Modernising the handling of Safety Management Systems for better efficiency
By One Ocean
Following several sea accidents during the late 1980s, there was widespread concern over maritime safety. The decade had seen a series of maritime incidents, the most serious one being the sinking of the Herald of Free Enterprise’s Ro Ro Ferry as it sailed from Belgium to England. As a result, in October 1989 the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted resolution A 647 (16) which specified guidelines on management for the safe operation of ships and for pollution prevention.
Following this resolution, the IMO’s International Safety Management (ISM) Code became mandatory with its entry into force on July 1, 1998. The ISM Code mandated that commercial maritime companies assess all identifiable risks to a company’s ships, personnel, and to the environment, and establish appropriate safeguards. In short, ISM provides an international standard for the safe management and operation of ships at sea.
As an important element of the ISM Code, all commercial vessels
are required to have a Safety Management System (SMS) in place to establish safe ship management procedures. The SMS must also include procedures for reporting accidents and any non-conformities with the ISM Code as well as procedures for preparing for and responding to emergency situations, and procedures for internal audits and management reviews.
In addition to the long list of SMS requirements, adherence is required also to the International Ship and Port Facility (ISPS) Code. This code
represents a set of measures that enhance the security of ships and port facilities and was developed in response to the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Part of the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention, ISPS is mandatory for the 148 contracting parties to SOLAS. It requires shipping companies to assess any security- related information received, and to distribute it to the appropriate government contracting agencies. A proper communication protocol must be defined for ships and port facilities to ensure that the information exchange is without complications.
The Report • September 2022 • Issue 101 | 67
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128
