Docstoc

REPORT REPORT.doc - ICAO

Document Sample
REPORT REPORT.doc - ICAO Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                                  ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                  23/10/03




            TENTH SESSION OF ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP ON SAR (2003)

                               Torquay, United Kingdom, 15 to 19 September 2003



1.        REPORT OF THE TENTH SESSION OF THE ICAO/IMO JOINT WORKING GROUP
          ON HARMONIZATION OF AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND
          RESCUE

1.1     The tenth meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization/International Maritime
Organization (ICAO/IMO) Joint Working Group (JWG) on Harmonization of Aeronautical and Maritime
Search and Rescue (SAR) was held in Torquay, from 15 to 19 September 2003. Mr. U. Hallberg
(Sweden) was Chairman and the position of Vice-Chairman was temporarily unfilled. Mr. Peter
Dymond, Head of Search and Rescue, welcomed the joint working group (JWG) on behalf of the hosts,
the United Kingdom Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA). The Chairman welcomed the members,
advisors and observers of the group to the meeting and made reference to the fine venue and highly
professional arrangements made by MCA .

1.2       The experts who participated in the JWG/10 meeting are listed in Appendix A.

1.3      The chairman brought the need for election of a vice-chairman to the attention of the meeting.
This need arose out of the resignation, in 2002, of Mr. John Young, who was replaced as Australian
aeronautical member by Mr. David Cole. The chairman explained that it would be appropriate for the
vice-chairman to be an aeronautical SAR expert on account of the chairman being a maritime SAR
specialist. He called for nominations from the floor. None were forthcoming. The ICAO Secretariat was
asked for input. Mr. Brian Day advised that he had had discussions with Colonel Scott Morgan, the chief
of the United States Air Force rescue coordination centre (RCC), Langley Air Force Base. Col. Morgan
headed up an organization with the experience, capacity and expertise well able to support the JWG and
had indicated his preparedness to stand as vice chairman. He was duly nominated by Mr. Day, seconded
by Mr. Cole and duly elected unopposed. Mr. Cole advised his willingness to serve as vice chairman for
the duration of JWG/10 and was duly elected.




ae11a7e0-8fb7-4d9f-8eb3-46ddcccff0f3.doc
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                               -2-


2.     AGENDA ITEM 1: ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

2.1    The Group approved the draft agenda as given in Appendix B.

3.     AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF TERMS OF REFERENCE - FUTURE WORK
       OF THE JWG AND PRIORITIES

3.1      The terms of reference are contained in Appendix C. The chairman explained that ICAO had
requested that the form of the JWG should be in keeping with its guidelines for study groups and consist
of a maximum of eight aeronautical and eight maritime experts. That had been accepted by IMO, which,
however, requested that all IMO members should be invited to send observers. Delegates to the JWG
attend as SAR experts with global issues as their focus; their status as citizens of various States is
incidental. In some cases, aeronautical and maritime members are of the same nationality. The chairman
explained that there was provision made for a separate maritime coordination meeting to be conducted in
parallel to the JWG. The JWG had agreed to the ICAO format for drafting reports. The chairman advised
that the meeting had an open mandate to make recommendations to ICAO and IMO on any matter
considered relevant to the harmonization of SAR, consistent with its terms of reference which addressed
matters of SAR policy and operational and technical procedures and practices. The chairman advised that
the JWG task was to develop recommendations. IMO and ICAO accept these recommendations as advice
and, as evident from past experience, customarily put JWG recommendations into effect.

3.2    The chairman called for consideration of the Terms of Reference. There were no calls for change.

4.     AGENDA ITEM 2.1: BRIEFING ON THE OUTCOME OF COMSAR 7 AND MSC 77

4.1     The IMO secretary, Mr. Vladimir Lebedev, introduced WP 10/2 providing information on the
outcome of and decisions made by COMSAR 7 and MSC 77 with respect to SAR matters such as the
adoption of proposed amendments to the SOLAS and SAR Conventions concerning measures and
procedures for the treatment of persons rescued at sea, amendments to the IAMSAR manual, and others.

4.2     Reference was made to Resolution 1 of the Florence SAR Conference which advanced the
concept of five regional MRCCs around the African coast.

4.3      Reference was made to the International SAR Fund (ISF). It still needed to be defined and
established. The Fund could benefit from proceeds from the sale of IAMSAR Manual volume 3 which is
required to be carried by all SOLAS ships from 1 January 2004. Thousands of ships will be required to
purchase this volume at a cost of twenty pounds sterling. The ISF could also be funded by donors. The
IMO MSC was seeking advice on the methodology for the establishment of ISF. This matter is
addressed further in a separate section of this report.

5.     AGENDA ITEM 2.2: BRIEFING ON THE OUTCOME OF ICAO ACTIVITIES
       RELATED TO THE JWG WORK

5.1      The ICAO secretary, Mr. Brian Day, briefed the group on the progress made in the adoption of a
comprehensive amendment to Annex 12 to the Convention of International Civil Aviation. The
amendment arose out of recognition for the need to more closely harmonize IMO and ICAO
documentation, starting at the highest level. Mr. Day referred to the desirability of RCC and RSC staff
being proficient in the use of the English language to minimize errors in the process of information
transfer. This need had found expression in Annex 12 in the form of a Recommendation. The
                                                  -3-                            ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


amendment proposal had benefited from input from many sources, not least the JWG. The version put to
the Air Navigation Commission at its preliminary hearing closely reflected the work of JWG/9.

5.2       ICAO had made input to the African SAR project presently being administered by the African
Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC) by assisting in the production of documents and in joining a team
to evaluate SAR systems in South Africa and Nigeria. ICAO had also contributed to a sensitisation
seminar convened at the training facility of the Air Traffic & Navigation Services (ATNS) training
facility, Johannesburg International Airport, at which a number of African State representatives attended.

5.3     The Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat representative emphasised the importance of the work completed
by ICAO in amending Annex 10 to the Chicago Convention which specified the minimum details to be
recorded when registering 406MHz ELTs. The same amendment brought ICAO and Cospas-Sarsat
documents into line by specifying a new ELT uplink frequency of 406.028MHz as part of the Cospas-
Sarsat frequency management programme. These provisions would become effective on 27 November
2003.

5.4      Mr. Dan Lemon (United States Coast Guard) offered the thanks of the JWG to the ICAO
representative for his leadership in ushering the proposed amendment to Annex 12 through the process of
State consultation and Air Navigation Commission hearings. Mr. Vladislav Studenov, Cospas-Sarsat
Secretariat, seconded Mr. Lemon‘s thanks to the ICAO representative, bringing the group‘s attention to
those parts of Annex 12 that evidence the close cooperation that exists between Cospas-Sarsat and ICAO.
The ICAO/Cospas-Sarsat collaboration had found expression in, for example, ICAO‘s requirement for
registration of 406 MHz ELTs and for States to nominate SAR Points of Contact for distribution of
Cospas-Sarsat alert and location messages.

6.      AGENDA ITEM 2.3: JWG ROLE IN FACILITATING IMPROVED SUB-REGIONAL
        COOPERATION

6.1     See item 5.5.

7.      AGENDA ITEM 3: PROVISION OF CONVENTIONS, PLANS, MANUALS AND OTHER
        DOCUMENTS AFFECTING SAR

7.1      No papers were submitted. The Chairman asked the meeting whether the matter should continue
to be listed as an agenda item. The meeting noted that some positive activity that had to do with printed
material and software indicated that progress had been made and that there was a potential for further
development. The meeting agreed that the matter should remain an agenda item.

8.      AGENDA ITEM 3.1: STATUS OF THE MARITIME SAR CONVENTION

8.1    The IMO Secretariat representative informed the meeting that at present 78 members had ratified
the SAR Convention, representing more than 50% of the world fleet.

9.      AGENDA ITEM 3.2: PROGRESS REPORT ON THE POSSIBLE ALIGNMENT OF THE
        IMO SAR AREA SAR PLANS, GMDSS MASTER PLAN AND ICAO REGIONAL AIR
        NAVIGATION PLANS

9.1     The chairman noted that this item had, over past JWG meetings, not attracted input and sought
advice from the meeting regarding the appropriateness or otherwise of retaining this agenda item.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                 -4-



9.2      Mr. Dan Lemon advised the JWG that the United States and New Zealand had concluded an
agreement to bring their SAR regions into alignment. To have the topic included in JWG ToRs was a
positive reminder of the need for such cooperation. Capt. Ron Miller (Canadian Coast Guard) supported
the retention of the item on the agenda. Mr. Vladimir Lebedev (IMO Secretariat) agreed that the retention
of the agenda item was important and suggested that the item title could be rephrased to include reference
to databases.

10.     AGENDA ITEM 3.3: PROGRESS REPORT ON POSSIBLE ALIGNMENT OF ICAO
        ANNEX 12 TO THE MARITIME SAR CONVENTION

10.1    Mr. Day advised that all consultation with respect to the proposed amendment to Annex 12 had
now been concluded. The task now rested with the ICAO Secretariat in the preparation of working papers
and a presentation to the Air Navigation Commission for its final hearing and the ICAO Council in its
consideration of the proposal for adoption. It was expected that the proposal would be adopted by the
ICAO Council and would become effective in 2004.

11.     AGENDA ITEM 3.4: FURTHER WORK ON THE IAMSAR MANUAL, AVAILABILITY
        FOR TRAINING INSTITUTIONS - PRIORITY ITEMS FOR AMENDMENTS

11.1     Major Kevin Grieve (Canadian Air Force) presented WP/1 SAR Debriefing. Canada had
presented a WP at JWG/9 to which the meeting had responded positively but with a request for some
changes. The meeting noted that those changes had now been made. The SAR debriefing form had been
constructed in a different format to conform to the requirements of the Maritime SAR Convention.
Reference to critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) had also been deleted for the sake of its inclusion
elsewhere in the manual‘s text. Core information had not otherwise changed. The meeting agreed that
CISD material, as amended for minor ―house-keeping‖ purposes, would be better included in the
IAMSAR Manual elsewhere. There was some discussion as to whether CISD material should be
included in volume 1. The United States, Australia and the IMO Secretariat agreed to join with Canada in
further refining the document and in identifying where in the manual the amendment should be included.
A query was raised regarding debriefing of SAR units, facilities and users who were not normally
included in SAR operations debrief sessions. Although there was a logistical difficulty in getting such
participants to attend for debriefing, the meeting agreed that it was a worthy objective. The meeting
considered that non-dedicated SAR assets should be sent a simple SAR debriefing form for their input. It
was suggested that a small amendment to this effect should be drafted for volume 3. Canada volunteered
to draft a proposal.

11.2    Subsequently, JWG reviewed a draft proposal and agreed that it should be included in the
manual.

12.     RECOMMENDATION 10/1: THAT THE TEXT APPEARING AT APPENDIX D
        BE INCORPORATED AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE IAMSAR MANUAL,
        VOLUME 2.

