Preventing and managing fatigue in the Shipping industry

TNO Quality of Life TNO-report TNO report R08-673 031.10575 Preventing and managing fatigue in the Shipping industry Work and Employment Polarisavenue 151 P.O. Box 718 2130 AS Hoofddorp The Netherlands www.tno.nl/arbeid T +31 23 554 93 93 F +31 23 554 93 94 Date October 27 th, 2008 Authors Annick Starren, Madelon van Hooff, Irene Houtman, Nicole Buys (TNO), Audrey Rost-Ernst, Sjoerd Groenhuis, Ronald Janssens (STC-Group), Drew Dawson (Centre for Sleep Research, University of South Australia). No part of this publication may be reproduced and/or published by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without the previous written consent of TNO. In case this report was drafted on instructions, the rights and obligations of the contracting parties are subject to either the Standard Conditions for Research Instructions given to TNO, or the relevant agreement concluded between the contracting parties. 2008 TNO

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 2

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 3 Contents Executive summary... 5 1 Introduction and background... 15 1.1 Research Questions and project activities... 16 2 Phase 1: the time-use study... 19 2.1 Introduction and goal... 19 2.2 Method... 19 2.2.1 Target group... 19 2.2.2 The time-use diary questionnaire... 20 2.2.3 Development of list of activities... 23 2.2.4 Participation by ship owners... 23 2.2.5 Participants and Procedure... 24 2.2.6 The questionnaire... 24 2.2.7 Additional questions... 25 2.3 Results... 26 2.3.1 Respondents... 26 2.3.2 Time-use on board... 26 2.3.3 Effort... 34 2.3.4 Transferability... 35 2.3.5 Transferability in relation to time and effort... 40 2.3.6 Sleep & Fatigue... 45 2.4 Summary and conclusions... 48 2.4.1 Conclusions on delegation of tasks... 48 3 Phase 2: the study on Fatigue Management... 53 3.1 Introduction and goal... 53 3.2 Methods... 55 3.2.1 Literature and internet search on fatigue management... 55 3.2.2 Interviewing experts on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems... 55 3.3 Results: literature and internet search on fatigue management... 56 3.4 Results: expert interviews on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems... 60 3.4.1 The old and the new approach to fatigue management... 60 3.4.2 Ingredients of a F(R)MS recommended by the experts... 63 3.4.3 High-level aspects of a F(R)MS... 64 3.4.4 Proactive measures as potential ingredients of an FMS... 70 3.4.5 Reactive fatigue measures as potential ingredients of an FMS... 74 3.5 A framework for fatigue management... 76 3.6 Comments on the implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry... 79 3.6.1 Conditions for a successful implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry... 79 3.7 Fatigue management measures in the shipping industry... 81 3.8 Conclusions fatigue management... 81

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 4 4 Phase 3: economic consequences and consequences for training... 83 4.1 Transfer maintenance activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system... 83 4.2 Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems... 84 4.3 Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer or the 2nd officer in 3-watch system... 86 4.4 Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems... 86 4.5 Transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system... 87 4.6 Transfer of safety & training activities from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system... 87 4.7 Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process)... 88 4.8 Fatigue Incident reporting... 88 4.9 Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry... 89 4.10 Summary & conclusions... 89

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 5 Executive summary As a follow-up to our earlier research on fatigue 1 in the shipping industry, the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management has asked TNO and the STC Group Rotterdam to do research on Fatigue Management Programs and other measures to reduce and prevent the risk of fatigue in the shipping industry. Measures are explicitely related to the delegation or redistribution of workload from the master and 1 st officer on the bridge, or by undertaking more integrated 'Fatigue Management' activities to combat fatigue at the organisational level. Hence, delegation or workload redistribution is assumed to be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of Fatigue Management System (FMS). Proper and effective implementation of a FMS identifies if the whole system is out of balance and if reallocation of work may be necessary. This study aimed at answering three main questions: 1. Which activities on board and/or in port do seafaring officers perform, what time do they actually take, which of these activities take a lot of effort and which can be organized more optimally, e.g. by being delegated to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload? 2. What are potentially effective elements of a Fatigue Management System and what are the preconditions for implementing these fatigue measures, especially the measures that are compatible with the 'Safety Management System' that prevent or tackle fatigue effectively? 3. What is the expected effect of the most feasible fatigue (FMS) measures on the short sea shipping industry and maritime education in the Netherlands? The first question was tackled by a time use study. In order to further look into the potential effectiveness of Fatigue Management Systems a literature study was performed, followed by interviewing experts in the field. Additionally, a conference was held with sector representatives who were fed back the preliminary data of this study and were challenged to respond both on the findings of the time use study and the findings on 'FMS's'. Finally a cost estimate was performed on the most effective, feasible, acceptable and compatible measures. Time use study The results of this time use study can be used to select the tasks that can have the most effect in preventing fatigue. An overview of tasks and their categories as studied are given in the main text on page 19 (table 1). The assumption is that delegation of tasks that take much time and effort in combination will make the largest difference. Conclusions can be drawn for the master and the deck officers in the 2 and 3 watch system at the level of categories. There is not enough information available to draw conclusions neither for the engineer officers nor for the subcategories. The conclusions based on the data from the 2- watch and the 3-watch system have to be interpreted with caution due to the few number of respondents. 1 In this study, the use of the word fatigue does not necessarily refer to over -tiredness or exhaustion. Fatigue as defined here is the same as is used in the former research on fatigue and as is formulated by the IMO: 'Fatigue is a reduction in physical and/or mental capacity as the result of physical, mental, or emotional exertion which may impair nearly all physical abilities including: strength, speed, reaction time, coordination, decision making or balance'.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 6 The time used to perform a predetermined and tested set of activities was registered for mainly masters (n=43), 1 st deck officers (n=20), 2 nd deck officers (n=20) as well as some chief engineer officers (n=6) and 2 nd /3 rd engineer officers (n=6). On total 95 working days were registered, from which most of them at sea Time Regarding time-use, the results show that, on average, masters and deck officers spend most of their working time on watchkeeping activities and that engineer officers devote most of their time to maintenance activities. Activities with respect to safety, security and training generally take the least time of seafarers daily time-budgets. See for an example of time use figures a1, a2 and a3. time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training 2 watch 3 watch day duty 2+3 watch/other 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure a1: Time use of the Mater per 24 hours (in minutes) time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training on-shore off-shore both 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure a2: Time use of the master at sea and in port (in minutes)

