Management Consultants
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Irish Coast Guard Study Final Report 13 August 2002
Nautical Enterprise Centre Ltd
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations 1
Review Process 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
2
3
13
Introduction Terms of Reference Methodology Acknowledgements
Background 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.3
1
16
Overview of the Irish Coast Guard Resources and Locations Context / Environment Regulatory Context
Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
23
3.1 Introduction 3.2 Customers & Services 3.3 Relationships 3.4 Physical and Technical Resources 3.5 Operations / Processes 3.6 Staff Issues and Analysis 3.7 Communications 3.8 Logistics and Equipment 3.9 Volunteers 3.10 Resources & Structures 3.11 IRCG Performance Indicators 3.12 Summary of Key Issues
Continued over…
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page i
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Table of Contents
4
Recommendations, Options and Costs
82
4.1 Introduction 4.2 Customers & Services 4.3 Relationships 4.4 Physical and Technical Resources 4.5 Operations / Processes 4.6 Staff Issues 4.7 Communications 4.8 Logistics and Equipment 4.9 Volunteers 4.10 Resources & Structures 4.11 Performance Indicators 4.12 Other Recommendations 4.13 Key Costings
5
The Next Steps
118
5.1 Proposed Implementation Timeframe 5.2 Managing the Process 5.3 Future Growth Considerations
Appendices A Review of Organisational Structures B Staff Questionnaire C List of Interviews -
Internal / Departmental Consultations External Consultations
D International Benchmarking Table E Irish Coast Guard Declared Resources F Organisations that the IRCG interacts with G Communications Infrastructure H Interlinking Circuits
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page ii
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Table of Contents
Continued Over …
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page iii
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Table of Contents
I VHF Radio Coverage J Telecoms Infrastructure K Combined Fire Services Network
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page iv
13 August 2002
INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 1.1
INTRODUCTION
This report presents a review of the Irish Coast Guard (IRCG) operations within the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (hereinafter referred to as the Department). The review was carried out by Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants in partnership with Mason Communications and the Nautical Enterprise Centre Limited (NECL) and involved the staff, volunteers and stakeholders of the IRCG. Deloitte & Touche led the project and were assisted by Mason Communications in relation to physical and technical infrastructure and resources and NECL in relation to benchmarking. The objective of the review was to determine the existing IRCG organisation, to identify and propose the most satisfactory, cost effective, Coast Guard model having regard to International Coast Guard Models with similar functions and responsibilities, to determine appropriate staffing, resources and structures and to make recommendations regarding the most appropriate and effective organisational relationship with the new Maritime Safety Directorate. This report presents our assessment of the key issues relating to the current situation together with an outline of proposals for the future direction and operation of the IRCG. 1.2
SUMMARY OF CURRENT SITUATION
The IRCG is the nation-wide marine emergency organisation and is a division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. The core services of the IRCG are: To provide a national marine search and rescue response service, including a service 1 to the offshore islands; To provide a coastal and, where appropriate, cliff search and rescue service; To provide a post-emergency body search and recovery service and relative liaison; To develop and co-ordinate an effective regime in relation to marine pollution; To provide a response to marine casualty incidents and to monitor/intervene in marine salvage operations; To provide a safety awareness and public information service in relation to the discharge of the functions set out above; To provide a revenue earning marine communications and public correspondence service (e.g. ship to shore telephone); To provide a maritime safety communications service. There are 81½ full-time staff and 8642 volunteers in the IRCG. The volunteers are based in fifty-two coastal units at locations around the coast. The current structure of the organisation is outlined overleaf.
1 2
This includes medical evacuation. May 2002.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 1
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Current Structure of IRCG Director
Stores Services Attendant Services Attendants * 3 1 on contract
Chief of Operations 1
Chief Engineer 1
Electronics Officer * 3 1 vacancy
Administration HEO (Job share) 2 1 HEO vacancy
Regional Controller *3 2 Vacancies
Senior Engineering / Operations Officer, Cork 1
Divisional Controller Dublin 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Divisional Controller Malin 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Divisional Controller Valentia 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Engineering/Ope rations Officer 2 vacancies
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 10 3 vacancies
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 7 1 vacancy
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 8 1 vacancy
Training and Operations Officer *6 3 vacancies
EO * 2
CO * 4
Typist * 0.5 (shared with MSD)
The IRCG has three Marine Rescue Centres: Marine Rescue Co-ordination Centre (MRCC, Dublin); Marine Rescue Sub-Centre (MRSC, Malin); Marine Rescue Sub-Centre (MRSC, Valentia). In addition to co-ordination of SAR operations, the three centres are involved in radio communications. There are fifteen remote controlled VHF radio stations forming the IRCG national communications network (see section 2.2 and 3.4 for further details). The overriding view is that the IRCG is a professionally run organisation and it provides an excellent service. The IRCG has a committed full-time staff and a volunteer infrastructure that has contributed enormously in providing essential services. Since its inception in 1992, the IRCG has grown substantially and has taken on a number of additional functions. As outlined in the body of this report, the IRCG deal with a large volume of incidents successfully every year. This report outlines wide-ranging recommendations for the IRCG. In our view, there are five critical issues that must be addressed. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
The role of the IRCG going forward; The relationship of the IRCG with the Department; The number of Control Centres; Structure and Staffing; Communications and technical resources.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 2
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Many significant issues will have to be addressed under each of these headings 1.3
RECOMMENDATIONS
Our key recommendations for the future are as follows: 1.3.1
Current Functions & Services (see also sections 3.2 & 4.2)
We believe that the IRCG provides an excellent service in relation to their current core functions and services. We recommend that the IRCG should continue to provide its current functions and services. The functions include: o o o o o o o o
Providing a national marine search and rescue response service, including a service to the off-shore islands; Providing a coastal and, where appropriate, cliff search and rescue service; Providing a post-emergency body search and recovery service and relative liaison; Developing and co-ordinating an effective regime in relation to marine pollution; Providing a response to marine casualty incidents and to monitor/intervene in marine salvage operations; Providing a safety awareness and public information service in relation to the discharge of the functions set out above; Providing a revenue earning marine communications and public correspondence service (e.g. ship to shore telephone); Providing a maritime safety communications service.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 3
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
1.3.2
Customers & Services
The table below summarises the recommended functions/services of the IRCG. Table: Recommended Functions/Services Should IRCG provide the service? Services
Yes
Current Services not being provided
Functions under Sea Pollution Act
Co-ordination of inland waterways
No
Overlapping Services 3
Water safety New Services
Co-ordination of inland pollution Co-ordination of mountain rescue
Co-ordination of cave rescue
Air ambulance Enhanced Services
Aerial surveillance Expansion of county emergency committees Automatic Identification Services
marine
System
VHF Direction Finding
Provision of ETV
Ancillary services (Research and Development)
In relation to the difference between the SAR zone (IMSRR) and the pollution zone (IMPRZ), there is merit in the argument to re-define the boundaries into one common zone. In order to redefine these boundaries, the IRCG would have to consult with its UK counterparts and would also 3
In our view, IRCG should continue to play a key role in the dissemination of water safety information. However, we are recommending that the Maritime Safety Directorate should take over responsibility for the coordination of water safety policy. This fits well with the MSD’s role for maritime safety policy.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 4
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
have to consult with a number of Irish organisations such as the Irish Civil Aviation Authority and the Air Corps. If the IMSRR is extended to coincide with the IMPRZ, there will be an increase in the number of incidents that the IRCG will have to co-ordinate. At the time of writing, it is difficult to ascertain how significant this increase will be but it is estimated by the IRCG to be a 3 to 5 percent increase in total. 1.3.3
Committees
We recommend that the committee structure needs to be reviewed. At a high level, there should be an overall committee (possibly entitled – Marine and Inland Waterways Emergency Response Committee) with two sub-committees, one with responsibility for SAR preparedness, response and co-operation and one with responsibility for pollution preparedness, response and cooperation. This reflects the proposed management structure of the IRCG. 1.3.4
Identity
In relation to identity and marketing we recommend that:
1.3.5
o
the IRCG equipment replacement programme should include replacement of all IMES badged items.
o
consideration should be given to the possibility of a fully uniformed service for all full-time IRCG personnel.
o
an audit of all IRCG’s premises should be carried to ensure that signage is up to date.
o
marketing of water safety needs to be reviewed. Greater use can be made of new media, video and television/radio.
Relationships (see also sections 3.3 & 4.3)
We are of the view that establishing the IRCG as an Agency is the preferred option for the IRCG. 1.3.6
Physical and Technical Resources (IT) (see also sections 3.4 & 4.4)
We recommend that IRCG should operate two Control Centres. Each location should be capable of supporting the entire IRCG national network and the configuration should allow for continuity of service in the event of any one individual Control Centre becoming unserviceable. Following on from the recommendation that the IRCG should operate two Control Centres, there are three possible scenarios that the IRCG could follow: o o o
Build two new centres; Use and upgrade one existing centre and build one new centre; Use and upgrade two of the existing centres.
We recommend that each Control Centre should be identically equipped and IT systems should be mirrored at each site to ensure accurate up to date data is available at all times.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 5
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Our recommendation for the provision of an inland waterways communication network is to construct a private IRCG network based on microwave radio technology.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 6
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
1.3.7
Operations / Processes (see also sections 3.5 & 4.5)
The Station Officer should act as the SMC whilst on duty. Once a decision is taken in relation to the number of centres (i.e. two versus three), the shift system and rostering may have to be reviewed. Manual procedures should be minimised. 1.3.8
Staff Issues (see also sections 3.6 & 4.6)
Due to the fact that Radio Officers with sea-going experience are becoming less common additional sources of recruitment will have to be identified and pursued. We have outlined proposed additional sources of recruitment in the body of the report. 1.3.9
Communications (see also sections 3.7 & 4.7)
Recommendations to enhance communications include: o o o o
Regular team briefings; Development of an IRCG intranet; Updating the IRCG internet site; Publication of a quarterly newsletter to full-time staff and volunteers.
1.3.10 Logistics and Equipment (see also sections 3.8 & 4.8) Recommendations to improve logistics and equipment include: o o o o
Scoping and installing an electronic stock control system urgently; Establishing a formal system to call out engineers; Standardising all equipment on a phased basis; Ergonomically assessing the General Stores.
1.3.11 Volunteers (see also sections 3.9 & 4.9) The key recommendation in relation to volunteers is the appointment of five Sector Officers to oversee and co-ordinate the operation of the 52 Coastal Units. Additional Sector Officers may be required once the inland waterway network survey has been completed. 1.3.12 Resources & Structures (see also sections 3.10 & 4.10) We recommend that the IRCG be restructured into three distinct divisions under the command of the Director of the IRCG. These three divisions are Coast Guard Operations, Volunteers & Support and Engineering and Information Technology. The proposed structure of the IRCG is outlined overleaf. The number of staff outlined in the structure overleaf is a reflection of the agency model. Fewer staff will be required if the IRCG remains within the Department or has a closer relationship with the MSD. There would be no need for the following staff as the IRCG
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 7
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
would have the support of Department staff: IT Manager, Technical and Web Support, Legal Executive and Public Relations Executive.
Proposed Structure
Director – Irish Coast Guard
Assistant Director Operations
SAR Operations Manager
Div Controller (Team 1)
Div Controller (Team 2)
Pollution/Salvage Operations Manager
Pollution Planning Officers*3
Assistant Director – Volunteers & Support
Assistant Director Engineering & IT
Electronics Officer *3
IT Manager
Senior Engineering Officer
Technical & Web Support *1
Deputy DC *2
Policy, HR & Admin Manager
HR *1 Payroll*1 Finance*1 Admin*4 PR *1 Legal Executive *1
Logistics Manager
Volunteer Unit & Training Manager
4 OTOs
Stores Services Attendant *2
5 Sector Officers
Engineering Officer *2
Service Attendant *2
Watch Officers
Director’s Personal Assistant
Volunteers (inclusive of enhanced functions under inland waterways)
Watch Officers
See options outlined in Tables 4.10 (b) & (c)
The positions on the chart are not representative of rank.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 8
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Our recommended staffing numbers are outlined below: Position
Current (including vacancies)
Recommended
Volunteer Unit & Training
74
105
Logistics/Stores
1
3
8.5
116
IT
-
27
Engineering (excluding Chief Engineer)
6
6
Pollution/Salvage
18
49
SAR (Watch Officers)
46
35/4210
6
411
Services Attendant
2
2
SAR Operations Manager
1
112
Management Structure (above
3
4
Volunteers & Support
Policy / Administration Engineering & IT
Operations
SAR Divisional & Divisional Controllers
Deputy
4
This figure includes current six Operations and Training Officer (OTO) positions and one Regional Controller position. 5 This figure includes five new Sector Officers. The remaining positions are one Volunteer Unit & Training Manager (Regional Controller level) and three OTOs in the Volunteer Unit and Training section (these already exist). The remaining one new OTO is for cave and mountain rescue. 6 Includes the Director’s Personal Assistant. The Assistant Director, Volunteers and Support position is accounted for as part of the ‘Management Structure’ and not reflected in this figure. 7 The IT Manager position should be filled by one of the existing Deputy Divisional Controller positions. The IT Manager position carries significant responsibility and should be upgraded to Assistant Principal level. 8 We have allocated one of the vacant Regional Controller positions under this heading. 9 Includes one Pollution/Salvage Operations Manager (Regional Controller level) and three Pollution Officers (filled by current OTO vacancies). The Pollution Officer grade should be equivalent to the OTO grade. 10 See Options outlined in tables 4.10 (b) and (c). 11 Three Deputy Divisional Controller positions are currently vacant. In our recommended structure, there is a requirement for two Deputy Divisional Controllers in the SAR Operations area. The other Deputy Divisional Controller should fill a position in IT area as outlined above. Two Divisional Controllers should be assigned to the SAR Operations section and the remaining Divisional Controller should work in the Policy and Administration section as the Policy and Administration Manager. 12 Two Regional Controller positions should be allocated to the Training and Pollution functions. The remaining position should be in the SAR Operations area (i.e. SAR Operations Manager).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 9
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Regional Controller) Total
81½
82/89
1.3.13 Performance Indicators (see also sections 3.11 & 4.11) In addition to the current performance indicators, we recommend a number of other indicators that should also be adopted by the IRCG. 1.3.14 Other Recommendations (see also section 4.12) We recommend that a full review of the number of coastal units be carried out. 1.3.15 Key Costs (see also section 4.13) Estimated Recurring Operational Costs per annum €000
Key Costs Customers / Services Inland Waterways Communication network
Aerial Surveillance in relation to pollution Automatic Identification System Services VHF Direction Finding Emergency Towing Vessel Development of marketing in relation to IRCG and specifically water safety
Operational costs not included 40013
Estimated Capital Costs €000
8,000 750-1,20015 1,00516
2,000-3,00014 20
13
Estimated cost is €1,000 per hour based on 400 flying hours per year. Assessment of Cost and Benefit of ETV provision was calculated in the UK in 2000. The cost of four ETVs stationed at four locations over 10 years was expressed as a range between STG£68.6-STG£85.2 million. 15 A cost of between €50,000 and €70,000 has been estimated for the provision of shore based AIS base stations. We have estimated the cost based on 15 base stations. 16 We estimate the cost as €67,000 per site / €1,005,000 for 15 sites. 14
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 10
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Physical Technical Resources Construction of control centre Fitting out of two control centres17 o Equipment Area o Power o Cooling for equipment area o Cooling for control centre o Fire detection and control o Security o Furniture Control Centre Equipment for two centres18 o Integrated Communications Control System o Command and Control Applications Pager replacement Pager Infrastructure (excluding inland waterways)
Cost not available19 8 66 51 12 70 10 12 80020 1,20021 40022 55023
17
Based on 70-100 square metres. Control Centre Equipment is inclusive of server and PC costs. 19 Dependent on factors outside of the scope of this study (e.g. price of land, location etc.) 20 Estimated cost is €400,000 per centre. 21 Estimated cost is €600,000 per centre. 22 POCSAG Paging Solution. Estimated cost of 1000 pagers at a cost per unit of €400. 23 This is the estimated cost of the network infrastructure using existing sites. There are 41 sites at a cost of €13,500 per site. The cost would be greater when inland waterways are taken into account. We estimate that an additional 45 sites would have to be found to cater for inland waterways. In this scenario, the total cost would be €1,161,000 (i.e. 86 sites at a cost of €13,500 per site). 18
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 11
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
Estimated Recurring Operational Costs per annum €000
Key Costs (continued)
See footnote24
Operations / Processes Staff Issues Communications Development of IRCG Intranet Production of Quarterly Newsletter
Estimated Capital Costs €000 -
3525 5
Logistics and Equipment Electronic Stock Control System Equipment for Inland Waterways SAR
50-20026
Volunteers Additional volunteer, equipment and training costs for Inland SAR, cave and mountain rescue Resources & Structures Staffing27 o Assistant Director, Support (PO) o 1 Logistics Manager (AP) o 1 Services Attendant o IT & Web Support (HEO) o 1 OTO (Cave & Mountain) (ROII) o 5 Sector Officers (EO) o 1 EO (Administration) o 1 CO (Administration) o Total Cost Estimated savings through reduction in number of Watch Officers28
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
Estimated Net Cost – Resources & Structures
95 72 25 53 53 194 39 31 562 (214)29 348
While this report includes statements, estimates and projections with respect to key future costs for the IRCG, such statements, estimates and projections reflect various assumptions and are 24
Redundancy costs will also have to be taken into account and are not shown here. Investment in Router hardware will cost c. €20,000. Basic rate ISDN at each of the 52 coastal unit sites is estimated at €208.82. Primary rate ISDN at the central site is estimated at €4,418.69. Recurring costs include annual rental per site, annual rental at the central site and usage cost per day. 26 We estimate that a basic package would cost c.€50,000. However, there is every likelihood that this package will need to be developed further and the estimated cost of a developed off the shelf product designed to meet the current market requirements would be in the region of €200,000. 27 Median salary on the scale taken. Costs are inclusive of employers PRSI pension contribution and direct overhead costs (43.67% in total). 28 Median salary of Watch Officer taken. Shift allowance included. Overtime not included 29 Option 2 – 42 Watch Officers (see table 4.10 (c)) 25
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 12
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that such statements, estimates or projections will be realised. The illustrative key costings and actual costings may vary, and those variations may be material. Costs under the customer / services, communications (intranet), logistics, equipment and volunteers headings will be incurred irrespective of whether the IRCG opts for two control centres or three centres. Where costs savings (arising from using two centres as opposed to three) can be made these are in relation to the two areas of staffing and physical / technical resources. The table below illustrates very broadly the additional savings that would be made by the IRCG in relation to two centres versus three centres. Savings – Two centres versus three Two Centres
Three Centres
Physical / Technical
Costs (€000)
Costs (€000)
Fitting out the Centres
229
343.5
1,620
2,430
950
950
2,799
3,723.5
Control Centre Equipment Pager replacement & Infrastructure30 Capital
Net Savings (€000)
924.5
Staffing Net Saving – Staffing per annum (Current Value: 2002)
214 (per annum)31
On the physical/technical side, by opting for two centres, the IRCG would make an estimated once off cost saving of €924,500.32 In addition, if the IRCG opts for two centres, they will have an annual recurring cost saving of €214,675 (i.e. having 4 less Watch Officers on the roster).
30
Estimate that there will be a similar cost. This is the estimated cost of having an additional 4 Watch Officers over the three centres (i.e. 46 staff versus 42). This figure is inclusive of PRSI, pension, direct overhead costs and shift allowances (27% of salary) but excludes overtime. 32 In relation to the two centres, this figure does not account for the purchase of a site(s) for the new centre(s) (location) or the construction costs. In relation to the three centres, this figure does not account for the upgrades that may be required to existing premises (e.g. extensions). 31
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 13
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Introduction & Summary of Recommendations
1.3.16 Implementation (see also section 5) An implementation plan is set out in section 5. Given the level of difficulty in managing a significant change process of moving to two centres and the issues to be addressed for individual members of staff, the IRCG should consider the benefits and costs of: o
Introducing the change quickly (e.g. over a period of one or two years). This would bring into focus, the issue of redundancy and / or early retirement for staff who are not in a position to retrain for alternative roles; or
o
Implementing change over a more prolonged period (e.g. over a period of five to seven years).
In our view, it is feasible and desirable that the changes are introduced over a two year period. If the implementation of change occurs over a longer period of time, there are a number of disadvantages: o o
o
o
There would be an annual recurring cost of €400,000 plus (the cost of carrying the additional watch officers). Some of the IRCG’s current equipment is reaching the end of its lifespan. For example, when the IRCG take on the additional responsibility in relation to coordinating inland waterways SAR, if they keep the same equipment, the ‘CentreCom’ would have to be expanded. This would require additional space in an already cluttered office environment. The CentreCom itself may be at risk in that it may not be supported by the manufacturer in the future. The only advantages for implementing change over a more prolonged period would be that it could possibly be more easily implemented from an organisational / change management perspective and there would be a slight reduction on redundancy costs.
We recognise the difficulty of implementing change from a staff and from an organisational perspective. We recommend that the Department/management should be sensitive to the needs of staff (e.g. offer an early retirement education programme, offer financial advice).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 14
13 August 2002
1. REVIEW PROCESS
1.1
INTRODUCTION
The requirement to undertake a study of the Irish Coast Guard (IRCG) is within the general context of the Strategic Management Initiative and the need to ensure efficiency, effectiveness and value for money in service delivery in an environment demanding ongoing response to change and accountability. Following a competitive tendering process, Deloitte and Touche Management Consultants together with a panel of experts including Mason Communications and Nautical Enterprise Centre Ltd (NECL) were appointed to carry out this review.
1.2
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Terms of Reference for the review as agreed by the Steering Committee were: 1.
To determine, taking cognisance of the existing Irish Coast Guard organisation, through consultation with the various stakeholders, Government Departments, national services and related interests involved, the appropriate functions for the Irish Coast Guard, bearing in mind national and international responsibilities for offshore, coastal, littoral and inland areas and key taskings.
2.
Following on 1 above, to identify and propose the most satisfactory, cost effective, Coast Guard model having regard to European and International Coast Guard Models with similar functions and responsibilities.
3.
To determine, for the Coast Guard model identified at 2, appropriate resources and staffing levels (to include numbers, skills, competencies and standards); and appropriate organisational structures, having particular regard to the technical and operational requirements of the service – see Appendix A; and to develop operational performance indicators.
4.
To examine the issues and make recommendations regarding the most appropriate and effective organisational relationship with the new Maritime Safety Directorate.
5.
In carrying out this exercise, to have general regard to the following criteria: - Government policies on regional development including decentralisation and resource management issues - partnership structures in the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources - effective and efficient marine rescue co-ordination - overall resource efficiency - costs (a) operational and (b) technical.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 15
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
1. Review Process
1.3
METHODOLOGY
The review has been structured around the following phases: -
Phase 1 – Project Initiation Phase 2 – Background Data Gathering and Review Phase 3 – Data Collection Phase 4 – Data Analysis Phase 5 – Development of Recommendations and Draft Report Phase 6 – Report Finalisation
The review was undertaken on a partnership basis with all staff and stakeholders, with opportunity for expression and incorporation of views. Phase 1 involved development of a detailed project plan together with general project management and scheduling. It also involved the preparation and distribution of a coastal unit briefing document outlining the objectives of the study to volunteers in each of the fifty-two coastal units. Phase 2 consisted of background data gathering and review. Phase 3 involved consultation with internal and external stakeholders followed by analysis of all data gathered. Consultation with internal stakeholders involved: -
Analysis of documentation as supplied Completion of a staff questionnaire addressing functions/services, customers, organisation and resources33 (The staff questionnaire is set out in Appendix B) 25 staff interviews 3 group staff workshops 1 area officer workshop Visits to Howth, Valentia and Dun Laoghaire coastal unit facilities.
Consultation with external stakeholders involved: -
Twenty three individual interviews (key contact points in client organisations), and Requests for written submissions from 79 individuals/organisations, of which (15%) responded.
A complete list of each of the above is presented in Appendix C. Phase 3 also involved the identification of international benchmarks. Key people from each of the benchmark countries were identified and consulted using a structured questionnaire. The coastguards of the UK, Italy, Sweden and the Netherlands were visited while desk based research was conducted in relation to the coastguards of Canada, the USA, Spain and France. Appendix D sets out a table of the findings from the international benchmarking study.
33
It was decided not to enforce mandatory completion of the questionnaire. The final response rate was c. 55%.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 16
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
1. Review Process
Phase 4 involved development of an ‘As Is’ document outlining the existing organisation in terms of functions, structure, staffing, training, workload, business processes, performance indicators, communications, information technology, engineering facilities, physical configuration and number of coastal stations. Phase 5 saw the development of a draft report. Specifically, this comprised the development of recommendations relating to assessment of existing structures and decisions, the most satisfactory and cost effective Coast Guard model having regard to international benchmarks, appropriate staffing and resources, organisational structures, operational performance indicators and organisational relationship with the Marine Safety Directorate. Phase 6 involved finalisation of the report, following feedback on the draft report from the Steering Committee.
1.4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Deloitte & Touche Management Consultants, Mason Communications and NECL wish to thank the following for their assistance with this review: -
-
34
The Steering Committee, chaired by Declan Geoghegan, IRCG, who provided guidance and assistance during the course of the review and who provided feedback to interim findings 34. The staff and volunteers of the Irish Coast Guard who were very helpful in terms of both input to the review through questionnaire completion, interview and workshop participation and provision of documentation in the course of our research. The representatives of the organisations who participated in the in-person and written stakeholder consultation processes.
The Steering Committee was established on a partnership basis.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 17
13 August 2002
2. BACKGROUND
2.1
OVERVIEW OF THE IRISH COAST GUARD
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG) is the nation-wide marine emergency organisation and is a division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Its headquarters is at Lesson Lane, Dublin 2. The IRCG was formerly known as the Irish Marine Emergency Service (IMES) and was renamed the Irish Coast Guard by Government decision in January 2000. IMES was originally established in 1991 largely on foot of the ‘Doherty’ Air / Sea Rescue Report. This report was the product of an expert review group which was established to review marine Search and Rescue (SAR) emergency response needs with a particular emphasis on the west coast. The establishment of IMES brought together functions and assets which had previously been discharged by a number of Government departments and it also gave IMES the primary co-ordinating role in relation to a wider variety of State and voluntary organisations engaged in marine SAR services. The division currently forms part of the reporting line to the Assistant Secretary in the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources with responsibility for the Maritime Safety Directorate and the IRCG. The overall objective of the IRCG is to reduce the loss of life within the Ireland Search and Rescue Region and rivers, lakes and waterways and to protect the quality of the marine environment within the Irish Pollution Responsibility Zone, harbours and maritime local authority areas and to preserve property. The following are the core services of the IRCG: To provide a national marine search and rescue response service, including a service 35 to the offshore islands; To provide a coastal and, where appropriate, cliff search and rescue service; To provide a post-emergency body search and recovery service and relative liaison; To develop and co-ordinate an effective regime in relation to marine pollution; To provide a response to marine casualty incidents and to monitor/intervene in marine salvage operations; To provide a safety awareness and public information service in relation to the discharge of the functions set out above; To provide a revenue earning marine communications and public correspondence service (e.g. ship to shore telephone); To provide a maritime safety communications service.
35
This includes medical evacuation.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 18
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
2.2
RESOURCES & LOCATIONS
There are 81½ full-time staff, inclusive of 18 vacancies36, and 86437 volunteers in the IRCG. The fulltime staff are based at four locations (Dublin, Malin Head, Valentia and Cork). The Irish Coast Guard Engineering Unit and the Coast Guard stores are based in Blanchardstown, Dublin. The stores contain SAR equipment for the volunteers and anti-pollution equipment. The Irish Coast Guard Marine Rescue Co-ordination Centre (MRCC) which is based in Leeson Lane, Dublin, was previously responsible for ensuring an appropriate response to all marine emergency (SAR, pollution, casualty and salvage) operations around the Irish coast. However, since 1999, both Malin and Valentia have been classified as Marine Rescue Sub-Centres (MRSCs) with responsibility for an associated Search and Rescue Division (SRD). MRCC Dublin has retained responsibility for the SAR response in its own division and for national pollution, casualty and salvage response. In addition to co-ordination of SAR operations, the three centres are also involved in radio communications. There are also fifteen remote controlled VHF radio stations forming the Irish Coast Guard National Communications Network. In addition, there are 4 MF/HF sites, two remotely controlled and two co-located at Malin and Valentia; a Navtex system, co-located at Malin and Valentia with Valentia being remotely controlled; and a National VHF/MF DSC System. The IRCG also maintains a national paging system for its SAR resources – IRCG coastal units, RNLI and Community Inshore Rescue Service. The IRCG also consists of fifty-two Irish Coast Guard Coastal Units at locations around the coast. These coastal units are operated by volunteers. Each coastal unit is headed up by an Area Officer and supported by a Deputy Area Officer (who are also volunteers). Their capability and range of equipment largely depends on location38 but includes radio communications, breeches buoy rescue gear, cliff rescue gear, rescue boats, vehicles and beach search quads. The IRCG has one main pollution response equipment store in Blanchardstown and two smaller stores of equipment in Killybegs and Castletownbere. Figure 2.2 illustrates the coast guard units around the country. Figure 2.2: Coast Guard Units
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001 The IRCG manages and operates two medium load carrying marine emergency helicopters 39 based at Shannon Airport and Dublin Airport. A third full IRCG helicopter service will commence at 36
864 September 2001. May 2002. 38 Capability also depends on whether other resources are available (e.g. RNLI), closeness to other IRCG stations and skillset. 39 24 hour all weather helicopters. 37
ACHILL TORY Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 19
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
Waterford airport on 1 July 2002 with a reduced service commencing on 1 May 2002. It also has a number of declared resources (see Appendix E for a complete list of declared resources). 2.3
CONTEXT / ENVIRONMENT
Ireland has a significant marine industry comprising commercial, fishing and pleasure sectors. There are over 5,000 kilometres / 3,100 miles of coastline40 with 2441 shipping ports for use by Irish and international vessels. The fleet of Irish registered vessels consists of about 30 cargo ships, about 4 to 5 large passenger ships, a further 140 or so medium sized passenger vessels, a further 580 or so small passenger vessels, about 1,17742 Irish registered fishing vessels and around 7,50043 vessels used for leisure purposes, referred to as pleasure craft.44 The limits of the Irish Marine Search and Rescue Region (IMSRR) is the Irish Flight Information Region (FIR) which is approximately 200 miles off the west coast, 30 miles off the south coast and divides the Irish Sea.