12.1    The meeting noted that it was common practice amongst users that the IAMSAR manual was
copied for training but not for operational purposes. Discussion ensued as to whether the manual could be
made freely available for training institutions. Mr. Guy Beale, (United Kingdom Hydrographic Office),
reported that with respect to his office‘s publications, States wanting to use documents for training
purposes need only state what sections they want and licences for use could be made readily available.
                                                   -5-                             ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


The ICAO delegate advised the meeting that the cost of translating operational documents was very high
and that the ICAO Secretariat was dependent on income from document sales. The idea of a special price
applying for training institutions was advanced. Comment was made that to purchase all of volumes 1, 2
and 3 was expensive and there seemed to be a misperception at large that all users required all three
copies. In this regard, a suggestion was made that some form of title other than volumes 1, 2 and 3 might
assist in the three books being independently assessed for users‘ usefulness. It was also suggested that the
manual could be produced in a cheaper form for training.

12.2    The IMO Secretariat representative admitted that once documents were available on the internet,
access prices might be quite low. The group discussed the notion of the IAMSAR manual being made
available on a website on a subscription basis so that amendments could be readily posted by publishers
and easily accessed by users. It was suggested that the idea should be advanced through IMO COMSAR
to induce IMO Publications Section to continue planning and moving in this way. A web-based list of
amendments and their status were considered to be of benefit to the user community.

12.3    It was proposed that ICAO and IMO should develop a website showing SRRs.

12.4    The chairman suggested that there was a need to look at all 3 volumes of the IAMSAR Manual to
identify where work was required in updating, supplementing, deleting and amending text. New
circumstances pertained, for example, closer maritime/aeronautical harmonization had been achieved,
AIS was now the major marine traffic monitoring system throughout Europe and new security measures
had been introduced; all these changed aspects of service required supportive reference in documentation.
The chairman encouraged the meeting to consider changes in layout and organization of the manual and
how new objectives might best be met. A splinter group was convened under the leadership of Mr. Cole.
The splinter group subsequently reported as follows:

12.5    As a basis for maintaining and improving the manual, the splinter group recommended three key
concepts: Modernise, Minimalise, and Internationalise. The splinter group reported that the IAMSAR
Manual, together with an amendment service, should be web-based. Access to the web should be by code
which, as well as allowing access to the manual itself, would allow participation in an amendment
service. Users would need to be notified at the time of amendment issue, the means to be determined by
ICAO and IMO. Amendment should be by means of whole pages, dated and annotated with an
amendment reference number. The methodology presently employed by ICAO was seen as a good
system.

12.6    The splinter group considered there to be benefit in the number of volumes being reduced to two,
being mindful of numerous repetitions in volumes 1 and 2, although it acknowledges that once web-
based, the manual, and sections of it, will be readily available for downloading regardless of the number
of volumes. The splinter group considered that some relatively complicated sections of text should be
geared more to the minimal needs of many user States while being accessible in their entirety, perhaps by
hyperlink, to more developed States. This was in recognition of the early stage of development of most
user States.

12.7    As an overall comment, the splinter group saw advantage in the text being simplified and
generalised. There was scope for deletion of out-of-date and superfluous data. A mechanism needed to be
found for regular review of material. The splinter group foresaw readier reference being facilitated by the
proposed comprehensives indices which should be developed to the point of being electronically
hyperlinked. Some subject matter was in need of updating to accommodate contemporary realities; these
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                  -6-


included security matters, the introduction of AIS, carriage of dangerous goods and an additional section
that adequately addressed the conduct of aeronautical SAR operations over land.

12.8     The splinter group saw scope for expansion of volume three in the field of SAR unit (SRU)
training, necessitating an organisational link between the JWG and training facilities. On-scene-
coordinator training was a case in point. There needed to be a system established for the incorporation of
IMO COMSAR and MSC circulars into the manual.

12.9   The splinter group was persuaded that more emphasis needed to be given to preventive SAR.
This would involve inclusion of some quasi-regulatory material.

12.10 The splinter group believed that added value would be derived from inclusion of human factors
material. This was particularly appropriate to the performance of SAR, which is an essentially human
centred activity both in its practice and its purpose.

12.11 The splinter group noted that references to various subjects were scattered throughout various
sections and subject matter needed to be consolidated. Ideally, the splinter group would have liked to see
sequential treatment of subject matter in accord with the actual prosecution of SAR events. Training
programme material that rests on the guidance of the IAMSAR Manual would benefit.

12.12 The splinter group saw distinct benefit in soliciting feedback from the user community. A
mechanism for this should be found.

12.13 The process for implementation of these needs requires that ICAO and IMO be formally advised
of the need for manual amendment. This would require formal submission of these perceptions to IMO
COMSAR and the ICAO Secretariat. Given that the IAMSAR manual had been in use for five years, the
splinter group expected that worthwhile feedback would be forthcoming from the user community. It was
for ICAO/IMO to establish a communication link that would facilitate this input.

12.14 In conclusion, the joint working group considered the objective of IAMSAR maintenance to be a
process of regular review that would give opportunity for continual improvement, ensuring a document
that is straight-forward in its style, concise, and a robust, consistent guide for all SAR administrators and
operators.

13.     RECOMMENDATION 10/2: THAT THE IMO COMSAR SUB-COMMITTEE AND THE
        ICAO SECRETARIAT BE FORMALLY ADVISED OF THESE FINDINGS AND BE
        ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN AND, WHERE NECESSARY, IMPROVE MEANS OF
        MEETING THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS FOR HIGH STANDARDS OF MANUAL
        MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT

13.1    Mr. Gerry Keeling (International Lifeboat Federation) gave a briefing on the planned Quick
Reference (QR) Manual. The ILF, jointly with The International Sailing Federation (ISAF), had
developed a final text for use in the proposed QR manual. This publication was planned to be directed to
the operators of small sea craft and small aircraft, highlighting in a readily understandable way how
survivors of accidents and incidents might facilitate their return to a place of safety. It was planned to
consist of a concise manual and a series of quick references with graphics and limited text. Further
production work would require the engagement of industrial artists. It was now necessary to determine
how the final document would be produced. Intentions were that only an English language version
would be produced in the first instance and that other language versions would be produced by
appropriate States before distribution. The QR manual would need to be stored in small craft and would
                                                  -7-                            ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


be subject to rough handling. It would, therefore, need to be of robust construction and would not be
cheap to produce. Distribution to those operators of small craft most at risk would also be expensive.
Altogether, costs were expected to be high.

13.2     The meeting noted that the question now was how the project should go forward. Funding for the
project fell outside ICAO and IMO mandate and capacity. ILF was not in a position to print multiple
copies in one language, let alone in multiple languages, so without sponsors, the project could stall. ILF
considered itself unable to carry such a major task forward. Some discussion ensued about the prospect
of commercial sponsorship. It was suggested that a very small document could be produced with
abbreviated text and simple pictograms in clear layout, and that it could be referred to IMO for
distribution.

14.     RECOMMENDATION 10/3: THAT THE ILF, IN COOPERATION WITH MEMBER
        GOVERNMENTS, SHOULD SUBMIT THE ABOVE PROPOSAL TO IMO

15.     AGENDA ITEM 3.5: LIST OF REFERENCES AND ELECTRONIC INDEX TO THE
        IAMSAR MANUAL

15.1    Major Allan Knox (United States Air Force) introduced WP/9, Index to the International
Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue Manual (Doc 9731). Major Knox reported that the
United States had developed a comprehensive list based on key words supplied by the ICAO Secretariat.
The meeting noted that the United States believed that the indices are a solid product. The United States
advised that the next step would be the development of an electronic version, cross referenced by
hyperlink. Capt. Gabriel Kinney observed that the index was constructed on a chapter-by-chapter basis
thus making all-volume searches difficult. Mr. Dymond noted that the customary model was for a
volume-by-volume index which allowed easier access to broad subject matter. The meeting agreed with
these comments and requested that the United States rearrange the indices on a volume-by-volume basis
to be ready for presentation to the next IMO COMSAR meeting. This required that they be ready by the
middle of November, 2003.

16.     RECOMMENDATION 10/ 4: THAT THE UNITED STATES PREPARE A VOLUME-BY-
        VOLUME INDEX USING THE MATERIAL ALREADY SUBMITTED AND MAKE A
        SUBMISSION TO THE NEXT IMO COMSAR MEETING PROPOSING THAT ON-
        GOING AMENDMENT OF THE INDICES BE HANDLED BY THE IMO AND ICAO
        SECRETARIATS’ PUBLICATION SECTIONS

17.     AGENDA ITEM 4: SAR OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLES, PROCEDURES AND
        TECHNIQUES

17.1    Ms Annika Wallengren-Lejon (Civil Aviation Authority, Sweden) presented WP/7 Aircraft
Coordinator (ACO) Entry Report detailing a suggestion for a standard entry report from airborne SRUs to
the ACO when entering a rescue area. The meeting agreed with a suggestion that there was a need for
endurance to be noted. Further, the meeting agreed that reference to ―rescue area‖ should be amended to
read ―search and rescue area‖ and that the aircraft type should include reference to ―helicopter or fixed
wing‖. The meeting generally agreed with the amendment proposal. Ms. Wallengren-Lejon agreed to
prepare a clean text and subsequently submitted the text appearing at Appendix E.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                  -8-


18.     RECOMMENDATION 10/5:     THAT THE PROPOSED TEXT APPEARING AT
        APPENDIX E BE INCORPORATED IN THE IAMSAR MANUAL IN VOLUMES 2 AND
        3 AND AT THE PARAGRAPHS INDICATED

18.1    Mr. Lemon advised the need for some editorial amendments to the IAMSAR manual and, after
consultation, proposed the changes appearing in Appendix F.

19.     RECOMMENDATION 10/6:    THAT THE PROPOSED TEXT APPEARING AT
        APPENDIX F BE INCORPORATED IN THE IAMSAR MANUAL IN THE VOLUMES
        AND AT THE PARAGRAPHS INDICATED.

20.     AGENDA ITEM 4.1: SAFETY OF LARGE PASSENGER SHIPS

20.1    Mr. David Jardine-Smith (United Kingdom Maritime and Coastguard Agency) addressed the
meeting on the subject of large passenger ship safety. The meeting noted that large passenger ships
constituted a valuable SAR resource, but any emergency involving a large passenger ship as casualty
would likely require response from aircraft and ships of many kinds. COMSAR was considering relevant
aspects of passenger ship safety as part of a holistic review instituted by the IMO Secretary-General.
COMSAR established a correspondence group to this end in February 2002. The group made its first
report to COMSAR in January 2003, and COMSAR endorsed all 35 of its recommendations. Work
continued. The group was due to report again in early 2004 and had set a deadline of 31 October 2003 for
the receipt of new material, to allow time for collation and discussion of its report. Tasks given to
COMSAR by MSC included: evaluation of recovery techniques & equipment; consideration to
parameters and scale of application for new proposals; consideration of ICCL best practices over and
above SOLAS; consideration of measures and techniques for recovery of survivors from the water and
from survival craft; assessment of compatibility of ships as possible SAR facilities; evaluation of
techniques and equipment to recover survival craft; evaluation of reliability of rescue equipment; advice
on medical issues; evaluation of communications systems and practices; advice on combined SAR service
effectiveness – including dedicated and additional resources; evaluation of the adequacy of SAR services
to rescue large survivor complements; identification of new concepts and adequacy of current provisions;
investigation into what coastal States may do to assist SAR efforts; and consideration to the human
element and training as regards SAR service personnel.