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 7 The master spends most of his time on watchkeeping, slightly more working in a 3 watch system than in a 2 watch system. This outcome may appear illogical at first, which can be seen as a consequence of the seafarer s scoring the more active activities that are done in combination with watchkeeping, e.g. navigation, instead of pure watchkeeping. Navigation tasks are indeed most common among masters working in a 2 watch or 2+3 watch/other watch system. Time on administration tasks is equal in all watch systems. Tasks related to loading/discharging/cargo care are mostly conducted by masters working day-duty. Masters also spend time on command & control, the most in the 2+3 watch/other watch systems. Generally, masters conduct most administrative tasks in port and have most off-duty time in port as well. time-use officers per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities 783 806 Watchkeeping 231 295 Navigation 95 Administration 23 10 37 Loading/discharging/cargo care 201 Command & Control Communication Organization and Leadership Maintenance Safety, Security and Training 71 0 3 26 6 0 86 7 31 150 1st officer 2nd/3rd officer/marof 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure a.3 Time-use of the 1 st and 2 nd officer or dual purpose officer per 24 hours (in minutes) The 1 st deck officers spend most of their time on watchkeeping and navigation. Navigation tasks are conducted most in day duty (which is logical) and considerably more in a 2 watch system than in a 3 watch system. Watchkeeping activities are performed by 1 st officers, slightly more in a 3 watch than in a 2 watch system. Just like watchkeeping, activities regarding loading/discharging and cargo care are mostly executed by 1 st officers working a 2+3watch/other watch system. The 2 nd /3 rd deck officers/dual purpose officers spend most time on watchkeeping (except when working day-duty). Maintenance activities, and also loading/discharging cargo are relatively often performed working day-duty. Maintenance is mostly executed in port. Most chief engineer officers, and all 2 nd and 3 rd engineer officers in this study work day duty. Chief engineer officers working spend most of their time on maintenance, administration and watchkeeping, and also on organization & leadership. In a 2+3 watch/other watch system they spend more time on administration and in day duty more on watchkeeping. Effort With respect to effort, the results of this study show that off-duty activities are generally not considered as effortful, as to be expected. However, maintenance activities are on average the most effortful work tasks. These findings are also observed for the master. Within this rank, navigation tasks are considered as rather effortful as well. In general, 1 st deck officers consider loading/discharging/cargo care activities among the most effortful activities, and indicate that tasks with respect to safety, security and training are effortful as well.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 8 The 1 st deck officers, 2 nd /3 rd deck officers/dual purpose officers indicate that loading/discharging/cargo care tasks are relatively effortful as well, and consider these tasks as even more effortful than the 1 st deck officers. Maintenance activities are effortful as well within this group. The average effort attributed in these ranks is higher than the effort attributed in the other ranks. Tasks with respect loading/discharging/cargo care are judged as most effortful by the chief engineer and they consider these tasks as more effortful than the 2 nd /3 rd engineer officers. This latter group of workers considers tasks with respect to communication as most effortful. Transferability Tasks that are considered to be most suitable to be delegated are those regarding safety, security and training. These tasks require nonetheless only a limited amount of daily work time. To a lesser extend loading/discharging/cargo care, organization & leadership and for 2 nd /3 rd deck officers tasks with respect to maintenance are considered effortful. Most interesting are the tasks which are transferable and take a lot of time and/or are effortful. For the master and the 1 st deck officer in the 2 watch and in the 3 watch system, a closer look has been taken at the combinations of transferability on the one hand, and time and effort on the other. For the master in the 2 watch system, these analyses show that tasks regarding organization & leadership and maintenance are among the most suitable for delegation: these tasks are considered to be transferable and are also considered relatively effortful, but do not require a lot of time. For the master in the 3 watch system, tasks with respect to communication and safety, security and training are considered to be most transferable. Only a limited amount of time is spent on 'maintenance', but these activities are considered as rather effortful. Time and effort for safety, security and training are average. In the 2 watch system, the 1 st deck officer assesses that activities regarding loading/discharging/cargo care can also be delegated, but these activities are not reported to take a lot of time and effort. Navigation is considered to be mediocre in transferability and it can result in saving a lot of time and effort. In the 3-watch system, tasks with respect to watchkeeping are the most transferable ones, they require a lot of time and are quite effortful. In the two watch system watchkeeping activities are also considered transferable, but these are not the most effortful tasks. Loading/discharging/cargo care is considered less transferable but when transferred, a lot of time and effort can be gained. Fatigue and sleep Fatigue as reported here refers to the level of overall tiredness in a range form 1 to 10. On average, participants sleep about 8 out of 24 hours. Hours of sleep vary across ranks: chief engineers sleep substantially less than 1 st officers. Generally, masters and officers sleep least on days during which they are both in port and at sea. The respondents rate the quality of their sleep as very good in all ranks. The seafarers score themselves in the centre between not fatigued" and very fatigued. For master and deck officers, fatigue levels are generally higher during work than during off-duty time. Their work-related fatigue is highest during in port days. To be mentioned is that for engineer officers the levels of fatigue do not decrease substantially after work.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 9 Based on the fatigue and sleep results, it can be concluded that fatigue scores work out quite well for most of the groups, but there are varying fatigue levels across rank and watch systems that ask for more analyses and research. In addition, the quality of sleep is considered to be good enough. The largest gain in handling fatigue appears to be at the days that ships arrive at or depart from port Potential activities for delegation The time use study has resulted in a set of potential activities for delegation, which are not only specified on the basis of the time-use study, but also on the input from the workshop with delegates from the shipping industry who were presented the preliminary findings of (amongst others) the findings of the time use study: 1. Transfer of maintenance activities from master to the engineer officer(s) in 2- watch system; 2. Transfer of loading, & discharging & administration activities to shore in all watch- systems; 3. Transfer of watchkeeping activities from 1st deck officer to the dual purpose officer/ 2nd deck officer in 3-watch system; 4. Transfer of administration activities to software in all watch- systems; 5. Transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer officer(s) in 2-watch system; 6. Transfer of safety& training activities from master to the 1st deck officer in 3- watch system. At last, the time-use study showed us that there is significant opportunity for transferring or delegating tasks, e.g. to other crew members, the shore etc. On the other hand there is not yet sufficient information to enable clear policy to inform the specific details on when, to who and how to delegate workload in order to reduce fatigue-related risk. This still depends on a more detailed understanding of the relationship between the person, time and situation and the resultant fatigue-related risk. Actually, it is good fatigue management, which is also needed to contextualize these types of task allocation process Fatigue management and its potential to prevent and manage fatigue, is described in the second part of this study. Ideally, a good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute workload when somebody inevitably ends up tired. Delegation may be a way of fatigue proofing (the management of fatigue related errors) in a way that is attractive to the industry, cost effective and realizable in the short-term. Important is not to forget that delegation may just be a part of the solution. Fatigue Management Systems and their preconditions In the 3 rd chapter of this report a framework for Fatigue (Risk) Management systems is provided, together with its most frequent and most recommended ingredients. Fatigue Management is introduced as a way to contextualize the task allocation process as potential part of a package of effective measures for fatigue management. A good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance, what the risk factors for fatigue are or may be, and if reallocation of work is necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute activities in work from who to whom.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 10 Tools appear to be available that identify if the system is out of balance -i.e. efforts put into work are not fully compensated for by the rest periods provided for or taken-, what exactly the fatigue risks are, and what the organization can do to manage these fatigue risk and how to bring activities back in balance (risk mitigation). The latter is preferably done by way of integrating fatigue management into the company s (e.g. safety management) systems and S.O.P. s (Standard Operating Procedures). One of the main conclusions is that fatigue management is a process. It is not some kind of paperwork. An important aspect of preventing fatigue is that fatigue should be seen as just one of the risks (financial, safety, business continuity) in an organization. The occurrence of fatigue has a frequency and consequence. Fatigue has to be managed in such a way that the most severe consequences have to be prevented. Moreover, fatigue as a risk can be a part of a broader (safety) management system. Over the last years, one can speak of an old and a new approach to fatigue management. The old approach can be characterized as: - aimed at the direct cause of fatigue, e.g. measures focused on a person who is already fatigued; - an individual responsibility, aiming at the aspects relevant to the personal vulnerability for fatigue for a/that individual; - well known measures against fatigue to be used (drinking caffeine, napping, training on awareness); - restrictions in the amount of working hours. The new approach can be characterized as: - need to look at the chain of events further away in time and location from the actual event; - to be initiated from within the organization s policy (safety mgt); - a shared responsibility; - countermeasures which are defined at several levels, aimed at schedulers, operators (e.g. drivers) and executives/managers; - measures how to assess personal fatigue risks (early warning signals). The common thought is that several (as opposed to one) measures are necessary to have an effective F(R)MS. The 5-level model of Dawson has given us a framework for fatigue management measures at all levels. Inspired by the philosophy of the 'Reason s Swiss Cheese Model', the model reflects the range of tools or measures to take at all levels, starting from proactive prevention of fatigue to eventually handling fatigue as it occurs. Moreover, management commitment, good communication and training on fatigue at all levels are necessary. The model is a framework for the variety of options to manage fatigue. At the end, it is the fit to the organisation s culture that is most critical for success. Interesting options for the implementation of fatigue management in the Shipping Industry, more specifically, are measures that are compatible with the ISM code. For example the integration/inclusion of fatigue in (company) incident reporting (see ISM Code, section 9) is considered to be an interesting option. Another interesting example is a fatigue management training program, compatible with the existing training and education of seafarers, e.g. the BRM (Bridge Resource Management) and the ERM (Engine room Resource Management) training. Rostering analysis models could not only help the industry in signalling fatigue, it can also be the beginning of more flexibility in (watch) scheduling.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 11 This has lead to the following 3 potential measures: 1. Implementation of fatigue management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process). 2. Fatigue to be integrated/included in (company) incident reporting. 3. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry. Economic consequences and consequences for training Selection of the delegation and fatigue management measures is based on the results of both the time-use study as well as the fatigue management overview and more specifically the input from sector representatives in the workshops of the conference organised to feed back the preliminary results of this study (phase 1 and phase 2). Criteria for selection of the measures were: Effectiveness in reducing fatigue. Feasibility. Acceptance within the sector. Compatibility with existing procedures & regulation, e.g. the ISM code.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 12 Table a1 below summarises the above findings related to the costs of potentially effective, feasible, acceptable and in principle compatible fatigue reducing measures Measure Effectiveness Cost in euro per Investment costs day per ship 1. Transfer maintenance activities from Limited time reduction 25 master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system 2. Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload 600 Possible training costs for the shore personnel 3. Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st off to the dual officer/ 2nd officer in 3-watch system Significant reduction in workload; Flexible 100 (based on 2 hrs) 4. Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload, but with limitations none Significant (investment & training) 5. Transfer Organization & leadership Limited none activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system reduction in workload 6. Transfer Safety& Training activities Limited reduction in 25 from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system workload 7. Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the Significant effect because of more awareness 800 / ship for training of 1 person BRM, ERM training -group process). 8. Fatigue Incident reporting Limited time reduction 9. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry Effect dependent of implementation on board Regarding measures 1-6, the transfer of loading and discharging activities appears to be the most effective delegation measure, also taken into account that good rest periods in port means a safe situation to start the forthcoming sea voyage. The need to have shore personnel (a super cargo- available in each port to control the actual loading and unloading of the ship means significant additional costs but has advantages from a fatigue point of view as well as cargo handling point of view. Other transferring measures are less effective regarding the total reduction in workload or time but if all of them can be applied, a significant improvement of the workload for master and 1st officer can be arranged. Extra costs by these measures are limited compared to the total costs per day. Reduction of administrative work on board will certainly reduce fatigue. Costs of development has restrained the development of automatic administrative computer programs and sensor equipment But nowadays there are already some good examples of administrative supporting programs. Also the use of broadband internet has become more and more common. In particular for this measure cooperation with Administrations and inspection organizations is essential.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 13 The incorporation of a super cargo is a valuable option to reduce fatigue on ships with a 2 watch system. If the super cargo is not an option, the cargo handling activities should remain with the 1 st officer. Then, in the 2 watch system, more flexible multitasking is required. This is an option for the smaller ships, e.g. carrying break bulk. In other situations with more complexity, the 1st officer in port should remain free from any other tasks as well as during the period before arrival and after departure. This means that either one 1 st officer extra is needed to take over watch obligations in these periods or tasks should be delegated to for example the chief engineer. This extra officer can also take over other tasks from the master and 1st officer. With the availability of this dual purpose officer, maintenance work on deck and in the engine room can be carried out as well. Theoretically, with a well considered effort of this extra dual purpose officer, the total cost of one extra officer on ship originally having a 2 watch system could be limited and even negligible compared to extra shore personnel for loading and discharging activities. Nevertheless, although the incorporation of an extra dual purpose officer may effectively reduce or prevent fatigue of master and officers, (senior) dual officers are hard to find at the moment and their availability will probably even be more limited in the future. Moreover, the issue of accommodation will be a problem on the smaller ships. NB: it is important to realize that transferring tasks can also be a way of shifting the problem of fatigue, e.g. when it leads to difficulties in (intercultural) communication. Therefore, monitoring these task delegations is necessary. Regarding measures 7-10 Transferring tasks/delegation or workload redistribution will be the most effective when it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). A proper and effective FRMS identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A FRMS also gives an answer to the question of how to bring the system back in balance (risk mitigating). Measures 7 9 are recommended as fatigue management measures for the shipping industry. To combat fatigue related risks, it is important to define measures at all levels of the 5 level model of fatigue management. In the chapters on fatigue management we have given more examples of possible fatigue management activities that identify whether the system is out of balance, what the fatigue risks are, what the organization s S.O.P. s for managing the risk are, and how to bring it back in balance. Transferring cargo activities and integration of fatigue management issues into the BRM training is assumed to be most effective. To conclude: This study has given insight in how to handle fatigue risks in the shipping industry. The transfer or delegation of tasks can restructure crew members workload in such a way that major errors and incidents may be less likely to occur. This is also called workload re-distribution. The delegation or workload re-distribution will be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). For a successful implementation of a FRMS. fatigue management has to be seen as a process, which starts with the discussion of when fatigue actually becomes a risk. The next step for the sector is the further exploration and exchange of (current) experiences, also abroad and in other sectors. This report gives the opportunity to share the (international) state of the art thoughts and ideas on fatigue management approaches. We hope this will encourage the sector to make use of them.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 14 As was stated in the symposium which was held to discuss the present research findings with the sector: Maybe we are already managing fatigue but we are not aware of it. We have to make it visible! Nowadays, when a major shipping accident happens, people will ask: is there environmental pollution or not?. Should there be pollution, the first question should be: what have we done to prevent fatigue?. Then we have to be able to show society that we are dealing with it.. When there is a threat of regulation, fatigue management be a way to do it yourselves, and keep flexibility in the way how to do it. It is quite complicated. If there were already golden solutions, the sector would probably already have done it that way.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 15 1 Introduction and background As a follow-up to our earlier research on fatigue 2 in the shipping industry, the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management has asked TNO and the STC Group Rotterdam to do research on Fatigue Management Programs and other measures to reduce and prevent the risk of fatigue in the shipping industry. Fatigue is nowadays seen as an important issue in the shipping industry. Fatigue has been recognized more and more as a risk for safety in scientific publications, and it is clear that measures should be taken to prevent and reduce the risk of fatigue. The Exxon Valdez and Herald of Free Enterprise disasters already clearly illustrated the major impact of the human element and fatigue decades ago. Nevertheless fatigue related shipping accidents have continued to occur. Moreover the working environment in the shipping industry has undergone continuous changes in regulation, experienced large increases in the amount of paper work they are obliged to handle, new technologies have been introduced and finally the continuous growth of the sector plays a role in this respect as well. The human element asks for permanent attention in preventing accidents at sea in the future. Managing fatigue related risks in shipping is recognized to be an important avenue for improving safety and preventing future accidents in the sector. In the previous study on the relationship between fatigue, collisions/ groundings and the shift system, it is concluded that: Fatigue is related to an impairment of functioning. Fatigue is involved in 11-25% of the collisions and groundings in the shipping industry (conservative estimation). The literature on relation shift system fatigue/collisions and groundings is inconsistent. Period of 8 hrs rest/uninterrupted sleep is best. In the previous study, the following potential measures were mentioned to prevent fatigue: proper implementation of ISM-Code, optimisation of work organisation on board, lengthening of the rest period and reduction of administrative tasks. The study concluded that, replacement of a 2-shift system by a 3-shift system appeared to be too expensive and also has a major impact on maritime education. Additionally adding someone just for administrative tasks appeared not to be an option. Improvements in the delegation of tasks however could help reduce the risk of fatigue. Another interesting option was flexibility in the shift system, e.g. into 4 hours on, 8 hours off 8 hours on 4 hours off, which accommodates the advice to have at least 8 hour rest, 2 In this study, the use of the word fatigue does not refer necessarily to over-tiredness or exhaustion. As a definition of what characterizes fatigue, we use the same definition as in the former research on fatigue and as is formulated by the IMO, in which fatigue is conceptualised as a 'reduction in physical and/or mental capacity as the result of physical, mental, or emotional exertion which may impair nearly all physical abilities including: strength, speed, reaction time, coordination, decision making or balance'. Fatigue can be divided into categories in many different ways. However, systematic studies seem to find between three and five dimensions, including general fatigue (tired, bushed, exhausted), mental fatigue (cognitive impairment), physical fatigue, and sleepiness (tendency to fall asleep), and sometimes motivation or lack of activity (Akerstedt et al, 2004).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 16 and preserves the regularity in shifts over 24 hours. Lastly setting up a Fatigue Management program in line with the implementation of the ISM code and as an integrated part of safety management was seen as an interesting measure. In this report we present the results of a follow-up study. In this study the focus is on delegation or redistribution of tasks and the potential effective design and implementation of a Fatigue Management System as promising measures to combat fatigue. 1.1 Research Questions and project activities. The research questions are based upon the conclusions of the former research, in which delegation of tasks and the design and implementation of a Fatigue Management System were recommended as a potentially effective measure to prevent or reduce the risk of fatigue. The research questions of this study are formulated as follows: 1. Which activities on board and/or in the port do seafaring officers perform, what time do they actually take, which of these activities take a lot of effort and which can be organized more optimally, e.g. by being delegated to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload? 2. What are potentially effective elements of a Fatigue Management System and what are the preconditions for implementing these fatigue measures, especially the measures that are compatible with the 'Safety Management System' that prevent or tackle fatigue effectively? 3. What is the expected effect of the most feasible fatigue (FMS) measures on the short sea shipping industry and maritime education in the Netherlands? To answer this research question, the study consists out of three phases: Phase 1: In the first phase, the first research question was answered. A time-use study was designed and conducted among masters, officers and engineers on board various ships. With this time-use study tasks and activities of the master and officers were identified, the effort required was assessed, and the possibility to organize these tasks more optimally, e.g. delegate to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload, was explored. STC-Group and TNO have asked shipping companies for their participation. Participating companies supplied job descriptions and/or completed time use studies by their officers. The result of phase 2 is an overview of activities that can be delegated in order to lighten the master s and officer s workload. Phase 2: In the second phase the second research question on Fatigue Management was answered. A literature and internet search was done and interviews were held with internationals experts. In this manner good practices of the implementation of a Fatigue Management System to prevent fatigue are identified. These could also be outside the shipping industry, for example in road transport, where these systems have been implemented regularly. Subsequently, Prof Drew Dawson has complemented the research as an international expert on 'Fatigue Management Systems' by reviewing these best practices and formulating preconditions for the implementation of such a system in shipping. Phase 2 resulted in a framework for a Fatigue Management System. Whilst answering the first two research questions a set of potential measures to manage fatigue were found. These preliminary results have been presented to and discussed

