WORK PROGRAMME. Submitted by Israel and Poland SUMMARY

Transcription

1 E MARITIME SAFETY COMMITTEE 99th session Agenda item 20 MSC 99/20/1 19 December 2017 Original: ENGLISH WORK PROGRAMME Proposal for a new output on the development of performance standards for Navigation Decision Support System (NDSS) for Collision Avoidance (CA) Submitted by Israel and Poland SUMMARY Executive summary: Strategic direction: The co-sponsors of this document invite IMO to undertake formulation of performance standards for Navigation Decision Support System for Collision Avoidance (NDSS CA). NDSS CA are already commercially available. Some of these systems have been presented to IMO and other marine forums with the view that NDSS CA will become an integral component of the navigation decision support system in the future, as it is intended to overcome the limited effectiveness of ARPA by utilizing the AIS data. NDSS CA aims for on board use and, therefore, international performance standards are needed to assist in the process of approval. The standards should provide general guidance for manufacturers and certification bodies in order to achieve effective and harmonized means of support for the master or the officer of the watch (OOW) in optimizing the course of action in situations of danger of collision, in compliance with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREG). SD2 High-level action: Output: No related provisions Action to be taken: Paragraph 20 Related documents: NAV 57/6; MSC 85/26/Add.1, annex 20, section 5; NAV 59/INF.2; NCSR 1/9; NCSR 2/INF.10 and MSC 98/INF.10 Background 1 Collisions still occur and cause loss of lives, they also almost inevitably cause pollution and financial damage. Contributory factors are: human error, inaccurate interpretation of available data and lack of adherence to COLREG. A report by the European Maritime Safety

2 Page 2 Agency (EMSA) (Annual Overview of Marine Casualties and incidents 2015) noted that ships within its remit, were involved in 3,025 accidents at sea with 136 lives lost and 1,075 injured in 2014, the estimate for 2015 is around 3,500 to 4,000 accidents. With the advent of e-navigation, it is incumbent upon the maritime community to provide the OOW with reliable analysis of traffic in ship's vicinity, focusing on vessels which may pose danger of close quarter situation. The system should provide a decision support tool to recommend the mode of action required to avoid collision, in compliance with COLREG. Document MSC 98/INF.10 submitted in 2017 was aimed to encourage the discussion on the need for international performance standards to assist in the process of design and approval of the NDSS CA. Scope of the proposal 2 It is postulated that the maritime community should support the capability of the master and OOW to avoid collision by providing them with NDSS CA. This can be achieved by a software system with additional/new functions to existing systems or a standalone unit which would be incorporated into the integrated navigation system. The sponsors propose a new agenda item for the NCSR Sub-Committee: Development of performance standards for NDSS CA. Draft performance standards for NDSS CA as the basis for discussion are formulated in annex 1. IMO objectives 3 The main goal of this proposal is collision avoidance, which clearly lies within IMO's "safety of shipping and prevention of pollution" objectives. 4 Collision avoidance technology is within IMO's newly structured strategic direction SD2 as adopted by A 30, namely, Integrate new and advancing technologies in the regulatory framework. Compelling Need 5 NDSS CA are already available on the market, and performance standards established and recommended by IMO are required. In order to ensure safety of navigation, performance standards for NDSS CA should be developed. 6 NDSS should be certified by recognized organizations in line with IMO recommendations. Performance standards should be available for navigational equipment manufacturers. The use of NDSS CA without defined performance standards may jeopardize the safety of navigation. Analysis 7 Rapid development of Information Communication Technology (ICT) broadens the possibilities of navigational data acquisition, processing and presentation, a significant advance in supporting the master or OOW responsible for the safe navigation at sea. Navigational equipment and systems on board ships considerably raise the level of navigational safety. These are mostly information systems helpful in the decision-making process. The broader application of ICT is ascertained by such concepts such as the e- navigation concept. Further enhancement of navigational safety can be achieved by limiting human errors as this account for the majority of marine accidents. 8 There is a tendency to upgrade navigational information systems into navigational decision support systems. Such systems are already available on the market. These systems are intended to assist the master or OOW in collision avoidance situations, thus reducing the