20.2     The meeting noted that there were many lessons to be learnt from exercise and incident
experience, including the ESTONIA disaster. For example, a renewed vision of the concept that ‗the ship
is her own best lifeboat‘ might prove beneficial – that a ship might be able to sustain collision or fire
damage – and that ―survival‖ craft should be able to sustain survivors satisfactorily for several days. Mr.
Jardine-Smith queried whether we should be speaking of ―evacuation‖ or ―survival‖ craft. He stressed
that recovery at sea can be extremely difficult and yet, to date, thinking seems to have stopped at the point
of getting people off the casualty vessel and into survival craft. The meeting noted that that deficiency is
unacceptable.

20.3    To assist in assessing SAR service capability, the United Kingdom, Ireland and the ILF were
developing a number of models including Geographical Information System (GIS) model. This would
enable electronic indication of the time required to recover various numbers of survivors from any point
in the modelled area. The model had other potential uses, for example, strategic SAR planning. A report
on the modelling exercises would be included in the correspondence group‘s report to COMSAR.

20.4   On the subject of recovery, a workshop was convened in Torquay immediately prior to the JWG
meeting. It was attended by representatives of Canada, Germany, Ireland, Sweden, the UK, the U.S. and
                                                     -9-                             ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


the ILF. Discussion at the workshop was wide-ranging and useful. For example, a Swedish expert
reported on research modelling of current evacuation systems which cast doubt on their safety when
launching in loaded and moderate to poor sea state conditions; and a UK expert reported on offshore oil &
gas industry recovery equipment & procedures that were more effective than those currently in use in the
maritime industry. There was a need to tap into this experience. The workshop developed a draft
functional requirement that all SOLAS ships must be equipped to actively recover persons from the water,
from survival craft and fast rescue craft, at a rate and under conditions to be determined by IMO but, as a
minimum, at a rate of [twice] the number of the ship‘s ‗operating crew‘ per hour, in 3.5 metre significant
wave height conditions. Such systems must be demonstrated as being effective under actual conditions.
The group was not seeking to define new equipment but to determine a response that was a reasonable
expectation of SOLAS ships in terms of recovery capability. This needed more research. However, as
SOLAS ships are required to assist those in distress, they must also be given the means to do it.

20.5    Mr. Stan Deno (ICCL) commented that to rescue twice the number of operating crew per hour
was a huge requirement requiring high levels of equipment. The proposal would need extensive
consideration. The Canadian delegate queried whether to rescue twice the ―assigned rescue crew‖ might
give less concern to operators than a requirement to rescue twice the ―operating crew‖. The ICCL
delegate responded that the matter was a major one requiring careful consideration.

21.       AGENDA ITEM 4.2: MASS RESCUE OPERATIONS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE
          EXPERIENCE OF MAJOR DISASTERS

21.1     Mr. Francois Escaffre (National Maritime SAR Coordination, France) introduced WP/4, Disaster
Victim Identification following a maritime accident. This paper raised the question of the need for
cooperation between SAR personnel and those personnel practising disaster victim identification (DVI).
The meeting noted that a French working group has dealt with the DVI issue. This study required
interaction with INTERPOL who are experienced in DVI. The meeting noted that there is no legally
binding instrument for the DVI function; the best advisory reference available is the ―INTERPOL DVI
Guide‖. The IAMSAR Manual makes no reference to DVI. The question arises as to whether there is a
need for SAR personnel to have knowledge of DVI. The frequent contact of RCC personnel with next-of-
kin would indicate a need. The meeting noted two proposals for IAMSAR manual text input advanced by
France: an international version of French DVI instructions which could be included in the manual as an
Appendix, and a shorter section which could be included in the text of the manual. Discussion ensued as
to the relevance of DVI to SAR personnel. It was agreed that:

         DVI is not a SAR function;
         SAR service personnel sometimes become involved in the recovery of bodies;
         Identification of victims can be a very difficult task especially if foreign nationals are involved;
         National police are sometimes at a loss as to how to respond;
         There should be no distinction made between aeronautical and maritime disasters with respect to
          the DVI function.

21.2    The meeting agreed that while DVI is a responsibility of authorities other than SAR, some
guidance material should be developed for the purposes of making SAR personnel aware of the DVI
function. A short reference in the text of the manual should satisfy this need. The summary provided by
France could serve as a basis. The meeting agreed to establish a splinter group which subsequently
developed the text given in Appendix G.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                - 10 -


22.     RECOMMENDATION 10/7: THAT THE PROPOSED TEXT, AS APPEARING AT
        APPENDIX G, BE INCORPORATED IN THE IAMSAR MANUAL AT VOLUME 2,
        PARAGRAPH 6.17.7

22.1   Further discussion by the JWG ensued on the need for IAMSAR manual amendments and the
proposal as given in Appendix H was developed.

23.     RECOMMENDATION 10/8: THAT THE PROPOSED TEXT, AS APPEARING AT
        APPENDIX H, BE INCORPORATED IN THE IAMSAR MANUAL AT THE VOLUMES
        AND PARAGRAPHS INDICATED

24.     AGENDA ITEM 4.3: MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN SAR SERVICES

24.1   The IMO Secretariat representative referred the meeting to the medical doctor specialising in
maritime SAR matters:

Dr. Michel Pujos
Centre de Consultation Medicale Maritime (CCMM/TeleMedical Advise Service(TMAS))
Hopital Purpan
31059 Toulouse, France
e-mail: pujos@chu-toulouse.fr
Tel: +33 5 61 772485
Fax: +33 5 61 777451

25.     AGENDA ITEM 4.4: EFFECT OF MEASURES TO ENHANCE MARITIME AND
        AERONAUTICAL SECURITY ON SAR SERVICES

25.1    Mr. Escaffre presented WP/4, Revision of MSC Circ.967. The meeting noted that JWG/9 had
deferred action on security measures pending a forthcoming diplomatic conference and MSC 76. JWG9
expressed the opinion that the role of the MRCC should focus mainly on receiving and relaying alerts to
security authorities.

25.2     The meeting further noted that in December 2002, IMO adopted a new chapter of the SOLAS
Convention concerning maritime security. The new provisions were due to enter into force on 1 July
2004. Further, the meeting heard that France had submitted a document Piracy and armed robbery
against ships – Directives for MRCCs at COMSAR 7 which referred the French proposal to the MSC.
Subsequently, the MSC agreed to the subject being urgent and eventually decided on the publication of a
new circular, MSC/Circ.1073, Directives for Maritime Rescue Coordination Centres (MRCCs) on acts of
violence against ships. These directives included reference to the possibility of a SAR case developing
out of a security breach.

25.3    Reference was made to Resolution MSC.147(77), adopted on 29 May 2003, Adoption of the
Revised Performance Standards for a Ship security Alert System.

26.     AGENDA ITEM 4.5: DEVELOPMENT OF PROCEDURAL STRATEGIES FOR THE
        PRACTICAL PROVISION OF SAR SERVICES

26.1     Mr. Keeling (International Lifeboat Federation) briefed the meeting on the history, evolution and
aspirations of the International Lifeboat Federation. The meeting noted that the ILF formed in 1924 to
bring SAR providers together. In 1951 the RNLI formally took the organization under its patronage and
                                                   - 11 -                          ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


provided it with a permanent secretariat. In recent years, it had become apparent that the organization
needed to become independent and generate its own sources of funds if it wished to reach the objectives
set by its members. Accordingly, the 19th international conference approved proposals for the formal
incorporation and phased restructure of the organization over the four year period leading up to the 20 th
conference in 2007.

26.2     The meeting noted that the ILF was now an incorporated body with its own trustee board and
council. One of the organization‘s key objectives was to promote the establishment and growth of new
search and rescue service providers where required. To bring this about, the intention was to gather the
experience of the existing members and to develop a guidance manual to help SAR providers in a similar
way to the process involving ICAO/IMO JWG input to the IAMSAR manual with regard to the
establishment of new maritime and/or aeronautical SAR organizations. To supplement this approach, the
Federation did seek to provide practical consultancy and on-the-ground training through secondment of
members. Until now, the ILF had worked only with like-type SAR providers but would like, in the
future, to work with all parties in both the ICAO and IMO forums to ensure that the development of
global SAR, in all its manifestations, happens in a coordinated fashion. The ILF has 89 members from 62
countries.

27.     AGENDA ITEM 5: SAR SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION, ORGANIZATION AND
        IMPLEMENTATION METHODS

27.1    Mr. Brian Mullan (Aeronautical and Maritime Safety Services, Inmarsat) provided a 24 hour
contact number for its Network Operations Centre in London: +44 20 7728 1616. The delegate advised
that 19 RCCs have applied for and been granted remote access to the Inmarsat MRCC database. Remote
access was only available to those RCCs that were associated with an Inmarsat land earth station. The
chairman noted that there needed to be an update of the list of coast earth station operation coordinators in
the Inmarsat system.

28.     AGENDA ITEM 5.3: QUALITY/IMPROVEMENT, NEEDS ASSESSMENT, RISK
        MANAGEMENT, (SUB-REGIONAL) AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION

28.1     The chairman informed the JWG that the Swedish Maritime Authority had obtained a quality
assurance certificate of Lloyds. He noted the general desirability of RCCs achieving a quality assurance
certificate from an appropriate, accredited organization. The chairman suggested to the meeting that
inspections should be welcomed by SAR administrations as an external support to efficient operations.
Quality inspections could establish a more structured document system.

28.2     Mr. Lemon commented that the IAMSAR manual sought to outline minimum requirements for an
adequate system. Expanded material was also included for the benefit of better-established organizations.
States could differentiate between lists of those attributes that make a SAR system very good and those
that establish a minimalist system of acceptable efficiency.

28.3     Mr. Escaffre advised that French MRCCs were currently involved in a quality improvement
process.

28.4    Mr. Miller advised that Canada continued to develop a risk model identifying, for example, the
types of ships for which the Canadian SAR system might become responsible, fatigue, and other factors
and to present the information graphically by way of bar and pie graphs which could be used to determine
the need for and necessary extent of resources. Canada would continue to advise the JWG of progress.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                 - 12 -



28.5    Mr. Lemon advised the meeting that software was being developed by the United Kingdom to
give an indication of the SAR resources available globally. This could be a very useful tool for risk
assessment. The chairman expressed the need for the JWG to be advised of continuing research in this
area.

28.6    Dr. Tse advised that computer aided devices were being used to analyze risks in the use of SRUs
in Hong Kong, China. The target date for implementation of this risk strategy methodology was the end
of 2003.

