Final SSAS July deadline - Beware the unprepared

Date: 08/06/2006

The final deadline for compulsory Ship Security Alert Systems (SSAS) compliance looms this July and, according to global maritime security services provider, Securewest International, many in the industry are still unaware of the requirements and the implications of this red-letter day.

The significance of the July 06 date, and the crucial point for many ship owners, is that the implementation of SSAS will no longer be an optional choice – rather a requirement under SOLAS Chapter XI-2 regulation 6. To be precise, the last and final deadline for installation is on cargo vessels over 500 gross tons and mobile offshore drilling units constructed before 1 July 2004, is due by the first survey of radio installation after 1st July 2006. All other classes of vessels over 500 gross tonnage should already have SSAS equipment installed as their deadline was by the first survey of radio installation after 1 July 2004. All new builds since 1 July 2004 are required to install and just as importantly, monitor SSAS equipment.

“As the days slip by we are convinced that the deadline will arrive and many companies will find that time has run out leaving them in breach of SOLAS regulations, and placing people, and resources at legal and financial risk, says Securewest International’s Paul Singer (Vice President) Business Development.

Essentially a silent alarm system designed to indicate vessel distress due to a threat or compromise of security, SSAS is activated by pushing a concealed button on the vessel, a signal is then transmitted via satellite to a land based communication service provider (CSP). The minimum information transmitted must include verification that it is not a GMDSS distress call, the vessel identification, position, date and time.

In the wake of continued and evermore sophisticated in attacks by pirates on shipping, the perceived threat from terrorists, and the perennial problems associated with stowaways, Securewest International believes that SSAS is even more important today than when first conceived.

“Everyone accepts that there are some hazards in shipping that are unavoidable, but those maritime incidents which occur because shipping companies have simply not bothered to take professional security advice and rectify bad security procedures are avoidable, and therefore inexcusable,” says Singer

“Obviously there has to be an answer to the alert and so communication service providers create the link between the equipment on the vessel and the Company Security Officer (CSO) and/or competent or designated authority. These systems can be set up to send alerts by email, fax, and SMS text message by cell phone or a combination of transmission methods.

“Attention should also be drawn to the SSAS legislation that dictates that all system equipment must meet standardised criteria set forth by the International Maritime Organisation, Singer continues. “Equipment is made by various companies, and finding out if it is compliant can be time consuming.”

Furthermore, according to Singer, the problems regarding compliance do not stop with the installation of SSAS hardware. International standards require that a competent or designated authority (usually the Company Security Officer) is responsible for the monitoring of all vessels under his charge, and that SSAS monitoring be accomplished 24/7.

“We have found that for many busy clients this burden is too much, and they have taken up the option within the regulations giving them the opportunity to engage the services of an approved monitoring organisation such as ourselves. It is then the duty of such an organisation to act as the simultaneous first point of contact (along with the appropriate Administration) in the event of an alert.”

Closer inspection reveals plenty more potential banana skins for the under prepared. For example, in the event of a SSAS alert being raised on a US flagged vessel, the US Coast Guard (USCG) now demands that contact with them must be made within just five minutes, and in the case of the UK Coastguard that time is only marginally increased to 15 minutes. Even 15 minutes is not a long time.

“Add such time restraints to the SOLAS 24/7 monitoring requirement, and suddenly compliance doesn’t seem so easy, warns Singer. Automated systems that do not have live monitoring can only contact pre-set destinations or numbers without any receipt verification process. What if the ‘incident’ in question takes place out of normal office hours or, as we have found on occasion, when needed, the relevant company security officer is on leave, has their phone off, or is nowhere to be seen?

“Incidents and false alarms have a habit of arriving when you don’t want them to. And for those who believe their SSAS will never go off, our experience to date is that they do for a number of different reasons and they must all be treated as ‘real’ until such time as the pre-agreed verification procedure proves otherwise. Often alarms are triggered by a slip of the hand, during routine cleaning or maintenance, or by simple human curiosity.”

Securewest International counters this by providing a live monitoring facility, manned by ISPS trained security professionals day and night, that ensures client and relevant authority notification always takes place in the event of an alert – even if a member of the crew sits on the alert button by mistake!

Another important aspect easily over looked, is that an Annex needs to be written into each and every Vessel’s Security Plan describing the processes, features and system details. Will company staff have the time and knowledge to write these? SSAS Annexes are a mandatory requirement of the US Coast Guard’s NVIC No. 04 03, Change 1, and the maritime industry’s need for companies qualified to write Annexes and assist throughout the approval process, will only increase as time elapses.

“SSAS compliance rules may not seem terribly arduous to some, but if companies are really serious about protecting their ships, cargo and - most importantly - their crew and passengers, they are going to have do more than just scrape by with the bare, legally-enforced minimum. If shipping companies are sending their employees into dangerous waters, surely they have a duty to take care of them?” Singer concludes.