40
Ireland has the second longest coastline in Europe. Nine commercial, 14 regional and one harbour port. 42 Source: Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources Register. 43 Source: Irish Sailing Association – estimate figure – of which c. 500 are registered. 44 There are a significant number of non-Irish registered vessels passing through Irish Waters. 41
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 20
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
Figure 2.3 (a): Irish Marine Search and Rescue Region
The limits of the Irish Marine Pollution Responsibility Zone (IMPRZ) are inland waters, the territorial seas and any area lying within a line, every point of which is 200 nautical miles from the baselines for the purpose of the Maritime Jurisdiction Acts , 1959 and 1988, and waters above it. IMSRR differs from IMPRZ and this can cause difficulties between the IRCG and other rescue services (particularly the UK Coast Guard) in relation to the co-ordination of incidents. The Government agreed in principle in 1999 that the responsibility of the Irish Marine Emergency Service (now IRCG) for marine emergencies be extended to encompass SAR emergencies occurring in inland rivers, lakes and waterways. Due to the need for an in-depth, county by county, statistical survey and analysis which is on-going and the Government’s stipulation that existing SAR facilities (fire brigade, voluntary rescue units, canoe clubs, boat clubs) be included, this has not yet been fully implemented.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 21
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
The network of inland waterways is represented in figure 2.3 (b). Figure 2.3 (b): Inland Waterways of Ireland
Source: Department of the Environment and Local Government
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 22
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 23
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
The operations of the IRCG brings it into contact with many organisations such as other Government departments and other state organisations (the Garda Síochána and the Naval Service) as well as the Irish Chamber of Shipping, the Irish Passenger, Boat and Ferry Operators, the Central Fisheries Board and the Irish Sailing Association. (For a complete list of organisations that the IRCG has contacts with, see Appendix F). 2.4
REGULATORY CONTEXT
The IRCG operates within a complex legal environment encompassing national legislation, EU Directives and International Conventions. For example, under national legislation 45, the IRCG has been designated as the national agency for the provision of a national marine pollution contingency plan for oil pollution preparedness, response and co-ordination and the approval of plans by harbour and designated local authorities of arrangements for the protection of coastal amenity / fishery / wildlife areas. The IRCG is also responsible for the removal of oil from the coastline and in the event of major pollution incidents, the direction and co-ordination of the at-sea and on-shore response. IRCG Officers are authorised officers under the MS (Salvage and Wreck) Act 1993 which provides the powers and obligation to save the lives of the persons belonging to a vessel, the vessel and the cargo and apparel of the vessel. The Sea Pollution Act 1991 provides the powers, purpose and conditions for intervention in situations that pose a threat of pollution by oil or by any other substance other than oil following on a marine casualty. The Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act 1999 also provides for IRCG modification and approval of offshore units and oil handling facilities oil pollution emergency plans. A further amendment to the Sea Pollution Act will be enacted to give effect to the Protocol 2000 on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to Pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances. The Sea Pollution Act is being amended to include provision to extend oil pollution preparedness, response and co-operation to cover pollution incidents by hazardous and noxious substances. The IRCG is the national competent authority for the purpose of EU Council Directive 93/75/EEC (HAZMAT), (S.I. 229 of 1995) concerning minimum requirements for vessels bound for or leaving Community ports and carrying dangerous goods. S.I. 96 of 1999 European Communities (Minimum Requirements for Vessels Carrying Dangerous or Polluting Goods) (Amendment) Regulations 1999 gave effect to EU Council Directive 98/55/EC and to EU Commission Directive 98/74/EC which amended S.I. 229 of 1995 and provides for the inclusion of the IMO Code for the safe carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel, plutonium and high level radioactive waste in flasks on board ships (the INF Code). EU Council Directive 92/29/EEC was given full effect by European Communities (Minimum Safety and Health Requirements for improving Medical Treatment onboard Vessels) Regulations, 1997. The Maritime Medical Consultation Unit of the Southern Health Board based at Cork University Hospital (MEDICO Cork) and the IRCG work in tandem to provide free medical advice to 45
Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 24
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
2: Background
injured or sick seafarers in or adjacent to the Ireland Search and Rescue Region and for providing free medical radio advice to injured or sick Irish seafarers world-wide. Ireland is party to a significant number of international conventions on search and rescue, salvage, intervention compensation and pollution such as the IMO OPRC Convention (Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and Co-operation). Signatories to this Convention are required to establish a pollution planning and response regime, through national and local contingency plans. The key point is that while the IRCG is mandated by a number of national and international protocols, there is no stand-alone national legislative framework that outlines its role, responsibilities and modus operandi. Its functions are gleaned / derived from custom and practice, Government policy and various national Acts, EU Directives and International Conventions.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 25
13 August 2002
S
3. CURRENT SITUATION, ISSUES AND ANALYSIS 3.1
INTRODUCTION
This section sets out our understanding of service delivery and resources within the Irish Coast Guard under the following headings:
Customers & Services Relationships Physical and Technical Resources (IT) Operations / Processes Staff Issues and Analysis Communications Logistics and Equipment Volunteers Resources & Structures.
This section also highlights key issues under each of these headings. The issues presented reflect inputs to the review process from management, staff, internal customers and external customers of the IRCG. In summary, the critical issues identified in this section relate to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Proposed new and enhanced functions The relationship of the IRCG with the Department and the Maritime Safety Directorate The number of marine emergency command and control and co-ordination centres The management and organisation structure Communications and physical resources.
3.2
CUSTOMERS AND SERVICES
3.2.1
Current Situation
The Irish Coast Guard purpose statement is ‘To reduce the loss of life within the Ireland Search and Rescue Region and rivers, lakes and waterways and to protect the quality of the marine environment within the Irish Pollution Responsibility Zone, harbours and maritime local authority areas and to preserve property’. In support of this statement, the IRCG has developed a business plan (2001-2003) which sets out objectives, outputs, key performance indicators and targets for 2001-2003. The IRCG handle a considerable volume of work. In 2000, the IRCG dealt with a total of 1,718 incidents. A break down of these incidents across the three stations is represented overleaf46.
46
In relation to the incident statistics for the 3 Co-ordination Centres, incidents are allocated for statistics purposes to Centres according to the Centre where they are initiated. Other Centres may be involved in the incident subsequently.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 26
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Table 3.2 (a): Number of Incidents, 2000
No. of Incidents % of total
Dublin 650 37.8%
Malin 408 23.8%
Valentia 660 38.4%
Total 1718 100%
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001 On closer examination, over the years 1998-2001, the total number of incidents per year is approximately 1,600-1,700 between the three stations. Figure 3.2 (a) represents this. Figure 3.2 (a): Total Number of Incidents per year (1997-2001)
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2002 Dublin and Valentia handle more than 1.5 times as many incidents as Malin. This is highlighted over the four year period 1998-2001 in figure 3.2 (b) overleaf.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 27
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Figure 3.2 (b): Number of Incidents in Dublin, Valentia and Malin, 1998-2001
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001 The statistics for 200147 highlight a slight increase in the number of incidents handled by Malin (a 6% increase) and, conversely, a slight decrease in the number of incidents handled by Valentia (an 11% decrease). Overall, the statistics for 2001 highlight a slight increase over the number of incidents handled in 2000. This is represented by table 3.2 (b). Table 3.2 (b): Number of Incidents, 2001
No. of Incidents % of total
Dublin 733 41.7%
Malin 433 24.6%
Valentia 593 33.7%
Total 1,759 100%
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2002 A significant proportion of incidents relate to pleasure crafts as represented in table 3.2 (c) (particularly on the eastern and southern coasts). Valentia account for over 50% of all fishing vessels assisted in 2000. This correlates with the fact that fishing traffic is most highly concentrated on the southern and western coasts. Table 3.2 (c) illustrates this point. The three stations have significantly less interaction with merchant vessel casualties. For example, while Valentia dealt with 181 fishing related incidents in 2000, they only dealt with 23 merchant vessels.
47
Subject to clarification.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 28
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Table 3.2 (c): Number of Incidents, 2000
No. of Incidents Pleasure Craft
–
% of total Pleasure Craft No. of Incidents Fishing Vessels % of Vessels
total
–
Fishing
No. of Incidents Merchant Vessels
–
% of total – Merchant Vessels
Dublin
Malin
Valentia
Total
155
53
111
319
48.6%
16.6%
34.8%
100%
96
60
181
337
28.5%
17.8%
53.7%
100%
34
19
23
76
44.7%
25.0%
30.3%
100%
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001 Over the period from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 1999, the maximum number of incidents in any one 24-hour period across all three control centres was seventeen and the minimum number of incidents was zero. The average number of incidents in any one 24-hour period was four and the median number of incidents was also four. 3.2.2
IRCG Services and Drivers
The Irish Coast Guard has been delegated responsibility for marine emergency management in the Irish Marine Search and Rescue Region (IMSRR), inland rivers, lakes and waterways and the Irish Marine Pollution Response Zone (IMPRZ)48. These responsibilities include the following: SAR Co-ordinating and management of marine search and rescue incidents within the IMSRR, the littoral areas and cliffs of Ireland. Maintaining up-to-date information on the availability, readiness, capability and limitations of all rescue facilities and authorities which can provide assistance in SAR operations. Assessing each notified marine emergency or potential emergency. Selecting, mobilising and tasking the appropriate search and rescue facilities. Survival care. Terminating SAR operations. Debriefing SAR facilities. Co-operating with and providing facility assistance to foreign SAR authorities in the coordination of marine SAR outside the IMSRR. Maintaining computer-based search and rescue decision support and response models. National Competent Authority for HAZMAT reporting and international information requests. Exercises, Planning & Training Maintaining a national Search and Rescue (SAR) plan. 48
IMSRR and IMPRZ are different zones for different functions.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 29
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Updating the International Maritime Organisation’s IAMSAR manuals, Volumes 1, 2 and 3. Updating the IRCG operational procedures manuals and memoranda. Contingency planning for the three manned centres. Approval of harbour pollution emergency plans. Approval of offshore unit oil handling facility oil pollution emergency plans. This is currently being prepared. Develop and maintain a national marine pollution emergency plan. This is currently being prepared. Approval of designated local authority oil pollution emergency plans. This is currently being prepared. Exercising SAR plans regularly with those organisations and authorities who would normally be involved in such incidents, both nationally and internationally. Developing, maintaining and exercising liaison agreements with national marine and land emergency response organisations and authorities. Designing and directing in-house professional training for full-time and voluntary IRCG staff. Designing and directing Search and Rescue seminars for ferry crews and shore management. Agreeing and exercising passenger vessel search and rescue plans required by SOLAS.
In the event of a terrorist attack on an aircraft or a ship, it is not the role of the IRCG to respond to the attack but to co-ordinate any required SAR response. The Garda Síochána and the Defence Forces will respond to the attack. Communications Monitoring on a 24-hour basis VHF and MF marine radio distress frequencies and eircom 999/112 telephone emergency system. Monitoring on a 24 hour basis VHF and MF marine radio frequencies for receipt of Vessel Trade Route and recreational craft sail reports. Contact point on a 24 hour basis for passenger ship/ferries passenger counting and recording reports. Contact point on a 24 hour basis for reporting and requesting information on marine emergencies. Organising and providing the prime alerting and communication links between the IRCG and other emergency services and shore based authorities in marine emergencies. Operating the GMDSS Area A1 and A2 automatic alerting DSC system. Revenue earning marine communications and public correspondence service (e.g. ship to shore telephone). Revenue earning helicopter safety monitoring (CIL). Pollution In relation to the Irish Marine Pollution Response Zone (IMPRZ), the IRCG is responsible for: Receiving, preparing for and responding to pollution reports and incidents in the IMPRZ including local and harbour authority areas, oil handling facilities and offshore oil units. Monitoring of vessels at anchor outside harbour and port areas. Pollution prevention through casualty intervention, wet and dry salvage control and control of any transfer operations outside harbours and ports.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 30
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Maintaining a stockpile of pollution equipment at stores49 and providing and directing annual training courses in marine pollution preparedness response, co-operation and familiarisation with pollution equipment. Implementing the directions from the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999. Inland Waterways In relation to inland waterways, it has been agreed in principle50 that: The current responsibility of the IRCG for SAR marine emergencies should be extended to encompass emergencies occurring in inland rivers, lakes and waterways. The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources engage in consultation with other State agencies and local interests with a view to developing, costing and implementing the necessary planning, communications and operational infrastructure to bring inland emergency response up to the current standards of marine emergency response. Safety The IRCG has the responsibility for Marine Safety and Pollution Awareness within the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources Safety Initiative. As part of that responsibility, the IRCG chairs a working group from all the marine safety agencies (the Marine Safety Working Group – MSWG). The MSWG produces booklets and posters entitled ‘Safety on the Water’. The booklets provide basic safety guidelines and advice for recreational craft users, fishermen, divers etc. who take to the waters of Ireland. The IRCG (full-time and voluntary staff) visit schools, seaside caravan parks and holiday homes during the summer months and holiday periods. They give talks and hand out safety publications. They also provide “safety on the water” interviews and radio safety advertising and contribute to marine radio programmes. A pollution awareness programme has not been developed. Other Services The following services are also provided by the IRCG: Facilitation of the Irish Marine Search and Rescue Committee (IMSARC).51 Facilitation of the Marine Emergency Advisory Group (MEAG).52. This group advises the Minister and Director of the IRCG on emergency planning and response. Facilitation of the Coastal Unit Advisory Group (CUAG).53 Facilitation of Community Inshore Rescue Service Advisory Group (CIRSAG).54 Facilitation of Maritime Counties Shoreline Marine Emergency Committees (MCSMECs) in Kerry, Donegal and Dublin/Wicklow.55
49
Dublin, Killybegs and Castletownbere. Government decision, 21 January, 1999. 51 This is a national committee for the users and providers of SAR Marine Emergency Services also involving an annual SAR demonstration and accident prevention/information at a coastal location. It meets twice annually. 52 This is an advisory group of senior officers of maritime and land-based services for planning and advice in a major marine emergency and commitment of their services. It meets twice annually. 53 A group representing the Coastal Unit volunteers to obtain suggestions and feedback to/from the units regarding operations and equipment. This group meets twice annually. 54 A group representing members of the Community Inshore Rescue Service to assist with standards for role training, and equipment. This group meets twice annually. 50
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 31
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Liaison and MOU meetings with all declared facilities at least once a year. Participation in Interreg Projects. Participation in Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources committees and working groups. Provision of IRCG expert advice to Department policy. Drivers The drivers of the work of the IRCG are: International obligations (e.g. IMO, EU Directives, ITU56). Regulatory requirements (e.g. Sea Pollution Act, 1991; Merchant Shipping (Salvage and Wreck) Act, 1993; Pollution Amendment Act, 1999; Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Act, 1988/98; Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926; Safety Health and Welfare Act, 1988; Maritime Jurisdiction Act, 1959; Continental Shelf Act, 1968; Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1995). External customer demands (e.g. fishing vessels, commercial vessels, pleasure craft, the general public, the media). Internal customer demands (e.g. Maritime Safety Directorate, Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources Divisions). Ministerial requirements. Seasonality. Increased leisure time (more people involved in water based activities). For example, 48.6% of all incidents reported to the Dublin Centre in 2000 involved pleasure craft. Parliamentary demands. Bonn Agreement member states (mutual agreement between a number of states to offer assistance and cooperation in combating pollution). UK / Ireland SAR operational agreement. 3.2.3
Customers & Stakeholders
The customers57 of the IRCG are:
Commercial users of the sea, inland rivers, lakes and inland waterways. General public and visitors. Merchant ship owners / managers, ferry operators. Maritime local authorities and harbour authorities. Recreational users of the sea, rivers, lakes, inland waterways, littoral areas and cliffs.
The stakeholders of the IRCG are: 55
A county committee for users and providers of services to shoreline emergency management. Each committee meets twice annually. 56 Other conventions: UNCLOS 1982; MARPOL 1973/78; SAR 1979; Intervention 1969/73; Salvage 1989; CLC 1969; OPRC 1990 & Protocol on Hazardous and Nox Substances 2000; International Telecommunications 1983; Liability and compensation for damage in connection with the carriage of hazardous and nox substances by sea; HAZMAT; Minimum Health and Safety requirements for Improved Medical Treatment on Board Vesssels 1997; Erica II. 57 Presented in alphabetical order rather than in order of priority or frequency of interaction.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 32
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources. Members of committees facilitated by the IRCG. Organisations who have declared their resources as available to the IRCG. Staff of other Departments and agencies of the State. Staff of other divisions of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Volunteers of the IRCG’s Coastal Units. Customers (as identified). Full-time staff.
The IRCG is well regarded within the Department and by its external customers. They have liaison agreements with a number of Government departments and agencies.58 3.2.4
Issues and analysis relating to current functions and services
The key issue to consider is whether the current functions / services are appropriate for the IRCG, bearing in mind national and international responsibilities. The functions / services addressed in this section are as follows:
Co-ordination of coastal SAR Co-ordination of inland waterways SAR Coastal pollution Water safety
It was clear from our consultations, that the IRCG is held in high regard amongst the diverse body of stakeholders that it serves and has relationships with. There was a strong external view that the IRCG’s full-time staff and volunteers provide an excellent professional service and discharge their core functions efficiently and effectively with limited resources. Co-ordination of coastal SAR A core function of all international coastguards benchmarked is the co-ordination of coastal SAR. The IRCG is reliant to a large extent on a communications infrastructure operated by full-time staff and the support and dedication of an infrastructure of voluntary coastal units and declared resources to carry out this function. Since the inception of the IRCG (IMES), this arrangement has proven to be a cost effective and efficient way for the country to fulfil its international and national obligations in relation to SAR. In addition, the IRCG manages and operates two medium load carrying marine emergency helicopters to support the coastal SAR and has the two Air Corps helicopters at its disposal as declared resources59. It was widely acknowledged during the consultation process by both IRCG staff and external parties that this arrangement works efficiently and provides the IRCG with a degree of flexibility (i.e. not dependent on one particular service provider). In addition, closer cooperation with other organisations / agencies has been developing in recent years and there are now a number of liaison agreements in place. Nevertheless, further work needs to be done in relation to 58
Dublin Fire Brigade; RNLI (Declared Facilities and Procedures); Department of Defence (currently being redrafted); Defence Forces; Irish Aviation Authority; Community Inshore Rescue Service; Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland; Civil Defence; Outdoor Lifeguards; Maritime Medical Consultation Unit (Medico Cork) (Draft agreement); Shannon and Dublin Coast Guard Helicopters (Standing orders). 59 In addition, there will be a further helicopter at Waterford airport from 1 May 2002.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 33
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
agreeing liaison / formal agreements which should result in a more integrated service. For example, while the IRCG has a good working relationship with the Navy and the Garda Síochána, formal agreements with these bodies are not in place.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 34
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Co-ordination of inland waterways SAR While the majority of international coastguards are not involved in the co-ordination of inland waterways SAR60, the IRCG is uniquely placed in Ireland to co-ordinate inland waterways SAR for a number of reasons: One organisation responsible for the co-ordination of both coastal and inland waterways SAR; The IRCG has the experience in relation to co-ordination of SAR operations; The IRCG has a trained marine rescue co-ordination staff and has an active coastal volunteer infrastructure. It is acknowledged elsewhere in this report that further development of the volunteer network will be required in order to cover inland waterways; The IRCG has helicopter resources at its disposal. Pollution All of international coastguards surveyed have some responsibility for coastal pollution response as the table 3.2 (d) below indicates: Table 3.2 (d): Coastal Pollution Response Ireland Sweden Italy UK France Canada Holland USA l pollution Ireland
Coasta
Swede n
Ital y
UK
In addition to the fact that other coastguards have responsibility for coastal pollution response, the IRCG is the best placed organisation in Ireland to carry out this function for a number of reasons: The IRCG staff have the experience in relation to co-ordination of pollution response; The IRCG has a volunteer infrastructure in place; The IRCG has the experience of dealing with other agencies and this is very important in relation to coastal pollution (e.g. dealing with designated local authorities). However, due to lack of resources, the IRCG has been unable to fulfil some aspects of its pollution mandate as discussed in section 3.2.4.1. This issue is addressed in section 4 of this report. Another issue that is related to both the coordination of coastal SAR and coastal pollution is the difference between the Irish SAR zone (IMSRR) and the pollution zone (IMPRZ). According to those consulted, on occasion, co-ordination of incidents between the Irish and UK Coastguards can become confused because of the lack of standardisation between the two zones. Water Safety There are overlaps between the water safety services that the IRCG provide and some of the services that the Irish Water Safety Association (IWSA) offers.
60
Co-ordination of inland waterways SAR is done in Canada by the police and in France and Holland by the Fire Services.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 35
13 August 2002
Franc e
C
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
There is no specific legislation in relation to IRCG marine safety awareness responsibility. It is delegated to the IRCG by the Secretary General of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources under the Public Service Management Act, 1997. The IWSA was established as a corporate body by Statutory Instrument in 1999 to promote water safety in Ireland. The functions of the IWSA are defined as follows (S.I. No. 361 of 1999): a. b. c.
The promotion of public awareness of water safety; The promotion of measures, including the advancement of education, related to the prevention of accidents in water; The provision of instruction in water safety, rescue, swimming and recovery drills, and such other services relating to water safety as the Minister for the Environment and Local Government may from time to time require, direct or determine.
In practice, the IWSA is mainly involved in recreational emergency management, boat courses, beach safety, lifeguards, water safety awareness while also providing safety commissions for water safety equipment and practice. In carrying out its functions the IWSA engages in a broad range of activities as listed below. Where the IRCG is involved, it is also stated below. Teaching swimming and lifesaving courses to children and adults. Twenty seven internationally recognised qualifications are available through these courses. The IWSA runs both summer and winter programmes, for example, the summer programme comprises an average of 180 courses in 23 counties. Conducting lectures and demonstrations. IRCG staff (full-time and voluntary) also conduct lectures and demonstrations on water safety. Publishing literature to promote water safety and target specific at-risk groups. Examples of published literature include posters on safe swimming, a basic life support manual, a rescue skills manual, a cold shock / hypothermia leaflet, the Beach Safety Report. The IRCG distribute this literature through their volunteer network. Carrying out risk assessments of bathing areas and providing the appropriate advice to local authorities, for example, in relation to the erection of life buoys, signage etc. Testing national beach lifeguards for local authorities. Assisting in programmes in which national schoolteachers learn to teach water safety principles. This is primarily the role of the IWSA but IRCG staff also visit primary schools. Training and examining crews for the Coast Guard and Inshore Rescue Boat Service. Working with other organisations involved in water safety through membership of the Marine Safety Working Group and the Irish Marine Search and Rescue Committee. The IRCG is also involved in this activity. Delivering water safety messages to the public through national and local media and also by working with private sponsors. The IRCG is also involved in this activity. Organising the Annual National Lifesaving Championships. The IRCG has no role in this activity. Recognising the work of those involved in the promotion of water safety through various awards, including the Just in Time Rescue Award.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 36
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Providing advice and information to the public and to public and private bodies on water safety related matters. The IRCG also is involved in this. What is clear is that there is a certain amount of overlap between some of the functions of the IWSA and the IRCG, particularly in the area of promotion of water safety (e.g. dissemination of water safety information, giving awareness lectures in schools and carrying out demonstrations). The key issue is whether the IWSA should be merged with the IRCG. In addition, the issue of whether the IRCG is the most suitable organisation to co-ordinate water safety policy needs addressing. In essence, while the IRCG has enormous expertise in the area of water safety, it is largely an operational type organisation. In relation to the international benchmarking study, safety is seen as an essential function of other coastguards. The Swedish Maritime Safety Agency (i.e. the Swedish Coastguard) is responsible for the production and circulation of safety literature and the promotion of maritime safety through seminars workshops and demonstrations. The Italian Coastguard produces and circulates safety literature and is responsible for promoting maritime safety and public relations material for national matters. Maritime offices are responsible for local matters. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency in the UK is responsible for the production and circulation of safety literature for the fishing and leisure industry. Maritime safety is also promoted through seminars, workshops and demonstrations. The production of public relations material is the responsibility of a specialised department of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency based at their headquarters in Southampton.
3.2.5
New functions / enhanced services
In the context of any new functions or enhanced services, one has to consider other issues such as staffing levels, relationships with other agencies, physical infrastructure, communications infrastructure, information technology infrastructure and the volunteer infrastructure. This sub-section analyses services not currently being provided by the IRCG, possible overlapping services between the IRCG and other agencies, proposed enhanced services and proposed new services. 3.2.5.1 Current Functions not being met There are two functions in particular that the IRCG has been mandated to carry out but has not been doing so. These are: a. b.
Functions under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999; The co-ordination of inland waterways, lakes and rivers SAR.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 37
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
These functions are examined in detail below. a.
Functions under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999
The Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 provides the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources with the legislative powers to require harbours and ports, offshore units, oil handling facilities and designated maritime local authorities to submit oil pollution emergency plans, based on realistic risk assessment, for approval by the IRCG. Templates for these plans have been provided to the harbour and port authorities which require risk assessment and a comprehensive breakdown of their risk management facilities – command and control, communications, manpower, equipment, training and exercises. These oil pollution emergency plans are part of the overall national marine pollution plan, also required under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 which is being prepared by the IRCG. The Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 is being further amended to extend oil pollution preparedness, response and co-operation to cover pollution incidents by hazardous and noxious substances. A further enhancement of this service could be the inspection of port waste facilities in support of pollution prevention by IRCG officers. Due to limited resources, the IRCG has been unable to implement the provisions of this Act as well as the additional provisions required by the protocol of the OPRC Convention. b.
Co-ordination of Inland Waterways, Lakes and Rivers SAR
At present, the Garda Síochána have overall responsibility for public safety and assumes the coordination of inland waterway rescue services and mountain and cave rescue services in the Republic. The Government has decided that the IRCG should have responsibility for SAR co-ordination on inland rivers, lakes and waterways. However, not withstanding the Government decision on inland waterways, the IRCG already provide alert and response assistance when notified of an emergency. In addition, the IRCG provide helicopter rescue services to inland cave and mountain rescue teams if requested to assist. While the IRCG has been delegated responsibility for the co-ordination of inland rivers, lakes and waterways SAR by the Government, there are two key issues that need to be addressed. (i) (ii) (i)
Communications infrastructure; Inland waterways resources. Communications infrastructure
There are two communications requirements identified for the provision of inland waterways communications coverage: Initial emergency communication between the public and the IRCG;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 38
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Ongoing co-ordination of the IRCG response. Initial Emergency Communication The IRCG must be capable of accepting emergency calls from the public. For the inland waterways requirement, the initial emergency communication is likely be from the 999/112 public service. Presently there are two possible networks on which this call may be initiated: Digital Mobile Telephony 999/112 (GSM); Public Telephone Network 999/112 (PSTN). Although 999/112 calls from the PSTN must be made from land-based locations, the every increasing popularity of the mobile phone may well result in the majority of 999/112 calls originating from mobile terminals at the incident location. The possibility of having to deal with dropped calls and fluctuating voice quality, commonly experienced with the current mobile networks, will need to be considered at the control centres. According to the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation, there are now (Nov 2001) 2.8 million mobile (GSM) subscribers in Ireland, this represents a penetration rate of 75% of the population. The ability to accept emergency calls via VHF radio systems will require a considerable investment in hill top communications infrastructure. This is discussed in further detail in the options for the coordination of the IRCG response. Ongoing co-ordination of the IRCG response The co-ordination of the IRCG response will require access to a comprehensive and efficient communications network. The network must be capable of providing a reliable mobile communications network throughout the entire area of operations. A recently completed study has identified a number of potential hill top sites from which comprehensive radio coverage of the River Shannon may be obtained. However, in order to provide communications coverage on a national scale the following options have been considered:
Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) Digital Mobile Telephony GSM Combined Regional Fire Service Network IRCG Private Network.