29.     AGENDA ITEM 5.4: IMPLEMENTATION                            AND      OPERATION          OF     THE
        “INTERNATIONAL SAR FUND”

29.1    See discussion below.

30.     AGENDA ITEM 5.5: EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF VARIOUS “TECHNICAL
        COOPERATION    PROJECTS”  IN  COOPERATION  WITH    RELEVANT
        GOVERNMENTS, ORGANIZATIONS AND AGENCIES WITH A VIEW TO
        ASSESSING THEIR IMPACT IN IMPLEMENTING AND MAINTAINING SAR
        SERVICES

30.1     Mr. Geoff Roberts, private consultant, (ex Royal Air Force and United Kingdom Maritime and
Coastguard Agency) briefed the meeting on his recent mission to determine a rescue and air accident
needs requirement for Guyana. This required an evaluation of the present SAR arrangements and the
formulation of recommendations for its further development. Development funds were understood to be
available from the International Development Bank (IDB) for the establishment of SAR services.
Presently one Bell 412 helicopter was available, manned by a capable crew but without any specialized
SAR equipment. The Guyana Defence Forces (GDF) had a single mine hunter vessel, ex Royal Navy,
very much pre-occupied with drug interdiction activity. The air traffic controllers had no training in
aeronautical SAR but provided a modicum of SAR service when required. The prime moving force
behind the SAR development plans were the aircraft operators who had developed a skeletal arrangement
for SAR services but it was uncoordinated and its activation ad hoc. The Bell 412 had been out of service
for three months undertaking a regular overhaul that would normally require the aircraft to be offline for a
day. A Chinese Yak12 and a Skyvan aircraft supported the helicopter in search operations. Terrain
throughout the country is difficult to search due to a 200 ft. jungle canopy which conceals disabled
aircraft. Small fishing craft had no means of self-SAR-support although larger fishing craft had a
communications network that served as an element of SAR infrastructure. There were no shore-based
rescue boats. There were, however, many enthusiastic personnel likely to volunteer for any SAR service
who would take to training readily. Medical facilities extended only to an ability to hospitalize up to 20
people. There was a particular need for properly equipped rotary wing aircraft. The GDF could not be
expected to operate a SAR-dedicated helicopter – it would come under immediate pressure for
incorporation in the drug war. Mr. Roberts made recommendations for a national SAR service under the
Transport Minister; appropriate legislation; a National SAR Plan; a JRCC in the ATC centre manned by
SAR-trained coast guard and ATC staff; a dedicated helicopter, initially under wet-lease contract;
improved maritime and aeronautical communication systems (there was no radar coverage); development
of international MoUs; training for speedboat operators and fisherman; procurement of a lifeboat; and a
communication network for control of speedboats. Mr. Roberts had been requested by the Guyanan
government to proceed with phase two of the project. A question was raised regarding the costs of
maintaining a SAR system in Guyana. Mr. Roberts acknowledged the criticality of this matter and
                                                  - 13 -                          ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


observed that the IDB would need to be assured of the viability of on-going services before committing to
the project.

30.2    Mr. Cole presented IP/1 detailing assistance efforts in the Pacific region. In 2002, a workshop
was convened in Nadi, Fiji to assist Pacific Island States to promote aviation accident preparedness. The
workshop was sponsored by south Pacific airlines with input from Emergency Management Australia
(EMA). Presentations were made by AusSAR, CAA New Zealand, Qantas, Airports Fiji, EMA, Victoria
Police (Australia). Recommendations were made that there be a sequential workshop (held in July 2003),
assessment and documentation of the Pacific Island States emergency response capacity and production
of a bilateral SAR arrangements. AusSAR had been tasked to take a lead role in developing an
emergency management plan. The chairman enquired whether the work could be channeled to maritime
emergency situations. Mr. Cole replied that the work could be developed generically with input from
maritime specialists. Australia liaised closely with the United States (through Honolulu), France (through
Noumea) and New Zealand in the use of that State‘s P3 Orion maritime surveillance aircraft.

30.3     Mr. Day introduced IP/2 concerning his recent mission to Iraq and gave evidence of the
difficulties involved in providing SAR coverage to civil international humanitarian flights in a war zone.
There was a need for close cooperation, a clear definition of functions and responsibilities, a synergy of
civil and military procedures, and an affective knowledge of respective abilities and methodologies. The
meeting noted that there was a letter of agreement between Jordan and Syria for cooperation in SAR
service provision and an assurance had been given that all of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Syria and Israel
were prepared to cooperate in the establishment of a regional SAR organization. There was, then, some
scope for positivity with respect to the ultimate establishment of a cost-effective SAR system embracing
all Middle Eastern States in the future.

30.4    Mr. Gregory Lievre (African Civil Aviation Commission –AFCAC) gave the meeting a
comprehensive briefing on the major SAR rehabilitation project underway in Africa. The goal of the
project was to promote SAR services compliant with international standards, efficient in themselves and
amenable to integration in the emerging Global SAR Plan.

30.5     The methodology was to identify shortcomings and deficiencies and to assist with legal and
organizational aspects and in implementation of strategies and exercises. Evaluation was based on three
elements: study of ICAO reports; a questionnaire to all participating States; and State visits of one week
each to review States‘ systems. Seven aspects were being treated: organization, international SAR
agreements and conventions, operational procedures, equipment, human resources, exercises and quality
control.

30.6     The continent had been divided into six geographic areas. Only States that had expressed a
desire, participated; all activity was voluntary. To date, 30 States had agreed. Missions in the assistance
phase had been scheduled, generally, to be of two weeks duration although mission durations would vary.
AFCAC, a specialized body of the African Union, was managing the project. The French Cooperation,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was funding it. ICAO was inputting technical assistance. An assessment
manual had been developed by AFCAC in conjunction with ICAO. States were rated in each aspect of
service from A (not implemented) to E (full level of implementation). To date, evaluation results had
come from seven States. AFCAC had committed to not broadcasting results of evaluations without State
permission.

30.7    The matter of SAR agreements was considered difficult. Many States were reluctant to consider
entry of foreign aircraft into their sovereign airspace without specific diplomatic clearances (which would
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                 - 14 -


take too long a time to arrange). That most aircraft involved in SAR actions were State aircraft tended to
aggravate this difficulty. To date, there were indications of some organizational arrangements in place
within States although many of these were historic and required re-evaluation. There was an extreme
shortage of funds in most States. Operational procedures were undeveloped. Human resources were
largely untrained. Specialised equipment was scarcely evident. Public infrastructure was hard pushed to
support specialist services in some States. Exercises and quality control were insufficient. There was a
need for a funding mechanism, trained personnel, training and exercises. There were 20 States still to
evaluate. The project planned a conference to be held on SAR funding next year to which high-level
personnel would be invited. High-level sensitization could assist in the provision of personnel training.
Two training sessions had been done; two more were planned, each over a three week duration. Some
States could be assisted with planning and conduct of exercises. Reports to States from the evaluation
teams were sufficiently comprehensive in themselves to give the States a start in rebuilding State systems.
The project was not intended to provide ready-made solutions. Solutions, to be sustainable, must come
from the Sates themselves. The interest shown by the States had been impressive.

30.8     Mr. Lemon suggested that there needed to be some indication from petitioning States of their
willingness to participate for there to be prospect of success. Unless the States became actively involved
in their own service rehabilitation, no input was likely to be sustained. There needed, further, to be an
involvement of many contributory agencies in each State. And there needed to be a mechanism for
internal cooperation and coordination; national SAR committees were an appropriate forum. There
needed to be follow-up activity; one-off input was very unlikely to have lasting effect.

30.9     The IMO Secretariat representative briefed the meeting on the outcome of IMO COMSAR 7 and
MSC 77. The 2000 Florence Conference on SAR proposed that the African continent should be divided
into 5 maritime regions and a Resolution was made that regional MRCCs should be established in each.
The COMSAR Sub-Committee subsequently established a 5 step approach as given in Annex 3 of W.P 2.
It was decided that financial applications should be considered. Countries where MRCCs had been
planned should contact their neighbouring countries to initiate discussion of cooperation. The meeting
noted that all parties had agreed in principle to the establishment of regional MRCCs. Nigeria was
nominated for a regional MRCC to cover Equatorial Guinea, Cameroon and Gabon. There had been an
insufficient response from West African States to allow IMO to proceed. On the other hand, Kenya,
Seychelles and Tanzania had signed an agreement to establish a regional MRCC in Mombasa. Work had
commenced on the construction of a complex at Mombasa to house a sub-regional MRCC but IMO had
not been able to provide technical or financial support. The meeting noted that there was a critical need
for assistance in advancing the reorganization of SAR in Eastern Africa and, in this and other regards,
there was an urgent need for the establishment of the International SAR Fund.

30.10 The chairman highlighted the need for technical assistance and drew the meeting‘s attention to
the need for more technical assistance from developed States The SAR fund should receive financial or
other assistance. With respect to training, assistance could be given by the provision of scholarships. In
respect to hands-on technical assistance, States could assist by making experts available for field activity.
The chairman suggested that every opportunity should be taken to publicly discuss the inadequacy of the
global SAR service, thereby influencing decision makers to take a more pro-active stance in supporting
global SAR service provision. There was a need to enlighten fund providers, including development
banks, of the need to fund SAR services. Preventive SAR was an important aspect. The possibility of
introducing a SAR fee on ship passengers should be further explored. A fee of US $1 per passenger could
result in US $25-30 million on a yearly basis.
                                                    - 15 -                          ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


30.11 Mr. Lievre reinforced the point that a worthwhile input from States is in the provision of experts
to undertake field activity. Assistance in this regard was vital to the continuation of the AFCAC SAR
project.

30.12 The chairman informed the meeting of a special coordination meeting convened at IMO HQ,
London, Friday, 12th September, to explore how IMO and ICAO might cooperate more closely in the
actual conduct of technical assistance missions worldwide. This need was pronounced in consideration of
the SAR rehabilitation project being administered by the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC)
throughout the African continent. This meeting was satisfactory and promising.

30.13 Mr. Keeling presented a paper on the establishment of a SAR global development advisory group.
The meeting noted that under an IMO initiative the International SAR Fund (ISF) had been proposed to
assist in the realization of the Global SAR Plan. Resolution 5 of the 2000 Florence Conference invited
the IMO, ―in co-operation with aviation and maritime communities and for the purpose of assisting
countries, in particular developing countries, to fulfill their obligations under the SAR and SOLAS
Conventions, to consider establishing an international SAR fund for the purpose of:


    1.       establishing and maintaining worldwide an adequate number of operational RCCs to cover
             the needs of international shipping;
    2.       establishing and maintaining an efficient global communications network for the
             dissemination of distress alert data and SAR coordination communications;
    3.       establishing and maintaining databases for the operational support of the GMDSS, if this is
             not done on a national basis; and
    4.       support the provision of other necessary resources for the effective implementation of the
             Global SAR Plan.

30.14 The meeting noted that the ILF has established an independent SAR development fund. The
meeting noted the contention of the ILF that it was ―vital that all available funds (for SAR development)
are used efficiently and in a prioritized manner in implementing the Global SAR Plan‖ and, ―recognizing
the independence and autonomy of each of these funds, it is proposed that a Global SAR Development
Advisory Group be established to coordinate joint ICAO/IMO SAR initiatives and to advise on how
projects can be established in a harmonized fashion.‖

30.15 The meeting noted further that the ILF proposed a SAR development advisory group which could
consist of:

        The chairman of the ICAO/IMO JWG;
        The vice chairman of the ICAO/IMO JWG;
        A representative of the ILF Secretariat;
        A representative of the IMO Secretariat;
        A representative of the ICAO Secretariat;

and that the terms of reference of the group should be:

        To develop and establish mechanisms for funding;
        To assist administering authorities establish mechanisms for prioritizing projects;
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                  - 16 -


         To assist administering authorities identify and make available the expertise and resources
          required to implement these projects;
         To assist administering authorities identify the Parties necessarily affected by proposed SAR
          project activity and facilitate cooperative working arrangements between them all;
         To assist administering authorities in facilitating mechanisms for safe handling of funds to ensure
          absolute security of deposits, integrity of management and proper allocation directly to SAR
          providers in accordance with recognized international accounting and auditing arrangements.

