External Affairs / Policy / Consultations Consultations
Inland waters Small Passenger Boat Code
Maritime
and Coastguard Agency
Bay 2/01 Spring Place
105 Commercial Road
Southampton SO15 1EG
13 June 2003
Dear Sir
DRAFT INLAND WATERS SMALL PASSENGER BOAT CODE
Thank you for giving the Institute for Outdoor Learning the opportunity to comment on your consultation paper on the above subject. The Institute, as a registered charity, was formed two years ago as the result of the convergence of six outdoor organisations. We represent probably the broadest spectrum across the industry of any existing organisation. Our members include employers and employees involved in watersports, mountaineering, personal development, outdoor activities, and field studies and are present in outdoor centres, educational establishments, charities, local authorities and commercial enterprises. Many of these providers will use water for navigation, recreation, skill training, competitions, scientific studies and adventure projects.
We find that the technical advice in the consultation paper is based on good practice and has a refreshing and positive response in its application, with little bureaucracy, but retaining the requirements of a strong safety approach.
We have the following proposals:
1 There is no definition of vessel within the code. (Para 1.4) You define various
types of vessels in annex two but not passenger vessel or vessel. This could
lead to the inclusion of everything from a canoe to a raft or a bath that
are clearly not intended by the purpose of the Code. Canoeists are already
well provided by the requirements and codes of the British Canoe Union with
Training and Commercial Establishments receiving a yearly inspection. It
is suggested that the dictionary definition of vessel should be included: "Vessel
- A boat, ship, barge or the like designed to transport passengers or freight
on water." (Readers Digest Universal Dictionary)
2 Para 3.2.1. It is not clear whether the Code only applies to vessels in
category C and D waters or A & B as well. The former is suggested by this paragraph
but 12.2.1 includes A & B waters? What is the correct intention?
3 Para 3.2.5 would appear to be a catch all for any remaining waters - including
the village pond? This again needs clarification, otherwise some eager local
authority official will seize upon this and we will have another one of those
popular newspaper headline stories that would of course involve the Agency!
4 Para 3.4.1. Again, you use the catch all phrase of: "any vessel that
is not a pleasure vessel is deemed to be operating commercially." This
may be an easy way to write a code but we suggest that again in practice it
would net all sorts of craft, vessels, boats that were not intended to be included.
This could include a punt operating in marshes for the purposes of duck shooting
where an estate supplied boat and driver.
5 Para 3.5 These two paragraphs show the right intention but do not appear
to state it and are ambiguous. We are delighted to hear that The Adventure
Activities Licensing Authority has clarified with you the very strict licensing
regime that is in place for licensed outdoor centres. This system requires
establishments that are licensed to be the subject of frequent inspections
by Inspectors from AALA.
6 We would propose that a para 3.5.3 should state "Any establishment which
holds a licence from AALA should be should be - "deemed to provide 'equivalence'
to the code requirements."
7 Para 3.5.2. Does not reflect the onerous but sensible requirements, that
apply to teaching establishments which the Royal Yachting Association and the
British Canoe Union approve. Their regulations cover every possible aspect
of safety from staff certification, equipment, and craft, operating waters,
staff refresher updates and a yearly inspection by one of their inspectors.
Some of their requirements go much further than your Code, especially when
dealing with young people.
8 We suggest that: "any establishment which is approved by the Royal Yachting
Association or the British Canoe Union as a teaching establishment should be
should be - "deemed to provide 'equivalence' to the code requirements."
9 Para 3.6.4. (4) Climatic change has caused the patterns of river flows to
change and you may want to consider that "in summer river flow conditions" should
be changed to "non-flood conditions" or other suitable wording.
10 Para 3.8.3, last paragraph is a welcome refreshing change in requiring practical
instruction and knowledge, rather than written risk assessments, these only
ensure that managers or skippers are writing instead of doing!
11 Sections 4 to 24 we believe would benefit from being divided into classes
of vessels rather than trying to cover all. This makes it most difficult for
the user to untangle what applies to a particular type. We would suggest that
if the sections were reproduced for say five types of vessel - it may justify
more - then this clarity would also be an aid to safety. We suggest: a.Canal
or narrow boats b.Decked vessels with watertight integrity c.Open boats d.Rigid
Inflatable craft e.Inflatable craft f.You may also wish to consider craft with
a petrol outboard engine This would also ensure that the equipment required
would be commensurate with the craft.
12 Para 13.1. In small craft such as ribs and inflatables, the carrying of
lifebuoys can interfere with the space available for normal operations. We
would suggest that where all passengers and crew wear either buoyancy aids
or lifejackets dependent upon the class of waters (As is the practice with
our members) then such craft would not have to carry lifebuoys.
13 Para 13.3 Again the carrying of a life raft on say a 3metre rib could cause
severe handling problems and if the inflatable complies with the construction & use
provisions of para 11.2.3.1 then it should be able to float and again all crew
and passengers would be required (in cat. D waters) to wear a lifejacket. Could
you please reconsider the above requirement?
14 Para 18.2 and para 19.6. It may not be appropriate or required to have a
boat hook on all small craft and could be a most potential hazard on an inflatable.
15 Para 26.4.3 Again your medical fitness requirements are sensible, straightforward
and inexpensive, where the skipper is able to provide a self-declaration of
fitness for the operation etc. However, some local and harbour authorities
require an expensive medical in accordance with the Merchant shipping for craft
that "go to sea." We trust that the provision of this Code will cause
those authorities to change such medical procedures to your requirements?
16 Para 26.7 - Basic Sea Survival Course. The RYA Sea Survival Course is not
included in your approved courses for any of the four category waters. Would
you please include?
17 Para 31.3 This perhaps should stress that a valid medical fitness certificate
includes the self-certificate under para 26.4.3.
18 There appears to be no provision for "kill cords" on Ribs, Inflatable
and other required craft. The lack of these has been the cause of a number
of fatal accidents and we believe that such provision and usage should be mandatory.
Finally, we stress that we welcome the way in which the MCA has approached the provision of these requirements and trust that our views will be of value. We are also grateful to you for extending the deadline for responses, in view of the fact that we had not received the original consultation papers being a new organisation not known to The Marine & Coastguard Agency.
Yours faithfully
(Allan Myatt)
Chairman of Institute for Outdoor Learning.
Please note that any response should be addressed
to
Brian Lamb
Greystone Cottage Bere Ferrers Devon PL20 7JX
01822 841309
Briankay1@talk21.com