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 17 with representatives of the Dutch shipping sector and some international experts at an invitational Conference. The input of the sector has been used to help define the final measures. Phase 3: in the third phase a set of potential measure was selected for further in-depth research into their financial consequences for the (short sea) shipping industry and consequences for maritime education. The consequences were assessed to answer the third research question. The following parties have been involved in the project: TNO Work and Employment: - Literature and internet search & experts interviews on implementation of Fatigue Management Systems. - Time use study. STC-Group Rotterdam - Time use study. - Consequences of the implementation of fatigue management measures. Professor Drew Dawson from the Centre of Sleep Research, the University of South Australia. - Review and advice on FMS. Members of the Sounding board committee: The Dutch Ministry of Transport DGTL, the Netherlands Shipping Inspectorate, KVNR (Royal Association of Netherlands Ship-owners, Nautilus (Seafarer s Union), NVKK (Dutch Master s Association), VBKO (Dredging company s association) and the Nova (maritime) college. In the next chapter the method and results of a time-use study among Dutch seafarers will be presented (phase 1). This gives insight into delegation or redistribution of tasks as a potential measure to prevent fatigue. In chapter 3 the research methods and results of both our literature review and our interviews with international experts on the implementation of fatigue programs within and outside the transport sector, will be presented (phase 2). This results in a framework for the implementation of fatigue management programs in the shipping industry. In chapter 4 the results of the in-depth study on consequences are presented (phase 3). The conclusions and discussion are presented in chapter 5.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 18