30.16 The meeting further noted that the ILF proposed that the advisory group convene to review the
terms of reference and make recommendations to the appropriate ICAO and IMO forums.

31.       RECOMMENDATION 10/9: THAT THE PROPOSED ICAO/ILF/IMO ADVISORY
          GROUP ON GLOBAL SAR DEVELOPMENT BE ESTABLISHED.

32.       AGENDA ITEM 6 : RCC/RSC EQUIPMENT AND FACILITY DESIGNATIONS AND
          STANDARDS

33.       AGENDA ITEM 6.2: STATUS OF AIS AND RELATED SYSTEMS IN AERONAUTICAL
          AND MARITIME SAR

33.1     The chairman gave a briefing on European Union Maritime Monitoring IT System, SafeSeaNet.
The meeting noted that this system involves an electronic data exchange network for cost effective
exchange of information. It was built on existing systems and the web-based XML/EDIFACT systems.
It provided a rapid communication reply service by electronic means. It would be sufficiently flexible to
accommodate new regulatory requirements and would be secure. Traffic monitoring was the core of the
system. There would need to be an infrastructure developed and national contact points published.
Position notification would be done through coastal radio stations which would notify the central index
server that they have information on a ship. That information would be stored. This would expedite
MRCC requests for information about ship movements. It would interface with data concerning larger
fishing vessels. Long range tracking capability, when developed, would be linked to this service. The
intention was to develop a Europe-wide, comprehensive exchange service, coordinated by way of inter-
connected national systems based on a common set of specifications. States must manage the server.
Implementation was planned in three years, to begin in 2004.

33.2   Mr. Miller advised the meeting that Canada had revised their statement of requirements for an
AIS network to include long-range identification and tracking of ships. Implementation would commence
November 2004 and conclude February/March 2007.

34.       AGENDA ITEM 7: SAR COMMUNICATIONS

35.       AGENDA ITEM 7.1: STATUS OF THE GMDSS

35.1    The IMO Secretariat representative reported that the international SAR community would like to
know the stage of States‘ implementation of shore-based GMDSS facilities. The IMO representative
gave a demonstration of a low cost, electronic chart presentation of a worldwide SAR information system.
The chairman advised that States should investigate interfacing between this system and their national
SAR systems.

36.       AGENDA ITEM 7.2: STATUS OF AERONAUTICAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
                                                  - 17 -                         ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


        FOR DISTRESS AND SAR

36.1   Mr. Vladislav Studenov (Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat) presented WP10/8, Cospas-Sarsat
information bulletin No.16 – August 2003.

36.2    The meeting noted that since 1982 to the end of 2002, Cospas-Sarsat had assisted in the rescue of
over 15,700 persons in distress in about 4,500 SAR events.

36.3    In 2002, participating administrations and organisations reported that Cospas-Sarsat provided
assistance in 373 SAR events, which resulted in the rescue of 1,411 persons. The 406 MHz system was
used in the rescue of 1,062 people, or in about 75% of all rescues. In 2002, 63% of SAR events assisted
by Cospas-Sarsat were maritime, 12% were aviation and 25% were caused by PLBs.

36.4    The Cospas-Sarsat System was composed of:

    -       8 satellites in polar orbit and 4 satellites in geostationary orbit;
    -       25 Mission Control Centres, 37 LEOSAR ground stations and 12 GEOSAR ground stations;
            and
    -       over 314,000 beacons operating on 406 MHz and about 690,000 beacons operating
            on121.5 MHz.

36.5    Existing statistics on registered 406 MHz beacon population showed the following figures on
beacon types: EPIRBs – 90%, ELTs – 6.5% and PLBs – 3.5%.

36.6    There were 37 countries and organizations formally associated with Cospas-Sarsat.

36.7    Recognizing the continued growth of the number of 406 MHz beacons and their impact on the
System capacity, the Cospas-Sarsat Council decided that, from 1 January 2002, the carrier frequency of
all new models of operational 406 MHz beacons should be moved to 406.028 MHz. 10 beacon models
had been type approved for operations in the new frequency channel 406.028 MHz.

36.8    As a part of activities associated with the termination of 121.5 MHz satellite processing on
1 February 2009, Cospas-Sarsat had been actively investigating technologies and possible specification
changes that would enable 406 MHz beacons to be produced at a lower cost, while maintaining the same
operational performance.

36.9     Cospas-Sarsat successfully continued collecting data on beacon false alert rates. In 2002, the
false alert rate from the SAR response perspective (based on false alerts plus undetermined alerts over
total number of alerts) was, for 406 MHz beacons, 94.9% and for 121.5 MHz beacons, 98.2%.

36.10 Cospas-Sarsat was investigating the possible implementation of an international 406MHz beacon
registration database.

36.11 The USA, Russia, and the European Commission/European Space Agency had indicated their
intentions to include 406MHz SAR instruments on their respective constellations of global navigation
satellites (GPS, GLONASS and Galileo).

36.12 The chairman sought confirmation from the Cospas-Sarsat Secretariat that there was no need for
User States to provide a LUT within their territories to benefit from the Cospas-Sarsat alert and location
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                               - 18 -


system. This was confirmed and advice given that the African continent was fully covered for 406MHz
beacons and that installation of the planned LEOLUT in Nigeria would significantly improve 121.5MHz
coverage of the African continent.

36.13 The chairman thanked the Cospas-Sarsat delegate for his detailed presentation and underlined the
successful operation of the Cospas-Sarsat system and its significant contribution to both GMDSS and the
aeronautical SAR alerting system.

36.14 In response to a question from Mr. Miller, Mr. Day reported on the development of controller-
pilot data link communications (CPDLC) in the aviation domain. The meeting noted that this innovation,
while having the potential to reduce the problem of frequency congestion in busy airspace, was not a
panacea for the problems involved in information transfer. Miami Centre was using CPDLC with
success; other limited geographic regions incorporated CPDLC in their communication infrastructure.
CPDLC, however, would not obviate the need for voice communications in the foreseeable future,
especially in consideration of the broad array of message contracts inherent in urgency and emergency
communications. CPDLC was not free of error potential. Aeronautical radiotelephony communication
remained a critical aspect of aviation operations.

37.    AGENDA ITEM 7.3: FUTURE TRENDS IN SAR COMMUNICATION

37.1     Mr. Dymond commented that mobile phones were increasingly being used as an alerting
mechanism in the United Kingdom. This procedure was not recommended but was acknowledged as a
fall-back system. Mr. Dymond reported that a yachtsman recently made a distress call on a mobile
telephone only, then, to lose verbal contact, but continued to exchange messages with the RCC by means
of text messages.

37.2   Mr. Keeling advised that mobile service providers in the United Kingdom could provide
information on the cell in which the caller was placed.

37.3    Mr. Dymond advised that some mobile telephone service providers were also working on a
direction finding facility.

37.4    Mr. Escaffre advised that French mobile phone users could dial 1616 and be connected directly to
the MRCC. Fears that this facility might be too much used by beach-goers had not materialized. This
procedure was implemented in 2003 on an experimental basis in three locations on the French coast. The
call number was due to be extended to the whole coast.

37.5    Discussion ensued. The meeting noted that mobile phone use was generally not encouraged
because telephones should not be relied upon as sole means of alert; there were gaps in coverage and
specifications for equipment were insufficient. Mobile phones were not manufactured with appropriately
robust components for marine use. The chairman advised that, whereas in Sweden there were almost
300,000 pleasure boats with at least two sleeping bunks, 280,000 of them were without VHF radios. On
the other hand, ―every second person‖ had a mobile phone. There was, then, a strong case for the use of
mobile phones in SAR, notwithstanding their non-purpose-built nature and their present incompatibility
with other communication equipment, e.g. direction finders.

37.6    Mr. Lemon advised that on the land side, mobile phone coverage was not always as advertised.
This could result in unexpected communication deficiency. Mobile phones had forced down the price of
GPS chips. Manufacturers were buying chips with all the connections for US$8-10 wholesale. This
suggested the economic use of GPS chips in mobile radios and the potential that existed for more
                                                  - 19 -                          ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


widespread GPS application generally. The main reason for losing lives was an inability of SRUs to
arrive at the distress site quickly. This, in turn, was generally attributable to the distress position not
being accurately known. GPS, when embedded in radio equipment, was considered to have the potential
to lessen this problem. An adjunct to this was that boats with GPS could become SAR assets; thus more
SAR resources would became available at a reasonable price. The International Telecommunications
Union (ITU), however, had some technical objection to GPS integration in radio transceivers. Fixed
radios could not be fitted with GPS very economically on account of the need for antennae. A mobile
radio equipped with a GPS positioning device was about to be manufactured for about $300. It would
incorporate a LED display. Studies needed to be done to verify apparent advantages in terms of cost,
reliability and effectiveness. The United States would keep the group informed.

37.7      Mr. Lemon advised the meeting that the United States National SAR Committee, in conjunction
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), was investigating means by which
crashed aircraft in the vicinity of aerodromes might signal their position readily and accurately. A
method being researched was by means of ELTs that would be detected at the aerodrome rather than by
satellite. Other prospects were being researched in an on-going study.

38.     RECOMMENDATION 10/10: THAT THE CONCEPT OF AUTOMATIC POSITIONING
        CAPACITY BEING INCORPORATED IN RADIO TRANSCEIVERS BE RESEARCHED
        AND REPORTED UPON

38.1     Ms. Wallengren-Lejon queried the ability of 406MHz ELTs to survive crash impact. The United
States reported having done a lot of work on beacon non-performance although there was not a lot of
data accrued on 406MHz ELTs involved in distress situations. ELTs were customarily hooked into a
GPS interface rather than having an embedded GPS unit although more manufacturers were expected to
integrate GPS in beacons from next year. The United States FAA had not mandated carriage of 406MHz
ELTs on general aviation aircraft thus, on present indications, it was expected that tens of thousands of
121.5MHz ELTs would continue to be in use after 2009 when satellite coverage of beacons operating on
that frequency would be withdrawn.

38.2     Mr. Kinney questioned whether the proposal for channel 16 to be monitored by SOLAS ships
should be considered by the group. Use of channel 16 was not covered by GMDSS. The chairman
agreed that use of channel 16 was an important issue and requires consideration. A move to support use
of DSC and the prospect of eradicating the bridge radio monitoring function had resulted in a proposal for
dissolution of channel 16 radiotelephony. The meeting expressed a belief, however, that distress alerting
was at stake if use of channel 16 is discontinued.

