way I manage my traffic compliance; the risks are not the same.
  4122 Hits

U.S. Coast Guard Appeal Process

 There is an age-old quandary in the maritime industry when it comes to dealing with the U.S. Coast Guard: to just do whatever they say, or challenge their decision? Many choose to go along with whatever a Coast Guard inspector says, even when a decision may have been made in error, or the impact to the company may be great. This is mostly due to a misconception that the Coast Guard is likely to retaliate if challenged. Another common reason for going along with whatever the Coast Guard inspector says is simply to "keep them happy and make them go away." Sometimes this can backfire and have serious consequences for a vessel owner when they realize the impact of what they have agreed to, and if they don't follow through in the future.


 


Many years ago, as a trainee Coast Guard marine inspector, I was sent out to do my first solo barge inspection. While inspecting the bunker barge I looked at the warning sign and told the company representative that I thought the sign was also supposed to read "dangerous cargo." He assured me the sign was fine, and I pushed back. I offered to look it up, but he did not want to debate the issue and told me to go ahead and write the CG835 and that he would change the sign. I should have looked it up... A few days later while reviewing cases, my boss called me into his office and made me look up the regulation. He then directed me to go back and tell the barge representative that I was incorrect, and to put the original sign back. I felt terrible at having caused this barge operator money and aggravation, but I learned a valuable lesson that day. I'm thankful for having had a boss who understood his responsibilities and was willing to hold me accountable.


While most Coast Guard inspectors are knowledgeable and conscientious, none are perfect. It's not unreasonable to ask the inspector if he would provide the regulatory citation and explain the deficiency. If the issue can't be resolved at the lowest level, industry has the right to appeal. The intent of the policy is best explained by a well respected former Commandant, ADM Thad Allen, in his message to the troops (ALCOAST 108/08): "Disruption in the normal flow of commerce impacts many parties in the supply chain. We have clearly established appeal procedures when we make a decision that could have negative impacts on a licensed mariner or on the maritime industry. The exercise of appeal is a right we strongly support. Questions, differences of professional opinion, and appeals are normal and improve the conduct of business. We must be as accepting of these as praise. Attempt to resolve problems at the lowest level possible and be resourceful in doing so."


Appeals can be challenging, but they are a necessary part of the process. When necessary, give the Coast Guard a chance to exercise its own system of checks and balances.
  4467 Hits

Towing Vessel Regulations – Freedom of Choice?

The Coast Guard has offered the industry a compliance option in the proposed towing vessel regulation: traditional Coast Guard inspections, or the Towing Vessel Safety Management System (TSMS). The TSMS was introduced to address the human element in towing vessel incidents, justified in the proposed rule by statistics which showed that human factors accounted for 54 percent of the medium and high severity towing vessel incidents. While the members of the Towing Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) recommended that the TSMS be the backbone of any inspection program, the Coast Guard has proposed to make the TSMS a choice and not mandatory.

 


The Coast Guard contracted with the American Bureau of Shipping Group (ABSG) in 2006 to study, among other things, the impact of an inspection program on the towing industry. The findings of that study were cited by the Coast Guard, along with input from the TSAC Economic Working Group, as their reasons for making the TSMS voluntary and not mandatory: "a safety management system may not [be] a very cost-effective way to achieve safer operations, "the industry personnel were clear that effective implementation of a safety management system was a very difficult task for a company that had not previously been highly structured and had not formally documented its policies and procedures.'' TSAC Economic Working Group report stated ''[A SMS] will likely have a larger and more devastating impact on smaller companies who do not have the economic means, manpower, or even time to implement a system.'' Therefore, the Coast Guard concluded: "…it is appropriate to propose that all towing vessels subject to this rulemaking have the option of operating within a company implemented TSMS." Federal Register/ Vol. 76, No.155/ Thursday August 11, 2011/ Proposed Rule, pg.49979


This seems like a fair and well-reasoned approach by the Coast Guard. Oddly enough however, there are some in the industry who are opposed to allowing this option and who want the TSMS to be mandatory for all. In fact, reports from the first public meeting on the topic were that there was virtually no support of the traditional Coast Guard inspection option! Perhaps, companies are not concerned about the economic impact projected, but they should heed the warning that, "effective implementation of an SMS was a very difficult task.." Indeed. It is a very difficult task for any company. Why would companies oppose such a choice? Perhaps they do not yet understand what the government means by "effective implementation." But surely they will find out.


If this choice is allowed to remain in the final rule, companies will be faced with a very important choice. I suggest that before companies choose the TSMS option they first ask their captains if they will be willing to operate their vessels in strict conformance with the company's written policies and procedures in the TSMS, and not simply rely upon their experience and license when operating the vessels. If the captains respond, "Of course we will, no problem," and the company is 100% confident in that response, then they should go ahead and bet their vessel's Certificate of Inspection (COI) on it by choosing the TSMS compliance option. Otherwise, a prudent risk-based approach would dictate going with the traditional Coast Guard inspection option.

