Transport Publication Comparitive Study
Background
Over the years there have been considerable criticisms of Transport Canada's regulatory requirements applicable to Small Passenger Vessels and Towboats. These criticisms were based on the perception that Canadian regulations were much more stringent than the equivalent requirements in the United States thus placing Canadian operators at an economic disadvantage in a competitive market place.
In order to address these concerns, a contract was placed with MIL Systems in July 1995 to undertake a comparative study. The approach to the study involved the following tasks:
- To determine the regulatory requirements of Canadian and United States regulations applicable to the construction and operation of small passenger vessels and towboats;
- To compare the differences between the Canadian and United States regulations;
- To review the Canadian and United States philosophies with respect to the development and content of the regulations for vessels operating in the domestic trades;
- To review the Canadian and United States accident statistics for the vessels under review;
- To compare the accident rates in the two countries;
- To select certain representative passenger vessels and towboats for use as a basis for costing differences.
- To estimate the cost of disadvantage to the Canadian industry;
- To provide conclusions and recommendations based on the results of the study.
The study was completed, on schedule, at the end of March 1996. However there was some recent significant changes to United States regulations affecting both classes of vessels which might call into question the conclusion of the study.
The MIL Systems contract was extended to address the recent regulatory changes but not the comparative accident statistics due to the lack of an available data base in the United States.
The scope of work of the extended contract was as follows :
- To obtain and review all newly revised or proposed US regulations for small passenger vessels and towboats;
- To update regulatory comparisons, costing and other areas impacted by the change in regulations;
- To update the final report.
Current Status
MIL Systems presented the finding of the final report of the Study at a video-conference including all the regions on March 3, 1997 . The final report of the Study was completed on the end of March, 1997 and included the following conclusions:
Small Passenger Vessels - The major differences between Canada and US regulations for passenger vessels relate to lifesaving equipment, followed by manning, structural fire protection, navigating equipment and fire detection system.
Towboats - The major differences between Canada and US regulations for towboats relate to manning, stability and loadline, inspection and lifesaving equipment.
Departmental Position
General
Recommendation - US system of issuing, tracking and revising regulations seem more open. Proposed rulings, and rulemaking revisions are clearly explained in terms of rationale and all comments were addressed and published. This approach should be considered by Transport Canada in revising its approach to the design of regulations.
Response - Marine Safety Directorate ( MSD ) agrees to pursue a more open and transparent process in issuing, tracking and revising regulations. MSD also agrees in principle that the rationale for developing non-convention regulations or regulation alternatives should not be by directly "lifting" International Maritime Organization ( IMO ) Conventions or Resolutions. In future safety requirements for non-convention vessels will be developed specifically for the Canadian operational environment.
Small Passenger Vessels
Recommendation - The USCG approach of developing domestic requirements in lieu of basing regulations almost entirely on IMO initiatives, is equally effective in limiting loss of life and damage to property for vessels GRT less than or equal to 100. It may be beneficial to review the current practice of Transport Canada applying IMO requirements to vessels on domestic trade.
Response - The current practice of developing safety requirements for vessels on domestic trade will be reviewed as proposed above. Our limited resources will be focused in priority areas and on the basis of greatest risk. Wherever feasible, separate domestic regulations and / or standards will be developed to reflect our reality and environment.
Recommendation - The large increase in accidents for US vessels over 100 tons GRT would seem unusual. Further analysis of these statistics and their underlying causes might be beneficial in better understanding regulatory impacts on vessel safety.
Response - MSD will approach the USCG to determine if they have investigated this anomaly and to discuss the issue. Any formal statistical analysis by MSD will be dependent on the availability of adequate resources.
Recommendation - The disparity in tonnage measurement between Canada and US systems, for allowing the T-boats, still remains for existing vessels. However for new vessels, US will eliminate T-boats with the new US regulations. The US safety requirement will depend on the size of the vessel and number of passengers carried instead of tonnage. Canada should not change the current tonnage measurement systems to allow the existence of T-boats.
Response - MSD has no current plans to change the tonnage measurement system to allow for tonnage which might misrepresent the vessel size. However MSD will undertake to review the operational disadvantages to the Canadian vessels especially with respect to manning requirements and address the specific issues, by discussing there with affected stakeholders.
Towboat
Recommendation - The large variation between Canadian and US accident statistics implies a very poor safety record for US towboats versus their Canadian counterparts. The US now seems to recognize this alarming accident rate and has initiated more stringent regulations in the areas of navigation equipment, manning and certification. It remains to be seen whether the new regulations will reduce US accident rate to the low levels currently experienced in Canada. It is suggested that accident statistics be revisited in approximately two to three years to evaluate the effect of the new US regulations.
Response - Safety record comparisons between the two countries would imply that the more effective Canadian regulations may be the reason for Canada's low accident rate. Regardless MSD will monitor the situation and discuss the occurrence statistics over the two to three years period, to evaluate the effect of any new US regulations. Any relaxation in the current Canadian regulatory regime at this time would not seem appropriate.