3 Page 3 burden of decision-making in heavy traffic and allowing more time for better analysis of the situation. Therefore there is a need for performance standards recommended by IMO to ensure proper design and manufacture of such systems. 9 The proposed NDSS CA should fulfil the following requirements:.1 define the safety parameters by setting the relevant encounter parameters from all targets, i.e. minimum Closest Point of Approach (CPA) and Time to Closest Point of Approach (TCPA) or ship domain;.2 consider other parameters (as might be required by the master or OOW);.3 take into account all available information from Radar Tracking and Automatic Identification System (AIS);.4 analyze the navigational encounter situation with all radar targets and/or AIS objects within selected range;.5 analyze the possible (required) course of action with reference to recommendations of COLREG;.6 indicate to the master or OOW the course and/or speed alteration required to keep the vessel at safe passing distance for all analysed radar targets and AIS objects;.7 adapt the indications continuously (real time) according to current situation, a feature which neither ARPA nor AIS provide; and.8 tools of additional use of navigational charts data such as depth, navigational dangers/obstacles, delineation of special areas and environmental restrictions, may be integrated in the NDSS CA to enhance the system into effective decision support tool. Analysis of implications 10 The co-sponsors consider that this proposal will not imply any additional administrative requirements or burdens. In this regard, the completed administrative checklist set out in annex 5 to the Organization and method of work of the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine Environment Protection Committee and their subsidiary bodies (MSC-MEPC.1/Circ.5) is set out in annex 2 to this document. Limitations 11 The NDSS CA is not intended for navigation in close proximities where the inaccuracy of distances obtained or estimated from AIS or radar might lead to misinterpretation of close-quarters situation. The system does not relieve the master or the OOW from their responsibilities in compliance with COLREG and with good seamanship. Cost(s) to the maritime industry 12 The formulation of performance standards will not incur any additional cost for the maritime industry.

4 Page 4 Associated legislative and/or administrative burden 13 Associated legislative and/or administrative burden will be minimal. There will be no need for a new convention or an amendment to an existing convention. Do adequate industry standards exist? 14 At present, there are no standards for NDSS CA although such tools are already available. Benefits which would accrue from the proposal 15 It is assumed that NDSS CA can increase the safety of life at sea and minimize risk of collisions by assisting the master or OOW in analysis of encounter situations by simultaneous plotting of all targets in the declared range and the calculation of the safe course or speed to pass clear from all targets, according to COLREG. It is assumed that performance standards will assist the shipping community in proper analysis, design, testing and approval of such systems. Output 16 The proposed output is "Development of performance standards for Navigation Decision Support System for Collision Avoidance (NDSS CA)". Priority 17 Considering the trend of changing information systems into decision support systems and development of autonomous vehicles, the new output is therefore proposed as a high-priority work and should be addressed as soon as practicable within the working arrangements of the Organization. Estimation of the number of sessions needed to complete the work 18 Two sessions would be required. Human element 19 See checklist in annex 3. Action requested of the Committee 20 The Committee is invited to consider the above proposal and justification and include in the current or upcoming biennium agenda of the NCSR Sub-Committee the new item on "Development of performance standards for Navigation Decision Support System for Collision Avoidance". ***