Each of these is considered in turn. The benefits and limitations of each option are outlined in the following pages. TETRA Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) is a recognised standard for digital, land and mobile radio communications. A national TETRA network, funded by the Department of Justice, is in the process of being constructed and a pilot project is currently underway in the Dublin area. It is expected that this network will provide, a single ‘seamless’ national network and will support the voice and data communication requirements for An Garda Síochána and the other emergency services. Based on the current project timescales, the national network is not likely to be completed until after 2005.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 39
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The benefits of using the national TETRA network are as follows:
A guaranteed grade-of-service; ‘100%’ coverage for vehicles nationwide; Significantly enhanced hand portable coverage; Simultaneous voice and data; A data capability suitable for status messaging, automatic location, and packet data message transfer; Telephony type features and facilities; Access to a highly resilient communications infrastructure; Flexibility to manage a rapidly changing operational situation. The limitations of using the National TETRA network are as follows:
TETRA terminals are currently expensive; The completion date for the national network is not known (possibly 2005/2006); Operational and usage cost details have yet to be decided; The national TETRA network will be restricted to emergency services use only, public access is not likely to be provided; It may not be possible to use the TETRA network to provide communications circuits between the control centres and the remote VHF/MF/HF sites. This will need to be further investigated when the final plans for the National TETRA network are completed. Digital Mobile Telephony - GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) GSM is the digital mobile telephone system that is widely used in Europe and other parts of the world. There are currently three GSM operators in Ireland, Eircell/Vodafone, Esat and Meteor, providing GSM voice and data services on a national basis. The benefits of using GSM: Network infrastructure currently in place; Current choice of two service providers with significant national coverage. The Meteor network has yet to be fully rolled out on a national scale; Because of the size of the GSM market, a wide range of terminals is available and characteristics such as cost, size and battery life are impressive when compared to Private Mobile Radio (PMR)/TETRA terminals; Future enhancements to the GSM network will provide high speed data services. The limitations of GSM include: The technology has been developed for the commercial market and does not offer facilities such as fast call set-up or group calling that are typically used by the emergency services; GSM networks do not offer the level of reliability and resilience expected for emergency services communications; Network congestion is outside the control of the IRCG and may result in communication failure in certain areas; IRCG would incur ongoing costs on a per call basis as well as recurring rental charges;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 40
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Group calling is possible but requires specialist hardware and may be limited to certain areas; Coverage is determined by the network operator and led by population density. This may not be suitable for inland waterways and river coverage requirements. Combined Regional Fire Service Network The Fire Services in Ireland have been working in a national project with the aim of developing three regional centres for the fire authorities to be known as Regional Mobilisation and Communication Centres. The role of each Centre is to provide a service to each fire brigade within the Region in the areas of call taking, mobilising, incident communications and logging, incident reporting and statistical production. The control centre also performs a control function throughout an incident. The Centres have been established in the following locations in the country, each serving a specific region of Ireland, namely: CAMP East – Control centre located in Tara St., Dublin; CAMP West – Control centre located in Castlebar, Co. Mayo; CAMP Munster – Control centre located in Limerick City. Each of the regional networks has been designed to provide comprehensive VHF radio coverage within the respective region. Each network consists of a number of digital link circuits, to provide the communications channel from each hill top site back to the respective control centre, and a number of hill top base station sites. Currently the three CAMP initiatives consist of three separate regional Fire Service networks. However there are plans to consider integrating all three in the near future to form one complete national network. A detailed diagram of the proposed CAMP networks is provided in Appendix K. Benefits of using the Fire Service Network: are as follows:
Site acquisition has been completed; Site development has been completed; Site rental costs may be shared; Existing accommodation for equipment may be available; Significant reduction in the time required to ‘Go Live’.
The limitations of using the Fire Service Network include: Coverage from existing Fire Service hill top sites may not fulfil the IRCG’s requirements; The networks have been developed piecemeal. The same amount of additional capacity may not be available throughout the entire network; Future capacity enhancements may be restricted; Complex agreements and operating procedures may restrict IRCG functionality; Significant capital investment required in hill-top base station and associated equipment. IRCG Private Microwave Network The implementation of a national IRCG Private Network based on digital microwave circuits interlinking the required number of hill top radio base station sites would provide the IRCG with a
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 41
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
communications network capable of supporting the inland waterways and river requirement. The network could also be extended to provide connectivity to the existing VHF, MF and HF remote sites. The benefits of constructing an IRCG Private Network include:
Full IRCG ownership and control of the network; Network coverage can be designed to meet the current IRCG requirement; Network coverage could be expanded to provide circuits to and from the existing remote sites; Leased line circuits could be used to provide a back up circuit in times of network failure; Network capacity can be dimensioned to meet future IRCG requirements; The network would be capable of supporting a radio communications channel between the public and the IRCG control centre.
The limitations of the IRCG building its own network are as follows: (ii)
Significant capital investment required to provide digital link circuits; Significant capital investment required in hill top base stations and associated equipment; Significant recurring hill top site rental charges; Difficulties associated with site lease agreements; Lengthy equipment procurement process; Lengthy network construction and implementation process. Inland Waterway Resources
The second key issue facing the IRCG is the lack of a volunteer structure for SAR on inland waterways, rivers and lakes. The IRCG already have their own well-developed network of volunteers for coastal SAR and these volunteers are complemented by declared resources of the RNLI, the Community Inshore Rescue Service, and two Air Corps SAR helicopters. In addition, they have liaison agreements with the Defence Forces, the Civil Defence, Dublin Fire Brigade, Outdoor Lifeguards and standing orders for Shannon and Dublin Coast Guard Helicopters. An option open to the IRCG is to extend these liaison agreements and standing orders to incorporate coverage of inland waterways, rivers and lakes. In terms of agencies / organisations that the IRCG do not have a liaison agreement with, the following were identified by a number of consultees as agencies/organisations that the IRCG could develop closer links with regarding SAR for inland waterways, rivers and lakes: The Garda Síochána: Until the recent Government decision to devolve responsibility for the coordination of inland waterway, rivers and lakes SAR to the IRCG, the Garda Síochána assumed this role. Therefore, they can provide essential local knowledge and assistance to the IRCG. Furthermore, the Garda have resources (e.g. boat on the Shannon and the Garda Helicopter) that could be deployed in an inland waterway incident. The Fire Services: While the IRCG has a liaison agreement in place with Dublin Fire Brigade, agreements should be extended to a national basis (i.e. agreements with the 37 Fire Authorities). The Fire Services are actively involved in inland waterways, rivers and lakes rescues and this is borne out by their statistics (i.e. The Fire Services were involved in 260 rescues / removals from
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 42
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
water in 1999 and 199 in 1998).62 The Fire Services have a boat on the Shannon and a boat on Lough Neagh. In addition, they are in the process of purchasing an additional two boats that will be suitable for inland waterways, rivers and lakes SAR.63 The Ambulance Service. The Tour Operators on the navigable rivers of Ireland. Boat Hire Companies. In tandem with extending and establishing liaison agreements with other organisations / agencies, the IRCG could develop their own network of inland voluntary units. At present, the IRCG are employing a consultant to carry out a county-by-county statistical survey and analysis incorporating risk assessment. The survey includes the identification of the number of people using the rivers, lakes and waterways including a description and area of their activities, time of year, incidents, existing response facilities, etc. This report will not be delivered for another year and a half but once completed will be a key component in ascertaining where inland waterways, rivers and lakes voluntary units should be located. Arising from the IRCG’s responsibility for the co-ordination of inland waterways, rivers and lakes SAR, there are a number of ancillary functions or enhancements/supports to the service that they could provide: o
Regular consultation with interested inland waterways, rivers and lakes stakeholders (e.g. the Inland Waterways Association of Ireland) could support the delivery of the service. The main option is for the IRCG to establish a committee of interested parties.
Safety inspections of recreational inland craft. The RNLI provide a voluntary SEA CHECK scheme for recreational craft on the coastline. They are considering extending it to inland waterways. The aims of the scheme are to help to reduce the increase in maritime SAR incidents; to help reduce accidents and deaths at sea; to help people be better prepared for emergencies and if necessary, to assist in their own rescues. A provision was included in the Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Act, 2000 to enable the Minister: o
to make regulations on national provisions governing the safe use of such craft, such as lifejackets, dangerous driving and age restrictions, and
o
to provide for the enactment, by local authorities and other agencies of bye-laws to control the use of recreational craft in areas under their jurisdiction.
None of the European coastguards examined (Sweden, Italy, UK, France and the Netherlands have any role in inland waterways SAR). The Canadian Coastguard and the US Coastguard have a role in inland waterways SAR. However, the scale of operation is much greater than the Irish situation with waterways such as the Saint Lawrence Seaway falling within the remit of the Canadian and US Coastguards. 3.2.5.2 New Services
62 63
Fire Statistics, Department of the Environment and Local Government, 1998 & 1999. Consultation, 26th September, 2001.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 43
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Co-ordination of pollution incidents on inland waterways, rivers and lakes; Co-ordination of Mountain Rescue; Co-ordination of Cave Rescue; Air Ambulance Service.
Each of these is examined in detail.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 44
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Co-ordination of Pollution Incidents on Inland Waterways, Lakes and Rivers The Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources outlined that no proposal is contemplated that would impinge on the existing and well established powers and responsibilities of both the Local Authorities and the Environmental Protection Agency in relation to environmental protection 64. Currently, the IRCG provide training courses on oil pollution preparedness, response and coordination to maritime local authority personnel and familarisation visits to pollution response equipment stockpiles. Table 3.2 (e) sets out the findings from the international benchmarking study in relation to pollution incidents on inland waterways, lakes and rivers. Table 3.2 (e): Pollution of inland waterways: International Coastguards
Ireland
64
Swe den
Ita ly
26 January, 1999.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 45
13 August 2002
UK
F
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
x = No; = Yes. x = No; = Yes. Source: NECL
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 46
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Co-ordination of Mountain Rescue The Irish Mountain Rescue Association (IMRA) is a 32 county organisation of approximately 370 volunteers comprising of twelve specialist teams.65 IMRA teams have been trained in basic mountain rescue skills, radio communications and first aid. Each team has a team leader, a deputy team leader, a training officer, a treasurer and a secretary. When an incident occurs and IMRA are required, they are formally called out by the Garda Síochána (e.g. pagers are activated through Garda communication protocols). IMRA have a good working relationship with the Garda Síochána and work well with them on the ground (e.g. Garda local knowledge is beneficial as are their powers – access to farmers lands). The local IMRA team leader acts as the incident commander. The twelve teams of IMRA reported involvement in a total of 138 incidents in 2000. Table 3.2. (f) highlights the number of incidents each team was involved in. Table 3.2(f): IMRA Teams involvement in incidents, 2000 Name of Team Donegal Dublin and Wicklow Galway Glen of Imaal Kerry Mayo Mournes North West Sligo South East Tramore Sea & Cliff SARDA Total Source: IMRA
Number of Incidents 11 45 3 43 22 2 15 12 10 11 0 7 18166
Of the incidents in 2000, 60% of callouts came through the Gardaí/Police Service of Northern Ireland, 28% came from the public and 4% from other organisations. The rescue team came across the remaining 8% while on the mountain.
65
Donegal Mountain Rescue Team MRT, Dublin Wicklow MRT, Galway MRT, Glen of Imaal MRT, Kerry MRT, Mayo MRT, Mourne MRT, North West MRT, South East MRT, Sligo and Leitrim MRT, Tramore Sea & Cliff Rescue Association, Search and Rescue Dogs Association (SARDA). 66 The total figure is greater than 138 because some incidents involved more than one team.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 47
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Figure 3.2 (c): Chief Mountain Ranges in Ireland
Source: Mountaineering Council of Ireland, 2001 IMRA currently has very little interaction with the IRCG from a policy point of view (e.g. they do not sit on any committees with the IRCG). From an operational stance, IRCG helicopters can be called out by the Garda Síochána in support of a mountain rescue. According to IMRA statistics, in 2000 a helicopter evacuated casualties in 17 instances. IMRA have received their funding from the Department of the Environment and Local Government up until recently and through voluntary donations. IMRA has representatives on the National Coordinating Committee for Mountain and Cave Rescue (NCCMCR) which is co-ordinated by the Department of the Environment and Local Government.67 IMRA also has representatives on the Northern Ireland Mountain Rescue Co-ordinating Committee. IMRA are a self-regulating organisation and there was no reporting Department for national mountain rescue quality assurance and policy up until recently. However, following a recent meeting of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and IMRA, the administration of the grant aid funding, the national co-ordinating committee for mountain rescue and associated quality assurance and auditing of mountain rescue will be transferred to the IRCG. The key issue to consider is whether or not the IRCG should assume responsibility for the coordination of mountain rescue. The reasons in support of having the IRCG co-ordinating mountain rescue are: While the Department of the Environment and Local Government provided funding to IMRA in the past, the organisation was self-regulatory. If a department provides funding to an organisation, it should be in a position to ensure that the organisation in question is following appropriate regulations, that quality assurance measures are being followed, that money is being spent prudently, that standards are consistent across different units and that health and safety statements etc. are in place. One body responsible for the co-ordination of mountain and water rescue; IRCG already have vast experience in relation to co-ordination of SAR operations; IRCG could take on the responsibility for co-ordination of mountain rescue without imparting on IMRA’s ability to manage itself much the same as the RNLI and Community Inshore Rescue Services; 67
The terms of reference of the committee are to monitor the provision and development of mountain and cave rescue facilities, provide liaison between the IMRA and its mountain rescue teams, the Irish Cave Rescue Organisation (ICRO), Government. Departments and other public bodies and advise on the allocation of State grants for mountain and cave rescue.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 48
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
IRCG cliff rescue and coastal units have responded to mountain incidents in the past; IMRA could provide additional support to the IRCG in cliff rescue and search; IRCG resources would be readily available (e.g. helicopters and cliff rescue teams). The reasons why the IRCG should not co-ordinate mountain rescue include: IMRA have a good working relationship with the current co-ordinating bodies - the Garda Síochána and the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI); IRCG resources are already readily available when required in mountain rescue situations (e.g. helicopters). In addition, none of the coastguards benchmarked have a function in relation to the co-ordination of mountain rescue operations.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 49
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Co-ordination of Cave Rescue Co-ordination of cave rescue is the responsibility of the Garda Síochána and the Police Force of Northern Ireland in their public service function. At the request of the Garda Síochána or the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), the wardens from the Irish Cave Rescue Organisation (ICRO) take responsibility for the control of callouts and the management of rescues. In addition, the wardens assist in training and the management of rescue stores.68 ICRO is a national voluntary organisation made up of cavers throughout the 32 counties of Ireland. The organisation is administered by a committee elected annually and consisting of a Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, Equipment Officer and a number of committee members. It takes responsibility for fund raising, purchase of equipment, preparation of the callout list (an annual publication of names, addresses and telephone numbers of experienced cavers in Ireland who can assist in rescues), organising training and general administration. Table 3.2 (g) highlights the number of incidents ICRO was involved in during 2001. Table 3.2 (g): ICRO Teams involvement in incidents, 2001 Underground Incidents Underground incidents (caving) Number of persons assisted Number of animals assisted Surface Incidents Surface incidents Number of persons assisted IRCG/RAF helicopter assisted Source: ICRO
Number of Incidents 0 0 2 Number of Incidents 1 8 0
ICRO have up to twenty wardens (i.e. the most experienced, skilled and technical cavers in the country) who have a detailed knowledge of the caves in their areas and are readily contactable by telephone. Like the Irish Mountain Rescue Association, ICRO has representatives on the National Co-ordinating Committee for Mountain and Cave Rescue (NCCMCR) and, up until recently, received its funding from the Department of the Environment and Local Government. ICRO is a self-regulating organisation. Following a recent meeting of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and ICRO, the administration of the grant aid funding, the national co-ordinating committee for cave rescue and associated quality assurance and auditing of cave rescue will be transferred to the IRCG. The reasons in support of having the IRCG co-ordinating cave rescue are:
68
There are four rescue stores. The two main stores are located in Doolin, County Clare and Gortatole, County Fermanagh. These stores are close to where Ireland’s most extensive and popular caves are located. There are two other stores in Dublin and Cork (Source: ICRO, 2001).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 50
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
While the Department of the Environment and Local Government provided funding to ICRO in the past, the organisation was self-regulatory. If a department provides funding to an organisation, it should be in a position to ensure that the organisation in question is following appropriate regulations, that quality assurance measures are being followed, that money is being spent prudently, that standards are consistent across different units and that health and safety statements etc. are in place. IRCG already have vast experience in relation to co-ordination of SAR operations; One body responsible for cave and water rescue; IRCG could take on the responsibility for co-ordination of cave rescue without imparting on ICRO’s ability to manage itself much the same as the RNLI and Community Inshore Rescue Services; IRCG resources would be readily available (e.g. helicopters); IRCG coastal units have responded to cave incidents; ICRO could provide support to the IRCG in cliff rescue and search. The reasons why the IRCG should not co-ordinate cave rescue include: ICRO have a good working relationship with the current co-ordinating bodies - the Garda Síochána and the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI); IRCG resources are already readily available when required in cave rescue situations (e.g. helicopters). In addition, none of the coastguards benchmarked have a function in relation to the co-ordination of cave rescue operations. Air Ambulance Services The issue is to ascertain whether the IRCG helicopter infrastructure might have a role in assisting the Department of Health and Children in the development of an Air Ambulance Service in Ireland. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (Belfast) and the Department of Health and Children (Dublin) have commissioned a feasibility study and a cost/benefit analysis associated with the introduction of a dedicated Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) covering the island of Ireland. A key issue to consider is whether an Air Ambulance Service is a service separate from but complementary to the IRCG’s core services. According to literature provided by the IRCG, there are three main mission types that Air Ambulance Services provide: Primary – Air Ambulance lands at incident for fast treatment / transport; Secondary – Transfers to air ambulance for fast transport / area cover; Tertiary – Urgent inter-hospital transfers. The IRCG already provide a limited air ambulance helicopter service - island medivacs and hospitalto-hospital transfer. Consideration should be given to the role a proposed Air Ambulance service would have within the overall Land Ambulance Service (e.g. what type of mission / how may
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 51
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
missions would a helicopter crew be expected to carry out as an Air Ambulance Service per annum?). The general view from the consultative process was that while this would be a useful service, the focus should be on getting the Land Ambulance Service right in the first instance and in any case, Air Ambulance is not a core service for the IRCG. 3.2.5.3 The following services, not provided at present by the IRCG could be classified as enhancements:
Aerial surveillance in relation to pollution Expansion of the marine committee system Automatic Identification System services Vessel Traffic Management Information Service VHF Direction Finding Emergency towing vessel service Ancillary services.
Each of these is dealt with in turn below. Aerial surveillance The function of aerial surveillance patrols is to augment the existing pollution monitoring and response regime. The primary objective of routine patrolling is to encounter ships in the act of discharging oil and other pollutants illegally, and to gather sufficient evidence for a prosecution. Once Ireland becomes a fully signed up member under the Bonn Agreement, she will have aerial surveillance obligations to meet in relation to pollution prevention. In order to fulfil its obligations under the Bonn Agreement, we are of the view that there are two options open to the IRCG.69 Use of Air Corps resources. Private Contract. The Air Corps currently have two Casa Maritime Patrol aircraft. These aircraft are primarily tasked with fisheries protection duties. It has been estimated that the cost of fitting out the Casas with pollution surveillance equipment would amount to over €1.9 million per aircraft and an hourly rate of over €1,000 would be charged thereafter.70 In addition, the question of the possible use of the Casa Aircraft for pollution surveillance was raised with the European Commission in August 1999. It was explained to the Commission that what is envisaged is that the Casa aircraft would be fitted with equipment for pollution surveillance and that these duties could be carried out during their normal fisheries patrolling. However, dedicated pollution patrolling was unlikely to arise except in the case of incident response. Therefore, it would be necessary to purchase an additional Casa aircraft in order to ensure a dedicated aerial surveillance pollution patrol.
69
A recent Marine Emergency Advisory Report (MEAG) outlined these options in detail and favoured the private contract option. 70 Standard hourly charge to the EU for the Casa Maritime Patrol Aircraft.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 52
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The alternative is to put a tender out to private contract. It has been estimated that the approximate indicative cost to the IRCG would be over €1,000 per hour. Of the international coastguards questioned, Sweden, Italy, the UK, Canada and Holland already provide for aerial surveillance to augment pollution monitoring. Expansion of the Maritime Counties Shoreline Marine Emergency Committees to cover all relevant maritime counties. In view of the importance of county littoral area and shoreline marine emergency management (particularly in the summer season and weekends and in pollution and salvage incidents, the IRCG was authorised to liaise with local authorities to set up maritime counties shoreline emergency committees. There are currently county marine emergency committees in four counties – Kerry, Donegal and Dublin / Wicklow. They are county committees for users and providers of services to shoreline emergency management. They meet twice annually and they are chaired by the relevant Divisional Controller. Secretariat is provided by the IRCG and they are attended by the relevant Harbour Masters, County Engineers, Port Authority personnel, Civil Defence, the Garda Síochána, the Ambulance Service and the Fire Services. The aims and objectives of the committees are: To consider county co-ordination problems on the shoreline; To improve liaison between interested county authorities; To inform and assess the support, availability, commonality, readiness and effectiveness of county rescue resources; To contingency plan for future events in the county; To further safety awareness and accident prevention in the county (e.g. in schools, clubs, scouts, adventure groups etc). It is clear that the aims and objectives of the county marine emergency committees are closely aligned to the core objectives of the IRCG and can enable greater co-operation between the IRCG and the relevant county authorities and stakeholders. Automatic Identification System services (AIS) AIS is a shipboard broadcast transponder system, operating on current maritime communications systems, that is capable of sending such ship information as identification, position, heading, ship length, beam, type, and draught, hazardous cargo information, to ships and to shore. AIS provides the platform for communications systems applicable to both ship-ship and ship-shore applications. The implementation of a ship to shore AIS system would consist of the following elements:
Transponder units located on participating vessels; A sufficient number of shore based units to provide the ship to shore link; Communications links back to control centre; Control centre units to collate, interpret and display data.
The system broadcasts information at regular intervals; it is capable of handling well over 2,000 reports per minute and updates as often as every two seconds. The ships position is determined by the built in GNSS/GPS receiver of the AIS, the ships course and speed can be mapped by tracking the
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 53
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
position points over time. AIS system must be installed under the IMO-SOLAS convention aboard ships greater than 300 gt. The AIS system permits automatic identification of the ships, reducing the operator’s workload as well as facilitating radio communication. AIS data, both real-time and historical, can be utilised to produce prompt and comprehensive incident data reports and updates. The Swedish Coastguard has their own vessels fitted with AIS. It will become obligatory for coastal states to have AIS on the shore side in the future. Vessel Traffic Management Information Service (VTMIS) A VTMIS is an IT based system that provides an overview as well as additional detail of vessels at sea. VTMIS data can be captured automatically through AIS, radar or through ships report and is electronically displayed in the operational room. There are a number of advantages to implementing a VTMIS system: Traffic is displayed in a simplified and easy to use manner; Individual vessels can be identified on the electronic display and categorised; Different categories of vessels can be targeted for special services such as weather forecasts or sea state predictions for small craft or notifying the ETV of the presence of laden tankers; Vessel data can be processed and disseminated to official bodies such as ports, customs and police. As already mentioned, AIS will be compulsory for certain vessels from 2002. AIS can be utilised in VTS areas and is capable of providing automatic updates to the VTMIS for the purpose of monitoring traffic. Some Irish ports already have an operational VTMIS capability. In June 1998, Risk Assessment and Collaborative Emergency Response in the Irish sea (RACER) commenced. The primary aim of RACER was to enhance the emergency response services in a collaborative manner through the establishment of regional Vessel Traffic Management and Information Systems (VTMIS) in the Irish sea. In relation to VTMIS, the principle recommendations were: That adjacent coastal states in Europe should reap the benefits of co-operative VTMIS using shared traffic images and data. With the impending widespread application of new technologies, this will be relatively straightforward to achieve and the cost will be minimal to the coastal states; That VTMIS, data entry, data retrieval and data presentation should be integrated during both design and implementation in order to minimise data handling by operators to achieve meaningful and accurate data entries and to obtain maximum benefit from prompt, presentable and comprehensive incident data reports; That an environmental sensitivity assessment tool be made available to VTMIS operators so that they can be aware of the location, sensitivity and environmental value of areas within their jurisdiction. The Irish Emergency Towing Vessel Study, 1999 recommended that the Marine Safety Information Services should be extended to incorporate the functions of a Vessel Traffic Management Information Service. The report outlined that the functions would be:
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 54
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Facilitation of IMES (as it was then) staff by providing them with a traffic image of vessels in the IPRZ, especially those that pose a threat to the environment; Enhancement of the SAR services by incorporating all vessels that transit the IPRZ in a marine safety network that would enable these vessels to become useful resources in the event of a marine incident; Detection of vessels that may breakdown or be involved in an accident within the IPRZ, and the provision of an efficient safety management service for these vessels. VHF Direction Finding (DF) Radio direction finding is the process of electronically determining the direction of the source of a radio signal transmission. Utilising a radio direction finder processor, radio receiver and antenna array, it is then possible to ascertain the relative direction of this transmitted signal source within a predicted accuracy rate. This accuracy rate can vary from near 3 degrees to as much as 15 degrees or more depending on a number of factors, i.e. system location, signal source location, transmitter signal power, multipath reflections. A DF capability would provide the IRCG with the ability to estimate the location of a vessel, within the range of VHF/MF transmissions, based purely on standard radio transmissions. A direction finder may be a ground or mobile system. Presently the IRCG does not have any VHF (DF) capability. However DF capabilities are available on the IRCG and Air Corps helicopters and RNLI lifeboats. DF systems are used extensively in the UK, where it is reported that a DF capability is of considerable benefit to carrying out the SAR function. Provision of an Emergency Towing Vessel (ETV) The Irish Emergency Towing Vessel Study was commissioned by the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources to investigate the feasibility of deploying Emergency Towing Vessel(s) (ETV) within Irish waters.71 According to the report, an ETV could fulfil several functions:
Conservation of the ecologically sensitive areas of the coast; Protection of amenities and interests of the general public; Protection of marine economic activities; Reduction of costs associated with pollution events; Enhancement of SAR services; Carrying out a number of lower priority activities such as monitoring marine traffic and marine training, that would not interfere with its primary functions.
The report concluded that an ETV should be deployed in Ireland in order to empower the state to proactively protect its coast and all marine activities in the Irish Pollution Responsibility Zone (IPRZ) and the most cost effective method of securing an ETV would be a dual function vessel having a secondary role in fisheries protection.
71
Report delivered in 1999.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 55
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The Government decided, on foot of the ETV study, that Ireland needed and should acquire an ETV capacity to protect against a possibly catastrophic oil pollution event. Following on from this, the Government has given approval for the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources to further study the provision of an ETV on the south-west approaches and the Irish Sea for intervention and pollution prevention in marine emergencies. A series of meetings has been held with tug-owners, consultants and parties interested in the provision of ETV capacity. The key issue to consider is to build on the previous decision, to consider how to provide the ETV, and should the IRCG be the organisation with responsibility for her operation? It is clear that the main function of an ETV is in relation to pollution prevention and the IRCG is the organisation with responsibility for pollution prevention in Ireland. The Swedish Coast Guard do not have any ETVs but buoy tendres and have other vessels with restricted bollard pull (maximum of 50 tonnes). The Italian Coast Guard do not have any ETV but they have the support of the Italian navy. The UK and France have three ETVs each plus one other shared between them for the English Channel. The Dutch also have an ETV even though they have a relatively short coastline (300km)72. 3.2.5.4 Ancillary Services and Development of Services A number of other enhancements to the existing services were suggested by various individuals during the consultation process. These included the following new services: On-shore mobile patrols by voluntary and full-time staff (safety, anchored vessels, vessels arrivals in support of drug interdiction). These patrols would inspect public lifesaving equipment and lifebuoy signs. They would note the arrival and departure of recreational and other craft and would note vessels at anchor outside of harbour limits for onward transmission to IRCG Head-quarters. Local (rural) rapid emergency response (first aid and accident support). They also included development and enhancement of existing services through the introduction of the following: Mudflats hovercraft rescue and its use in pollution response. Offshore and mountain parachute rescue. Divers as part of helicopter air crews. While none of these services can be deemed as essential to the IRCG, further research and development particularly in relation to SAR based activities would be beneficial. The above services could then be considered in light of this research and development. Both the Swedish and the Canadian Coastguards have substantial research and development functions. 72
Source: NECL.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 56
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
3.2.6
Issues relating to customers and stakeholders
In addition to deciding whether the IRCG should take on additional responsibilities as outlined, there are a number of other issues related to customers and stakeholders.