  4256 Hits

Increased Scrutiny of SMS Implementation by U.S. Coast Guard

 When it comes to what constitutes full implementation of a safety management system such as the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, there seems to be a disconnect between what different stakeholders believe to be adequate. Different flag states, recognized organizations, class societies, and port state control authorities enforce the code to their own standards, not to mention each individual auditor's experience and subjective opinions.  The real disparity becomes painfully clear during times of major accident investigations and litigation, when everything is put under a microscope and the level of implementation that was considered "satisfactory" at the last audit can now constitute alleged negligence.



A company may have an acceptable safety management system and a satisfactory level of implementation, that is, until there is a serious casualty.  Once there is a serious casualty, the implication can be that whatever was being done before the accident was obviously inadequate, regardless of how many enforcement officials and auditors had blessed the program previously.  This is not what the ISM was intended to be, but it is unarguably what it has evolved into.  Nowhere is this more apparent than in the U.S. Coast Guard's report of investigation on the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.  The report finds fault with all stakeholders and pulls no punches. 

There must be clear and consistent expectations if ISM is going to be implemented as designed.  It seems the U.S. Coast Guard may now be thinking in a similar fashion. In the Deepwater Horizon report the recommendations include an investigation to see if a change to the current inspection and enforcement methods is required to increase compliance with the ISM code. Increased scrutiny of adherence to policies and procedures may be on the horizon. Vessel operators, including towing vessel operators in the U.S. who will soon be required by regulation to implement a safety management system, should start now making sure that their policies and procedures are actually being followed.

Say what you do, do what you say, and be able to prove it!
  4548 Hits

EPA VGP Compliance – Do You Have All the Facts?

10Each vessel owner/operator I ask about EPA VGP compliance gives me a different response:  "Oh yeah, I heard about that…We've got it covered we just log how much graywater we discharge and try not to wash any oil over the side…I asked the Coast Guard and they don't know anything about it…Is that for real..?" 

This year I was selected to do a session on EPA VGP compliance at the International WorkBoat Show Professional Series being held in New Orleans from December 1-3.  In preparation for my presentation, I just concluded a meeting in Houston with EPA officials who are responsible for the EPA VGP in EPA Region 6.


Participating in the meeting were the person in charge of VGP enforcement for Region 6, the EPA attorney responsible for VGP issues, and the individual responsible for permitting. The purpose of the meeting was to make sure I had all the facts from the horse's mouth when it comes to my presentation, and to be able to answer the tough questions.  Some clients had also provided me with their nagging questions, and these EPA officials were very forthright in their answers.  I found their willingness to discuss the issues candidly quite refreshing and I am truly grateful for their taking the time to meet with me.

My approach to compliance has always been to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.  This comes from my experience both in and out of the Coast Guard, seeing frustrated industry people whose compliance efforts amount to doing what everyone else was doing, or doing whatever the last government inspector said was OK.  This can only result in problems or penalties.  Companies must be in compliance with all aspects of written regulations and policies to ensure compliance, because a new inspector can always show up to enforce what he knows about.  But sometimes when a worst case scenario approach is compared to actual enforcement levels, it can appear to be a "boy who cried wolf" scenario.  That is why I wanted to make my presentation to the EPA officials first, for a reality check.  I wanted to know if my compliance management ideas were "over the top" or not.  Not only did they not think my approach was "over the top" they added many interesting comments.  Here are a few of the highlights:


The EPA VGP is currently being enforced.

Anyone who has knowledge of the requirements of the EPA VGP and deliberately ignores them will be referred to the criminal division.
The EPA VGP was written to be general, but the response in the form of BMPs, etc. must be specific processes tailored to your specific vessel and operation.

The best management practices (BMPs) required are the industry BMPs, not what youthink are BMPs. You could be fined for not following the industry best practices regarding any particular discharge. Follow the permit closely on BMPs and you won't be far off.

Documentation is very important when it comes to enforcement.

Anyone who certifies that inspections and monitoring required by the permit have been done, and it is determined that the inspections and monitoring in fact have not been done, those certifying individuals who signed the log or report will be referred to the criminal division.


I hope these comments make you confident and not worried, but in either case, consider attending the WorkBoat Show Professional Series session to hear the rest of the information and get the answers to your questions.  It should be noted that the comments above are paraphrased and not direct quotes and that the EPA does not endorse me, my company or any of our products. They simply listened and provided factual feedback. See you at the show. 

  5103 Hits

Contact Us

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Phone: 504.249.5291

Copyright ©
Maritime Compliance International
All rights reserved | Privacy Policy

Maritime Compliance Report Sign-Up

Click here to subscribe to the Maritime Compliance Report blog for critical email updates on compliance issues.