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 19 2 Phase 1: the time-use study 2.1 Introduction and goal The former report on Fatigue in the shipping industry (Houtman et al, 2005) suggested that task delegation is a potential measure - amongst others- that may potentially reduce fatigue-related risk. Especially since the administrative burden is considered a factor that contributes to fatigue in seafarers. The option of adding a crew member with designated tasks appeared to be unrealistic since the amount of tasks is typically not sufficient to warrant an additional fulltime job. Delegation may be a way to optimise the organisation of work on board vessels. The delegation of tasks can restructure crewmember workload in such a way that major errors and incidents may be less likely to occur. This is also called workload allocation. In our view, delegation permits the transferability of tasks to other ranks, as well as shifting tasks to shore or changing the nature of the task through the use of ICT/ automation. To examine the potential of delegation, a time-use study was designed that aimed to answer the following questions: 1. What activities do seafaring officers perform on board? 2. How much time and effort do these activities take? 3. Is it really necessary that these tasks are carried out by themselves, or can some of these tasks be delegated to other crewmembers, transferred to shore or took over by software? By answering these questions the aim of this part of the study is to identify the tasks and activities of the master and officers, to identify the effort required and the possibility to organize these tasks more optimally, e.g. delegated, with the result of enlightening the master s and officer s workload. The aims of this study were achieved through development of a task list, interviews with nautical experts, development of a time-use questionnaire and the analysis of the data from these questionnaires. The answers to these questions, as well as the research methodology, are presented in this chapter. Note that some parts of this study must be seen as an exploratory study due to the limited amount of respondents. 2.2 Method To obtain answers to these three specific research questions presented in paragraph 2.1, a questionnaire was developed that was completed by masters, deck- and engineer officers on board of ships within the short sea shipping sector. This paragraph deals with the development of the questionnaire, and the procedure of the study. 2.2.1 Target group The focus for the target group of this study was originally drawn to the master and deck officers from ships within the short sea shipping. After a meeting with the Sounding board committee the conclusion was drawn that it would also be very useful to in-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 20 clude the officers from the engine room department. The reason for choosing the target group within the short sea shipping was based on the fact that within the short sea shipping the turnaround time in the port is short and the time on sea is limited to short sea voyages. Within this compressed time a lot of activities have to be conducted. 2.2.2 The time-use diary questionnaire By performing a time use study an integrated picture is established of how the various activities are integrated in the time spent on working and living on board. In this timeuse study the activities and tasks of the master and the officers were documented. By way of a time use diary questionnaire, the participants were asked to report their activities themselves. Respondents recorded their activities in time-use diaries, using a list of tasks added to the questionnaire. The diary covered 24 hours. Each respondent was asked to fill out the diaries for four diary days, when possible two days in port and two days at sea. For an example of the questionnaire see Annex E. In this table the categories of the time use study are described. Activities within these categories are analyzed by their time use, their effort and their transferability. Table 1 Categories of the time use study Categories Time Effort Transferability 1= Command & Control General overview and responsible for safe operation of the vessel Voyage planning Routinely monitoring all shipboard operations Overall responsible for the effective and efficient operation of the technical systems, especially the propulsion plant Responsible for technical department on board (fairly engine room) Overall responsible for safety and environmental aspects of the technical operation Long term maintenance planning Directing and deciding in emergency situations/search and rescue operations etc. Control and supply of matters regarding deck department (inventory, supplies, etc); 2= Organization & Leadership Daily management of the ship Organize and manage the crew Daily work planning meetings Meetings with crew and officers Meeting safety committee Planning daily work of all technical crew/officers, taking into account the requirements of the legislation on hours of work/rest Provide work directions for Oiler s, Wiper s and general marine helpers in the repair and maintenance of the engineering plant operations. Supervising and directing all technical matters Inspection of the ship Monitoring shipboard operations Check loading, tank cleaning and discharge plans Ensure compliance with all applicable laws, federal and company regulations Plan and schedule operations Outsource maintenance and repair work Supervise executed work by contractors