Identity Liaison Agreements Standards and Complaints Investigation
Each of these is dealt with in turn. Identity While the IRCG has an excellent reputation for the work it carries out, there is a perception that it lacks an identity. For example, this is borne out by the fact that some equipment still has the IMES logo (e.g. jackets) and signage requires updating (e.g. the Valentia Centre still has IMES signage). In addition, all operations room staff of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (UK) wear a uniform as do all other members of the full-time staff. According to the Maritime Coastguard Agency: “Our staff prefer wearing a uniform and incidentally, this was endorsed by a positive vote amongst staff last year.” – Officer, Maritime Coastguard Agency. Table 3.2 (h) sets out that the majority of international coast guards benchmarked have a uniformed service for full-time staff. Table 3.2 (h): Uniformed Service Ireland Sweden Italy UK France Canada Spain USA Ireland x = No; = Yes. Source: NECL
Uniform x
In relation to delivery of services to customers and stakeholders, marketing material is primarily disseminated in paper format (e.g. safety brochures). This requires up-dating (e.g. safety awareness video for schools, safety through e-technology). Liaison Agreements As outlined previously, the IRCG has a number of liaison agreements in place. In order for liaison agreements and memoranda of understanding to be effective, they must be closely monitored to ensure that standards and services are being reached. In addition, they should be reviewed regularly. In addition, while the IRCG has liaison agreements / memoranda of understanding with a number of bodies they do not have any agreements with the following organisations / bodies: Marine Survey Office, Sea Fisheries Officers, Revenue Commissioners, Department of Health, Health Boards, Local
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 57
13 August 2002
S
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Authorities, Marine Institute, Naval Service, Air Corps, On-shore Oil Industry, Off-shore Oil Industry, The Garda Síochána. The IRCG will need to prioritise which organisations it requires liaison agreements with. Standards and Complaints The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources have recently published an action plan for 2002-2004 with the aim of improving services to their customers. This action plan will apply to the IRCG. The Department have set out twelve principles of quality customer services: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Quality service standards Equality Physical access Providing information Timeliness and courtesy Complaints Appeals Consultation and evaluation Choice in service delivery where feasible Official languages equality Better co-ordination Staff recognised as internal customer
The action plan outlines specific service standards for the IRCG as highlighted in table 3.2 (i) below. Table 3.2 (i): Service Standards Service Provided
Search and Rescue Services
Customers Include
Standards of Service
Members of the public, sailors, fishermen, commercial shipping
All 999 and 112 telephone calls and maritime distress signals to be responded to immediately IRCG and Air Corps helicopters will be ready to proceed within 15 minutes between 7.30am and 9.00pm and within 45 minutes outside these hours Helicopters will reach by day 40 nautical miles off-shore in one hour and by night or in bad weather 100 nautical miles in two hours IRCG units’ initial response teams ready to proceed within 20 minutes 24 hours a day Majority of IRCG units’ initial response team will reach the worst possible location possible for the unit within 60 minutes
Performance Indicators Time taken to respond to calls and distress signals
Time taken to deploy helicopters
Time taken to reach location of incident
Time taken to proceed
Time taken to reach location of incident
To ensure the effectiveness of the complaints procedure, the IRCG propose recording and monitoring all complaints made and to review regularly. It is also proposed to publish complaints made annually in order to enable the IRCG to target areas for improvement.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 58
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Other proposed service standards of the IRCG are as follows: Acknowledge all complaints within three working days of receipt and respond fully within 20 days. Respond to all reports of oil pollution and keep a public record. See visitors within 10 minutes of any appointment they make at any of our offices. Provide a 24 hour telephone advice and information service. Coastal unit response times. Complaints and the procedure to deal with them are also outlined in the Department’s action plan. The term complaint is used to include a customer’s pursuit of his or her dissatisfaction with the quality of service received or with a decision by the Department concerning the customer. The procedure does not cover matters which are subject of litigation, matters involving Freedom of Information requests or matters referred to the Ombudsman or Information Commissioner. At first instance, a complaint should be brought to the attention of the staff of the service concerned either orally or in writing. Staff are required to respond to the customer within not more than 20 working days from the receipt of the complaint. If a customer is unhappy with the response at first instance, they can pursue the matter with the Customer Services Manager of the Department. Investigation Internal Another issue is the internal investigation procedure in place in relation to response to incidents. In the interest of quality assurance and mishap catching, all incidents are reviewed by the Divisional Controller of the co-ordinating centre. Adherence to procedures and provision of the appropriate response are the main objectives of the review. There is a checklist for carrying out reviews of coordination centre performance in initiating and co-ordinating search and rescue incidents. A second level review is carried out by the Regional Controller. However, there will always be incidents that require further in-depth follow up and reports which include quality control, health, welfare and safety, customer service, complaints and discipline. The issue is whether a resource should be allocated to investigate these incidents. External Data from the benchmarking study indicates that accidents and incidents at sea are generally investigated by independent and specialised bodies. In the UK, a Marine Accident Investigation Branch is run independently of the coast guard and it has the authority to investigate any maritime accident. Similarly, a ‘Bureau Enquêtes Accidents/Mer’ (i.e. an Investigation, Accident/Sea Bureau), carries out these functions in France. While this bureau is part of the Ministry for Transport and Equipment, it acts independently. In the Netherlands, the Dutch Admiralty Court investigates incidents at present. From 1st July, 2002, the function will be the responsibility of the Dutch Council for Transport Safety, Seagoing Chamber. In Ireland, the Marine Casualty Investigation Board (the Board) was established in 2000. The Board’s purpose is to establish the cause(s) of a marine casualty with a view to making recommendations for the avoidance of similar marine casualties.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 59
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
In a major incident, there is a role for staff within the MSD who will have specialist knowledge in ship construction, navigation and stability. 3.3
RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
The Maritime Safety Directorate (MSD) with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources is currently being established. It has responsibility for policy and legislation relating to marine safety and the marine environment. It also has responsibility for surveying vessels, surveying ship board marine radio equipment and marine safety examinations. Currently, the IRCG has little critical interaction on a day-to-day basis with the MSD.73
73
The MSD are not involved in daily operational issues. The MSD are primarily responsible for policy, legislation and support assistance in emergency response.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 60
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Issues and analysis relating to the IRCG’s relationships with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources There are three issues that must be addressed. 1. Should the IRCG remain as a division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, or; 2. Should the IRCG be integrated into the Maritime Safety Directorate. Alternatively, should the IRCG has a closer relationship with the MSD without full integration, or; 3. Should the IRCG be set up as a self contained separate agency. Each of these will be considered in turn setting out the reasons for and against each option. In relation to international coastguard models, there is no one model common to all selected coastguards. For example, the Canadian Coastguard is part of the Fisheries and Oceans Canada Department whereas the Dutch Coastguard involves several departments such as the Ministry of Transport and Public Works, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Finance. In France, there is no separate coastguard agency, but the SAR function is carried out by different Ministers and departments. Table 3.3 (a) summarises the findings from the international benchmarking element of the study. Table 3.3 (a): International Coastguard Status - Agency Ireland Sweden Italy UK France Canada Holland USA Ireland x = No; = Yes. Source: NECL
Agency x x x x x
Reasons for remaining as a division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources The IRCG is a high profile division of the Department; The IRCG is heavily reliant on the Department for funding; There is considerable expertise within the Department in relation to marine related issues and policies; The Public Service Management Act, 1997 provided for a management structure to enhance the management, effectiveness and transparency of operations of offices of the public service and increase the accountability of civil servants; THE IRCG/IMES has operated successfully as part of the Department since its inception. It is possible to provide for the IRCG under legislation without setting it up as an agency. Reasons for not remaining as a division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources The IRCG is operational in nature and as such, is not ideally suited to civil service structures; The IRCG would have greater flexibility to use resources;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 61
13 August 2002
Sw
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The IRCG has little critical operational interaction with the Department on a day-to-day basis; While the Public Service Management Act, 1997 provides for enhancements in the area of transparency of operations, removing the IRCG from under the auspices of the Department would result in even greater transparency of operations; Removing the IRCG from under the auspices of the Department could possibly result in enhancing the IRCG’s identity. Reasons for integrating the IRCG into the Maritime Safety Directorate Integration would facilitate greater knowledge sharing; Leverage of professional / technical staff resources, particularly in relation to management of incidents, policy, legislation, information and administration. Reasons for not integrating the IRCG into the Maritime Safety Directorate The IRCG has little interaction with the MSD on a day-to-day basis. Following an analysis of the IRCG services and functions (see section 3.2), it is unclear whether there would be a substantial increase in efficiency and effectiveness if the IRCG were to become integrated into the MSD structures. The MSD has responsibility for policy and legislation in relation to marine safety and the marine environment. In addition, it has responsibility for surveying of vessels and marine radio equipment and it carries out safety examinations. While there are clear synergies between the two organisations, it is questionable whether there are significant overlaps/commonalities to justify integration; The MSD will have its own profile. If the IRCG is integrated into this structure, it could result in the dilution in profile of both organisations; The IRCG is an organisation that will always have a higher profile amongst the public than the MSD due to the nature of work carried out. If the IRCG were to be integrated into the MSD, the image and profile of the IRCG could be reduced / diluted; The IRCG is currently a larger organisation (81½ full-time staff with a network of 864 volunteers) than the MSD (c.55 staff). If the IRCG were to become integrated into the MSD structure, a problem could arise with the reporting relationship that the Director of the IRCG would have with the Director of the MSD. The Director of the MSD is at Assistant Secretary level and the Director of the IRCG is currently at Principal Officer (Higher) even though he has more staff reporting to him; Greater knowledge sharing between the two organisations is possible without integration. This can be achieved through negotiating a detailed liaison agreement. Reasons for establishing the IRCG as an agency It would allow for an enhanced identity; There would be greater flexibility to deploy resources (e.g. recruitment); Current departmental support services (e.g. IT Support and Press Relations) are not ideal in that the IRCG do not have dedicated IT or press relations support; It would result in greater accountability as the IRCG would be set out in the legislative framework; Agencies structures are well suited to serving the State’s operational activities; It would allow for greater independence; Separation from the policy makers in the Department;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 62
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
While the Public Service Management Act, 1997 provides for enhancements in the area of transparency of operations, establishing the IRCG as an agency would result in even greater transparency of operations;; It would enable the IRCG to raise funds independent of the Department that could go some way to meeting operational costs (e.g. the RNLI do not depend on state funding); Other Marine organisations are successful agencies – Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Marine Institute. While it is outlined below that detailed legislation will be required in order to establish the IRCG as an agency, it can be argued that legislation will be required irrespective of the decision on the status of the IRCG; MSD could still have involvement in relation to governance. Reasons for not establishing the IRCG as an agency The IRCG can never have full financial independence (i.e. it will always be dependent on Government for its budget). In addition, the IRCG has a limited ability to raise its own budgets and it is undesirable for them to impose levies and charges for their mainstream functions (i.e. SAR activities). Nevertheless, there are numerous public sector organisations who are independent bodies while still having supervisory Government Departments providing funding e.g. Bord Iascaigh Mhara, Marine Institute, The Pensions Board, the Health and Safety Authority, the Equality Authority, the National Treasury Management Agency, the ODTR. It would require detailed legislation. This will take time. However, this should not be an insurmountable reason. Table 3.3 (b) scores each of the options on seven criteria:
Public profile; Funding (including ability to raise own funds); Transparency/accountability; Flexibility (e.g. recruitment); Knowledge sharing; Separation from political sphere; Support services (e.g. dedicated IT resources).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 63
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Table 3.3 (b): Weighting of each option Scoring Key High
Moderate Low Criteria
Agency
Public profile
Funding (including ability to raise own funds)
Transparency/accountability
Flexibility (e.g. recruitment)
Knowledge sharing74
MSD
Status Quo
Separation from political sphere
Support Services
6.5
2.5
2.5
Total Score
74
If a liaison agreement is negotiated and put in place between the MSD and the proposed IRCG agency, there should be no issues in relation to ‘knowledge sharing’.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 64
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The above analysis points towards the agency option as the preferred option based on the specified criteria. Another point that favours the agency option that is not captured in the table is that it allows the Department to focus on policy and better standards independently of operational practicalities. However, one point in favour of the status quo option that is not captured in the table above is that the IRCG operates effectively within current departmental structures. 3.4 3.4.1
PHYSICAL AND TECHNICAL RESOURCES Physical Resources
The full-time staff of the IRCG are based at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources in Leeson Lane (Dublin), Malin, Valentia, Cork and Blanchardstown. The voluntary staff are based in 52 coastal units around the country. The Engineering section of the IRCG was originally based at Cork Airport. The main engineering base is now located in Blanchardstown, Dublin. The new engineering base is composed of offices and a workshop and is co-housed with a store of about 20,000 square feet where spare parts, pollution equipment, trucks, inflatable boats and engines are stored. An Engineering depot in Cork exists which contains spare parts for the VHF and MF / HF infrastructure for the Valentia Division. Buffer stock of pagers for the country are also held in Cork. All communication centres have limited spare cards for the CentraCom control system and MF radio systems. Volunteer coastal units do not hold spares on site for their radios or pagers. 3.4.2
Communications Infrastructure
The IRCG utilises fifteen coastal VHF sites, four MF/HF sites and two NAVTEX sites and radio system operating at various sections of the Radio Frequency spectrum. The IRCG utilises a network of leased circuits to link remote sites to the associated local control centre. Leased circuits are also utilised to link the MRCC in Dublin to each of the MRSCs (Malin Head and Valentia) which allow for mutual support and assistance in times of incident coordination and centre evacuation. The provision of data services consisting of DSC and NAVTEX is provided via the VHF/MF (DSC) and MF (NAVTEX) radio networks. A rapid reliable mobilisation system is essential for the efficient and effective call out of IRCG voluntary personnel. The mobilisation function is carried out predominantly using the IRCG paging network utilising channel 67 of the VHF radio network. Mobilisation may also be achieved using the mobile and fixed line telephone network. Mobilisation of RNLI and Community Inshore Rescue Service resources is achieved via the IRCG paging network. The RNLI have also introduced a new IT based alerting system. This system is currently on trial with the IRCG. Details are provided in Appendix G.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 65
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
3.4.3
IT Systems
IT systems have become an integral part of control room operations, supporting both operations and communication systems. The systems currently in place in IRCG control rooms are used for the following purposes: Logging and Reporting: The completion of incident logs and associated reports has become heavily reliant on IT systems; SAR tools to assist in SAR operations; Computer decision and system to assist with oil/chemical spill direction, spread, evaporation, etc.
3.4.4
Issues and analysis relating to Physical Infrastructure & Communications
The IRCG is required to provide a 24-hour service to the public. In order to provide this level of service the IRCG must ensure that a point of contact for marine radio and 999/112 emergency calls is available and operational on a 24-hour basis. The key issue to be considered in relation to physical infrastructure and communications is the number of Marine Emergency Co-ordination / Sub-Centres in the future. As outlined previously, there are currently three Centres. Issues relating to reserve safety SAR capability in the event of evacuation, fire or data line and equipment failure must be addressed to ensure that the occurrence of any of the afore-mentioned events are not visible to the public. The number of Control Centres operated by the IRCG should be based on the following requirements: Availability – Sufficient in number to ensure that in the event of complete loss of functionality at any one individual location, all services are automatically available from an alternative location; Reliability – The provision of supporting infrastructure, both national and localised, based on reliable and resilient systems ensuring that the highest possible level of Control Centre availability is achieved; Efficiency – The implementation of Control Centre systems that maximise operational efficiency. The IRCG currently avail of wide area network circuits between the MRCC in Dublin and each of the MRSCs. However, these circuits are currently limited to providing remote access to radio, DSC/Navtex communication services only. The provision of enhanced wide area network circuits should be considered for the support of Dual Active Control Centres. There would be a number of operational advantages in relation to Dual Active Control Centres. These include: o o o o
Absolute continuity of service, allows for the provision of a resilient 24hour service. Transparent switchover in the event of single location failure. Workload sharing between centres in the event of a major disaster. Each centre could have the ability to take control of the entire area of operation. o Identical systems at each location will allow for equipment familiarisation amongst staff and freedom of movement between centres.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 66
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
In addition, there would be a number of technical advantages arising from operating Dual Active Control Centres. These include: o o o o o
Transparent switchover in the event of single location failure. Wide Area Network circuits could allow for workload sharing between the centres in the event of a major disaster. Modern IT systems allow for simplistic system expansion when required. Transfer of data between centres allows for the provision of a real-time up to date information management system. Dual or mirrored databases.
The Dutch Coastguard has one co-ordination centre with an average number of Watch Officers of 29. In addition, the Dutch have a back-up centre 50 metres from their main co-ordination centre. This is a ‘cold site’ (un-manned) and is a replica of the manned co-ordination centre75. The Dutch use the cold site for training exercises on a regular basis. In 1996, they were responsible for the co-ordination of 1,500 incidents76. During the consultation process, the local knowledge of SAR co-ordination staff was brought up as an issue to be taken into consideration in relation to deciding whether there should be a reduction in the number of co-ordination centres. As stated in the Review of the Five Year Strategy for HM Coastguard, 1999: ‘some people mistakenly reason that the closure of a co-ordination centre will invariably lead to the withdrawal of search and rescue personnel, their equipment and the cessation of radio services. In reality, these will remain wholly intact after the closure of a co-ordination centre. The radio cover for the area will remain unchanged, the equipment and the personnel used to undertake search and rescue operations will remain at their posts. The difference is that the focus for distress messages and the co-ordination effort will be located elsewhere’. The report went on to define local knowledge specifying the need for Watch Officers to have a detailed knowledge of all search and rescue equipment and be familiar with the people that they call upon when co-ordinating the response to a distress call. However, the report outlined that it is unrealistic to expect a Watch Officer in a co-ordination centre to have an intimate knowledge of every mile of coastline in the region. The fact is that local knowledge needed by Watch Officers in coordination centres is more extensive geographically and much less detailed than that needed by the coastal units (i.e. the volunteers). All other issues in relation to physical infrastructure and communications will need to be considered in light of the key issue regarding the number of centres. These issues are related to: 75 76
Control room configuration Radio communications and coverage Telecoms Information technology Paging
Source: NECL Source: National Audit Office
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 67
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Each of these is dealt with in turn. Control Room Configuration In relation to control room configuration, the existing Motorola operator consoles take up a considerable amount of space in the control room. This has the knock on effect of restricting the ability to have eye contact between operators and the SMC. Over time the addition of new systems has lead to a considerable amount of clutter in each of the control centres. This in turn makes accessibility to certain systems difficult and may at times require an operator to leave the console position for prolonged periods of time. The Motorola CentraCom has been in service with the IRCG for the past 10-14 years. In the past few years Emergency Service Control Centre developments have seen the implementation of modern IT based call taking systems. Such systems are capable of supporting both telephony and radio requirements and may be customised to support other communication services such as paging and fax/data transmissions.
Radio Coverage For the majority of vessels off the Irish coast, marine band radio communication provides the only means of communication between the sea going vessel and the shore based monitoring station. Without the provision of a reliable shore based network capable of providing comprehensive regional coverage, shore based stations may be unaware of emergency situations at sea. Practical radio coverage is limited by the following factors: Terrain: For shore based radio stations, the surrounding terrain can often produce a shadow effect, which in turn can result in a number of communication blackspots. Propagation Properties: Propagation of VHF radio is limited to a range of approximately 30-50 miles. MF/HF communication is possible worldwide. Coverage may also be further affected by the quality of the backhaul circuits from remote radio sites and the lack of regular and preventative maintenance on radio equipment. It should be highlighted that certain elements of the IRCG radio network have been in service for the past 18 years, with a considerable amount of the VHF network in service for over 14 years. There is a significant level of resilience built into the IRCG radio networks with battery backup at all VHF sites and main/standby transmitters at all VHF and MF/HF sites. Further details of the available resilience are provided in Appendix G and Appendix H. A detailed plot of the theoretical VHF radio coverage is provided in Appendix I. Although the plot represents the theoretical coverage based on a baseline signal strength requirement, physical coverage may be somewhat better. However, the plot does highlight coastal areas where reliable VHF coverage may not be guaranteed.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 68
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
A reliable and comprehensive radio communications network has a key role in the provision of current IRCG functions and services. The ability to provide this type of network is dependent upon the following factors: Suitable site selection for remote radio stations. Communication blackspots may be avoided through the addition of extra sites in suspect areas. Provision of good quality backhaul circuits. The IRCG currently use analogue circuits. Analogue circuits have limited capacity and are susceptible to additional noise that can often lead to the reception of poor quality audio. Digital circuits can offer greater protection from the effects of noise often resulting in clearer reception of radio transmissions. A single digital circuit is also capable of supporting a number of separate channels. In the short-term, a migration over to digital backhaul leased line circuits may well lead to significant cost savings. The implementation of digital circuits reduces the need for individual circuits for each radio channel. The migration over to digital circuits should be further investigated with the telecommunications service providers. Due to the lack of infrastructure in remote areas, the availability of digital circuits may not be possible. Regular maintenance and equipment replacement programmes. A considerable amount of the communications equipment is over 10 years old with some equipment more than 18 years in service. Although the replacement of ageing voice recording and MF transmitters has commenced, consideration should be given to implementing a programme encompassing all communications equipment. Reliability and spare parts may be an issue in the future. Operation of resilient radio systems. Although the IRCG operate resilient VHF/MF/HF radio transceivers at most locations, there is no standby on channel 67 at some sites. The reliance on unprotected backhaul circuits leaves the network vulnerable to individual or multiple site failure. Telecoms Due to current limitations on third party telecommunications infrastructure, it is not possible to provide resilient leased circuits between the local control centre and the associated remote sites. The map provided in Appendix J highlights the limitation of broadband infrastructure in Ireland77. This map represents the combined network capability for all service providers currently operating in Ireland. Considering the location of the current IRCG remote VHF/MF/HF sites, only eircom is in a position to provide connectivity to these sites. In the majority of IRCG locations resilient circuit routes are not available. The introduction of additional communications infrastructure, for the support of inland waterways communication requirements, may be utilised to provide these circuits in the future. In the event of localised failure of the telecommunications network, a system is in place with the service provider, eircom, to reroute 999/112 calls within an individual control centre. Therefore, IRCG radio coverage off the Irish coast is at risk if the telecommunications operator experiences an element of network failure. Localised single circuit failure would lead to the isolation 77
This information relates to August 2000.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 69
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
of a remote site, cutting off from the relevant control centre. Vessels dependent on communication through this site would have no radio contact with the IRCG. Regional failure would have a dramatic impact on the IRCG radio network and may well result in the inability to provide radio communication within a large portion of the IMSRR. This has been the case in the past and the continuous lack of third party telecommunications infrastructure leaves the IRCG vulnerable to another partial or comprehensive network failure in the future.
Information Technology IT applications have become an integral part of the ongoing daily operations in the control centre. There is considerable concern surrounding the specification of PCs currently running these applications. Further concerns surround the requirement for duplicate data entry in the completion of incident logs and various reports. The introduction of modern IT equipment together with receipt of data in electronic format would have a significant impact on the time taken to receive data, process the data and pass it for onward transmission over the data radio network. Throughout the emergency services, there is an increasing reliance on modern IT systems to help achieve performance targets and speed up the critical process of receiving and managing emergency calls. There are currently a number of companies offering a range of products, utilising proven operational practices, that have been developed to keep pace with changing requirements and advances in technology. Current Command and Control applications are generally of modular design and could be suitably developed to meet the IRCG specific requirements. These systems are based on Open Standard IT systems and are designed to address issues of operational efficiency in handling incidents. The implementation of such systems would have a significant impact on the Control Centre configuration/layout and overall performance standards. With an increased reliance on IT systems, it is essential that each of the control centres are provided with adequate IT support. The level of IT support has in the past resulted in prolonged periods of system downtime.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 70
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Paging The mobilisation of IRCG volunteer staff, the Community Inshore Rescue Service and the RNLI is primarily provided using channel 67 of the VHF radio network to support a Two-Tone IRCG paging system. The overall network consists of the 15 existing remote sites, high sites and an additional 36 remote paging repeaters, low sites. This network is also capable of supporting the mobilisation of the RNLI resources when required. It has been brought to the attention of the review team that the current supplier of the Two-Tone paging system will be withdrawing their support for the system in the near future. It is imperative therefore that consideration is given to identifying an alternative paging system and that the proposed solution utilises as much of the existing infrastructure as possible. Although it is outside the scope of the current assignment to provide a pager solution, an indicative cost for a paging solution has been provided. The solution is based on a digital POCSAG system with an estimated cost of €13,500 per site. The cost for each site, both high and low, includes: Transmitter equipment/interface equipment; Antenna/filtering; Rigging, installation and engineering costs. The possibility of overlaying a solution on the existing IRCG radio infrastructure will require further investigation with suitable equipment suppliers. Further details are provided in section 4.13 of this report. Consideration should also be given to extending the paging network to cover the inland waterways and rivers. The IRCG are currently evaluating an RNLI IT based system for the mobilisation of the RNLI resources. This system uses a combination of telephone circuits and the GD-92 alerting system for the purpose of mobilisation. Failure of the paging system would lead to considerable delays in the mobilisation of IRCG resources. Alternative methods, including the use of mobile and the fixed wire telephony networks, would not only be time consuming but would also represent an additional cost to be met by the IRCG. 3.5
OPERATIONS / PROCESSES
3.5.1
Marine Emergency, Salvage and Casualty
There is a defined course of action to be followed when handling any emergency situation, as outlined in the IRCG Operational Procedures Manual. The MRCC/MRSC receiving initial notification of an emergency situation becomes the ‘Initial Action Station’.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 71
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The Search and Rescue Mission Co-ordinator (SMC) in the co-ordinating MRCC/MRSC has to assess and initiate the required level of response, pass incident details as required to the Divisional Controller, pass the Sitrep (Situation Report) to all information addresses, issue regular Sitreps by broadcast and telex to inform and up-date the authorities concerned, inform the Initial Action Station that responsibility has been taken. Selection of SAR Facilities has to be made based on risk, time available, availability and capability of facilities within reach, search capability and endurance, ability to take charge as onscene commander if required, capability of picking up survivors, probability of other incidents occurring while units are deployed and training and experience of the crew. MRCC/MRSC staff are responsible for maintaining a continuous effective state of readiness within the centres. Once any incident (SAR, Pollution, Salvage or Casualty) is reported to the IRCG, intervention has taken place. The IRCG must stay connected in all aspects of the response until the incident is completed. The IRCG response may require monitoring from a centre or on-scene or full command and control. Once an incident has developed to a point at which the government, in terms of statutory powers and responsibilities, has become entitled to give directions, the IRCG has an inescapable and continuing responsibility to monitor and control the operation. A basic SAR and pollution incident would generally start with VHF/MF, a 999/112 call, a direct telephone call or observation by IRCG staff. A radio officer could receive a number of calls related to the same incident. Each call must be taken and the radio officer must be satisfied that it is a genuine call. Good judgment is required in evaluating the circumstances of particular cases. Once the radio officer is satisfied that the call is genuine, a number of tasks must be carried out (e.g. get position using admiralty charts and/ or SAR software, assess local conditions, weather at sea), get a description of the incident and number of persons involved and decide on asset(s) to be tasked. Once the asset(s) have been deployed, the control centre monitors the situation regularly (e.g. by keeping in contact with the asset(s) and other bodies involved). A typical basic SAR incident could take many hours to run involving hours of phone calls, communications and liaison with relatives and in the case of a basic pollution incident it will involve close liaison with local and harbour authorities and direct involvement of IRCG staff (usually Training and Operations Officer acting as incident manager). A simple pollution incident could take up to one week. Many incidents take two to twelve weeks and serious incidents can take years. Body search and recovery can take up to three weeks with daily liaison with relatives. Incident managers are appointed approximately three times a year and can be anyone from Chief of Operations, Regional Controller, Divisional Controller or Training and Operations Officer. Incident Managers require assistance from other operational staff and administration. In addition, there is frequent need for incident management for marine emergency incidents such as on the shore, body search and recovery (up to 21 days), casualty intervention, collision, fires offshore but are not appointed to on-scene because of insufficient resources. The IRCG has superintendent responsibilities under Government decisions for all marine emergency incidents including pollution, salvage and casualty and SAR. Incident managers are also appointed by international coast guards. For example, the study of the Canadian Coast Guard indicated that in large searches involving many resources, an on-scene commander is designated by the SAR co-ordinator. The on-scene commander acts as the local contact for the SAR co-ordinator and gives directions to the resources involved.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 72
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
3.5.2
Issues and analysis relating to Operations / Processes
While the centres at Dublin, Valentia and Malin work efficiently during an incident, there are a number of operational issues which require further examination. It should be stated that we have not carried out an operational risk review of IRCG procedures. We have commented on technical risks (in the communications section of the report). Recently, the Station Officer position was established in the Dublin Centre (seven appointees). It is proposed that the position be adopted by Valentia and Malin. The Station Officer has responsibility for the shift and is the Divisional Controller’s duty officer. The Operational Procedures Manual (Part II) outlines that: ‘The Station Officer is the Divisional Controller’s duty officer, and is the predesignated SMC for all SAR missions. The Station Officer automatically acts as SMC until relieved or until the mission is terminated or suspended. When another SMC is designated by the Divisional Controller for a specific mission, the Station Officer monitors that mission to ensure that established policies are followed. The Station Officer has the full operational authority of, and is accountable to the Divisional Controller and should always be prepared to take immediate action’. Dublin, Valentia and Malin operate an eight hour shift although there are minor variations in starting and finishing times to cater for local conditions. The roster arrangement covers a 365 day year. It is based on a nine day cycle as follows: -
2 evenings – 16.00 – 24.00 (approx) 2 days – 09.00 – 16.00 (approx) 2 nights – 24.00 – 09.00 (approx) 3 rest days.