38.3    Mr. Beale reported on a piece of equipment known as a ―Standguard EPIRB alarm receiver‖
which could be fitted to a vessel and was able to determine whether an activated EPIRB was on board that
vessel.

39.     AGENDA ITEM 7.4: MINIMUM COMMUNICATION NEEDS FOR RCCS

39.1    The meeting considered COMSAR/Circ.18: Guidance on Minimum Communication Needs of
Maritime Rescue Coordination Centres (RCCs). Mr. Escaffre advised that the objective of the circular
was to give basic guidance on communication requirements to authorities charged with establishing an
RCC. The meeting noted that the circular was issued five years ago and was in need of updating to
incorporate use of the internet and contemporary Inmarsat facilities in the RCC. France, in its document
COMSAR 7/1/1, submitted to COMSAR 7, (13 – 17 January 2003), invited the sub-committee to bring
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                - 20 -


this circular up to date. Document COMSAR 7/1/1 also underlined problems that related to the
progressive elimination of telex services. In response, the COMSAR 7 SAR working group expressed its
concern regarding the most suitable replacement for telex for SAR purposes. COMSAR 7 agreed that a
detailed review of COMSAR/Circ.18 should be undertaken by ICAO/IMO JWG 10, since it had been
incorporated in the IAMSAR manual, volume 1. In this connection, the JWG participants noted
information presented by the Cospas-Sarsat representative as suggested draft updates to
COMSAR/Circ.18. The suggested draft updates included the following changes to the existing text:

      a)     updated text on means of communication of Cospas-Sarsat alert data to MRCCs (section 2.6);
             and
      b)     new text concerning Cospas-Sarsat alert data distribution provided in Note 4 and Section 4.4
             of the circular.

39.2     The chairman noted that there may be a need for guidance in both ARCC and MRCC
communication equipment requirements. Such guidance could be incorporated in the IAMSAR Manual.
The French, Cospas-Sarsat and Inmarsat delegates advised their preparedness to contribute in a splinter
group. The United States delegate volunteered to write text appropriate to ARCC communication
equipment requirements and would cooperate with the French member in development of a generic paper.
It was agreed that the ARCC requirements would be included in the updated COMSAR circular. The
splinter group would be coordinated by Mr. Escaffre.

40.        RECOMMENDATION 10/11 : THAT A SPLINTER GROUP DEVELOP A SET OF
           GUIDELINES SUITABLE TO BOTH MRCCS AND ARCCS CONCERNING THE
           EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO MEET THE COMMUNICATION NEEDS OF RCCS,
           AND REPORT BACK TO JWG/11

41.        AGENDA ITEM 8: SAR PERSONNEL, STAFFING AND TRAINING

41.1     Mr. Tony Patterson (Marine Institute St. John‘s, Canada) introduced a two-day OSC course
targeted at volunteers and masters of commercial ships who may have to act as the initial OSC of a search
until the arrival of a more capable OSC. The group provided Captain Patterson with guidance to develop
the course further and to submit it to IMO for consideration as an IMO model course.

42.        AGENDA ITEM 8.2: DEVELOPMENT OF JOINT SAR COURSES BASED ON THE
           IAMSAR MANUAL;
                                                     - 21 -                         ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR


42.1    Mr. Lemon introduced WP/11, SAR personnel staffing and training – Best RCC and training
practices. The meeting noted that United States RCCs were established in multi-mission command
centres manned by military personnel who were tasked with multiple functions, SAR being but one of
them. Generally, less than half their workload was SAR. Staffing issues had arisen as a result of
successively more missions being added to the U.S. Coast Guard. Some studies had been undertaken
including one that highlighted the need to upgrade shore-based communication infrastructure. This
assisted in the United States satisfactorily complying with GMDSS requirements. A front-end analysis
had also been made of SAR mission coordinators‘ activities. There had been some human factors studies
completed and an assessment was recently made in 6 countries of best practices of RCC operation. Some
observations were made regarding various areas of knowledge and skills, refresher training, multi-tasking
requirements, staffing levels and length of watches. Simultaneous multi-tasking was shown to be an
inappropriate human activity; humans can only address analytical tasks sequentially. One extra civilian
had been added to United States RCC staff establishments. A standardization team had been established
as a part of the National SAR School establishment. The team examined RCC readiness and tested
understanding of SAR concepts and RCC proficiency throughout the country. The staff selection process
had been reviewed. SAR school staff had been increased. Some web-based SAR training had been
introduced. The number of live SAR cases to be managed by any one individual had been limited.
Findings of best practice included:

         optimal RCC staffing seems to be 7 + 1 per watch position;
         RCCs should be staffed so that no person stands more than a 12-hour watch;
         typical initial RCC training should be at least two month, and initial on-the-job training should be
          at least 7 months;
         SAR training should include several days of simulation and exercises;
         provision should be made for recurrent training and re-certification of RCC staff;
         SAR should be made the only mission of an RCC or RSC; and
         steps should be taken to help maintain vigilance and proficiency on communications watches.

42.2    Mr. Kinney warned the group of ―task creep‖ by which workloads increase while staffing
numbers and other resources remain unchanged. The end result was that the system becomes seriously
over-loaded. Capt. Kinney made the point that a price needed to be paid for every work demand that was
made. It may be made directly, under control, or incidentally, with unpredictable results.

43.       AGENDA ITEM 8.3: DEVELOPMENT OF A GMDSS COAST STATION OPERATORS’
          MODEL COURSE

43.1    Mr. Dymond introduced WP/10, GMDSS coast station operator certificate (CSOC) course. The
meeting noted that GMDSS had been in use at sea and at coast stations for a number of years and that
RCCs and coast stations needed to be adequately trained and qualified to operate communication
equipment effectively. GMDSS training courses had been introduced. Some administrations had
developed a training course for coast station and RCC operatives. The United Kingdom had introduced a
coast station operators‘ course (CSOC). Discussion revolved around the aims and objectives of the
course. The course lasts for 4 days with an examination on the 5th day. The U.K. was holding these
courses up as an IMO model for adoption. The Netherlands and Norway delegates agreed to assist the
United Kingdom to submit the draft model course to IMO.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR                                - 22 -


44.     RECOMMENDATION 10/12: THAT A SUBMISSION BE MADE TO IMO COMSAR
        RECOMMENDING THAT THE CSOC TRAINING COURSE BE IMPRINTED AS A
        MODEL COURSE.

44.1    Ms. Wallengren-Lejon introduced WP/6, Aircraft coordinator (ACO) training. The meeting noted
the recommendation that SMCs who participated in ACO training courses increased their confidence and
efficiency in the conduct of SAR cases. Mr. Lemon queried the interaction between the ACO and the
OSC. The chairman responded by stating that where an OSC was employed, a decision needed to be
made about the role of the ACO. The working paper was referred to a splinter group for refinement as an
IAMSAR manual amendment. Subsequently, the Swedish delegate proposed text as appearing at
Appendix I for inclusion in the IAMSAR manual:

45.  RECOMMENDATION 10/13 : THAT THE PROPOSED TEXT, AS CONTAINED AT
APPENDIX I, SHOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE IAMSAR MANUAL AT THE VOLUME
AND PARAGRAPHS INDICATED.

46.     AGENDA ITEM 9: ANY OTHER BUSINESS

46.1   The JWG welcomed and accepted the offer by Sweden to host the next meeting of the JWG
which will, if approved by ICAO and IMO, be planned to take place in September or October, 2004. The
venue would be Gothenburg (Göteborg).

46.2      In consideration of the Terms of Reference of the JWG, and being mindful that to be efficient in
its remit the group needs to be composed neither of too few participants for expert input nor too many
participants for focus, the JWG recommended that no delegation should comprise more than one
aeronautical and one maritime observer at future meetings. This was to apply to IMO Member States, the
United Nations and its specialised agencies, inter-governmental organisations and non-governmental
organisations in consultative States. The need to limit the number of observers was largely based upon
the difficulties of the hosting organization in planning the meeting and allocating funds for conference
facilities, study-tours and social events. The group considered, however, that if more then one observer
wished to participate, it should be possible if they met their own expenses. A strict timeline to confirm
participation should also be applied.

46.3   At the gala dinner, the chairman proposed that a collection be made for delegates to initiate a fund
for SAR development. He proposed that the money collected be held, in trust, by the ILF until the
proposed international SAR development fund is formally established. The collection amounted to 142
pounds sterling, 50 Norwegian Crowns, 10 Australian dollars, 6 US dollars and 5 Canadian dollars.

46.4    The meeting expressed its heartfelt thanks to Mr. Peter Dymond and his staff at the United
Kingdom Maritime and Coastguard Agency whose unstinted efforts resulted in another very successful
meeting of the JWG. All members and observers were aware of the extent of effort required to mount
such an event. The U.K. input in this regard was excellent. The arrangements at the meeting venue were
amenable to both hard work and pleasant and profitable interaction after hours. The visit to the Falmouth
MRCC gave insight into a highly efficient centre and state-of-the-art facilities from which all visitors
benefited.

46.5    The Chairman closed the meeting at 1300 on Friday 19 September 2003.
    - 23 -   ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR




——————————
                                                                                        ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                        Appendix A

                                                        APPENDIX A

                                                   ICAO/IMO JWG on SAR

                                                 Torquay, 15-19 September 2003

      * Aeronautical Representative
      ** Maritime Representative

Name                                 Organisation                         E-mail and telephone
Peter Dymond**                       UK Maritime and Coastguard           +44 (0)2380 329419
                                     Agency                               peter_dymond@mcga.gov.uk
Bob Lander                           MOD (UK)                             01923 837218
                                                                          S01SAR@hotmail .com
Ian Herdman*                         UK Civil Aviation Authority          ian.herdman@dap.caa.co.uk
                                     (Directorate of Airspace Policy)
Solve Tanke Hovden                   JRCC Stavanger, Norway               solve.hovden@jrcc-stavanger.no
Annika Wallengren-Lejon*             Civil Aviation Authority, Sweden     +46 31648002
                                                                          annika wallengren.lejon@lfv.se
Major Allan C Knox                   ARCC Langley, USA                    Allan.Knox@Langley.af.mil
                                                                          757 764 3980
Dan Lemon**                          US Coast Guard                       202 267 1582
                                                                          dlemon@comdt.uscg.mil
Romualdas Rackauskas                 ARCC Vilnius                         +370 52739185
                                                                          Rackauskas.r@ans.lt
Algimantas Valiukenas                MRCC Klaipeda                        +370 46499695
                                                                          algimantas@msa.lt