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 21 Categories Time Effort Transferability 3= Administration Preparing masters standing orders Maintaining/filling in Night Order Book Complete port entry/clearance documentation (arrival and departure checklists) Maintain all documentation, certification and other paperwork Writing End of Term Report Monitoring documentation of fleet manual Maintaining dock list Sign and check logbooks (e.g., radio logs, cargo record book, oil record book) Filling in logbooks (e.g., radio logs, cargo record book, oil record book) Filling in work order lists Administration of all radio and other communication Administration of safety exercises/safety committee Administration of daily work meetings Administration of ship management meetings Administration of crew lists, certificate lists Dangerous cargo administration Special cargo administration Administration of ship board accounts Ship s total budget administration and reporting to owners Regulate cash advance to avoid deficits Writing conduct reports of all crew members Voyage performance administration and reporting Supervision over all catering and steward matters, incl. monthly reports and requirements Ship s weather and current observations records Order supplies Correcting and keeping up to date charts/pilots/tide tables Overall administration of engine room matters: Keep required records, logs and reports Voyage reports, administration of bunkers consumption etc. Plan, direct and keep records of the maintenance and repair Maintaining logs on all operating machinery while on watch 4= Communication Internal communication with crew members Ship to ship Ship to shore Contact with pilots Communication with port state control, coastguards All required communication with port authority Contact with customs, immigration officers Contact with agent Arrival/departure/canal transit Contact about cargo matters with master Contact with charterers/cargo owners and cargo receivers Communication about discharge plans, loading plans, tank cleaning requirements Routing voyage via shore weather stations ISPS code Bunker suppliers Reporting to the ship owner, regarding the technical installations