In a normal working week there are 21 shifts (3 shifts per day for 7 days). The Divisional Controller (management) is present for 5 shifts (5 days). There are 16 shifts with no management supervision. The Station Officer post was established to address this lack of supervision. In normal circumstances, there are three staff on all shifts in the MRCC Dublin. In MRSC Malin Head and Valentia, there are three staff on all day and evening shifts and two staff on night shifts (in normal circumstances). Table 3.5 (a) outlines the current shift system.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 73
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Table 3.5 (a): Current Shift System Dublin
Malin
Valentia
Total Number of Radio Officers (excluding vacancies)
17
14
14
Number on Days
3
3
3
Number of Evenings
3
3
3
Number on Nights
3
2
2
5.66
5.26
5.26
Current Ratio78 Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001
Due to lack of cover, there have been a number of two man day / evening duty shifts in each of the centres in 2001 as outlined in table 3.5 (b). This may lead to the requirement to draft in additional staff in the case of a major incident. Table 3.5 (b): Number of two man day/evening shifts in the MRCC/MRSCs in 2001 Centre
Number of two man shifts in 2001
Malin
2179
Valentia
28
Dublin
14
Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001 A further point in relation to the shift system is that a number of staff are not living close to their respective centre. For example, eight Radio Officers based in Malin live outside county Donegal, five Radio Officers based in Valentia live outside county Kerry and seven based in Dublin live outside county Dublin.80 This means that replacement staff may not be available at short notice in the event of sick leave arising. There is a dependence on completing paper-based forms which is cumbersome and can lead to duplication of work. An example of some of the forms that require completion include Casualty Information Data and the SAR Sitrep (computer form). As was highlighted in the physical and communications section, there is currently a requirement to switch between IT applications in order 78
The Ratio is calculated by getting the average number of staff on shift and dividing the total number of staff in each centre by the average number of staff on shift. For example, the average number of staff per shift in Dublin is 3 and this is divided into the total number of staff (17) which gives a total of 5.66. 79 There was one, one man night shift in Malin MRSC in 2001. The three rest day staff were unavailable due to PMDS training. 80 Source: Irish Coast Guard Statistics.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 74
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
to complete incident logs and reports. This may well lead to errors as a result of the requirement to re-enter data manually for a second time. 3.6
STAFF ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
Staff issues are examined under the headings recruitment and career structure and training.
3.6.1
Recruitment & Career Structure
The recruitment, selection and training of suitable personnel is a prerequisite to the provision of professionally qualified personnel capable of contributing to safe and efficient marine operations. The IRCG has been finding it difficult to attract and recruit suitably qualified staff as currently specified and retain current staff. For example, there is a particular recruitment problem at Radio Officer Grade III level. This difficulty is related to the demise of the radio officer on board merchant vessels and other issues. We outline specific recommendations and options in section 4.6 of this report. In addition, there are limited promotional / advancement opportunities for certain grades (e.g. Radio Officer Grade III).
3.6.2
Training – Full-time staff
Due to staffing pressures, some staff (e.g. Radio Officer Grade III) have to perform overtime to allow others attend training courses. This can make it difficult to release staff for training courses. On recruitment, Radio Officers, Grade III (Watch Officers) are given a one week induction course at IRCG HQ covering the broad operational and equipment functions. They are also given a general departmental induction by the Personnel Unit. They are then trained at their Divisional Centre for up to three weeks following a set syllabus. This training is overseen by the Divisional Controller and involves specific instruction on systems and on the job training by watch staff. They are then assigned on the roster and continue to receive on the job training. After approximately six months, the Radio Officers receive three weeks training for the Search and Rescue Mission Co-ordinator (SMC) qualification at IRCG HQ. On the job training continues at their Centre and a three week refresher course is provided at HQ within two years of appointment. Refresher training is subsequently provided every two years. On-going training courses are provided on new equipment and systems as they are introduced but it is not possible to provide such courses to all staff due to minimum staffing levels for shift rosters. Personal development training is provided on a request and relevancy basis with refund of fees for own-time courses. The recently introduced Performance Management Development System (PMDS) has developed this further and now there is a structured scheme in progress for all staff. Newly appointed Divisional Controllers receive management development training from the Centre for Management and Organisation Development and also customised in-house training on systems
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 75
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
and equipment. In addition, Divisional Controllers receive cliff training and national and international pollution courses. Training and Operations Officers (OTOs) recruited are given an induction course at HQ on job requirements specialising on the operational procedures for Coastal Units. Cliff rescue training is provided. External assessment on this element takes place. Training is also provided on national and international pollution courses to the OTOs. Critical Incident Stress de-briefing (CISD) training is provided. They also receive SMC training and certification as per Radio Officer Grades. It is intended that all staff will receive computer training in Windows, email, word processing, Health and Safety, first aid and fire procedures. All staff have access to the Employee Assistance Service. In relation to the Engineering section, once an individual is recruited, they are given an induction course by the Chief Engineer and existing staff to familiarise them with the IRCG and Engineering section and all of its relevant functions. Specific product courses are given by manufacturers on particular items of equipment such as the VHF product range in use. Customised internal courses are delivered as required on both products and entire systems within which each product functions. Currently, due to a combination of resource, personnel and supplier constraints, it has not been possible to carry out formal supplier driven technical courses in Navtex. In addition, there are issues in relation to training in general areas of IT for engineering staff including Windows NT, Windows ME, LANs, WANs, SAR tools and database management. 3.7
COMMUNICATIONS
Heads of Function meet formally on a monthly basis. Bi-annual staff meetings are held in Dublin, Malin and Valentia. These meetings are attended by the Director, Chief of Operations, Chief of Engineering, Administration staff, the Regional and Divisional Controller and staff members working on site. Matters discussed include health, safety and welfare, annual reports, strategy statements, business plans and any issues the staff wish to discuss. In addition, permanent staff are also provided with management advisory committee minutes, partnership minutes, drop-in visits by OTOs and engineering staff, press releases and emails. Communications to and from the coastal units has no structure and is much less developed. Issues and analysis relating to Communications Due to a number of factors such as the shift system, the geographical spread of the organisation, historical factors (i.e. past industrial relations) and the profile of staff, communication systems could be further developed to enhance morale and the culture of the organisation. These have been identified by staff as key issues. The shift system can make it difficult for staff to interact with each other and management on a routine basis. This allied to the geographical spread of the organisation and the isolated nature of two of the co-ordination centres means that staff may not communicate with each other (particularly outside their own centres) as often as desirable. It should be noted that
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 76
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
progress has been made through partnership in recent times and this option will be further pursued in the future. In fact, this is evidenced by the composition of the steering committee of this study as it is made up of a cross-section of the IRCG workforce.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 77
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
3.8
LOGISTICS AND EQUIPMENT
Equipment is ordered, stored and distributed centrally from the General Stores in Blanchardstown, Dublin.81 Equipment is also stored in the Cork office. One person is employed full-time in the General Stores in Blanchardstown. The depot contains: Personal equipment (e.g. jumpers, trousers, shirts, ties, boots, cap covers, uniforms, boiler suits, gloves, wooley bears, wellingtons etc.), Rescue equipment (e.g. climbing helmets, ladders, whistles, ropes, rope safety, batteries, survival bags, blankets, body bags etc.), Boat equipment (e.g. hand held waterproof lights, pressure gauges, knives, anchors, power washers etc.), Vehicle equipment (e.g. motorcycle batteries, strobe lights, beacons, fluorescent tubes etc.), Medical equipment (e.g. large first aid kit, small first aid kit, cerverical collars etc.) Illumination equipment (e.g. rechargeable torches, extension leads, floodlights, halogen bulbs) Pyrotechnics (e.g. Smoke orange, four star white, paraillum white; rockets line throwing) General (e.g. pick axe handles, binoculars, compasses, pick head, shovel) The total value of this equipment is €190,000 / £150,000.82 In addition, the stores warehouse contains pollution equipment (e.g. pumps, booms etc.), boats (for maintenance) and outboard engines (for maintenance). The IRCG vehicle fleet consists of:
22 Transit Box Vans (1989 to 1991); 1 Tractor (1980); 1 Mercedes Unimog (1970); 1 Toyota Landcruiser (1981); 6 Nissan Jeeps (1996); 10 Transit Panel Vans (1989 to 1993); 9 Landrover Jeeps (1998 to 1999); 1 Toyota Avensis (2001); 4 Fiat Ducatos (2001); 5 Barrus Polaris (1999); 25 Honda 4x4; (quads) 25 Quad Trailers; 1 Linde Lansing Forklift (2000); 1 Cartwright single axle trailer (1989).
In 2001, 20 Ford Transits and 12 Toyota Landcruisers are being added to the fleet The total replacement value of the fleet is €1,562,862 (£1,230,600). 81 82
There are two containers in Killybegs and Castletownbere containing some standard pollution equipment. Source: Irish Coast Guard, 2001.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 78
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The IRCG has a total of 25 boats. The IRCG boat fleet consists of: 5 Ribs located at Greencastle, Mulroy, Killybegs, Doolin and Dingle; 9 ‘D Class’ inflatables located at Greencastle, Killala, Rossaveal, Knightstown (Valentia Island), Castletownbere, Goleen, Toe Head, Old Head of Kinsale and Greystones; 1 ‘D Class’ in stores to go to Achill when the station house is completed next year; 3 training / relief ‘D Class’ boats held in stores; 6 Searider Ribs held in stores – 3 of these are used for training and the other 3 are for inland waterways, rivers and lakes; 4.8 metre inflatable as a work boat and for training capsize drills. The equipment provision and replacement policy is as follows: Pollution equipment is serviced quarterly and replaced as necessary (on the advice of manufacturers life spans and serviced as per manufacturers requirements). Vehicle fleet subject to Department of Environment (NCT) testing as necessary. Four wheel drives are at all trailered boat stations. Personal equipment for all volunteers is replaced as necessary. Climbing and rescue equipment is life span specified and replaced accordingly. Boat equipment is inspected during routine visits and replaced as necessary. Servicing is carried out by authorised dealers only. Pyrotechnics is replaced as per manufacturer’s time replacement schedules and replaced when used. Illumination equipment such as lights and torches are inspected during routine visits and replaced as necessary. Medical equipment is inspected during routine visits and is replaced as necessary.
3.8.1
Issues and analysis relating to logistics and equipment
Radio In relation to radio equipment, there is no specific centrally run preventative maintenance system in place at present. There is a feeling that having a local engineering presence is of value. Also, there is the demand to complete ongoing projects. In order to carry out a replacement programme, a systematic and planned approach must be adopted. It is the aspiration that each site (both infrastructure and volunteer station house) should be visited twice per year. This is subject to resources and does not necessarily occur. Maintenance is carried out as required while backup systems are operating. If a fault occurs in a radio station outside of normal office hours, there is presently no system in place for the callout of an engineer. There is an issue in relation to the availability of an engineer, outside of office hours (regularisation of engineering availability after normal office hours), who can carry out urgent repairs and / or give advice as to how a fault may be corrected. The average time taken to carry out most repairs on new equipment is approximately one hour on site. Older equipment, antenna systems, combiner systems, Centracom control re-configuration and faults due to third party providers can take much longer. There is no available engineer in the MRSC Malin
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 79
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
region so travel to stations takes a long time relative to the time taken to repair some faults. The MRSC Valentia Division engineering / operations officer is based at Cork. Divisional Controllers and Radio Officers carry out front line maintenance functions. Divisional Controllers provide 24 hour technical work availability.
Logistics and Stores There are a number of issues in relation to logistics, stocktaking and stores. There is currently no electronic stock control system in place. This makes it difficult to assess stock levels and it hinders re-ordering of standard equipment. In addition, there is an issue around the standardisation of equipment (e.g. lifejackets, boots, rain gear etc.). Distribution of equipment is contracted out to SDS. However, on occasion, the Stores man and the OTOs deliver equipment to the coastal units. Spare parts are stored in the Engineering stores (Blanchardstown and Cork). Stocktaking is carried out once per year at the stores. Each volunteer unit is expected to carry out annual stocktaking. The stocktaking and storage system is paperwork based with no use of an information technology system. All documentation and records are stored on paper. During the consultation process, it came to our attention that ergonomics is an issue in the general stores area.
3.9
VOLUNTEERS
This subsection examines the current situation and issues in relation to the volunteer structure, recruitment and training, equipment and expenses.
3.9.1
Structure
The IRCG is made up of 52 coastal units with 864 volunteers83. The volunteers are an integral part of the IRCG and without them, the IRCG could not operate. The volunteers are involved in all aspects of search and recovery, assist in pollution incidents, recovery of bodies and wreckage and some teams specialise in cliff rescue operations. Each coastal unit has an Area Officer and Deputy Area Officer. These Officers are also volunteers. The capability and range of equipment of each coastal unit depends on location but includes radio communications, breeches buoy rescue gear, cliff rescue gear, rescue boats and vehicles. In the busier coastal units, the Area Officer’s workload is significant. Full responsibility for each of their team members;
83
May 2002
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 80
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Administration which includes incident and exercise reports and an account of the hours involved for each unit member; Organising and running exercises. Exercises take place every month for search teams and every fortnight for cliff and boat teams; Promoting safety on the water; Maintaining equipment; Ordering replacement equipment; Liaising with the Divisional Controller and the OTOs; Organising training weekends. Every year, the IRCG hold 3 / 4 training weekends at different stations around the coast. The Area Officers of each selected station are involved in organising the weekend (e.g. lecturers, accommodation for up to 60 volunteers, meals, planning and supervising the night exercise). In the normal course of events, either the Area Officer or Deputy Area Officer will visit the station on a daily basis. The Area Officers report to the Training and Operations Officers (OTOs) in relation to training, exercises and equipment, to the MRCC/MRSC concerning operations and the Divisional Controller concerning administration. The Regional Controller manages the Coastal Units. While the Area Officer has multiple lines of reporting, it makes sense that they report to the OTOs in relation to training (because this is the OTOs area of expertise) and the Divisional Controller in relation to administration.
3.9.2
Recruitment & Training
Volunteers are recruited in two circumstances: Replacement following retirement / resignation of individuals; Establishment of a new station. When a replacement is sought, the Area Officer conducts the recruitment process locally. Some stations have a waiting list of applicants and the Area Officer selects staff from this list. Those on the waiting list for volunteer vacancies have not been interviewed. Otherwise, the Area Officer will invite applications from local people they consider suitable. Each applicant must complete an application form giving details of address, relevant qualification(s) and distance from the station. The Area Officer vets the application form and sends it to IRCG Head Quarters. The Regional Controller recommends the successful applicant for enrolment and details are passed to Administration. Administration sends out an acceptance form outlining the terms and conditions which must be signed and returned by the applicant. Replacement vacancies for Area Officer and Deputy Area Officer are filled by interview board.84 The process of setting up a new station is initiated by the Regional Controller by placing press advertisements in the locality setting out the intention to set up a Coast Guard Unit and invites interested members of the public to attend an information session at a local venue. A presentation is made at the local meeting followed by a questions and answers session. Application forms are handed 84
The interview board comprises of the Regional Controller, the local Divisional Controller and the inspecting OTO.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 81
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
out and applicants apply directly to IRCG Head Quarters. Following consultation with the local Garda Síochána, appointment of Area Officer and Deputy Officer follows a similar process as that set out above for replacement personnel as does the appointment of volunteers. All vehicles, procedures and practices require fully trained individuals to operate them effectively. This requires the application of constant training courses. Typically, a volunteer team might be expected to have the following skills:
Manual Handling; Use and understand an Ordnance Survey Map and Admiralty chart to give and receive positions; Use a VHF set in accordance with the Restricted Certificate in Radio Telephony; Search and recovery; Operating safely and effectively with the IRCG helicopters; Use pyrotechniques properly; Understand nautical terms and be capable of completing designated knots; Certification in First Aid; Understand basis meteorology; Understand the IRCG; Undertake a safe recovery of bodies and wreckage.
3.9.3
Equipment
The type of equipment each coastal unit has depends largely on their location. A general sense of inadequate resourcing (particularly in relation to the coastal units) emerged during the consultation process. There are two issues in relation to equipment. Firstly, there is sometimes a delay in equipment being issued from the stores and secondly, there is an element of a lack of standardisation of equipment for the volunteers (e.g. different jackets).
3.9.4
Expenses
At present, volunteers are paid €12.70 (£10) for each exercise and €10.16 (£8) for the first hour of an incident and €3.81 (£3) per hour thereafter.
3.9.5
Issues and analysis relating to the volunteers
The role and workload of the Area Officer varies widely depending on the coastal unit. One option that could reduce the disparity in service would be to appoint a number of Sector Officers on a fulltime basis to oversee the operations of a number the coastal units. It would be envisaged that each Sector Officer would have responsibility for a number of coastal units. The Area Officer would report to their respective Sector Officer and the Sector Officer would report to their respective Training and Operations Officer in relation to training and equipment matters and to their respective Divisional Controller in relation to administration. The Training and Operations Officer (OTO) should still visit each station within his division once a year. Another benefit of appointing Sector Officer is that it would free up the Training and Operations Officers allowing the IRCG to make better use of their experience, knowledge, skills and competencies in IRCG general training, course designs, course direction, approvals, incident command systems and response planning functions.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 82
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The Sector Officer would have responsibility for the following reporting to the Divisional Controller: Administration within their designated sector (the Area Officers would still be expected to complete their own paperwork. The Sector Officer would act in a quality assurance role); The Sector Officer would have responsibility for the following reporting to the OTO: Maintenance of all equipment and station houses within their designated sector; Inspection of all equipment and station houses within their designated sector; Replacement of all equipment based on the IRCG replacement programme within their designated sector; Co-ordination and organisation of training for all volunteers within their designated sector; Quality assurance within their designated sector; Organisation of one training weekend every year. In addition, the Sector Officers could:
Carry out patrols of the coastline, small harbours, jetties and scenic anchorages Provide support to appointed Incident Managers Inspect pollution equipment in their areas Participate in pollution training and exercises
It would be essential that the Sector Officer have relevant SAR, team leading, cliff climbing, boat handling, training and administrative experience. The Area Officer would still have full responsibility for each of their team members and the day-today running of the team. The role of the Deputy Area Officer would be to assist the Area Officer in the management of the team and to deputise for him/her in their absence. The appointment of Sector Officers may create career opportunities for some volunteers. Not all volunteers have the skills and training required (as listed in the previous section). There are issues in relation to ordering and receiving equipment from the IRCG stores. There is currently no clear ordering procedure, no feedback on the progress of the order and delivery arrangements can be ad-hoc. There are issues around the type of equipment to be supplied to each station. Equipment maintenance is also an important issue (e.g. vehicle replacement programmes). In relation to expenses, some voluntary organisations such as the Civil Defence do not pay their volunteers . Others, such as the retained fire brigade service pay retainers and full time on call wages. The RNLI pay some members a full-time salary and volunteers are paid a call-out allowance. Many RNLI volunteers leave their allowances in a central fund for use as required by the station.
3.10
RESOURCES & STRUCTURES
This section outlines the current situation and issues in relation to staffing, structures and budgets.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 83
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
3.10.1 Staffing & Structure The Structure of the IRCG is represented in figure 3.10 (a). The IRCG is headed by a Director who reports to an Assistant Secretary within the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 84
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
Figure 3.10 (a): Irish Coast Guard – Structure – Full-time staff and Vacancies85
Director
Stores Services Attendant Services Attendants * 3 1 on contract
Chief of Operations 1
Chief Engineer 1
Electronics Officer * 3 1 vacancy
Administration HEO (Job share) 2 1 HEO vacancy
Regional Controller *3 2 Vacancies
Senior Engineering / Operations Officer, Cork 1
Divisional Controller Dublin 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Divisional Controller Malin 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Divisional Controller Valentia 1 Deputy DC vacancy
Engineering/Ope rations Officer 2 vacancies
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 10 3 vacancies
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 7 1 vacancy
7 Station Officers Radio Officers Grade III * 8 1 vacancy
Training and Operations Officer *6 3 vacancies
EO * 2
CO * 4
Typist * 0.5 (shared with MSD)
There are 81½ positions in the IRCG. The management team consists of the Director, the Chief of Operations, the Chief Engineer, the Regional Controller, three Divisional Controllers assigned to each of the stations and the Operations and Training Officers. The Director plays a lead role in the administration and development of the IRCG. He is responsible for operational aspects of maritime safety, rescue, shipwreck and sea and coastal pollution and for the activities of the Marine Rescue Co-ordination Centre and Sub-Centres. The Chief of Operations is responsible for the operational aspects of maritime safety, rescue, shipwreck, sea and coastal pollution. The Regional Controller is responsible for the operational administration of the three Marine Centres, and management of CRS Service, Coastal Units, IT, Training and staff including input and 85
Inclusive of 11 newly approved positions. The position on the chart is not representative of rank.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 85
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
adjudication in recruitment, personnel and industrial relations issues. There are also two vacant Regional Controller positions at present. These two positions were recently approved by the Department of Finance The three Divisional Controllers are responsible for the operational management and maintenance of their divisional centre. Their duties include administration, personnel, liaison officer with resource providers and all outside organisations, health and safety, training, after office hours on call, quality assurance, involvement in SAR demonstrations, promotion of safety on the water and technical matters. The Divisional Controllers respond to and undertake command and control of coastal marine emergency incidents, SAR, salvage and wreck and pollution as required during major incidents. There are three vacant Assistant Divisional Controller positions at present. These three positions were recently approved by the Department of Finance. The three Training and Operations Officers (OTOs) (three vacancies, two of which have been recently approved by the Department of Finance) have a background as naval service officers. Their principle functions are to manage, train and exercise Coast Guard volunteers coastal units in their station equipment and in all aspects of coastal emergency response appropriate to their location. The OTOs also assist with full-time staff training and harbour authority and local authority personal pollution training. In addition, OTOs respond to and undertake local co-ordination and control of coastal marine emergency incidents (SAR, salvage and wreck and pollution). The OTOs are also involved in planning and providing a presence at appropriate divisional public relations functions and assisting with safety awareness as directed. They are involved in reviewing incident reports and providing associated operational comment and statistics. The engineering team consists of the Chief Engineer, three Electronics Officers (one vacancy) and one Senior Engineering / Operation Officer based at Cork. Engineering / Operations Officers (two vacancies) report to the Electronics Officers and Chief Engineer. The Engineering section is primarily responsible for the IRCG radio communications equipment. Mechanical engineering in relation to pollution equipment, truck, boat and engine maintenance is the responsibility of the IRCG Operations section. The Engineering section is responsible for planning, maintenance, contract management, radio site (and buildings) maintenance, spare parts holdings and training. Of the 81½ staff, there are 46 Station Officers and Radio Officers Grade III (56% of total staff). The Station Officers and Radio Officers hold a Maritime Radio Communication’s General Certificate or an equivalent qualification acceptable for service on an Irish merchant vessel and have some practical sea-going/marine experience. The administration team consists of a Higher Executive Officer (one additional post recently approved by the Department of Finance), two Executive Officers and four Clerical Officers. They provide secretariat services to committees, briefings for the Minister, General Secretary, Assistant Secretary and other Divisions. They also produce budgets (estimates), annual reports, SWOT analysis, strategy statements, business plans and administer the building programme. They pay invoices, are involved in procurement of goods, oversee contracts (e.g. helicopter contracts) and liaison agreements. They monitor all programme budgets, travel and subsistence, overtime and telephone accounts.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 86
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
A Stores Services Attendant is employed in the Blanchardstown central stores depot and two Services Attendants are employed at Malin and Valentia. Public and media relations are handled centrally by the Press Officer of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. Notes on the Structure: Seven Station Officers have been appointed in Dublin and they are in the process of being appointed at the other two Centres. Of the Radio Officers Grade III in Dublin, two positions have been filled by temporary officers who are included in the Radio Officer Grade III serving numbers. Of the Radio Officers Grade III in Malin, one position has been filled by a temporary officer who is included in the Radio Officer Grade III serving numbers It is evident from the benchmark organisations that co-operated with this study that resources allocated depends on a number of factors such as management structures, organisational culture and the historical position of the organisation. The benchmarked coast guards are situated along a spectrum of hierarchical intensity. At one end of the spectrum (Alpha as referred to in table 3.10 (a)), one finds an extremely hierarchical structure, such as the Italian Coast Guard, organised along militaristic lines. At the other end of the spectrum (Omega as referred to in table 3.10 (b)), one finds an organisation based on the empowerment of operators, such as in Sweden. The respective characteristics of the two types of organisations are presented in table 3.10 (b) below. Table 3.10 (b): Spectrum of Features of International Coast Guards
Alpha
Omega
Emphasis on Hierarchy, Tight Internal Control
Empowerment of Operators, Loose Internal Control
Internal Operational procedures
Strict
Guidelines
Training
Emphasis on operational training
Emphasis on operator’s experience, qualifications, training and competence
Operational structure
Tight and hierarchical
Loose and flat operational structure
Responsibility
Hierarchical levels activated with escalation of events
Accountability
Operator has limited accountability
Operator remains fully responsible throughout events; hierarchy alerted Operator is accountable, although organisation may be legally responsible
Dealings with third parties Post event investigations
Operator’s role is clearly defined.
Operator’s role is comprehensive.
Complicated by hierarchical structure. Extra hierarchical levels are required. More people, less well
Facilitated because one person is in charge Less people, better paid; reduced overall cost.
Features
Cost
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 87
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
paid Source: NECL The appropriate structure lies somewhere along the spectrum denoted by Alpha and Omega in table 3.10 (b). The choice is influenced by factors such as culture, the historical position of the organisation, as well as the future role of the organisation and economic considerations. IRCG staff are experienced and well qualified. The average age of all staff is 49. Table 3.10 (b) below illustrates this and also outlines the average age of senior management, divisional controllers, training and operation officers (OTO), the radio officers (grade III) in Malin, Dublin and Valentia and administration staff. Table 3.10 (b): Average Age of Staff Staff All Staff Senior Management Divisional Controllers Training and Operational Officers Radio Officers Grade III Dublin Radio Officers Grade III Malin Radio Officers Grade III Valentia Administration Staff Engineering Staff
Average Age 49.1 50.3 54.3 41.3 46.9 51.7 51.3 40.6 44.0
3.10.2 Budget The IRCG receives its funding from the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. In 2002 the budget allocations are as follows86:
Coastal Units Development of Coast Radio Stations Marine Emergency Contingency Marine Emergency Service Travel and Subsistence
€
€ 2,453,000 € 1,099,000 13,000 €20,252,000 € 165,000
3.10.3 Issues and analysis relating to Resources & Structures Staffing, structure and budgets can only be addressed in detail following consideration of the proposed new and enhanced functions, the relationship of the IRCG with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Marine Safety Directorate and the number of Marine Emergency Command and Control and Co-ordination / Centres. With this in mind, the following points set out issues relating to resources. The proposed structure is dealt with in the next section. 86
Exclusive of salary costs.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 88
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The majority of staff within the IRCG are at Radio Officer Grade III level. This level is reasonably well structured from the point of view of reporting lines (Radio Officers Grade III report to their respective Divisional Controller who in turn reports into the Regional Controller who reports to the Chief of Operations who reports to the Director). The Engineering area is also clearly structured. Engineering staff report directly to the Chief Engineer who in turn reports to the Director. On the other hand, there is very little structure throughout the remainder of the organisation. For example, although there is a network of 864 volunteers, there is a limited management structure. Although the Training and Operations Officer (OTO) role is primarily tasked with training the volunteers in the coastal units, they spend a large proportion of their time on other duties e.g. liasing with other SAR agencies, assisting in the promotion of water safety, involved in surveys on inland waterways, ferry liaison officer under SOLAS Chapter V, administrative duties, stores delivery, logistics, production of training and operational materials, assist with stores distribution, OPRC responsibilities, and incident management. Another issue is whether the grade of the Director of the IRCG should be reviewed. The primary issue relates to the fact that two grades, Principal Officer and Assistant Principal Officer, cover the ten most senior people within the organisation. In addition, as table 3.10 (c) highlights, the Chief Executives/Directors of comparable ‘bodies’ are at Assistant Secretary level. Table 3.10 (c): Comparison with Chief Executives/Directors of other agencies Irish Coastguard Level of CEO/Director No. of full-time staff
Health & Safety Authority (2002)
The Pensions Board (2000)87
Competition Authority (2000)88
Equality Authority
PO (Higher)
AS89
AS
AS
AS
81½90
157
23
3091
4592
22.0093
13.0094
2.42
1.55
5.0295
Budget (IR£m.)