5 Annex 1, page 1 ANNEX 1 DRAFT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS NAVIGATION DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR COLLISION AVOIDANCE (NDSS CA) A Minimum functional requirements The system shall:.1 receive data of all AIS objects in the VHF range and targets detected and tracked by radar;.2 analyze and display targets within selected range only;.3 limit the number of targets analyzed according to user's selection of CPA limit so that the NDSS CA will calculate best response to keep the relevant targets on CPA equal or greater than the selected CPA limit;.4 have the capacity to limit the number of targets analyzed according to user's selection of TCPA limit. Only targets with TCPA smaller than the selected TCPA limit, i.e. targets with closest proximity less than the selected TCPA, will be analyzed;.5 have the capacity to calculate the required course for passing at a distance greater than the CPA limit from all Stand-On targets;.6 warn the user if the course proposed is laid over any charted dangers or caution-marks;.7 have the capacity to calculate the required speed for passing at a distance greater than the CPA limit from all Stand-On targets. Speed can be either slower or faster than present speed;.8 have the capacity to calculate the required course and/or speed taking into account targets within selected range, in compliance with COLREG both in good and restricted visibility;.9 provide the master with the means to define safe distances from Give-Way vessels, which require a warning (Visual or Audio) to the Give-Way vessel and/or which requires action that should be taken in accordance with COLREG;.10 have the capacity to advise the user that a warning should be given to a Give-Way vessel, indicating the doubt about the Give-Way vessel's actions, in accordance with rule 34 (d) of COLREG. Such advice will be according to the safe distance described in item 9; and.11 have the capacity to account for situations, (according to the safety distance described in item 9), when action by the Give-Way vessel may be insufficient to avoid risk of collision (rule 17 (a) and (b)), and advise a proper action by the Stand-On vessel as described in items 5 and 7.

6 Annex 1, page 2 CPA limit should not be less than the value appropriate for the vessel, taking into account the dimensions of the vessel, its speed and manoeuvrability, and other relevant parameters such as weather, sea state etc. The selected TCPA limit should be appropriate for the vessel, taking into account the dimensions of the vessel, its speed and manoeuvrability, and other relevant parameters such as weather, sea state etc. Safety distances should be appropriate for the vessel, taking into account the relative speed of approach, dimensions of the vessel, its speed and manoeuvrability, and other relevant parameters such as weather and sea state etc. All calculations mentioned in items 6, 7, 8 and 11 above should be carried out in compliance with COLREG. B Additional functions of the NDSS CA NDSS CA may:.1 enable the user to explore a "non-colreg" advice (e.g. going to port rather than starboard), which in the prevailing circumstances and sea conditions may be the only possibility;.2 provide full analysis of each ship (type, size, course, speed, CPA, TCPA etc.) and the status in accordance with COLREG requirements;.3 allow manual input of data regarding targets which, on observation, did not conform to their AIS transmission, or entirely lacking any transmitted information. Manually entered data should be clearly indicated and as such may have limited "time-validity";.4 enable removal of certain targets from the list of targets being considered;.5 advise when it is safe to return to the original course or speed;.6 define a preferred sector while limiting the analysis to vessels within that sector; and.7 graphically display indication of "dangerous sectors" and "safe sectors" of the vessel's advance, e.g. distinctly marked Navigation Circle showing all compass courses. ***

7 Annex 2, page 1 ANNEX 2 CHECKLIST FOR IDENTIFYING ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS This checklist should be used when preparing the analysis of implications required in submissions of proposals for inclusion of outputs. For the purpose of this analysis, the term "administrative requirements" is defined in resolution A.1043(27), i.e. administrative requirements are an obligation arising from future IMO mandatory instruments to provide or retain information or data. Instructions: (A) (B) (C) If the answer to any of the questions below is YES, the Member State proposing an output should provide supporting details on whether the requirements are likely to involve start-up and/or ongoing costs. The Member State should also give a brief description of the requirement and, if possible, provide recommendations for further work (e.g. would it be possible to combine the activity with an existing requirement?). If the proposal for the output does not contain such an activity, answer NR (Not required). For any administrative requirement, full consideration should be given to electronic means of fulfilling the requirement in order to alleviate administrative burdens. 1. Notification and reporting? Reporting certain events before or after the event has taken place, e.g. notification of voyage, statistical reporting for IMO Members NR Yes Start-up Ongoing Description of administrative requirement(s) and method of fulfilling it: (if the answer is yes) 2. Record keeping? Keeping statutory documents up to date, e.g. records of accidents, records of cargo, records of inspections, records of education NR Yes Start-up Ongoing Description of administrative requirement(s) and method of fulfilling it: (if the answer is yes) 3. Publication and documentation? Producing documents for third parties, e.g. warning signs, registration displays, publication of results of testing NR Yes Start-up Ongoing Description of administrative requirement(s) and method of fulfilling it: (if the answer is yes) 4. Permits or applications? Applying for and maintaining permission to operate, e.g. certificates, classification society costs NR Yes Start-up Ongoing Description of administrative requirement(s) and method of fulfilling it: (if the answer is yes) 5. Other identified requirements? NR Yes Start-up Ongoing Description of administrative requirement(s) and method of fulfilling it: (if the answer is yes) ***