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 22 Categories Time Effort Transferability 5= Safety, Security and Training Maintain discipline on board, ensure compliance with company regulations Planning safety/security exercises Organization of safety/security exercises Safety drills and exercises Monitor security system Inspection and maintenance safety equipment Monitor and control safety regulations Monitor and control environmental regulations Organize and manage the provision of medical care on board Review safety practices and conditions in the department and other parts of the ship and recommend improvements Ensure safe working practices Provide on-the-job training and guidance to (other) assistant engineers 6= Navigation 7= Loading & Discharging 8= Maintenance Supervising navigation Supervising the preparation of the passage plan Preparing passage plan Manoeuvring the ship In Command on Bridge during arrival/departure/anchorage/heavy traffic conditions/reduced visibility conditions/difficult passage etc. Analyzing passage (Supervision of) loading (Supervision of) discharging (Supervising of) bunkering Cleaning tanks/holds Stability calculations Ballasting/deballasting instructions Ballasting/deballasting operations Maintenance and checking of cargo reefer containers Shifting hatches Supervising/controlling maintenance and repairs Supervising/controlling maintenance and repair when in dry dock or in yard Organization and execution of maintenance on ship Execution of technical/er maintenance Cleaning ER spaces Maintenance deck on chief engineer orders Maintain required formal equipment and spare inventories Control/order supply bunkers Control/order supplies and spare parts Start up and shut down main propulsion and auxiliary machinery, including associated systems Operate main and auxiliary machinery and associated control systems Operate, monitor and evaluate engine performance and capacity Operate pumping systems and associated control systems Perform or prepare specifications and estimates for major system modifications and overhauls Fabrication and repair operations