17.16
10.24
1.90
1.22
3.95
€m budget per staff member
0.269
0.083
0.105
0.052
0.112
Budget (€m.)
87
Source: Annual Report 2000 (latest annual report). Source: Annual Report 2000 (latest annual report). 89 AS = Assistant Secretary 90 The IRCG Director also has responsibility for 864 volunteers. 91 Includes chairman and members. 92 Source: Annual Report 2000 (latest annual report). 93 Source: IRCG, 2002 Budget 94 Source: 2002 Department of Finance estimates. 95 Source: 2002 Department of Finance estimates. 88
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 89
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
The area of stores and logistics management does not have a management structure and this is addressed in section 4. The Engineering section is based in two separate locations (Dublin and Cork) at present. This is an issue and will be addressed in section 4. The Administration section lacks structure with a HEO reporting directly to the Director. This is addressed in section 4. In addition, it is clear from the consultations that there are staffing pressures within the IRCG as it is currently structured. These and other staffing pressures, which are reflected in organisation structural deficiencies, will be examined in this report. Required staff numbers are principally related to the set of functions, the relationship with the Department and the management structure. 3.11
IRCG PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Table 3.11 outlines the current performance indicators used by the IRCG. Table 3.11: Current Performance Indicators Number of incidents Number of persons assisted Number of hoax calls Pleasure craft assisted Fishing craft assisted Merchant craft assisted Coast guard units tasked Number of helicopters tasked RNLI lifeboats tasked CIRS boats tasked Number of maritime commercial communications Maritime safety information Call outs RNLI, CIRS, IRCG Coastal Unit response criteria The benchmarking study highlighted that coast guards in other jurisdictions also use similar performance indicators such as the number of incidents, numbers assisted and tasking statistics. We believe that these indicators are invaluable because they can help improve the service that the IRCG
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 90
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
3.Current Situation, Issues and Analysis
provides. In the recommendations section (section 4.11) we have outlined a number of additional performance indicators that could be adopted by the IRCG. 3.12
SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES
In summary, there are four critical issues that need to be addressed before any other issues can be examined. These are: Proposed new and enhanced functions As has been outlined in this section 3, a number of new and enhanced functions have been suggested through the consultation process. In the context of any new functions, one has to consider other issues such as staffing levels, relationships with other agencies, physical infrastructure, communications infrastructure, information technology infrastructure and the volunteer infrastructure. Some of these issues such as communications infrastructure for inland waterways are very significant (i.e. cost implications are substantial). Relationship with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Maritime Safety Directorate The key issue to consider here is whether the IRCG’s relationship with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources should remain as it currently is, whether the IRCG should have a closer relationship or be integrated with the Maritime Safety Directorate or whether it should be re-constituted as a stand-alone agency. Number of Marine Emergency Command and Control and Co-ordination / Centres The key issue is whether the three stations should be reduced in number. In order to reach a recommendation, reserve safety marine emergency capability in the event of evacuation, fire or data line and equipment failure will be addressed as will the assessment of the importance of local knowledge when co-ordinating an incident. Management and organisation structure This issue will be addressed following consideration of proposed new functions and enhanced services, the relationship of the IRCG with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Maritime Safety Directorate and the number of control centres. Each of these issues along with all other issues outlined in this section will be addressed in section 4 of the report.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 91
13 August 2002
S
4. RECOMMENDATIONS, OPTIONS AND COSTS
4.1 INTRODUCTION This section presents recommendations for the future delivery of Irish Coast Guard Services under the following headings:
Customers & Services Relationships Physical and Technical Resources Operations / Process Staff Issues Communications Logistics and Equipment Volunteers Resources & Structures – Staffing, Structure and Budget.
Section 3 of this report sets out the key issues, analysis and rationale for the recommendations outlined in this section. 4.2 CUSTOMERS & SERVICES 4.2.1 Current functions & services We believe that the IRCG provides an excellent service in relation to their current core functions and services. We recommend that the IRCG should continue to provide its current functions and services. The functions include: o o o o o o o o
Providing a national marine search and rescue response service, including a service to the off-shore islands; Providing a coastal and, where appropriate, cliff search and rescue service; Providing a post-emergency body search and recovery service and relative liaison; Developing and co-ordinating an effective regime in relation to marine pollution; Providing a response to marine casualty incidents and to monitor/intervene in marine salvage operations; Providing a safety awareness and public information service in relation to the discharge of the functions set out above; Providing a revenue earning marine communications and public correspondence service (e.g. ship to shore telephone); Providing a maritime safety communications service.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 92
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.2.2 Preferred Options for Current Services & Functions not being met As identified in section 3, there are two key services/functions that are currently not being met by the IRCG – the services/functions under the Sea Pollution (Amendment Act, 1999) and the co-ordination of SAR on inland waterways, rivers and lakes. 4.2.2.1 Services & Functions under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 We recommend that the IRCG undertake to carry out their functions under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 and the proposed new amendment to cover hazardous and noxious substances with immediate effect. The proposed new structure as outlined in section 4.10 will provide resources to achieve the implementation of this function. 4.2.2.2 Co-ordination of inland waterways, rivers and lakes SAR As outlined in section 3, there are two key issues – communications infrastructure and inland waterways resources. These are dealt with below. Communications Infrastructure The current IRCG communications network is designed for the provision of VHF/MF/HF radio coverage off the Irish coast. The current VHF coverage is not intended to cover inland waterways and is not capable of doing so at present. From the VHF coverage plot (outlined in Appendix I), it is clear to see that the current network is not capable of supporting an inland waterways VHF requirement. This is mainly due to the terrain and propagation limitations as previously mentioned. Although a programme of providing coverage on the river Shannon using leased line circuits from eircom has begun and is due for completion in mid-2002, comprehensive national coverage will require a significant number of sites interlinked by a network of circuits that should be capable of providing the following features:
Resilient circuits between sites; Sufficient capacity to meet current and future system demands; High quality audio reception; Capacity of accommodating changes in network topology.
The current IRCG network and the soon to be completed river Shannon sites utilise a number of leased line circuits from eircom. The provision of leased line backhaul circuits is an expensive option incurring substantial and ongoing annual charges. As already mentioned, the remoteness of IRCG sites means that more often than not, resilient links are not available. Our recommendation for the provision of an inland waterways communication network is to construct a private IRCG network based on microwave radio technology. This recommendation is based on the following factors:
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 93
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o
o
o o
o o
o
o o o
The IRCG will own and have complete control of the network. National communications will not be affected by any overloading during times of national emergency. This may well be the case on any shared or public network. Resilient circuits between sites will allow for the provision of reliable national radio coverage for the co-ordination of the IRCG response to emergencies on the inland waterways and rivers; Requirement to support an extended national paging network to assist in the mobilisation of IRCG resources This network could be expanded to support the existing maritime radio communications systems through the provision of communication circuits between the control centres and remote VHF/MF/HF sites. This network could be dimensioned to support any future additional communications systems such as AIS and DF. The increasing emergence of applications/systems based on data communications has led to a requirement for high capacity and reliable digital circuits. These circuits are needed to support existing and future applications/systems such as DSC, AIS, DF, VTMIS, ICCS and Command & Control. Simultaneous support will also be required for the provision of existing and future voice services. A typical microwave network could also support an IRCG Intranet and allow for the operation of a compressive incident logging and Management Information System (MIS) across multiple sites. The network could support localised Internet access without the need for recurring dial up changes. Circuits could be utilised to provide alarm facilities at remote site locations. Circuits could be utilised to provide telephony services between IRCG locations.
The construction of a national microwave network has been estimated at a cost of €8 million. This cost assumes a network of approximately 60 hill top locations and includes: o o o
Capital investment in microwave radio and supporting equipment; Site development works; Equipment accommodation facilities.
Operational costs associated with such a network include: o o o
Site rental charges; Maintenance costs; ODTR licence fees.
The use of the Fire Service network for the provision of a national IRCG network is not recommended for the following reasons: o
o
The Fire Service network currently exists as three separate networks. Although it is planned to combine the three, capacity is not consistent and this may well cause problems on certain links that will not suit the IRCG. Network overload during times of national emergency would be outside the control of the IRCG.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 94
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o o o o
Due to location, the sites associated with the current Fire Service network topologies are not capable of supporting the current IRCG network topology. Due to location, the sites associated with the current Fire Service network topologies may not support a future inland waterways requirement. Due to capacity limitations and location, the current Fire Service network may not be capable of supporting an IRCG Intranet requirement. The Fire Service network may not be capable of supporting future IRCG incident logging, MIS and telephony requirements.
The use of the National TETRA network is not an option either. As with the Fire Service network, the final completion date, availability of circuits and network configuration are currently not known. The option to expand and introduce new technologies may not be available to the IRCG on the TETRA network. The IRCG need to identify suitable locations for inland IRCG volunteer units. This is largely dependent on the inland waterways survey that is currently being conducted by an independent consultant. Inland Waterways Resources We cannot recommend any additional staff for inland waterways as this is also dependent on the inland waterways survey that is currently being conducted by an independent consultant. We recommend that the IRCG should negotiate the extension of the coastal declared resources to cover inland waterways, rivers and lakes. These declared resources are: o o o o o o o
Coast Guard helicopters; Coastal Units (where appropriate); Dublin Fire Brigade and other county fire services; Maritime and inland local authority lifeguards; Civil Defence; RNLI; Community Inshore Rescue Services.
The IRCG do not have liaison agreements with a number of key organisations and we recommend that they should develop closer links and liaison agreements (where appropriate) in relation to coastal and inland SAR with the following: o o o o o o o o o o
The Garda Síochána; Irish Naval Service; Port Authorities; Customs and Excise; The Fire Service; The Ambulance Service; Tour operators or boat hirers on navigable rivers; Waterways Ireland; Inland Waterways Association of Ireland; Maritime Safety Directorate;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 95
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o
Sea Fisheries Division, Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.
We recommend that the committee structure needs to be reviewed. At a high level, there should be an overall committee (possibly entitled – Irish Marine and Inland Waterways Emergency Response Committee) with two sub-committees, one with responsibility for SAR preparedness, response and co-operation and one with responsibility for pollution preparedness, response and co-operation. This reflects the proposed management structure of the IRCG. We recommend that pursuant to the Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Act, 2000, the IRCG should have responsibility for relevant bye-laws enacted by the Minister in relation to the regulation and use of pleasure craft and other vessels. Responsibilities would include the power or function to prohibit or regulate the use, speed, times of operation and noise output of vessels as specified by the regulations in particular areas or circumstances. We recommend that periodic peer reviews (other coast guard experts) should be conducted of the IRCG’s operations. 4.2.3 Preferred Options for Overlapping Services We recommend that safety awareness policy should be co-ordinated by the Maritime Safety Directorate. This would entail the Maritime Safety Directorate chairing the Marine Safety Working Group. We believe that the MSD is the organisation best placed to co-ordinate this group as one of its specific functions is to develop safety policies. However, the IRCG would still play a key role on this group considering its vast amount of operational experience. We recommend that the dissemination of water safety information should remain an essential and high profile function of the IRCG. Overlaps occur with the Irish Water Safety Association (IWSA). While this overlap does not appear to affect the role of either body, the issue is whether the IWSA should be merged with the IRCG. We believe that this is worthy of further consideration. Modern technology is currently under-utilised in relation to dissemination of water safety information. We recommend that the IRCG in partnership with private and public interested parties should investigate and develop this area (e.g. modern videos for schools, radio and television advertisements and an interactive educational internet site). 4.2.4 Preferred Options for New Services Co-ordination of inland waterways, rivers and lakes pollution incidents We recommend that the co-ordination of inland waterways, rivers and lakes pollution incidents should remain with the local authorities. IRCG resources should continue to be made available when required. Co-ordination of Mountain Rescue There are two available options.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 96
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
1. IRCG to coordinate mountain rescue. 2. Co-ordination of mountain rescue to remain with the Garda Síochána. We recommend that the co-ordination of mountain rescue should transfer to the IRCG (in line with the recent decision by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources). The IRCG are specifically trained to co-ordinate SAR operations and are therefore in a strong position to coordinate mountain rescue operations. IMRA should be a declared resource of the IRCG. We recommend that one new position should be created within the IRCG structure as outlined in section 4.10 (equivalent of OTO) with responsibility for the training, quality assurance and standardisation of the cave and mountain rescue units. The reasons for appointing a resource with specific responsibility for cave and mountain rescue are as follows: o o
o
o
The IRCG will be going into both organisations from a ‘standing start’. The IRCG will need to dedicate a significant amount of time in order to ascertain standards etc. The volume of work will require a full-time staff member initially (e.g. twelve mountain rescue units and cave rescue wardens need to be assessed). This position should be reviewed after two years to ensure that the volume of work is there to justify the assignment of a fulltime resource to this function. In order to gain buy-in and support from both organisations, it is essential that the IRCG have a point of contact that both organizations can relate to. It will also increase the likelihood of the move being successful. It will make the IRCG more easily accountable for the running of both organisations if appropriate resources are dedicated.
Co-ordination of Cave Rescue There are two available options. 1. IRCG to co-ordinate cave rescue incidents. 2. Co-ordination of cave rescue to remain with the Garda Síochána. We recommend that co-ordination of Cave Rescue should transfer to the IRCG (in line with the recent decision of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources). The IRCG are specifically trained to co-ordinate SAR operations and are therefore in a strong position to co-ordinate cave rescue operations. ICRO should be a declared resource of the IRCG. The additional resource outlined above (in relation to mountain rescue) will also have similar responsibilities in relation to cave rescue (i.e. maintenance of standards, quality assurance and training). Air Ambulance Services While the IRCG has helicopter resources, we believe that an Air Ambulance Service is ancillary to the core services of the IRCG. For example, it is our view that inter-hospital transfers are not a core service for the IRCG. These issues will be examined in a separate all-Ireland study (Feasibility study on helicopter emergency medical services).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 97
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.2.5
Other Proposed Services not currently being provided (enhancements)
Aerial Surveillance in relation to pollution There are two options open to the IRCG 1. Use of Air Corps resources; 2. Private contract. We recommend that the IRCG adopt the private contract option. The private contract option appears to be less expensive and is likely to give more flexibility. Expansion of the county marine emergency committees to cover all relevant maritime counties As outlined in section 3, the aims and objectives of the county marine emergency committees are closely aligned to the core objectives of the IRCG and can enable greater co-operation between the IRCG and the relevant county authorities and stakeholders. We recommend that the current three Maritime Counties Shoreline Marine Emergency Committees should be extended to cover all relevant maritime counties. The IRCG should continue to chair these meetings. Automatic Identification System Services (AIS) The International Telecommunications Union World Radio Conference in 1997 designated two VHF radio frequencies, 161.975Mhz (AIS1, or channel 87B) and 162.025Mhz (AIS2, or channel 88B) for AIS. The system is backwards compatible with DSC systems allowing shore based GMDSS systems to inexpensively establish AIS operating channels and identify and track AIS-equipped vessels. With the commencement of compulsory AIS for certain sized vessels due to come into force in 2002, this provides the opportunity for the IRCG to utilise the AIS data and develop a VTMIS capability. AIS allows for precise and reliable tracking of vessels, with a significant reduction of the operator workload. AIS is capable of providing the IRCG with a dynamic view of vessel activity within the IMSRR and AIS data could also be queried to establish a vessel’s last known position in times of emergency. AIS is more than just a monitoring tool, it is an information network. AIS systems can assist both mariners and emergency services with the ability to carry out the following tasks:
Anticipation of problems Avoidance of collisions Planning of rescue response Monitoring of ongoing incidents Monitoring of pollution trial based on vessel movements Retrieval of historical data Playback of previous incidents.
It is recommended that the IRCG implement an AIS solution.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 98
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
VHF Direction Finding While the IRCG has no existing land based DF capability, the implementation of AIS will go some way to providing a means of locating a vessel at sea. However, it cannot be guaranteed that all sea going vessels or smaller pleasure craft will have AIS capability. The provision of a limited DF service is currently provided by the IRCG and Air Corps helicopters and RNLI lifeboats. However, this DF capability is only available once the resource has been mobilised. It is crucial for the safety of lives at sea that as much information as possible is gathered from the initial transmissions received. We recommend that the IRCG implement a VHF DF capability: o
for comprehensive coverage of the entire coastal region, the DF capability will have to be implemented at each of the existing remote VHF sites;
o
for smaller pleasure craft that are likely to be equipped with nothing more than a handheld VHF radio.
VTMIS The automatic capture and display of vessel data is an invaluable tool for the monitoring of vessels at sea. A VTMIS display can provide an operator with a real time view of the levels of vessel activity in a specific coverage area. VTMIS can be used to assist the IRCG in the completion of daily routine tasks and in the planning of an incident response. We recommend that the IRCG implement a VTMIS capability. There are a number of advantages to implementing a VTMIS solution: o
o o
VTMIS can provide a simple, easy to view graphical display of the levels of traffic. Regular updates can be provided automatically with very little operator input required. VTMIS and AIS are compatible systems and together, can be used for the planning of an incident response. VTMIS can also be used as an aid to provide advance warning of potential collisions and so help reduce the risk of an incident occurring.
Provision of an Emergency Towing Vessel The Irish Emergency Towing Vessel Study, 1999 recommended that an ETV should be operated and deployed in Ireland in order to proactively protect the coast. As this is a primary function of the IRCG, they are the organisation that would derive most benefit from the ETV. We recommend that the IRCG has the responsibility for the deployment of the ETV. We recommend that the operation, maintenance and manning of the ETV should be contracted out to a suitably qualified third party. We recommend that the ETV should be used in support of both pollution / salvage and SAR incidents.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 99
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Ancillary Services We recommend that the following services / enhancements be examined in light of further research and development by the IRCG. We recommend that a research and development capacity should be established within the IRCG structure. This is taken into account in the proposed new structure as outlined in section 4.10. The Assistant Director – Volunteers & Support should have responsibility for this. We envisage the Assistant Director along with the Policy, HR and Administration Manager and the three Training and Operations Officers (OTOs) working in this division would work together in relation to research and development. The research and development capacity can assess the suitability of the following for the IRCG: (for example): On-shore mobile patrols (safety, anchored vessels, vessels arrivals in support of drug interdiction). These patrols would inspect public lifesaving equipment and lifebuoy signs. They would note the arrival and departure of recreational and other craft and would note vessels at anchor outside of harbour limits for onward transmission to IRCG Head-quarters. Local (rural) rapid emergency response (first aid and accident support). Mudflats hovercraft rescue and its use in pollution response. Offshore and mountain parachute rescue. Divers as part of helicopter air crews.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 100
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Table 4.2 below summarises the recommended functions/services. Table 4.2: Recommended Functions/Services Should IRCG provide the service? Services
Yes
Current Services not being provided
Functions under Sea Pollution Act
Co-ordination of inland waterways
No
Overlapping Services 96
Water safety New Services
Co-ordination of inland pollution Co-ordination of mountain rescue
Co-ordination of cave rescue
Air ambulance Enhanced Services
Aerial surveillance Expansion of county emergency committees Automatic Identification Services
marine
System
VHF Direction Finding
Provision of ETV
Ancillary services (research and development)
96
IRCG should continue to play a key role in the dissemination of water safety information. However, we are recommending that the Maritime Safety Directorate should take over responsibility for the co-ordination of water safety policy.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 101
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.2.6
Identity & Marketing
We recommend that the IRCG equipment replacement programme should include replacement of all IMES badged items. We recommend that consideration should be given to the possibility of a fully uniformed service for all full-time IRCG personnel. Full-time staff have agreed in principle to wearing a uniform. Our recommendation is that an audit of all IRCG’s premises should be carried to ensure that signage is up to date. We recommend that marketing of water safety needs to be reviewed. Greater use can be made of new media, video and television/radio. (also see recommendation 4.2.2, second bullet). 4.3 RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Establishing the IRCG as an agency is our preferred option for the IRCG. We appreciate that it would take time to implement this recommendation. However, on balance, we believe that the agency model is the most suitable one for the IRCG in the long term. The agency model provides the IRCG with the best opportunity to develop further as a modern best practice coast guard service with a clear identity and mandate. o
The IRCG should be established under appropriate legislation (e.g. similar to the Marine Institute Act, 1991).
o
In relation to the implementation of this option, we recommend the following: -
The IRCG should be a body corporate with perpetual succession, an official seal and power to sue and be sued in its corporate name and, with the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, to acquire, hold and dispose of lands or any rights.
-
The Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, with the consent of the Minister for Finance should be in a position to advance to the IRCG out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas, such sums as the Minister may determine for the purposes of expenditure by the IRCG in the performance of its functions.
-
The functions of the IRCG should be clearly set out. The recommended functions are set out in the functions section of this report.
-
The IRCG should be able to establish committees/working groups to assist and advise it in relation to the performance of its functions.
-
A Director of the IRCG should be appointed to manage and control the administration and business of the IRCG. The Director should hold office under a contract of service in writing containing such terms and conditions (including terms and conditions
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 102
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
relating to remuneration) as may be approved by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and the Minister for Finance. -
The Director should be appointed by the IRCG with the approval of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and can be removed from office at any time, by the IRCG with the consent of the Minister.
-
The Director should report to a board. The board should consist of a chairperson and a number of ordinary members (c. 6-8). These members should be appointed by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and should be selected by virtue of their expertise that would be of relevance to the IRCG.
-
The IRCG should accept into its employment every person who is a member of staff of the IRCG within the Department of the Marine and Natural Resource.
-
The IRCG should have the ability to recruit staff as it may determine with the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and the Minister for Finance.
-
Staff of the IRCG should be paid out of the moneys at the disposal of the IRCG with the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and the Minister for Finance.
-
The grades of the staff in the IRCG should be determined by the IRCG with the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources and the Minister for Finance.
-
The terms and conditions relating to tenure of office in relation to any person transferred by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources to the IRCG should not be less favourable than those prevailing in the civil service.
-
A member of staff of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources who is transferred by the Minister to the staff of the IRCG should not, while in the service of the IRCG, receive a lesser scale of pay or be made subject to less beneficial terms and conditions of service than the scale of pay to which the person was entitled.
-
In relation to staff transferred by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources to the IRCG, previous service in the civil service should be reckonable.
-
The IRCG should perform any of its functions through or by the Director or any other member of its staff duly authorised by the IRCG.
-
The IRCG should provide the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources with a written report of its activities during the year. This report should be provided to the Minister no later than six months after the end of the financial year.
-
The IRCG should be permitted to receive gifts of money, land or other property that are consistent with its functions.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 103
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.4 PHYSICAL AND TECHNICAL RESOURCES Number of Control Centres We recommend that IRCG should operate two Control Centres. Each location should be capable of supporting the entire IRCG national network and the configuration should allow for continuity of service in the event of any one individual Control Centre becoming unserviceable. We are not advocating that the status quo should be maintained, as technologically, it is possible to operate the IRCG service from two centres. In addition, significant cost savings can be achieved by reducing the number of centres to two (we estimate an annual staffing net saving of c. €214,000 exclusive of overtime and once off net savings of c.€925,000 in relation to physical/technical costs). The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources may wish to make use of existing physical resources. In our view, there are three options open: o o o
Build two new centres; Use and upgrade one existing centre and build one new centre; Use and upgrade two of the existing centres.
Control Centre Equipment We recommend that each Control Centre should be identically equipped and IT systems should be mirrored at each site to ensure accurate up to date data is available at all times. We recommend that control rooms should be equipped with modern resilient IT systems to improve efficiency and availability of service: o
o
An Integrated Communications Control System (ICCS) for the integration of the radio and telephony call taking/making requirements. These systems are also capable of handling paging and fax services. Based on currently available products, and depending on the final configuration of the IRCG network, the capital cost of a fully operational ICCS could be as high as €400,000 per control centre. This includes radio switching equipment that will be need to interface with the radio network; A typical ICCS system provides a touchscreen interface on which any quantity of the available channels may be presented at any one operator position97. Each control room should be configured to accommodate at least three operator positions, four in the case of option 2 as described in section 4.10. Depending on the selected option, an equal number of additional positions should be available at each location to cater
97
While it is true that there is a finite limit to the number of channels that may be presented, the screens can be set up to display a specific scenario/group of channels. Individual operators could therefore monitor the channels that they are only responsible for. The number of channels that can be presented on anyone screen is a system specific feature and is different for each ICCS supplier. It is only during a tendering exercise that this issue could be completely resolved.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 104
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o
o
for increased workload in times of emergency. Additional positions consist of a work area and a standard desktop PC with a touchscreen interface; Command and Control applications for the recording of incidents, data retrieval and provision of mobilisation assistance. Based on currently available products, the cost of a typical Command and Control systems has been estimated at €600,000 per control centre. This estimated cost is based on current market knowledge; IT systems based on Open Standards enable simplistic control room reconfiguration, relocation and system expansion.
We are of the view that monitoring facilities of all radio and telephony channels, as well as incident data, should be made available for the Divisional Controller/Deputy Divisional Controller to monitor ongoing incidents. Based on currently available systems, the proposed introduction of an ICCS and Command and Control systems could provide this facility. Ergonomics We recommend that control room layout should allow for good eye contact between the SMC and all operators. Such a configuration will promote teamwork and discourage the possibility of independent action and operators working in isolation. The current IRCG control room configurations do not allow for this with operators having their backs to either other operators, the SMC or both. Current IRCG control rooms are extremely cluttered with operators often having to reach between radio and telephony call taking systems. The recommended implementation of modern IT based call taking and incident logging/MIS systems, based on modern flat screen technologies, would provide call taking and logging systems with easy reach of the operator. We recommend that the control room environment should be suitably equipped to cater for increased workload during major incidents. This includes additional operator positions and duplicate fax systems. Network Our view is that the existing VHF/MF/HF remote sites and the proposed expansion to cater for the inland waterways should be supported by a resilient backbone network for the provision of a communications channel from each site back to the control centres. Options for the provision of the backbone network include: o
The expansion of the options proposed for the inland waterways requirement, estimated cost for an IRCG private microwave network - €8 million. The breakdown of €8 million for the provision of an IRCG private network is estimated as follows: At current market rates, a digital microwave link has been estimated at €49,000per site or €98,000 per link. A link is a circuit between two sites. 45 new links for inland waterways (45 x €98,000 = €4,410,000) Integrate in existing 15 sites (15 x €98,000 = €1,470,000) Provision of 3 x VHF channels at 45 sites (3 x 45 x €12,700 = €1,714,500) Site development works = (€400,000) All costs outlined are exclusive of VAT.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 105
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o
Going to the market for the provision of a resilient Virtual Private Network (VPN) to be supplied by an existing service provider. The ability to supply a resilient VPN may best be determined through detailed discussion with a number of service providers and a subsequent tendering process.
In the short term, the existing backbone circuit requirement, excluding inland waterways, could be enhanced by implementing one of the following options. It would be possible to implement a mixture of the options but this is not recommended as it would lead to complex equipment configuration and maintenance requirements. o
o
Upgrading the existing M1020 analogue lines to digital 64k circuits and investigating the possibility of using alternative technologies to provide a resilient solution. In general digital circuits are a more cost effective solution. However, the costs associated with implementing a digital circuit can only be determined once the location of the future control centres has been identified; Utilising sections of the existing Fire Service network to reduce the dependency on leased lines. The costs associated with this solution can only be determined through detailed discussion and agreement with the relevant Fire Service network managers.