Ekrem Ozcan                          Main Search and Rescue               +90 (312)231 91 05
                                     Co-ordination Center Ankara,         Ekocan70@yahoo.com
                                     Turkey
Hakan Durmaz                         Main Search and Rescue Co-           +90 312 231 9105
                                     ordination Center Ankara, Turkey     h.durmaz@mynet.com
Stan Deno                            ICCL                                 703 5228463
                                                                          sdeno@iccl.org
Vladislav Studenov                   COSPAS-SARSAT Secretariat            +44 (0)20 7728 1462
                                                                          Vladislav_studenov@imso.org
Gerry Keeling                        International Lifeboat Federation    +353 87 6073529
                                                                          gkeeling@rnli.org.uk
Gabriel Kinney                       International Lifeboat Federation    315 456 3911
                                                                          Gabriel.o.kinney@lmco.com
Guy Beale                            UK Hydrographic Office               +44 1823 337900 Ext 3641
                                                                          guy.beale@ukho.gov.uk
Anja Nachtegaal                      Netherlands Coastguard               +312 2365 8309
                                                                          anja.nachtegaal@kustwacht.nl
Angelos Giocaus                      Legal Expert, Ministry of Foreign    +302 103681322 office
                                     Affairs
Christos N Kouvertaris               Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority    +302 108916169
      ae11a7e0-8fb7-4d9f-8eb3-46ddcccff0f3.doc
       ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
       Appendix A                                  A-2

Name                      Organisation                        E-mail and telephone
                                                              Hcaad4c@yahoo.gr
Pavlos G Fotiou           Greece MOD/HNGS                     +302 1065 51275
                                                              law@hellenicnavy.gr
Lt Col E Protopappas      Greece – MOD/HAFGS                  00 30 210 6591321
                                                              a3c.gs@haf.gr
Commander HCG Sivitos     Hellenic Coastguard/ Embassy of     +442077270326/+442077270507
George                    Greece in London                    sivitosadamaki@hotmail.com
Tetsuya Yamaji            The Japan Association of Marine     +44 (0)20 7488 3168
                          Safety                              CXQ05210@nifty.ne.jp
Toshiya Hayama            Japan Coast Guard                   +81 (0)3 3581 2828
                                                              Toshiya-hayama@kaiho.mlit.go.jp
Raymond K.W. Tse*         Civil Aviation Department, Hong     852 29106813
                          Kong China                          rkwtse@cad.gov.hk
Summy Chu**               MRCC Hong Kong China                852 22337868
                                                              summychu@mardep.gov.hk
Fançois Escaffre**        National Maritime SAR               331 5363 4759
                          Co-ordination France                francois.escaffre@sgmer.pm.gouv.fr
Yves Thevenot*            French Civil Aviation               yves.thevenot@aviation-civile.gouv.fr
Gregory Lievre            African Civil Aviation Commission   +221 8399397
                                                              glievre@afcac-cafac.org
Kevin Grieve*             Canadian Air Force                  +1 613 945 7455
                                                              Grieve.kg@forces.gc.ca
Ron Miller**              Canadian Coast Guard                +1 613 990 3119
                                                              millerR@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Dave Cole*                RCC Australia                       +61 2 6279 5720
                                                              dave.cole@amsa.gov.au
Youngso Kim               IMO Secretariat                     +44 207 463 4263
                                                              ykim@imo.org
Vladimir Lebedev          IMO Secretariat                     +44 207 587 3111
                                                              vlebedev@imo.org
Urban Hallberg**          Swedish Maritime Administration     +46 11 191117
                                                              urban.hallberg@sjofartsverket.se
Tai Kit*                  Civil Aviation Authority of         +65 6541 2665
                          Singapore
Brian Day                 ICAO                                +1 514954 8219 Ext 5872
                                                              bday@icao.int
Capt A S Olopoenia        NMA Nigeria
Simon Burch               MoD – UK                            +44 (0)207 2184664
Capt Marcos Augusto de    Alternate Permanent Rep to IMO      020 8246 4487
Almeida                   (Brazil)                            maugusto@mar.org.uk
Tony Patterson            Canada
Victor Nosike             Nigerian Airspace Management        234-1-4931320
                          Agency (NAMA)                       vnosike@yahoo.com
                                                              vnosike@namc-ng.com
Eiegr Angus I Ozoka       Federal Ministry of Aviation PMB    ozokaaife@yahoo.co.uk
                          5012 Nigeria
Y Mohammed                Nigeria
                                                                             ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                       A-3                   Appendix A

Name                          Organisation                     E-mail and telephone
Brian Mullan                  INMARSAT Observer                +44 20 7728 1464
                                                               brian_mullan@inmarsat.com
Gordon Johnston               EMS Technologies                 Johnston.g@emstechnologies.ca
                                                               613 727 1771
M M Liman                     Federal Ministry of Transport,   080 44 1702 48
                              Nigeria                          liman70@hotmail.com




      * Aeronautical Representative
      ** Maritime Representative




                                         ——————————
                                                                              ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                              Appendix B

                                           APPENDIX B

                                        DRAFT AGENDA


1.    Adoption of the agenda

2.      Consideration of terms of reference - future work of the Joint Working Group and
priorities:

      1)     briefing of the outcome of the COMSAR 5 and MSC 74

      2)     briefing on outcome of ICAO activities related to the JWG work


3.    Provisions of conventions, plans, manuals and other documents affecting SAR:

      1)     status of the Maritime SAR Convention

      2)     progress report on the possible alignment of the IMO Area SAR Plans, GMDSS Master
             Plan and ICAO Regional Air Navigation Plans

      3)     progress report on the possible alignment of ICAO Annex 12 to the Maritime SAR
             Convention

      4)     further work on the IAMSAR Manual, availability for training - institutions, priority
             items for amendments

      5)     list of references to the IAMSAR Manual


4.    SAR operational principles, procedures and techniques:

      1)     safety of large passenger ships

      2)     mass rescue operations

      3)     medical intervention teams

      4)     overland search planning for missing aircraft

      5)     experiences from major disasters which might affect the SAR services

      6)     media relations

      7)     aircraft coordinator (ACO)

      8)     non-rescue aircraft interfering in rescue operations
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
Appendix B                                       B-2

       9)     hypothermia

       10)    escape, rescue, recovery from oil rigs


5.     SAR system administration, organization and implementation methods:

       1)     SAR database

       2)     development of minimum standards and guidelines

       3)     quality/improvement (risk assessment)

       4)     debriefing report

       5)     status report on the "international SAR fund"

       6)     review of various "Technical co-operation projects" and their impact on implementing
              and maintaining SAR services

6.     RCC/RSC equipment and facility designations and standards:

       1)     use of Internet in RCC/RSC work

       2)     status of AIS and related systems in aeronautical and maritime SAR

7.     SAR communications:

       1)     status of the GMDSS after its full implementation

       2)     future trends in SAR communications

8.     SAR personnel staffing and training:

       1)     development of a RCC Operators Certificate

       2)     future development of joint SAR courses based upon the IAMSAR Manual

       3)     seminars for users of the SAR system

9.     Any other business

10.    Report to ICAO and the COMSAR Sub-Committee

                                   ——————————
                                                                                ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                Appendix C

                                           APPENDIX C

                                     TERMS OF REFERENCE

1.      This Joint Working Group (JWG) is established to develop recommendations and information to
support the IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue and/or ICAO, as
appropriate, on any matters pertinent to harmonization of international maritime and aeronautical SAR.

2.    The JWG will meet as necessary, subject to approval of the IMO Maritime Safety Committee and
ICAO, with meetings hosted and supported by IMO and ICAO on an alternating basis.

3.     Invitations to participate in the JWG will be submitted to respective Member States by both IMO
and ICAO.

4.     Language services will not be provided during JWG meetings.

5.    JWG meetings will generally take place annually about midway between meetings of the IMO
Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue.

6.      The JWG will provide an active interface between IMO and ICAO for harmonization of maritime
and aeronautical SAR plans and procedures in accordance with the 1985 MOU between IMO and ICAO,
and with resolution 1 of the 1979 International Conference on Maritime Search and Rescue.

7.      The JWG will review and develop proposals relating to harmonization in various matters
including:

               a)      provisions of conventions, plans, manuals and other documents affecting SAR;

               b)      SAR operational principles, procedures and techniques;

               c)      SAR system administration, organization and implementation methods;

               d)      RCC/RSC equipment and facility designations and standards;

               e)      SAR communications; and

               f)      SAR personnel staffing and training.

The need for JWG continuation will be reviewed by IMO and ICAO on an ongoing basis; the JWG will
be discontinued when either organization concludes the work is no longer cost effective, and formally
informs the other of its decision to discontinue.


                                      — ———————
                                                                                 ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                 Appendix D

                                             APPENDIX D

                     IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENT : SAR DEBRIEFING

“ 8.9 Incident Debriefings

8.9.1   Debriefings, feedback sessions, and experience sharing opportunities between SAR responders,
        managers, and policy makers are methods of quality control and continuous improvement to a
        SAR system. To benefit from this process, SAR authorities should establish a structured and
        systematic approach to debriefing. Of particular interest would be the following matters:

                a.      extent of the debriefings (what experiences need to be shared);
                b.      focus of the debriefing (strive to focus on the most important issues);
                c.      determine the level of participation at the debriefing;
                d.      ensure each participant defines their needs; and
                e.      determine how the information will flow from the debriefing (normally from the
                        bottom up).

        Although each level of debriefing targets a specific audience, significant benefits can be derived
        from conducting simultaneous/joint debriefings. It is important to note that improvements to a
        SAR system will not be obtained unless recommendations identified by debriefings are reviewed
        and implemented.

8.9.2   Methods of debriefing can be grouped into three categories: operations, liaison, and
        administration. Each category deals with specific segments of an operation that normally
        includes the following:

                a.      Operations:
                        (1)     operations/response;
                        (2)     coordination;
                        (3)     communications;
                        (4)     reporting;
                        (5)     debriefing; and
                        (6)     logs and documents.

                b.      Liaison:
                        (1)     participation in briefings/courses held by various SAR providers;
                        (2)     seminars/workshops/working groups;
                        (3)     RCC coordinator visits to sub-units/agencies/groups;
                        (4)     joint exercises;
                        (5)     visits to neighboring countries; and
                        (5)     participation in international events.

                c.      Administration:
                        (1)    command, communication, and control structure;
                        (2)    policy and regulations;
                        (3)    personnel; and
                        (4)    administrative support.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
Appendix D                                        D-2


8.9.3   The following types of debriefings could be used to assist SAR Authorities improve their system:

                a.      Situation Report (SITREP). As described in chapter 2, this method provides the
                quickest means to forward issues of concern to the responsible authorities;

                b.        SAR Debrief (Search Operation Debriefing Form). As described in chapter 5,
                this debriefing form is intended to report actual actions and observations of rescue
                facilities after each tasking. It provides the opportunity to report areas of concern in a
                more formal way;

                c.      SAR Mission Report. This format would require the primary rescue facilities to
                prepare a quick description of the tasks and actions taken (see Appendix H). This report
                would provide another avenue for responsible authorities to capture areas of concern not
                previously provided in other formats. The concerns would most likely involve broader
                scope issues not necessarily apparent at the time of the event;

                d.      Formal Debriefing Session. This debriefing method could be initiated by a
                participating SAR facility, RCC, or higher authority and would normally involve a more
                in-depth review of issues of concern. Attendance by representatives of all units that
                participated in the incident would be highly desired.           Findings and proposed
                changes/amendments to local procedures would be validated and approved by those
                concerned and promulgated to the responsible authorities for implementation. There
                would be no requirement for a specific format as the results of this debriefing would be
                intended for internal use only (distributed among the various emergency service
                providers); and

                e.       SAR Operation Report. This method of debriefing would be required after a
                significant SAR incident and/or when issues identified in the operation need to be
                addressed. The report would be prepared by the responsible authority in line with the
                process described in section 8.7. The report would be intended for a wider audience,
                which could include outside agencies, government departments, interested groups,
                owners, and operators. Consequently, an established format would be needed to ensure
                adequacy and consistency of the reports (see Appendix H).