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 23 Categories Time Effort Transferability 9= Watchkeeping Bridge watchkeeping (at sea) Bridge watches to release other officers/master Watch in engine-room on arrival/departure Watch in engine-room at sea when required Engine room duty (in port) Duty on deck during cargo operations Responsible for the operation of all engine room machinery while on duty and complete any routine service, minor repair work and adjustments that are necessary during the watch 10= Offduty activities Sleeping Resting, but not sleeping Personal care (e.g. taking a shower, eating) Exercising Low-effort activities (e.g. reading a novel, listening to music, watching TV) Social activities (e.g. making a phone call to spouse, socializing with colleagues) Shore leave NB: Note that watchkeeping includes watchkeeping activities at sea and in port as well. When watchkeeping activities are combined with activities like navigation and/or loading & discharging, the more active activity (i.e. navigation) is and should be chosen before the passive activity (i.e. watchkeeping). This has consequences for the interpretation of the results regarding watchkeeping. 2.2.3 Development of list of activities After collecting job descriptions from personnel officers employed by ship owners, these descriptions were analyzed to identify the different tasks on board that the masters, deck- and engineer officers have to fulfill. From this analysis an initial list of activities was created describing the different tasks. However, the results of these initial job descriptions did not appear to be specific enough. To come to a more specific list of activities, the researchers interviewed five experts in the shipping industry. Four maritime experts were also asked to give their written comments to the list and added specific tasks. The final list of activities (see Annex D) was again checked by persons from the shipping industry and by the Sounding board committee. The list of activities was the core supplement of the questionnaire, used to rate their activities. In order do a final check on the clarity, usefulness and user friendliness of the questionnaire and list of activities, a pilot was performed using the crew of one ship, before sending out the questionnaire to other ships. 2.2.4 Participation by ship owners Our main aim was to send the questionnaires to officers on board of ships within the short sea shipping sector. In order to do this the co-operation was needed from the ship owners. In order to get co-operation from the ship owners an e-mail (see Annex C ) was sent to introduce the project and to inform the ship owners about the fact that they would receive an invitation by telephone to participate in this project. The e-mail was sent in the Dutch language because our main target group was the Dutch ship owners. Where needed some text was rephrased into English. One week after this e-mail the STC-Group started to contact the ship owners by telephone. Information was given to them with regard to the project, and their commit-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 24 ment for participation in the research was asked. The KVNR actively supported the participation by the ship owners. Originally 27 ship owners were contacted for participation of which about 12 Ship owners agreed to participate in the research (Exact number is unknown since the response was anonymous). 2.2.5 Participants and Procedure The study was conducted among masters, deck- and engineer officers on board of ships of various Dutch ship owners. Participants were requested to complete the questionnaires that aimed to map their time-use on board, the extent to which they considered activities as effortful and whether or not activities could be delegated. Questionnaires had to be completed just before starting and just after ending each watch period. This means that participants completed two (for those working day duty) or four (for those working a watch schedule) questionnaires daily. In each case, participants reported about their activities in their previous watch or off-duty period (e.g., report about activities during 1 st watch just after finishing this watch; report about activities during 1 st off-duty period just before starting 2 nd watch). To obtain a valid picture of work at sea (in questionnaire: off shore) and work in port (in questionnaire: onshore), respondents were requested to complete the questionnaires during two consecutive day s in port and two consecutive days at sea. If this was not possible during the research period, they were asked to participate during two two-day periods of their choice. Ship owners, who agreed to participate in the study, received the questionnaire by email and distributed it among masters, deck- and engineer officers on board of their ships. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter that explained the background and the purpose of the study, and it was explicitly stated that participation was anonymous and voluntary. Instructions on how to complete the questionnaires and an emailaddress and phone number participants could use if they had questions about the study, were also included. Questionnaires could be returned to the researchers by email or via regular mail. Initially, 12 ship owners agreed to participate in the study. Employees of 4 to 6 ship owners returned questionnaires (exact number is unknown because of the fact that participation was anonymous). Three ship owners indicated that they needed more time to send the questionnaires to their ships (at least one of them eventually sent the questionnaires), three ship owners withdrew from the study and one asked his employees to participate for two instead of the original four days. 2.2.6 The questionnaire General questions Before starting to complete the time-use questionnaire of the first day, participants were asked to provide some general background information about, for example their gender, age, rank, type of watch schedule and working hours. Time, effort and transferability Participants were requested to indicate for each period of 15 minutes which activity they conducted, how effortful this activity was, and whether or not the activity could be delegated to someone else. To do so, they were provided with a table in which the 24 hours of a day were depicted in blocks of 15 minutes each. An example of this table is presented in Table 2. The first column shows the time of the day, and in the second column participants are requested to indicate which category of activities they spent the largest part of these 15 minutes on (e.g., command & control ; watch keeping ;

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 25 see Table 1). In the third column they were asked to write down the subcategory of this activity, which they could look up in a list at the end of the questionnaire (e.g., voyage planning for command & control, or watch in engine-room on arrival/departure for watch keeping). The questionnaire and an overview of the subcategories of activities belonging to each main category is added in Annex E. In the fourth column they could indicate, for each quarter of an hour, how much effort the specific activity required, using a number between 1 (no effort at all) and 10 (extremely high effort). Participants were further requested to indicate if the activity could be done by another member of the crew (1 = no, 2 = possibly, 3 = certainly) and, if so, by whom (e.g. 3rd officer, someone at shore, rating). These last two columns did not have to be completed with respect to off-duty activities. Participants did not have to report about 24-hours at once. Instead, they were asked to report about their time use during a watch just after that watch, and were asked to report about their time use during off-duty time just before the start of the next watch. Those working day duty were requested to report about their work activities just after the workday, and to report about their off-duty activities just before the start of the next working day. Table 2 Example from time-use questionnaire Time Category activity Subcategory activity How much effort did this activity require? Can this activity be done by another member of the crew? If the activity can possibly or certainly be done by another member of the crew, by whom? 1= Command & Control 2= Organization & Leadership 3= Administration 4= Communication (see list page 40-44) Please indicate with a number between 1 (no effort at all) and 10 (extremely 1 = no 2 = possibly 3 = certainly (please print job type, e.g. 3 rd officer, someone at shore, rating) 5= Safety, Security and Training 6= Navigation 7= Loading & Discharging 8= Maintenance 9= Watch-keeping 10= Off-duty activities high effort) 09.00 09.15 3.2 3 1 09.15 09.30 3.2 3 1 09.30 09.45 3.8 5 3 Shore office 09.45 10.00 3.8 7 3 Shore office 10.00 10.15 10.15 10.30 2.2.7 Additional questions A number of additional questions was incorporated that had to be answered each time a part of the time-use table had to be completed (i.e. before and after each watch/working day). In all questionnaires, participants were also asked to indicate how