We recommend that, where possible, with the exception of providing resilience, the implemented solution should consist of services or circuits from one supplier or service provider only. This will avoid unnecessary maintenance difficulties in times of circuit failure. We recommend that overlaying an alternative paging system over the existing VHF radio infrastructure will need to be investigated in detail. Consideration should be given to expanding the paging network to cater for coverage of the inland waterways and rivers. We believe that consideration should be given to maintaining a listen watch on Channel 16 for sometime after 1 February 2005. This is required to facilitate the expected slow uptake of DSC by the public. Implementation Recommendations Prior to implementation, the key issue of the number of control centres and their location has to be decided. There is no point in upgrading equipment in existing centres until the number of centres to be used is clarified. Therefore, the timeframe indicated below is subject to this issue. The ideal situation would be to implement all the elements in one ‘big bang’, but cost and the order of change involved would suggest that a phased approach is required. Depending on the location of the future Control Centres, the proposed Phase 1 implementation may require a configuration change to the existing leased line network topology. We are of the view that the right phased approach will be as follows: Phase 1 - Purchase and install an ICCS/Command and Control Systems (Year 1)
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 106
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
In Phase 1, the most pressing requirement would be the replacement of the current Motorola CentreCom with an ICCS and Digital telephone system. The Command and Control system would provide a very solid structure based on a new computer system to manage incident handling/recording, mobilisation and integration with radio, telephony and paging systems. Due to the value of such systems, and to meet the OJEC requirements for public sector organisations, a tender procurement exercise would be required. The projected timescale for tender competition and implementation would be in the region of 12 months. Phase 2 - Install DF/AIS and upgrade existing Paging Systems (Year 2) The DF/AIS and upgraded Paging Systems will utilise the leased line network implemented for Phase 1. Again a Public Procurement exercise will need to be completed. The projected timescale for tender competition and implementation would be in the region of 12 months Phase 3 - Install National Network and Extend Paging System to Inland Waterway Sites (Commence Year 1 – Implemented Year 3). The estimated timescale for the implementation of an IRCG owned National Network would be in the region of 36 months. This timescale is dependent on the completion of the following preliminary tasks (commencing in Year 1):
User requirement capture Site identification Network design Tender document preparation.
Should the IRCG wish to pursue any of the alternative options such as, a network provided by a telecommunications service provider or the use of the Fire Service Network, the implementation time may be reduced to between 12 and 24 months. This would require the completion of the same preliminary activities in year 1 as described above. 4.5 OPERATIONS / PROCESSES We recommend that the IRCG should up-date their Operational Procedures Manual. This should take account of the proposed enhanced services and the proposed new structures. We recommend that the Station Officer should also act as the SMC whilst on duty. The Station Officer may nominate a member of staff to act as SMC for an incident. Our view is that manual procedures should be minimised. The IRCG should make use of currently available IT applications designed specifically to enhance operational efficiency, improve recording procedures and to ensure that good quality information becomes increasingly available. Each year, a full risk evaluation should be conducted to evaluate the daily and seasonal watch level requirements. This evaluation requires more detailed data on the type of incident (e.g.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 107
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
insignificant, minor, moderate, major) and the volume (level of activity in the control room). The UK Coastguard has outlined the following as generic hazards for setting watch levels: o o o o o
Predicted sudden and adverse changes in weather conditions; Levels of commercial shipping, fishing vessel, recreational boat and shore based recreational activity; School holidays; Time of day, weekend or public holidays; Tide time.
This may result in the IRCG operating at lower manning levels where less risk is identified. In exceptional circumstances, higher manning levels may be required to deal with particularly serious incidents (e.g. additional staff called upon). Flexibility in work practices will enable the IRCG to address this point. 4.6 STAFF ISSUES We recommend that additional sources for recruitment of Radio Officers / Watch Officers will have to be pursued. We believe that a number of options are open to the IRCG: o
Recruit holders of relevant third level qualifications (e.g. the National Diploma in Engineering in Marine Engineering or Marine Science could be considered). The aim of these courses are to provide a sound knowledge of marine engineering, nautical science and all aspects of maritime affairs. or
o
Direct entry from the Merchant Navy, Naval Service, recreational vessels, fishing vessels with appropriate current sea going experience and a GMDSS qualification that would allow them to use radio equipment on an Irish vessel. or
o
Recruit school leavers with appropriate organisation and communication skills. A basic knowledge of the sea would be desirable. These recruits would need to go through a structured training programme which combines with continuous on the job training and sea going experience.
Formal promotion criteria should be communicated to staff, which identify the knowledge, skill, ability and other criteria (such as service time necessary at the current position) required in order to be promoted and this criteria should be strictly adhered to for progression to higher level positions. We recommend that the IRCG should investigate the possibility of forging greater linkages with educational establishments, particularly the new training college in Haulbowine in County Cork once it is established. We recommend that all stages of training should include continuous assessment.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 108
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
We have made additional provisions in relation to training (see section 4.10 – Resources and Structures). 4.7 COMMUNICATIONS We recommend that team briefings should be carried out by management (above divisional controller and training officer level) on a quarterly basis at each site where full-time IRCG staff are located. We recommend that an IRCG Intranet should be developed. We recommend that the IRCG Internet site should be updated regularly. We recommend that a quarterly newsletter should be published for full-time staff and the volunteers. We recommend that partnership (between management and staff) should be continued. 4.8 LOGISTICS AND EQUIPMENT We recommend that an electronic stock control system for the General Stores (Blanchardstown) should be scoped and installed urgently. We recommend that a formal on call/availability system should be put in place in relation to the calling out of engineers. We found that there is a variety of equipment within the IRCG. We recommend that all equipment to the volunteers should be standardised on a phased basis. We recommend that the General Stores be ergonomically assessed (e.g. shelving) and we also recommend that a health and safety audit be conducted (e.g. storage of pyrotechnics in the General Stores). 4.9 VOLUNTEERS Training and exercises should be conducted with the various emergency system components in order to maintain proficiency and safety. Training, and especially exercises, allow early detection and correction of procedural and equipment problems before an emergency arises. We recommend that five full-time Sector Officers should be appointed to oversee and co-ordinate the operation of the 52 Coastal Units. Additional Sector Officers may be required once the inland waterway network survey has been completed. The Sector Officers should report to their respective Divisional Controller in relation to administration and to their respective Training and Operations Officer in relation to training and
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 109
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
equipment. (also see section 4.10 in relation to the proposed new structure). We have not recommended any Sector Officers for inland waterways as this is dependent on the inland waterways survey that is currently being conducted by an independent consultant. We recommend that each Sector Officer should have responsibility for approximately ten coastal units. In addition, Sector Officers should be available at the request of management to attend and support IRCG staff at specific incidents. We recommend that Sector Officers should have relevant SAR, team leading, cliff climbing, boat handling, training and administrative experience. In addition, Sector Officers could be recruited internally from suitably qualified staff. We recommend that each Sector Officer should be based in their own locality using one of the coastal units within their area as their administrative centre. We recommend that each Area Officer should report to their respective Sector Officer. We are of the view that each Coastal Unit should have be capable of: o o o o o o o o o o o
Manual handling Using and understanding an ordnance survey map and admiralty chart to give and receive positions Using a VHF set in accordance with the restricted certificate in radio telephony Search and recovery Operating safely and effectively with the IRCG helicopters Using pyrotechniques properly Understanding nautical terms and be capable of completing designated knots Certification in first aid Understanding basic meteorology Understanding the role of the IRCG Undertaking a safe recovery of bodies and wreckage.
Therefore each unit should be trained to be proficient in each of these tasks. We recommend that the coastal unit advisory group include capacity for a technical commission. The IRCG is heavily dependent on its voluntary infrastructure. We recommend that the IRCG voluntary infrastructure should be maintained and payment of expenses should be limited to cover basic costs and call out payments. This should be maintained as a principle of the IRCG. The level of payments has not been altered since 1996/7 and should be assessed. 4.10 4.10.1
RESOURCES & STRUCTURES Overview of Staffing
Figure 4.10 overleaf illustrates the proposed new structure of the IRCG. The position on the chart is not representative of rank.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 110
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
We believe that the proposed structure (e.g. three divisions) outlined can be used in whichever model the IRCG decides to adopt (e.g. agency, integrated into the MSD or remain within the Department). The number of staff outlined in the structure overleaf is a reflection of the agency model. Fewer staff will be required if the IRCG remains within the Department or has a closer relationship with the MSD. There would be no need for the following staff as the IRCG would have the support of Department staff: IT Manager, Technical and Web Support, Legal Executive and Public Relations Executive. We envisage three heads of function responsible for Coast Guard Operations, Engineering and Information Technology and Volunteer and Support Services reporting to the Director of the Irish Coast Guard. The Assistant Director - Operations would be responsible for the co-ordination of all SAR operations (i.e. both coastal and inland waterways, cave and mountain rescue), the co-ordination of pollution / salvage operation and pollution planning. The Assistant Director - Engineering and Information Technology would be responsible for engineering, information technology (including internet and intranet) and technical services/support. The Assistant Director – Volunteers and Support would be responsible for policy (research and development, strategy, business planning, performance measurement, quality assurance, health, safety and welfare), administration (HR, finance, committee support and legal affairs), logistics (central stores, fleet maintenance, buildings programme and maintenance and maintenance of equipment), coastal, cave and mountain rescue and inland unit management and public / press relations including safety awareness.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 111
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Figure 4.10.1: Proposed Structure of the IRCG Director – Irish Coast Guard
Assistant Director Operations
SAR Operations Manager
Div Controller (Team 1)
Div Controller (Team 2)
Pollution/Salvage Operations Manager
Pollution Planning Officers*3
Assistant Director – Volunteers & Support
Assistant Director Engineering & IT
Electronics Officer *3
IT Manager
Senior Engineering Officer
Technical & Web Support *1
Deputy DC * 2
Policy, HR & Admin Manager
HR *1 Payroll*1 Finance*1 Admin*4 PR *1 Legal Executive *1
Logistics Manager
Stores Services Attendant *2
Volunteer Unit & Training Manager
4 OTOs
5 Sector Officers
Engineering Officer *2
Service Attendant *2
Watch Officers
Director’s Personal Assistant
: New positions. In the logistics area, there is already 1 Stores Services Attendant so there is 1 new position. In the administration area, there may be a requirement to recruit a Legal Executive particularly if the recommendation in relation to the establishment of the IRCG as an agency is implemented. There will also be one new OTO in the Volunteer Unit with responsibility for cave and mountain rescue.
Watch Officers
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
See options outlined in Tables 4.10 (b) & (c)
Page 112
Volunteers (inclusive of enhanced functions under inland waterways)
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 113
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Coast Guard Operations We recommend that Operations be divided into two distinct sections – o o
SAR Operations; Pollution/Salvage Operations.
We recommend that the Operations Division be headed up by an Assistant Director and with a SAR Operations Manager and Pollution/Salvage Operations Manager reporting in. We recommend that two Divisional Controllers report to the SAR Co-ordination Manager. We recommend that the two Divisional Controllers be located at one centre (in the case of option 1) or one Divisional Controller in each of the two centres (in the case of Option 2). Each Divisional Controller would have a team of Station Officers and Watch Officers reporting to him/her and each team would have responsibility for a geographic area. Both teams would have the technology to cover the whole country if one centre went down. (see table 4.10 (a) below). Table 4.10 (a): Proposed Structure of the Control Centre Teams ( 2 teams with 3 shifts) Team 1 Divisional Controller
Team 2 Divisional Controller
Team 1a - Day
Team 2a - Day
Team 1b - Evening
Team 2b - Evening
Team 1c - Night
Team 2c - Night
We recommend that the Divisional Controllers be supported by two Deputy Divisional Controllers. They should assist the Divisional Controller in the day to day operational matters of the control centre(s). We outline two options in relation to staffing of the control centre(s). Option 1 The first option sets out two teams working in the same control centre (table 4.10 (b)). The second control centre (which would be in close proximity) would be unmanned (a cold site) and used only in the situation where the communications in the main control centre fails or where the centre has to be evacuated. Regular testing and training exercises should be held between the two centres to ensure continuity of service in the event of any one individual control centre becoming unserviceable. In this model, if for some reason, one team is much busier than the other on a given day (e.g. one team has a major incident), there is flexibility to allow staff to transfer across to the busier team in order to provide additional support. In this model, there should always be one Station Officer on duty and five Watch Officers.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 114
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
We estimate that the full complement of Watch Officer staff would be 34 under Option 1. In addition, we recommend the appointment of one additional Watch Officer (as cover while staff are on training courses) bringing the total complement of Watch Officer staff to 35. The teams would be managed by two Divisional Controllers and a two Deputy Divisional Controllers. Table 4.10. (b): Option 1 – Teams located in one centre Shift Numbers
Team 1
Team 2
Number on Day Shift
3
3
Number on Evening Shift
3
3
Number on Night Shift
3
3
1798
17
Total Number of Staff Required Option 2
The second option sets out two teams working in separate control centres. Both centres should be identically equipped in order to ensure continuity of service in the event of any one individual control centre becoming unserviceable In this model, there should always be one Station Officer on duty in each centre and three Watch Officers by day and evening and two Watch Officers in one centre and three in the other centre by night. We estimate that Watch Officer staff would be 42 under Option 2. Similar to Option 1, the teams would be supported by two Divisional Controllers and two Deputy Divisional Controllers. The model is outlined below in table 4.10. (c) below. Table 4.10. (c): Option 2 – Teams located in two Centres Shift Numbers
Total Staff
Team 1
Team 2
Number on Day Shift
8
4
4
Number Shift
8
4
4
Number on Night Shift
7
4
3
Total Number of Staff Required
42
2299
20
on
Evening
98
The number of staff required is calculated by taking the ratio of 5.5 and multiplying it by the number of staff on shift (3) and this gives a total of 17. 99 The number of staff required is calculated by taking the ratio of 5.5 and multiplying it by the average number of staff on shift (4 for team 1 and 3.66 for team 2) and this give a total of 22 and 20 respectively.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 115
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
We favour option 2 as both sites would be continuously manned.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 116
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
We have calculated the staff ratio for option 2 based on the following model: Table 4.10 (d): Calculation of Staff Ratio – Watch Officers
Total Gross Hours to be covered per annum Deductions per annum Annual Leave (Maximum)
Days
Hours
365
24
Days
Weeks
Total Hours 8760
31
Public Holidays
9
Privilege/Special days
3
Sick Leave
7
Training
15
Amount of time off
65
Total Working Weeks (52 weeks-13 weeks)
39
Annual Working Hours (41 hours X 39 weeks)
1599
Operational Position (8760 hours / 1599 hours)
5.47
13
We have calculated that the ratio is 5.47 (i.e. 5.47 Watch Officers to have one on watch). We have built in additional cover to increase the ratio to 5.5 (i.e. 22 Watch Officers in one location and 20 in the other location. This model provides for 15 days training per annum for each Watch Officer. Divisional Controllers and Deputy Divisional Controllers have not been included in the ratio but can be called upon in situations when a major incident is occurring. Work practice flexibility is important for this model to be successfully implemented. The latest composite international figures available in relation to staffing were compiled by the National Audit Office in the UK (1998). Table 4.10 (e) illustrates a comparison of the annual number of incidents handled by watch officers in 1996.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 117
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Table 4.10 (e): Number of incidents dealt with by coast guards per annum Country
Incidents per centre
Ireland Spain Canada Norway UK France Holland USA
465 180 233 66 538 875 1500 895
Average no. of watch officers per centre 15 12 15 2.6 14 22 29 11
Incidents per watch officer 31 15 16 25 38 40 52 81
Source: National Audit Office (UK), 1998 The average number of incidents handled by the IRCG over the past three years is 1719 incidents per year100. Hypothetically speaking, taking our recommended number of staff as 42, the average number of incidents per watch officer per year would be c.41. This is not unreasonable in comparison with the number of incidents per watch officer for other coast guards (e.g. UK – 38; France – 40; Holland – 52; USA – 81). When the cave and mountain rescue statistics are examined, there will be an additional 140 incidents per year (approximately) to be dealt with. This means that the average number of incidents per watch officer per year would be c.44. We are of the view that this is not unreasonable in comparison with the number of incidents per watch officer for other coast guards. We have not recommended additional Watch Officers in order to take account of the coordination of inland waterways as the survey of inland waterways traffic is not yet completed. There may be implications for the number of Watch Officers required as a result of the coordination of inland waterways search and rescue once the survey is completed. We have not recommended additional Watch Officers in order to take account of the possibility of the extension of the IMSRR to coincide with the IMPRZ. An accurate assessment of the number of additional incidents that will take place if the region is extended needs to be conducted and there may be staffing implications in relation to the appointment of additional Watch Officers as a result. Engineering and IT We recommend that Engineering and IT be led by an Assistant Director – Engineering and IT. The Assistant Director should have two separate teams reporting to him – Engineering and IT. Volunteers and Support Services We recommend that the Volunteers and Support Division be led by an Assistant Director – Volunteers and Support with a Policy and Administration Manager, a Logistics Manager and a 100
Incidents for 2001 – 1759; for 2000 – 1718; for 1999 – 1679.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 118
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Volunteer Unit and Training Manager (including inland, cave and mountain rescue) having responsibility for their particular areas and reporting in to the Assistant Director. Our recommended staffing numbers for the IRCG is illustrated in Table 4.10 (f). It is based on our:
knowledge of the IRCG’s processes and the work they entail; assessment of the IRCG’s workload (see Section 3.2 in relation to incident statistics); consultations with staff; consultations with external stakeholders.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 119
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Table 4.10 (f): Summary of Current and Recommended Staff Numbers Position
Current (including vacancies)
Recommended
7101
10102
1
3
8.5
11103
IT
-
2104
Engineering (excluding Chief Engineer)
6
6
Pollution/Salvage
1105
4106
SAR (Watch Officers)
46
35/42107
6
4108
Services Attendant
2
2
SAR Operations Manager
1
1109
Management Structure (above Regional Controller)
3
4
81½
82/89
Volunteers & Support Volunteer Unit & Training Logistics/Stores Policy / Administration Engineering & IT
Operations
SAR Divisional & Divisional Controllers
Deputy
Total
101
This figure includes current six OTO positions and one Regional Controller position. This figure includes five Sector Officers. The remaining positions are one Volunteer Unit & Training Manager (Regional Controller level) and three OTOs in the Volunteer and Training section (these already exist). The remaining one new OTO position is for cave and mountain rescue. 103 Includes the Director’s Personal Assistant. The Assistant Director, Volunteers and Support position is accounted for as part of the ‘Management Structure’ and not reflected in this figure. 104 The IT Manager position should be filled by one of the existing Deputy Divisional Controller positions. The IT Manager position carries significant responsibility and should be upgraded to Assistant Principal level. 105 We have allocated one of the vacant Regional Controller positions under this heading 106 Includes one Pollution/Salvage Operations Manager (Regional Controller level) and three Pollution Officers (filled by current OTO vacancies). The Pollution Officer grade should be equivalent to the OTO grade. 107 See Options outlined in tables 4.10 (b) and (c). 108 Three Deputy Divisional Controller positions are currently vacant. In our recommended structure, there is a requirement for two Deputy Divisional Controllers in the SAR Operations area. The other Deputy Divisional Controller should fill a position in IT area. Two Divisional Controllers should be assigned to the SAR Operations section and the remaining Divisional Controller should work in the Policy and Administration section as the Policy and Administration Manager. 109 Two Regional Controller positions should be allocated to the Training and Pollution functions. The remaining position should be in the SAR Operations area (i.e. SAR Operations Manager). 102
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 120
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 121
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.10.2 Staffing details Training / Pollution In terms of training / pollution, we recommend that a Pollution / Salvage Operations Manager and a Volunteer Unit and Training Manager be appointed at Assistant Principal Officer level (Higher) / Regional Controller Level. These positions (i.e. two Regional Controller vacancies) already exist within the IRCG, so there would be no additional cost implication. Six Operations and Training Officer positions already exist in the IRCG. We recommend that three of these should work in the Volunteer Unit & Training section and three should work in the Pollution / Salvage Operations section. We also recommend the appointment of one additional OTO with responsibility for cave and mountain rescue. In relation to the creation of five Sector Officers, two options are open: -
Appointment on a fixed term contract basis (e.g. 3 to 5 years), or Appointment on a permanent, pensionable basis.
We are aware that staffing practice in the civil service is to create fixed term contract posts in cases where, either: -
The work can be demonstrated to be of a fixed duration rather than on an ongoing basis. The rate of remuneration within civil service structures prevents recruitment of suitably qualified resources.
We are of the view that neither of the above conditions apply to the outstanding Sector Officer resource requirements in the IRCG. Our preferred option therefore is in relation to creation of permanent, pensionable staff positions. We are of the view that they should be appointed at Executive Officer level. Logistics / Stores In terms of logistics / stores, we recommend that the proposed Logistics Manager post be appointed to Assistant Principal Officer level. The key responsibilities of the Logistics Manager would include stores and inventory control policy and processes, procurement, supplier selection and item specification and standards policy, budget management and compliance, fleet management, equipment maintenance, policy and processes, asset register maintenance and audit. In addition, to the current Services Officer in the General Stores, we recommend the appointment of a further Services Officer. Policy / Administration In relation to administrative / clerical resource requirements, we are of the view that a resource at Divisional Controller level should be posted to the position of Policy, HR and Administration Manager. One of the three divisional controller posts could be used for this (given a two centre model).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 122
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
The administration structure should be restructured to account for the following functions – HR, finance, PR, administration and legal. There should be two higher executive officers (already existing), three executive officers (one new position) and 4 clerical officers (already existing). In addition, full-time clerical support is required for the Director (one new position). In relation to the member of the administrative team based in Cork, this needs to be assessed in light of the location of the administrative section of the IRCG (i.e. all other administration staff are based centrally in Dublin). We are of the view that the administration section should carry out ‘key administrative tasks’ for the IRCG. However, each section of the IRCG should carry out their own day-to-day administration. IT It is our view that staff will have to be recruited to develop and maintain IT systems and web-support. The IT Manager should be appointed at the equivalent grade of Assistant Principal (taken from one of the existing Deputy Divisional Controller positions and upgraded to Assistant Principal) and a technical and web support resource should be appointed at Higher Executive Officer level (new position). Engineering There are no additional staff proposed for the engineering section. In relation to the engineer based in Cork, this position needs to be assessed in light of the selected locations for the two proposed control centres. SAR Watch Officers We are recommending that the IRCG should reduce its number of Control Centres from three to two. There are currently 46 Station Officers and Watch Officers based at the three Centres. We have outlined two options both based on a two Centre model. Option 1 recommends 35 Station and Watch Officers and option 2 recommends 42 Station and Watch Officers. The Watch Officer grade is currently at Executive Officer (Higher), that is, €21,658-€35,228. Taking €29,414 as the median salary on the Executive Officer (Higher) scale110, we estimate that the total cost of Watch Officers salaries would be €1,943,918 inclusive of employer PRSI, pension and direct overhead costs but exclusive of overtime and shift allowance payments. Based on our two models, the cost of Watch Officers salaries under option 1 would be €1,479,068 and €1,774,881 under option 2 inclusive of employer PRSI, pension and direct overhead costs111 and exclusive of overtime and shift allowance payments. There are currently two Services Attendants employed on a full-time basis and we are of the view that there should be no increase in staffing in this area.
110 111
Actual salaries and overtime figures unavailable. Costs are inclusive of employers PRSI pension contribution and direct overhead costs (43.67% in total).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 123
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Regional Controller In terms of SAR Operations, we recommend that a SAR Operations Manager be appointed at Assistant Principal Officer level (Higher) / Regional Controller Level. This position (Regional Controller) already exists within the IRCG, so there would be no additional cost implication. Management Structure (above Regional Controller) The grade of Director should be reviewed. The primary issue relates to the fact that two grades, Principal Officer and Assistant Principal Officer, cover the ten most senior people within the organisation. In addition, when we compared the Director’s position with that of other agencies, we found that they were all at a higher grade. The position of Assistant Director - Operations (Chief of Operations) and Assistant Director Engineering and IT (Chief of Engineering) exist within the IRCG’s current structure. It is our view that the proposed position of Assistant Director – Volunteers and Support should be pitched at a similar level. Table 4.10 (g): Summary table of proposed new positions in the IRCG: Proposed new position
Number of appointments
Sector Officers – Volunteer Unit Logistics Manager - Logistics OTO (Cave and Mountain Rescue) Services Officer - Logistics Administrator – Policy, HR & Administration PA to Director IT Technical Support Assistant Director – Volunteers and Support
5 at Executive Officer level 1 at Assistant Principal Officer level 1 at Radio Officer II level 1 at Services Attendant level 1 at Executive Officer level 1 at Clerical Officer level 1 at Higher Executive Officer level 1 at Principal Officer level
As part of our recommendations in relation to staffing, there is also the requirement to upgrade the IT Manager position (we are using one of the vacant HEO positions – deputy divisional controller) to Assistant Principal Officer level. These new positions are offset to some extent by the proposed reduction of three Control Centres to two whereby under option 1, there would be 11 less Watch Officers and under option 2, there would be 8 less Watch Officers. 4.10.3 Change Management Given the level of difficulty in managing a significant change process and staff concerns, the IRCG should weigh up the benefits and costs of: Introducing the changes quickly (e.g. over a period of one to two years). This would raise the issue of redundancy and / or early retirement for staff who would not be in a position to retrain for alternative roles. or
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 124
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Alternatively, a more prolonged implementation plan could be put in place, possibly over a five to seven year timeframe, during which staff would either retrain for alternative roles (e.g. training, pollution, sector officers, logistics, administration) or prepare for early retirement. Given the level of difficulty in managing a significant change process of moving to two centres and the issues to be addressed for individual members of staff, the IRCG should consider the benefits and costs of: o
Introducing the change quickly (e.g. over a period of one or two years). This would bring into focus, the issue of redundancy and / or early retirement for staff who are not in a position to retrain for alternative roles; or
o
Implementing change over a more prolonged period (e.g. over a period of five to seven years).
In our view, it is feasible and desirable that the changes are introduced over a two year period. If the implementation of change occurs over a longer period of time, there are a number of disadvantages: o o
o
o
4.11
There would be an annual recurring cost of €400,000 plus (the cost of carrying the additional watch officers) Some of the IRCG’s current equipment is reaching the end of its lifespan. For example, when the IRCG take on the additional responsibility in relation to coordinating inland waterways SAR, if they keep the same equipment, the ‘CentreCom’ would have to be expanded. This would require additional space in an already cluttered office environment. The CentreCom itself may be at risk in that it may not be supported by the manufacturer in the future. The only advantages for implementing change over a more prolonged period would be that it could possibly be more easily implemented from an organisational / change management perspective and there would be a slight reduction on redundancy costs.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
In addition to the current performance indicators of the IRCG as outlined in section 3.11, we recommend that the following indicators could also be adopted: o o o o o o
Geographical coverage by VHF radio; Geographical coverage of helicopters; Geographical coverage of boats; Satisfaction of callers; Training standards for coastal teams achieved; Number of major emergency exercises;
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 125
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
o
o
4.12
Response times (time it takes to get to incidents) of: Helicopter; Boat; Cliff team; Other; Launch time (time it takes to get underway to incident) of: Helicopter; Boat; Cliff team; Other.