8

9 Annex 3, page 1 ANNEX 3 CHECKLIST FOR CONSIDERING HUMAN ELEMENT ISSUES BY IMO BODIES Instructions: If the answer to any of the questions below is: (A) (B) YES, the preparing body should provide supporting details and/or recommendation for further work. NO, the preparing body should make proper justification as to why human element issues were not considered. (C) NA, (Not Applicable) the preparing body should make proper justification as to why human element issues were not considered applicable. Subject Being Assessed: (e.g. Resolution, Instrument, Circular being considered) Performance standard for NDSS CA in the international maritime community Responsible Body: (e.g. Committee, Sub-committee, Working Group, Correspondence Group, Member State) Navigation, Communications and Search and Rescue (NCSR) Sub-Committee 1 Was the human element considered during Yes No NA development or amendment process related to this subject? 2 Has input from seafarers or their proxies Yes No NA been solicited? 3 Are the solutions proposed for the subject in Yes No NA agreement with existing instruments? (Identify instruments considered in comments section) 4 Have human element solutions been made as an alternative and/or in conjunction with technical solutions? Yes No NA 5 Has human element guidance on the application and/or implementation of the proposed solution been provided for the following: Administrations? Yes No NA Shipowners/managers? Yes No NA Seafarers? Yes No NA Surveyors? Yes No NA 6 At some point, before final adoption, has the solution been reviewed or considered by a relevant IMO body with the relevant human element expertise? 7 Does the solution address safeguards to avoid single person errors? 8 Does the solution address safeguards to avoid organizational errors? 9 If the proposal is to be directed at seafarers, is the information in a form that can be presented to and is easily understood by the seafarer? 10 Have human element experts been consulted in developing the solution? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA

10 Annex 3, page 2 11 HUMAN ELEMENT: Has the proposal been assessed against each of the factors below? CREWING. The number of qualified Yes No NA personnel required and available to safely operate, maintain, support, and provide training for system. PERSONNEL. The necessary knowledge, Yes No NA skills, abilities, and experience levels that are needed to properly perform job tasks. TRAINING. The process and tools by which Yes No NA personnel acquire or improve the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to achieve desired job/task performance. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY. Yes No NA The management systems, programmes, procedures, policies, training, documentation, equipment, etc. to properly manage risks. WORKING ENVIRONMENT. Conditions Yes No NA that are necessary to sustain the safety, health, and comfort of those on working on board, such as noise, vibration, lighting, climate, and other factors that affect crew endurance, fatigue, alertness and morale. HUMAN SURVIVABILITY. System features Yes No NA that reduce the risk of illness, injury, or death in a catastrophic event such as fire, explosion, spill, collision, flooding, or intentional attack. The assessment should consider desired human performance in emergency situations for detection, response, evacuation, survival and rescue and the interface with emergency procedures, systems, facilities and equipment. HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING. Yes No NA Human-system interface to be consistent with the physical, cognitive, and sensory abilities of the user population. Comments: (1) Justification if answers are NO or Not Applicable (2) Recommendations for additional human element assessment needed (3) Key risk management strategies employed (4) Other comments (5) Supporting documentation