Seafarers Shame: For Safety's Sake Contact CHIRP
Op-Ed by Captain John Rose, director (maritime) of the UK charitable trust CHIRP
There should be no shame in reporting that something went wrong, especially where an accident was narrowly avoided. As John Guy wrote in his article Shame and Shipowners, the shame should be in not reporting it. One avenue open to all seafarers, wherever there are in the world, is the Confidential Hazardous Incident Reporting Programme (CHIRP). Our role is to investigate hazardous occurrences, namely those that nearly result in injury or damage and are often referred to as a “near-miss”.
The aim of CHIRP is to seek out root causes, identify the lessons learned and to consider how best this information can be used to prevent reoccurrence elsewhere in the maritime industry. CHIRP does not seek to apportion blame to any company or individual(s). The term ‘whistleblowing’ is not one used in CHIRP as that is often used to cast blame on an organization or an individual.
A report can be generated either online (through a secure website), as a written report (via post/Freepost), or by telephone to the Charitable Trust’s office in Farnborough England. Reports come from professional and amateur participants in the maritime sector and upon receipt, all reports are validated by myself as the director (maritime).
Anonymous reports are not normally acted upon, as they cannot be validated. User privacy is taken very seriously, with the confidentiality of the source always being maintained. Thereafter, only de-personalized data is used in discussions with third party organizations - always protecting the identity of the reporter.
The same data is presented to my panel of maritime experts, the Maritime Advisory Board, from whom advice and recommendations are taken as to whether there is benefit in sharing the results in the “Maritime FEEDBACK” publication. The results are also fed back to the reporter. On completion of the investigation, all personal details are removed from all files, with only key information being retained in order to establish trends or identify root causes linked with human element behaviors.
To date, over 800 hazardous occurrence reports have been reviewed, these include all aspects of vessel operations: cargo handling, catering, engineering, navigation, shipboard services, and activities at the ship/shore interface.
Our publication of “Maritime FEEDBACK” now has a distribution of 65,000 and a social media site with over 1,100 followers from 46 countries around the world.
A priority is to promote the importance of safety reporting and the provision of a reporting structure that is not always available to all seafarers. Those most likely to benefit are: seafarers operating on vessels with hazards or incidents not managed within an appropriate safety management system (SMS); seafarers with concerns over fatigue or stress related issues; seafarers encountering gaps in the interface between two safety management systems (bunkering, pilotage, repair yards), and ship managers whose ships encounter poor application of the Collision Regulations by another ship’s officer.
Perhaps the largest challenge is convincing people to submit reports and increase their belief that a report will make a difference. A recent initiative involves working with The Nautical Institute Mariners' Alerting and Reporting Scheme (MARS), the aim being to establish an international network of eight voluntary ambassadors, designed to promote both schemes.
For those unclear as to the difference between the two programs; the MARS reports relay the lessons learned from the incident and near miss reports they receive, whilst in CHIRP each report involves pro-active follow-up and investigation of safety issues which otherwise may not have been reported to ship managers and authorities.
Examples of hazardous occurrences examined by CHIRP:
• A very hazardous operation in severe weather on an offshore vessel with potentially fatal consequence. This was followed up with the vessel operator, who took up the lessons learned and applied them to all the vessels in their fleet.
• Expert advice given on a concern expressed over the information contained in operational and maintenance manuals; where text can be inaccurate and/or poorly written which can create confusion for the operator.
• Explosion as a result of heavy corrosion of an air bottle in a ship’s lifeboat. This incident highlighted the importance of regular inspection and survey of all parts of a lifeboat, including bottles containing pressurized gas or air.
• A major argument witnessed between the captain and the pilot when entering port has highlighted the importance of establishing a positive relationship when the pilot first boards and then reaching agreement when the passage plan is discussed.
• A small passenger ferry was on passage when the vessel suffered intermittent power loss on both engines. The loss was due to blocked filters due to fuel bugs in the diesel fuel. This flagged up the fact that increased care is needed on small vessels in the storage of diesel where this contains biodiesel.
• Poor application of the Collision Regulations, led to feedback reiterating the need to take positive and early action when altering course, noting also that although there is often a reluctance to do so, reducing the speed of the ship can be used as an alternative means to avoid a collision.
To access past “Maritime FEEDBACK” publications please visit here and to submit dangerous occurrence reports please email [email protected].