8.9.4   The above debriefings are normally conducted for the benefit of certain individuals to meet a
        defined requirement as described in the following table:


          Recipients of Debrief              Situation     SAR          SAR           Formal       SAR
          (Category of Debrief)              Report        Debrief      Mission       Debrief      Operation
                                                                        Report                     Report
          SAR Responders                                                               
          (Operations)
          SAR Coordinators                                                                         
          (Operations/Liaison/Administrati
          on)
                                                                               ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                 D-3                           Appendix D

          SAR Managers                                                                           
          (Operations/Liaison/Administrati
          on)
          SAR Policy Makers                                                                         
          (Administration)
          International Audiences                                                                   
          (Operations/Administration)

Volume III, page 3034, ―SAR Briefing, Debriefing and Tasking‖

Add the following new bullet:

      Masters and pilots-in-command of SAR facilities not designated as search and rescue units should
       also be contacted by the SMC or OSC for debriefing.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
Appendix D                                    D-4

                                                      Operation Briefing and Tasking Forms


         SAR MISSION REPORT - AIRCRAFT/VESSEL
SAR CASE IDENTIFICATION: ____________________

DATE: _________________________________________

SAR UNIT REPORTING: _________________________


NARRATIVES

OPERATIONS — (Include narrative account of the conduct of the mission. Amplify factors that
affected the mission including location of incident, delay in responding, terrain/sea and
environmental conditions, procedures used, problems encountered during incident, etc)

MEDICAL — (Description of the patient‘s condition to include vitals, diagnosis and treatment
given, etc on scene and on arrival/release to other medical authority. Attach medical reports if
applicable. Note - distribution of medical reports and any personal information should be
classified)

EQUIPMENT REPORT — (Comments on the equipment used including inadequacies,
malfunctions, etc. If changes recommended, indicate what follow-up action has been taken)

ATTACHMENTS - (maps, photographs, etc)


DISTRIBUTION LIST

SAR Responders
SAR Coordinators
SAR Managers
                                                                                ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                D-5                             Appendix D

                                                          Operation Briefing and Tasking Forms


                                  SAR OPERATION REPORT

TITLE (SAR CASE IDENTIFICATION)

PART I       SEARCH OBJECT DETAILS
      (Equipment onboard, location of incident, intended route with timings, nature of emergency,
      weather, etc)

PART II      DETAILS OF SAR OPERATION

      1.     RCC ACTION

             a. Brief narrative of initial actions from log.

             b. SAR Facilities tasked, response times.

             c. Basic assumptions regarding the search object.

      2.     SEARCH OPERATION

             a. Rationale for the search plan.

             b. Explanation of any changes to the search plan.

             c. Brief outline of each day‘s search activities including areas covered, SAR Facilities
                used and general weather.

             d. If object is found, a complete explanation of how, to include type of SAR Facilities,
                altitude and/or distance, from what position in SAR Facilities, what was visual
                reference, was spotter trained, phase of flight, time of day, search conditions, distress
                beacon details, etc.

             e. If object not found, why (in general terms).

      3.     RESCUE OPERATION

             a. Condition of survivors.

             b. SAR Facilities used.

             c. Evacuation details.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
Appendix D                                     D-6

               d. Problems encountered, if any.

PART III       TERMINATION/SUSPENSION

        1.     OBJECT LOCATED (Date/time, location, survivors, fatalities, missing etc.)

        2.     SEARCH SUSPENDED (Authority for suspension, survivors, fatalities, missing,
etc.)

PART IV        CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

        1.     SMC CONCLUSIONS

        2.     SMC RECOMMENDATIONS (May include recommendations to government
               departments, agencies, private companies, etc to help prevent future accidents of
               this kind)

        3.     RCC CHIEF REMARKS

        4.     SAR MANAGER REMARKS

ATTACHMENTS

        1.     Weather reports.

        2.     Sighting reports.

        3.     SAR maps.

        4.     SRU utilization (flying/steaming hours).

        5.     List of objects recovered.

        6.     Photographs (if applicable).


DISTRIBUTION LIST

SM Coordinators
SAR Managers
SAR Policy Makers
International Authorities

                                   ——————————
                                                                               ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                               Appendix E

                                            APPENDIX E

 IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENT : AIRCRAFT COORDINATOR (ACO) JOINING ENTRY
                              REPORT

Add the following text in:
IAMSAR manual volume 2, chapter 1, paragraph 1.2.5, and
IAMSAR manual volume 3, section 3, page 3-5


“Joining entry report
Airborne SRUs should use a standard joining entry report to the ACO when entering a search and rescue
mission area, including:
            A. callsign
            B. nationality (if relevant)
            C. type (specify fixed wing or helicopter and type)
            D. position
            E. altitude (on pressure setting used)
            F. ETA (at relevant point or search area)
            G. endurance on scene
            H. remarks (specific equipment or limits).‖




                                   ——————————
                                                                                 ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                 Appendix F

                                             APPENDIX F

                            IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENT : EDITORIALS


                  PROPOSED DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE IAMSAR MANUAL

In Volume 2, replace ―poor‖ with ―normal‖ where it refers to poor search conditions in the following
provisions:

        4.6.14 [2 places]

        Footnote, page 4-18

        Data box, Figure 4-13

        4.6.14 (a), (b)

        4.6.16 (b)

        4.7.5 (b)(1), (2)

        5.3.6 [3 places]

        Page L-1, Line 17

        Page L-3, Line 17

        Pages N-11 and following in Figures N-5, N-6, N-7, N-8, N-10, N-11, and N-12

Volumes 1 and 2, remove the ―AMVER‖ entry from the list of Abbreviations and Acronyms, and add
―Amver‖ to the Glossary as follows: ―Amver A worldwide ship reporting system for search and rescue‖

Volume 1, 4.5.26, change ―Automated Mutual-assistance Vessel Rescue (AMVER)‖ to ―Amver‖ and
change ―AMVER‖ to ―Amver‖

Volume 2, 1.3.5, change ―Automated Mutual-assistance Vessel Rescue (AMVER)‖ to ―Amver‖

In Volume 2, 1.11.8 (b) and 2.18.5, change ―AMVER‖ to ―Amver‖

In Volume 3, pages 1-4 and 1-5, change the section title ―Automated Mutual-assistance Vessel Rescue
(AMVER) System‖ to ―Amver‖, and in the section change ―AMVER‖ to ―Amver‖ [4 places]


                                    ——————————
                                                                         ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                         Appendix G

                                     APPENDIX G

 IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENT : DISASTER VICTIM IDENTIFICATION

Text to be included in volume 2, paragraph 6.17.7:

―SAR operations are conducted only for assisting persons who may be living. However, it is wise
to consider the capabilities of existing Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) methods and
procedures in the instance of a mass casualty accident.

The DVI operation is a criminal police and forensic science operation carried out according to
national policies and legislation in accordance with standards established by INTERPOL. As it is
not legally a part of the SAR operation, it is not coordinated or supervised by the RCCs.

DVI may be of significant assistance to SAR personnel in those instances where unidentified
human remains are recovered in the course of a SAR case, particularly in those instances of
multiple casualties. This will assist SAR personnel in accounting for the persons who are the
subject of the SAR case, and to verify whether or not additional persons remain missing. This
will facilitate closing the SAR case as expeditiously as possible.

SAR and DVI authorities should cooperate in dealing with the families of missing persons.

DVI systems can usually be accessed through liaison with local or national police agencies.

SAR personnel are encouraged to assist DVI authorities if that is possible based on other
operational commitments and organization policies.‖



                            ——————————
                                                                                  ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                                  Appendix H

                                             APPENDIX H

          IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENTS : ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS


     VOLUME I

     Abbreviations and Acronyms

1       Instead of the word ―Inmarsat‖ insert the abbreviation ― IMSO‖.

2       Insert the new line as follows:

        ― Inmarsat…….satellite communication service provider for the GMDSS‖.

3       For the abbreviation ―SART‖ after the word ―rescue‖ insert the word ―radar‖.


4       For the abbreviation ―TLX‖ instead of the word ―teletype‖ include the word ―telex‖.

     Glossary

5       Delete the words ―International Mobile Satellite Organization‖ and brackets around the word
        ―Inmarsat‖.

6       Instead of existing glossary of NAVTEX and SafetyNET insert the new ones as defined in the
        appropriate IMO publications.

     Appendix D

7       Update address information as appropriate.

     VOLUME II

     Abbreviations and Acronyms

8       For the abbreviation ―gt‖, instead of the word ―ton‖, insert the word ―tonnage‖.

9       Instead of the word ―Inmarsat‖ insert the abbreviation ― IMSO‖.

10      Insert the new line as follows:

        ― Inmarsat…….satellite communication service provider for the GMDSS‖.

11      ―NM‖ for nautical mile should read ―nm‖.

12      For the abbreviation ―SART‖ after the word ―rescue‖ insert the word ―radar‖.
ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
Appendix H                                          H-2


     Glossary

13      Delete the words ―International Mobile Satellite Organization‖ and brackets around the word
        ―Inmarsat‖.

14      Instead of existing glossary of NAVTEX and SafetyNET insert the new ones as defined in the
        appropriate IMO publications.

     VOLUME III

     Abbreviations and Acronyms

15      For the abbreviation ―gt‖, instead of the word ―ton‖, insert the word ―tonnage‖.

16      Instead of the word ―Inmarsat‖ insert the abbreviation ― IMSO‖.

18      Insert the new line as follows:

        ― Inmarsat…….satellite communication service provider for the GMDSS‖.

19      ―NM‖ for nautical mile should read ―nm‖.

20      For the abbreviation ―SART‖ after the word ―rescue‖ insert the word ―radar‖.

     Glossary

21      Instead of existing text for ―Inmarsat‖ insert the text as given in Volumes I and II.

22      Instead of existing glossary of NAVTEX and SafetyNET insert the new ones as defined in the
        appropriate IMO publications.


                                     ——————————
                                                                           ICAO/IMO-JWG/SAR
                                                                           Appendix I

                                             APPENDIX I

                               IAMSAR MANUAL AMENDMENTS :
                                      ACO TRAINING

Add the following text in IAMSAR Manual Volume 1, Chapter 2. New paragraph 2.6.3 and 2.6.4

―Aircraft coordinator (ACO) joint training

2.6.3   The SAR management should provide ACO training between SRU crews from different
        organizations that might act as ACOs. The ACO training should improve understanding of the
        ACO role and increase confidence amongst the participating ACOs.

2.6.4   The ACO training can consist of:

               Experiences from live SAR missions;
               Legal documents;
               Duties for operating organisations;
               Performance characteristics of SRUs;
               Typical cases and methods;
               Role-playing between SMC – ACO;
               Paper exercises.‖




                                              — END —

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:56
posted:8/22/2011
language:English
pages:47