Prevention at Sea Signs Two MOUs

Lloyd’s Register certified marine risk assessor and maritime software developer, Prevention at Sea, has recently signed two Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs).

The first one has been signed with SQLearn, a leading e-Learning company that provides technological training solutions, and the two companies will collaborate on the development of eLearning training programmes using their combined knowledge of maritime know-how and technology.

This will include the use of the latest training techniques, including the use of Virtual Reality (VR), to engage and enthuse the younger generation entering the industry.

The second MOU has been signed with Katradis Marine Ropes, a specialist in mooring systems, procedures and products.

Katradis has many years’ experience in mooring system and line management best practices and tradition, so combining this with Prevention at Sea’s maritime regulatory knowledge and software expertise will benefit ship operators by enabling the detailed compilation of a ship’s mooring system plan to enable the safer management of its mooring procedures.

Both companies will also explore avenues of cooperation by combining technical knowledge and advances in technology to develop innovative products aiming at bettering the industry and enhancing safety.

Read more

Panama Maritime Authority Recognises Prevention at Sea’s Oil Record Book Software

Prevention at Sea Ltd has recently been authorized by the Panama Maritime Authority as a recognized manufacturer and distributor of the Panamanian Oil Record Book in electronic format as well as the electronic version of other official Books in general.

The merchant marine circular MMC-193 has been re-issued by the Panama Maritime Authority with the aim to notify the Industry that the Oil Record Book software as well as other official log books produced by the company are now accepted on board Panamanian vessels.

Since 2014, Prevention at Sea has been very active in software development in the maritime sector by winning multiple awards for innovation, especially with its Lloyd’s Register approved ε-ORB software, designed to be used for the preparation and printing of the traditional Oil Record Book.

This piece of software is already in compliance with the IMO guidelines published in the last PPR5 for electronic record books (February 2018) and will replace the traditional paper Oil Record Book whenever MARPOL is amended to allow the use of paperless electronic record systems.

Read more

PaSea clarifies Hours of Work and Rest interpretation for seafarers

Maritime risk prevention firm, Prevention at Sea (PaSea), has raised concerns about the different interpretations attributed to MLC 2006 Regulation 2.3 Hours of work and hours of rest, para. 5(b) and para. 6, specifically with regards to the phrase ‘in any 24-hour period’ used when calculating crew work schedules to ensure that sufficient rest periods are taken.

Petros Achtypis, CEO of PaSea, has brought this issue to the attention of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO’s) Labour Standards Department requesting clarification on whether the interpretation provided by his team were correct.

Specifically, the issue raised revolves around checks ‘in any 24-hour period’ and whether such checks should commence during a seafarer’s rest period.

PaSea’s stance is that this should be avoided and the reasons for this opinion is based on the fact that:

  • By not taking into consideration a part of the seafarer’s undisrupted rest period, irregularities may occur which could result in a violation of the regulations.
  •  The seafarer’s rest period should not be split into parts/sections, regardless if the rest period commenced during the previous day.For example, if a seafarer’s rest period was between 2000 of day 1 and 0400 of day 2, then the undisrupted rest time is 8 hours in total.Therefore, the beginning of ‘in any 24 h period’ checking during the rest period 2000 (day 1) – 0400 (day 2) i.e. starting at 2100, 2130, 2200, 2300 etc., should be avoided.PaSea recommends that when scheduling work patterns for crew, the ‘in any 24h period’ should commence at the start of any period of work by moving backwards 24 hours.This type of calculation clearly indicates whether the seafarer has received adequate rest in accordance with the regulations before the commencement of a new work- related task.Although the Constitution of the International Labour Office confers no special competence upon the ILO to interpret Conventions and any comment is without prejudice to what the supervisory bodies of the ILO may have to say about the issue, PaSea understands that the ILO’s Labour Standards Department supports and shares the same interpretation as PaSea.

    Examples of different scenarios are available from PaSea to demonstrate how using this system of checking ensures that the seafarer’s welfare is the priority and that only when proper rest periods have been taken should another work related task begin.

     

    To contact PaSea call +357 24819800 or visit the website www.preventionatsea.com

    ENDS

Risk Profiling is becoming more important to PSC Inspections

Port State Control inspections are increasingly focusing on the risk profile of the ship under inspection with inspectors singling out the performance of the ship manager and the flag state recognised organisation (RO) as major factors to concentrate on.

Petros Achtypis, Chief Executive Officer of Cyprus-based Prevention at Sea (PaSea), said PSC inspectors were changing the way they inspected ships with greater emphasis being placed on a vessel’s risk profile.

Many PSC Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) were starting to draw direct parallels between the risk profile of the ship and the performance of the ship manager and the RO.

“There is a growing trend to look at ways to identify operational and management risks and detect any pitfalls that could lead to accidents or injury,” he said.

Since risk assessment became part of the ISM Code the shipping industry has viewed risk identification and assessment as a simple process, limited to the use of one matrix – consequence x probability.

Read more