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend that a full review of the number of coastal units be carried out involving risk assessment and risk management requirements. In relation to the issue of decentralisation, physical location in the country is not a matter for this report. However, whatever government policy is in place will have to be taken into account by the implementation group. As stated previously, each location should be capable of supporting the entire IRCG national network and the configuration should allow for continuity of service in the event of any one individual Control Centre becoming unserviceable.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 126
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
4.13
KEY COSTINGS
Table 4.13 (a) is an estimate where available of the main cost elements. While this table and the report itself includes statements, estimates and projections with respect to key future costs for the IRCG, such statements, estimates and projections reflect various assumptions and are subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that such statements, estimates or projections will be realised. In addition, time value on money calculations have not been made. The illustrative key costings and actual costings may vary, and those variations may be material. Table 4.13 (a): Estimated Additional Costs for the IRCG
Key Costs Customers / Services Inland Waterways Communication network
Aerial Surveillance in relation to pollution Automatic Identification System Services VHF Direction Finding Emergency Towing Vessel Development of marketing in relation to IRCG and specifically water safety Physical Technical Resources Construction of control centres Fitting out of two control centres116 o Equipment Area o Power o Cooling for equipment area o Cooling for control centre o Fire detection and control o Security o Furniture Control Centre Equipment for two centres117 o Integrated Communications Control System o Command and Control Applications Pager replacement Pager Infrastructure (excluding inland waterways)
Estimated Recurring Operational Costs per annum €000 Operational costs not included 400112
Estimated Capital Costs €000
8,000 750-1,200114 1,005115
2,000-3,000113 20 Cost not available118 8 66 51 12 70 10 12 800119 1,200120 400121 550122
112
Estimated cost is €1,000 per hour based on 400 flying hours per year. Assessment of Cost and Benefit of ETV provision was calculated in the UK in 2000. The cost of four ETVs stationed at four locations over 10 years was expressed as a range between STG£68.6-STG£85.2 million. 114 A cost of between €50,000 and €70,000 has been estimated for the provision of shore based AIS base stations. We have estimated the cost based on 15 base stations. Although ship to ship systems are readily available at a reasonable cost, there is a limited number of manufacturers that currently provide shore based systems. 115 We estimate the cost as €67,000 per site / €1,005,000 for 15 sites. 113
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 127
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Key Costs (continued) Operations / Processes Staff Issues Communications Development of IRCG Intranet Production of Quarterly Newsletter Logistics and Equipment Electronic Stock Control System Equipment for Inland Waterways SAR, cave and mountain rescue Volunteers Additional volunteer, equipment and training costs for Inland SAR
Estimated Recurring Operational Costs per annum €000 See footnote123
Estimated Capital Costs €000 -
35124 5
50125 This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
This can only be ascertained once the survey of inland waterways in complete
116
Based on 70-100 square metres. Control Centre Equipment is inclusive of server and PC costs. 118 Dependent on factors outside of the scope of this study (e.g. price of land, location etc.) 119 Estimated cost is €400,000 per centre. 120 Estimated cost is €600,000 per centre. 121 POCSAG Paging Solution. Estimated cost of 1000 pagers at a cost per unit of €400. 122 This is the estimated cost of the network infrastructure using existing sites. There are 41 sites at a cost of €13,500 per site. The cost would be greater when inland waterways are taken into account. We estimate that an additional 45 sites would have to be found to cater for inland waterways. In this scenario, the total cost would be €1,161,000 (i.e. 86 sites at a cost of €13,500 per site). 123 Redundancy costs will also have to be taken into account and are not shown here. 124 Investment in Router hardware will cost c. €20,000. Basic rate ISDN at each of the 52 coastal unit sites is estimated at €208.82. Primary rate ISDN at the central site is estimated at €4,418.69. Recurring costs include annual rental per site, annual rental at the central site and usage cost per day. 125 We estimate that a basic package would cost c.€50,000. However, there is every likelihood that this package will need to be developed further and the estimated cost of a developed off the shelf product designed to meet the current market requirements would be in the region of €200,000. 117
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 128
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Resources & Structures Staffing126 o Assistant Director, Support (PO) o 1 Logistics Manager (AP) o 1 Services Attendant o IT & Web Support (HEO) o 1 OTO (Cave & Mountain) (ROII) o 5 Sector Officers (EO) o 1 EO (Administration) o 1 CO (Administration) o Total Cost Estimated savings through reduction in number of Watch Officers127
95 72 25 53 53 194 39 31 562 (214)128
Estimated Cost – Resources & Structures
348
Costs under the customer / services, communications (intranet), logistics, equipment and volunteers headings will be incurred irrespective of whether the IRCG opts for two control centres or three centres. Where costs savings (arising from using two centres as opposed to three) can be made these are in relation to the two areas of staffing and physical / technical resources. Some costs have not been estimated at this stage: o Operational cost of a new inland waterways communications network o Automatic Identifications System Services o Equipment for Inland Waterways SAR o Volunteer costs and training costs for Inland Waterways SAR o Redundancy costs
126
Median salary on the scale taken. Costs are inclusive of employers PRSI pension contribution and direct overhead costs (43.67% in total). In addition, there will be an additional cost if the Director of the Service is moved from the current grade of PO Higher to Assistant Secretary. 127 Median salary of Watch Officer taken. Shift allowance included. Overtime not included 128 Option 2 – 42 Watch Officers (see table 4.10 (c)).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 129
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
4. Recommendations
Table 4.13 (b) illustrates very broadly the additional savings that would be made by the IRCG in relation to two centres versus three centres. Table 4.13 (b): Savings – Two centres versus three Two Centres
Three Centres
Physical / Technical
Costs (€000)
Costs (€000)
Fitting out the Centres Control Centre Equipment Pager replacement & Infrastructure129
229
343.5
1,620
2,430
950
950
2,799
3,723.5
Staffing Net Saving – Staffing (Current Value: 2002)
Net Savings (€000)
924.5
214 (per annum)130
On the physical/technical side, by opting for two centres, the IRCG would make an estimated once off cost saving of €924,500.131 In addition, if the IRCG opts for two centres, they will have an annual recurring cost saving of €214,675 (i.e. having 4 less Watch Officers on the roster).
129
Estimate that there will be a similar cost. This is the estimated cost of having an additional 4 Watch Officers over the three centres (i.e. 46 staff versus 42). This figure is inclusive of PRSI, pension, direct overhead costs and shift allowances (27% of salary) but excludes overtime. 131 In relation to the two centres, this figure does not account for the purchase of a site(s) for the new centre(s) (location) or the construction costs. In relation to the three centres, this figure does not account for the upgrades that may be required to existing premises (e.g. extensions). 130
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 130
13 August 2002
S
5. THE NEXT STEPS 5.1
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIMEFRAME
The table (table 5.1) sets out a high level plan for the implementation of the key recommendations of this review. It is proposed that the implementation of this plan be categorised into: 1 2 3
Actions to be implemented immediately or as soon as possible Actions to be carried out within a year Actions to be considered over a longer timeframe (see paragraph below)
It is recognised that some of these actions depend on other factors (such as approval from the Department of Finance or time required to recruit suitable staff). In addition, given the level of difficulty in managing a significant change process and staff concerns, the IRCG should weigh up the benefits and costs of: Introducing the changes quickly (e.g. over a period of one to two years). This would raise the issue of redundancy and / or early retirement for staff who were not be in a position to retrain for alternative roles. Alternatively, a more prolonged implementation plan could be put in place, possibly over a five to seven year timeframe, during which staff would either retrain for alternative roles (e.g. training, pollution, sector officers, logistics, administration) or prepare for early retirement. In our view, it is feasible and desirable that the changes are introduced over a two year period. If the implementation of change occurs over a longer period of time, there are a number of disadvantages: o o
o
o
There would be an annual recurring cost of €400,000 plus (the cost of carrying the additional watch officers). Some of the IRCG’s current equipment is reaching the end of its lifespan. For example, when the IRCG take on the additional responsibility in relation to coordinating inland waterways SAR, if they keep the same equipment, the ‘CentreCom’ would have to be expanded. This would require additional space in an already cluttered office environment. The CentreCom itself may be at risk in that it may not be supported by the manufacturer in the future. The only advantages for implementing change over a more prolonged period would be that it could possibly be more easily implemented from an organisational / change management perspective and there would be a slight reduction on redundancy costs.
We recognise the difficulty of implementing change from a staff and from an organisational perspective. We recommend that the Department/management should be sensitive to the needs of staff (e.g. offer an early retirement education programme, offer financial advice).
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 131
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
5. The Next Steps
Table 5.1: Implementation Plan Action
Timing
Customers Services Fulfil obligations under the Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act, 1999 Co-ordination of inland waterways Construction of a national microwave network Identify suitable locations for inland IRCG volunteer units Negotiation of extension of declared resources to include inland waterways Review the overall committee structure Develop the use of modern technology to assist in water safety dissemination Handover of chairmanship of Marine Safety Working Group to the MSD Co-ordination of Mountain Rescue Co-ordination of Cave Rescue Aerial Surveillance in relation to pollution Expansion of the county marine emergency committees Implementation of AIS and VHF Direction Finding Provision of an ETV Establishing a research and development function Equipment replacement programme to include replacement of IMES items Relationships Establish the IRCG as an Agency Physical and Technical Resources Operate two control centres with mirrored IT systems and identical equipment Investigate an alternative paging system Operations / Processes Up-date Operational Procedures Manual & minimise manual procedures Staff Issues Appoint all Station Officers Review recruitment procedure and policy for Watch Officers Communications Carry out team briefings on a quarterly basis Develop an IRCG intranet Publish a quarterly newsletter to volunteers Logistics and Equipment Scope and install an electronic stock control system Formalise call out system for engineers Standardise all equipment to volunteers Ergonomically assess the General Stores Volunteers Appoint five Sector Officers Resources & Structures Implement proposed new structure and staffing Review grading of the Director
1 2 3 2132 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1
132
This should be considered following the publication of the independent consultants report on inland waterways traffic.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 132
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
5. The Next Steps
5.2
MANAGING THE PROCESS
Implementation will require considerable change management. Leadership The critical success factor for the effective implementation of change is leadership. A good plan and sound recommendations can and will languish without leadership. The IRCG will need a Change Management Working Group. The IRCG may require support from a competent facilitator on an ongoing basis to plan, control and monitor the internal changes required. The Process of Acceptance Management will have to devote considerable time and energy to ensure that there is both external and internal acceptance of the recommendations being proposed. 5.3
FUTURE GROWTH CONSIDERATIONS
We would recommend that process efficiencies, workload ratios, technical requirements and reporting structures are assessed on an annual basis with a view to ensuring effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report
Page 133
13 August 2002
S
APPENDICES Appendix A: Review of Organisational Structures A. Technical Aspects 1. To evaluate the requirements of the Irish Coast Guard service in terms of: i) Control centres and all equipment therein ii) Remote control communication network links iii) MF/HF voice communication systems iv) National VHF Voice communications v) National Digital Selective Calling networks vi) NAVTEX broadcast systems vii) Information technology systems and networks viii) Imminent and future communication requirements for all inland waterways and mountain rescue ix) Engineering facilities, resources and stores under the following headings: a. Staffing levels b. Maintenance centres c. Response requirements x)
Physical configuration of control centre buildings in light of a. b. c. d.
Operational needs Periodic evacuation requirements Communications infrastructure reliability Systems resilience.
2. Taking cognisance of A.1. above and B (ii) below, to evaluate other Coast Guard models in terms of the facilities and services available to Irish Coast Guard Centres and make appropriate recommendations. B. Operational Aspects To examine the operational needs of the service with particular reference to meeting the following requirements : i)
To evaluate the appropriate number of Coast Radio Stations required for day to day routine communications, weather and safety broadcasts, traffic management and marine emergency management (SAR, Marine Pollution, Wreck & Salvage, Safety Awareness).
ii)
To allow for future growth and requirements in the current functions of the Irish Coast Guard which include RTIS, inland rivers, lakes and waterways, mountain rescue and the possible extension of the Search and Rescue Region (SRR) and the possible expansion of oil industry activity off-shore.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix A)
Page 1
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
iii)
To determine staff ratios required to cover operations (workloading) - matching watchkeeping complement with demand (day to day operations including emergency management) and ensuring safety margins allowing for continuity and staff training.
iv)
To propose a staffing and organisational structure, taking into account the current Divisional structures and the recommendations of the PwC Review, also being aware of other areas of responsibility of the Coast Guard i.e. management of Coast Guard Units, stores, safety awareness, on-scene incident management, pollution, refresher training and training of voluntary and permanent staff, etc.
v)
To identify and recommend staff training to meet the skills and competencies identified in the new model
vi)
To review current practices and recommend quality control structures, service delivery systems and audit mechanisms.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix A)
Page 2
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix B: Staff Questionnaire
Deloitte & Touche Study of the Irish Coast Guard Staff Questionnaire
Name Division Grade & Position
Introduction Enclosed is a copy of the staff questionnaire for the Deloitte & Touche Study of the Irish Coast Guard. The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information from all staff relating to services and functions, customers, organisational structures and key issues facing the Irish Coast Guard Service. There are two main sections to the questionnaire: (1) Services and Customers and (2) Organisation and Resources. All staff are encouraged to complete the questionnaire as fully as possible in order to ensure full representation in the review process. Please attach an additional page if the space available is insufficient for your answers or if you have any other comments or information relevant to the review. Completed questionnaires will be treated as confidential and will be retained by Deloitte & Touche. Information provided and views expressed will be assimilated into the final report, however this will be done on a non-attributable confidential basis.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 3
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Please return your completed questionnaire in the envelope provided on or before August 29th, 2001. Thank you for your participation in the review process.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 4
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Services and Customers General What is your role within your division?
Current Functions Are these critical or ancillary functions / services to your division?
What are the key functions / services provided by your division?
Are you directly involved in delivery of these functions / services and to what extent?
In relation to the functions / services that you are directly involved in, please supply some background information about what is involved (the overall process or series of steps required) and the eventual output. Function / Service
Steps / Process
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Output
Page 5
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Current Functions - Continued In relation to the services that you are directly involved in, please describe how service delivery is quantified, what amount of time each service delivery takes, what volume is handled each year and what the key interactions are. Volume (typical Time (e.g. Unit (e.g. number of units Interactions Function / Service typical hours / distress call)) per year over (e.g. customers) days required) recent years)
In relation to the services that you listed, please describe what the performance standards (criteria) are, how these are measured, the performance record to date and potential risk areas. Standard (e.g. Current Measure (e.g. Potential risk Function / Service immediate performance no loss of life) areas response) record
How is quality measured?
Please list the general drivers of the services that you listed (e.g., customer demands, seasonality, government policies, regulatory requirements etc.) Function / Service
Driver
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 6
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 7
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Other Functions Please list the other functions / services that you think should be provided or dropped by the Irish Coast Guard and the reasons why these functions / services should be provided or dropped. Please also state if other functions / services not currently provided have been provided in the past, are under consideration for the future and why these functions / services are not currently in place – if known. Function / Service
Reason
Past
Future
Why Not Provided
Customers In relation to the functions / services that you listed, please state the external customers (e.g. general public), internal customers (e.g. other divisions) and any overlaps with other service providers (e.g. other divisions, other departments, etc.). Function / Service
External Customers
Internal Customers
Overlaps
Issues Relating to Services and Customers Considering the functions / services listed (both those provided and those not provided at present) and the customers and stakeholders mentioned, please state if there are issues to be resolved. Please also state if you have any suggestions relating to the resolution of each of these issues. Service/Customer
Issue
Possible Resolution
Please estimate future workload requirements in light of future growth, new functions, etc.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 8
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Organisation and Resources Structure What grade and position do you report to?
What grade and positions report to you (if applicable)?
Do you have a view on the current management reporting structure?
Do you have a view on roles and responsibilities? Are they clear?
Skills / Training What are the key knowledge and skill requirements in your role (e.g. managerial, technical, legal, interpersonal and/or administrative)?
What are the other key knowledge and skill capacities available within your division through other staff?
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 9
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
What are the additional key knowledge and skill requirements that need to be developed within your division?
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 10
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
What training needs do you have which have not been met?
Finance What level of funding does your area receive (if relevant)?
Are there financial constraints that effect service delivery?
Communications & Technology What technology is in use in your division (e.g. communication systems, information technology systems, broadcasting systems, etc.)?
What scope is there for greater use of technology?
What barriers are limiting the use of technology (e.g. training, costs, systems resilience etc.)?
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 11
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 12
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Physical What physical resources are necessary for effective service delivery in your division (e.g. control centre buildings, physical configuration, engineering facilities, transport, etc.)
What are the physical resource limitations are affecting service delivery (e.g. location, etc.)
Organisational Culture How would you describe the culture of your division? (e.g. open, closed, flexible, rigid, focused on the present, etc.)
How does it differ from the culture of other divisions or other private or public sector organisations?
How effective is communication (both written and oral) within your division? Is there scope for improvement?
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 13
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
How effective is communication between your division and your customers? Is there scope for improvement?
How would you describe morale within your division? Please give reasons and suggestions
Organisational Change What has been the impact of recent organisational change initiatives (e.g. Partnership or PMDS.)?
What are the key organisational issues facing your area / section?
What are the key organisational issues facing the Irish Coast Guard Service?
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 14
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 15
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Is further organisational change required? If so, in what areas and why?
What barriers (if any) are there to implementing further organisational change?
Are there any additional points which you feel are of relevance to this review?
Thank you for completing this questionnaire
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix B)
Page 16
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix C: List of Interviews Internal Consultations Name
Role
Dublin MRCC
Divisional Controller; 2 RO IIIs & Staff Workshop
Malin MRSC
Divisional Controller; 2 RO IIIs & Staff Workshop
Valentia MRSC
Divisional Controller, 2 RO IIIs & Staff Workshop
Area Officers
Workshop
Liam Kirwan
Director, IRCG
Geoff Livingstone
Chief of Operations, IRCG
Norman Fullam
Regional Controller, IRCG
Gerry Smullen
Chief Engineer, IRCG)
Chris Reynolds, Eugene Clonan, David McMyler
Operations Training Officers, IRCG
Administration
5 Staff, IRCG
Chris Burke
Coast Guard Stores, IRCG
Michael Guilfoyle
Assistant Secretary, DOMNR
Tony Fitzpatrick
Human Resources Division, DOMNR
Mirim Finnegan
Human Resources Division, DOMNR
Capt. James Kelly
Chief Surveyor, Marine Survey Office,
Mary Lally
Maritime Safety / Environment Division
John Keohane
Marine Leisure Division, DOMNR
David Glynn
Maritime Transport Division, DOMNR
Sara White
Sea Fisheries Division, DOMNR
Michael Daly & Keith Robinson
Petroleum Affairs Division, DOMNR
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix C)
Page 17
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix C (continued) External Consultations - Ireland133 Name Michael Vlasto Stephen Duffy Bill Shanahan Mark Mellet & team General John O’Brien & team Supt. Tom Murphy Sean Hogan Paddy Donnelly Comdt. Tony Gillick Colm Cronin Ken Geraghty Frank Nolan Philip O’Rourke Bill Nolan & team Frank Doyle Ian Dunn John Connaughton & Richard McCormick Capt. John Gillespie Gerry Burke Paddy Boyd Brian Kerr
Title/Organisation Operations Director, RNLI General Manager, CHC Helicopters Secretary, Community Inshore Rescue Service Naval Service Air Corps The Garda Síochána Chief Fire Advisor, Dept of the Environment Assistant Secretary, Revenue Commissioners Chief Fire Officer, Dublin Fire Brigade Irish Mountain Rescue Association Irish Cave Rescue Organisation Chairman, Irish Water Safety Association Chairman, Water Safety Development Officers Civil Defence Secretary General, Irish Fishermen’s Organisation Irish Aviation Authority Training Services Executive / Marine Services Manager, Bord Iascaigh Mhara Waterways Ireland Inland Waterways Association of Ireland Secretary General, Irish Sailing Association Director, Irish Chamber of Shipping
133
This table excludes the benchmark meetings. NECL met with coast guard representatives in the benchmarked countries.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix C)
Page 18
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix D: International Benchmarks Ireland Ireland Current Position No 2. Functions
Italy Sweden
Great Britain
France
Canada
Holland
USA
1. Agency 1. Agency SAR SAR
Inland Coastal MARITIME COMMUNICATIONS VHF AIS VTMIS POLLUTION Coastal
x
x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
-
x x
x x
x x
x (With French on Channel)
With other agencies X
x
Inland CONTINGENCY PLANNING Co-ordination Strategic Management of Maritime Traffic
x (Same as Italy) x (With English on English)
x -
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix D)
Page 19
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Co-ordination of Water Safety Co-ordination of Mountain Rescue Co-ordination of Cave Rescue Aerial Surveillance ETV ANCILLARY SERVICES R&D Divers as part of helicopter crew Offshore and Mountain Parachute Rescue Hovercraft Rescue Onshore Mobile Patrols Local Rapid Emergency Response Units CERTIFICATION OF MARITIME PERSONNEL Yes No INSPECTION Commercial Fishing Recreation LAW ENFORCEMENT Yes
x
-
x
Great Lakes only x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-
x x x x
x -
x -
-
x -
-
-
x
-
-
-
-
-
-
x x
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
x x x
x
x x
x x x -
x x x
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix D)
Page 20
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
No INVESTIGATION Commercial Fishing Recreation 3. Resources U niform full-time staff
x x x
x x x
x x
x x x
x x x
Uniform full-time
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix D)
Page 21
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Personnel
Funding (euro) Volunteers
Number of Centres
Equipment
81½
1400
9600
1140
-
-
60
16.5M 864
100M 500
395M None
110M 3100
-
304M 5000
10M -
3
1
13
18
7
5
1 and 1 cold site
600 Lifeboat Stations 250 Boats 5 Helicopters 3 Surveillance Craft
24 Rescue Boats 122 Light Crafts 3 Hydro Ambulances 1 Fast Patrol Vessel 18 High Sea Patrol 33 Fast Sea Boats 130 Coast
18 Rescue Vessels RNLI Helicopters Pollution Equipment ETV Surveillance Aircraft
Pollution Equipment ETVs Surveillance Aircraft Oil Dispersal Models
1600 Vessels c. 100 vessels 1 Fixed Wing Aircraft 4 Helicopters
Pollution Equipment Recovery vessels ETVs Surveillance Aircraft Oil Dispersal Models
4 Helicopters 25 Boats Pollution Equipment
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix D)
Page 22
staff Uniform full-time staff 38000 Active Duty 8,000 reservists and 35,000 auxiliarists 8 district 1 Area 1 HQ 211 Aircraft 1,400 Boats
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Patrol Boats 9 Helicopters 13 Aircraft
Length of Coastline (km) Oil Dispersal Model 4. Personnel S tate standard training for Watch Officer (induction, SAR, refreshers)
5675
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix D)
2700
8000 x
Page 23
7500
5500
243,000
300 x
State standard training for Watch Officer (induction, SAR, refreshers) State standard training for Watch Officer (induction, SAR, refreshers)
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix E: Irish Coast Guard Declared Resources
A Declared Resources:
Coast Guard helicopters - 2 Sikorsky S61Ns at Shannon and Dublin 52 Coast Guard Units, 18 with cliff rescue capability and 13 with inshore rescue boats Marine Pollution Response Team (MPRT) 9 CIRS (Community Inshore Rescue Service) boats at Drogheda, Wexford, Tramore, Bunmahon, Bantry, Banna, Ballybunion, Kilkee and Cahore. Caherdaniel CIRS is in the process of being approved at November, 2001. RNLI - 31 lifeboat stations with 18 all weather boats (ALBs) and 19 inshore boats, 4 of which are co-located with the ALBs. Air Corps - 1 Alouette helicopter daylight only at Waterford Air Corps - 1 Dauphin helicopter 24 hour currently based at Sligo Airport Dublin Fire Brigade Marine Fire Response Maritime Local Authority Lifeguards Civil Defence both Maritime and Inland Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland - provide expertise on nuclear incidents Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) Medico Cork
B Additional Resources:
Air Corps Casa fixed wing aircraft Irish Naval Service vessels and divers Garda Siochana patrol cars, helicopter and divers Port Authorities UK Assets Vessels of opportunity (all vessels in the vicinity of an incident) CIL (Commissioners of Irish Lights) Fishery Officers Customs and Excise boats
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix E)
Page 24
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix F: Organisations that the IRCG interacts with (excluding Declared Resources and Additional Resources from Appendix E): Government Departments (Defence, Justice, Finance, Health, Environment, Arts Culture the Gaeltacht and the Islands, Public Enterprise) Revenue Commissioners Irish Chamber of Shipping Irish Passenger Boat and Ferry Operators Central Fisheries Board Irish Sailing Association Bord Iascaigh Mhara Inshore / Off-Shore Oil Industry Health Boards Harbour and Local Authorities Irish Water Safety Association Irish Mountain Rescue Association Irish Cave Rescue Organisation Water Safety Development Officers Irish Fishermen’s Organisation Irish Fish Producers Association Royal Navy Helicopters RAF Commissioner of Irish Lights The Health and Safety Authority Waterways Ireland Inland Waterways Association of Ireland Irish Canoe Union Irish Underwater Council Irish Surf Association Irish Ports Association Fishermen’s Co-operatives Dúchas Oil Spillage Response Ltd Briggs Marine Environmental Services DV Howells Ltd Pollution and Waste Services International Salvage Union Bonn Agreement Member States The EU Management Committee for Marine Pollution (MCMP)
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix F)
Page 25
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix G: Communications Infrastructure VHF Network Each remote site has a number of operational channels. It should be noted that the following channels are available at all sites:
Channel 16 (International Distress) Channel 67 (Primarily a secondary distress channel with paging piggybacked) Channel 70 (DSC)
Control Centre
Dublin
Valentia
Malin
Remote Site Carlingford Dublin Wicklow Rosslare Mine Head Cork Mizen Bantry Valentia Shannon Galway Cliffden Belmullet Glen Head Malin
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
Operational Channels 67 04 70 67 83 70 67 87 70 67 23 70 67 83 70 67 26 70 67 04 70 67 23 70 67 24 70 67 24 70 67 04 70 67 26 70 67 83 70 67 24 70 67 23 70
Location
85 28 28
85
Ravensdale, Dundalk Windgate Road, Howth Wicklow Head, Wicklow Shelmaliere, Wexford Dungarvan, Co. Waterford Cork Airport, Cork Mt. Gabriel, Schull, Co. Cork Knockgour, Co. Cork Kilkeaveragh, Co. Kerry Knockanore, Co. Kerry Tonabrucky, Galway City Cregg Mt. Cliffden Corclogh, Belmullet Glencolumbkille Co. Donegal Malin Head, Co. Donegal
NAVTEX The IRCG operates two NAVTEX transmitters and the service is provided from two locations:
Malin Head Mizen Head
The Mizen Head site is unmanned and connected by leased circuit to Valentia. The requirement to locate the NAVTEX service at Mizen Head was required due to the necessity to provide comprehensive port coverage in the South West region.
MOBILISATION Paging Network
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix G)
Page 26
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Remote paging of almost 884 IRCG staff is achieved through the organisation’s own private VHF paging network. The paging system utilises a combination of channel 67, available at all 15 remote sites, on the VHF network and an additional thirty six (36) remote paging repeaters. RESILIENCE The following table provides a summary of the level of resilience built into the VHF network. Control Centre
Dublin
Valentia
Malin
Remote Site Carlingford Dublin Wicklow Rosslare Mine Head Cork Mizen Bantry Valentia Shannon Galway Cliffden Belmullet Glen Head Malin
Operational Channels 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67
04 83 87 23 83 26 04 23 24 24 04 26 83 24 23
70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
85 28 28
85
Resilience Main and Standby for all Channels Main and Standby for all Channels Main and Standby for all Channels Main and Standby for all Channels Main and Standby for all Channels No Standby on Channel 67 Main and Standby for all Channels No Standby on Channel 67 No Standby on Channel 67 No Standby on Channel 67 Temporary Site No Standby units Main and Standby for all Channels Main and Standby for all Channel Main and Standby for all Channel No Standby on Channel 67
MF/HF NETWORKS Both Main and Standby equipment is installed at the following locations:
Belmullet Rosslare Valentia Malin
All NAVTEX systems have main and standby transmitter configurations.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix G)
Page 27
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix H: Interlinking Circuits Remote Site – Local Control Centre M1020 (Analogue leased circuits) are used to connect each of the Control Centres to the respective remote sites. Because these circuits are analogue in nature there is a requirement to provide one M1020 circuit for each radio base station (Channel – as detailed in section 4.3) at an individual site. This means that either four or five M1020 circuits are required to provide connectivity from the remote site back to the Control Centre.
Malin Head MRSC
Glen Head Belmullet Carlingford
Clifden Dublin MRCC
Galway
Wicklow Head
Shannon Valentia MRSC
Rosslare Mine Head Cork
Bantry Mizen
Control Centre – Control Centre M1020 circuits are also used to provide the capability for the MRCC to have remote control of the entire radio network. These circuits also allow each to the MRSCs to have control of the radio MRCC radio network. Location DublinMRCC Valentia MRSC Malin Hd MRSC N/A Dublin MRCC YES YES N/A NO Valentia MRSC YES NO N/A Malin Head MRSC YES
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix H)
Page 28
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix I: VHF Radio Coverage The following diagram is a theoretical plot (coverage indicated by blue overlay) of the VHF radio coverage available from the 15 IRCG sites (as indicated by green squares). Although the actual coverage may be better, the plot highlights areas where coverage may be unreliable.
MF/HF Radio Coverage It was not possible to produce a predictive plot of the MF/HF radio coverage. This is due to the limited range of available vector mapping and the ground/sky wave propagation characteristics of radio transmission in the MF/HF bands.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix I)
Page 29
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix I)
Page 30
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix J: Telecoms Infrastructure The diagram below highlights the telecommunications infrastructure operational in August 2000. Since then telecommunications companies have made very little investment and the broadband network today is very similar. One conclusion that may be drawn from this diagram is that outside of the main backbone, eircom are the only operator with significant telecommunications infrastructure. Almost all of the existing IRCG VHF/MF/HF sites are located off the main telecommunications backbone. Consequently, the majority of the IRCG sites are situated at the end of isolated spur circuits. This makes it almost impossible for the existing service provider to deliver a resilient solution at the IRCG remote sites.
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix J)
Page 31
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Appendix K: Combined Fire Services Network
Crockaulin
Holywell Hill Arranmore Mongorry Hill Malmusog Barnesmore
Cashelgarren
Dooncarton
Truskmore
Baninama
Rathlee
Clairmont Cairn
Slieve Glah
Croaghmoyle
Minaun
Sheegorey
Mohercrom
Treannagleragh
Corraun
Fairymount Castlebar Sleive Bawn
Cregg
Cairn Hill
Mount Oriel
Mount Frewen
Screen
Abbeyknockmoy
Howth Tara St
Camp West
Camp East
Hill of Allen
Tonabrocky
Saggart
Cashlaundrumlahan
Wolftrap
Three Rock
Windgate Rossmore BrennansHill
Limerick
Kilcoole
Kilkenny Mount Leinster Additional Site
Carron Additional Site
Portlaw Nagles Caughan
Forth Mountain Waterford
Gurranbraher
Mullaghanish
Kilnafarna Mylane
Mt Gabriel
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix K)
Crosshaven
Page 32
Camp Munster
13 August 2002
Management Consultants
Appendices
Irish Coast Guard Study – Final Report (Appendix L)
Page 33
13 August 2002