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 26 fatigued they felt, on a rating scale from 1 (not at all) to 10 (extremely), and whether they were on-shore or off-shore. In the questionnaires addressing time-use during offduty time, a number of questions regarding quality of sleep were included (scale score: 0 = good sleep quality; 1 = bad sleep quality). Finally, in the questionnaires that had to be filled in after the watch/workday, the time when the watch/workday should have ended was asked, just like the time the watch/workday actually ended. 2.3 Results 2.3.1 Respondents The time-use questionnaires were completed by 31 seafarers, who altogether provided data on 95 days (see table 3). All respondents were male. Their mean age was 37,5 years (sd = 8,4) and they had on average 6,1 years of experience in their current rank (sd = 5,3). Their number of actual working hours per week varied between 40 and 85 (mean = 75,5; sd = 10,3). Table 3 gives an overview of the number of days they completed the questionnaire by rank, by type of watch schedule and by in port ( onshore )/at sea ( off-shore ). Almost half of the data were from masters (43 of 95), and engineers comprised a relatively small part of the sample (6 days 1st engineers, 6 days 2 nd /3 rd engineers). Most questionnaires were completed during days that participants were at sea (52 days). Regarding the types of watch schedules, respondents were working in the 2 watch schedule is least often reported (18 days), whereas no other rank but masters and 1st officers appeared to work in this type of schedule. A relatively large part of the respondents work day duty and all 2 nd /3 rd engineers in the sample work in such a schedule 3. Table 3 Number of days in dataset by rank and type of watch schedule and on-shore/off-shore Total In Port At sea Both* 2 watch 3 watch 2 and 3 watch/ Day duty other Master 43 8 24 10 14 13 8 8 1 st officer 20 5 9 4 4 4 8 4 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual officer 20 6 12 1 0 8 4 8 chief engineer 6 0 2 4 0 0 2 4 2 nd /3 rd engineer 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL 95 20 52 19 18 25 22 30 * This means that the vessel was both in port and at sea during the day the questionnaires were completed. 2.3.2 Time-use on board General picture Figure 1 depicts the time-use (in minutes per 24 hours) of all participants in the dataset. This figure shows that, on average, about 13 hours per day are devoted to off-duty activities (e.g. sleeping, social activities; see the Annex E and F for an overview of al subtasks for the different categories). Regarding work-activities, watch keeping (about 4 ½ hours per day) and maintenance (about 2 hours per day) are relatively often re- 3 This is due to the fact that most ships have UMS (= unmanned machinery space)

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 27 ported. Generally, communication, organization and leadership, command and control and safety, security and training do not comprise a large part of the participants workdays. This may nonetheless be due to the fact that the time-use varies significantly between ranks. The time-use per rank is therefore shown in figures 1 to 4. From these figures, it becomes clear that 2 nd /3 rd engineers generally have the most offduty time per day (about 15 ½ hours). Maintenance is mostly conducted by the engineers (1st engineer: about 7 ½ hours per day, 2 nd /3 rd engineer: about 6 hours per day. Annex F gives information on the subtasks within the category. Especially the master (about 1 hour and 15 minutes) and the 1st engineer (about 1 ½ hour) spend time on administrative tasks. Tasks with respect to loading/discharging/cargo care are mainly conducted by the 1 st officer (about 3 ½ hours daily). Compared to the engineers, the master (about 5 hours), 1 st officer (about 4 hours) and 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer (about 5 hours) spend most time on watch keeping. Navigation tasks are most often performed by the master and the 1 st officer (both about 1 ½ hour). Tasks regarding command & control are almost exclusively reserved for the master (about half an hour), whereas activities with respect to organization & leadership are performed by both the master (about half an hour) and the 1st engineer (about ¾ hour). Engineers spend less time on activities regarding safety, security and training. Participants in the other ranks spend about an equal amount of time engaging in these activities, although in all ranks the time devoted to these tasks is rather limited. It seems very likely that time-use per rank differs according to the type of watch schedule one is working in, or according to being in port or at sea. Therefore, in the next paragraphs, the time-use per rank is analyzed more in depth, by distinguishing for each rank between time-use in port and at sea, and between the various watch schedules. However, it should be noted that due to the relatively few cases per cell (see Table 3 above) it is not possible to make claims regarding the question whether possible differences (for each rank between time-use in port and at sea, and between the various watch schedules) are due to chance or not. Therefore, reported differences should be interpreted with caution, especially those regarding the chief engineer and the 2 nd /3 rd engineer, as there are only 6 observations for each of these groups. The sample size is also the reason for choosing only to report about the more general categories of activities. For a detailed picture of time-use according to the fine-grained tasks list, please see Annex F. Time-use per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities 793 Watchkeeping 260 Maintenance 112 Loading/discharging/cargo care Navigation Administration 52 66 82 Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training 22 20 17 12 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 1 Time-use per 24 hours (in minutes) of all participants.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 28 Time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities 778 Watchkeeping 310 Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Command & Control Communication Organization and Leadership Maintenance Safety, Security and Training 95 76 53 36 35 33 14 9 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 2 Time-use per 24 hours (minutes) for the master time-use officers per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities 783 806 Watchkeeping 231 295 Navigation 23 95 Administration 10 37 Loading/discharging/cargo care 71 201 Command & Control 0 Communication 3 26 Organization and Leadership 6 0 Maintenance Safety, Security and Training 7 31 86 150 1st officer 2nd/3rd officer/marof 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 3 Time-use per 24 hours (minutes) for the 1st and 2nd/3rd officer and dual purpose officer time-use engineers per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities 700 968 Watchkeeping 18 150 Navigation 3 0 Administration 15 98 Loading/discharging/cargo care 3 40 Command & Control 8 3 Communication 0 3 Organization and Leadership 43 20 Maintenance Safety, Security and Training 0 438 375 chief engineer 2nd/3rd engineer 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Figure 4 Time-use per 24 hours (minutes) for the chief and 2nd/3rd engineer

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 29 Master In some respects, the time-use of the master varies according to the watch schedule he is working in (see figure 5). Watchkeeping is especially common in the 3 watch system, and - to a somewhat lesser extent - in the 2 watch system, whereas master s working day duty does not spend a lot of time on this type of activities 4. Tasks with respect to loading/discharging and cargo care are especially performed by master s working day duty. Navigation tasks are most common among masters working a 2 watch or a 2+3 watch or other system. Time on administration tasks is executed equal in all watch systems. Tasks related to loading/discharging/cargo care are mostly conducted by masters working day-duty. Masters also spend time on command & control, the most in the 2+3 watch/other watch systems. The time spent on administrative tasks does not differ between the various types of watch schedules. time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training 2 watch 3 watch day duty 2+3 watch/other 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 5 Time-use of the master per 24 hours (minutes) by type of watch schedule. There are also some differences in time-use when the distinction between in port and at sea is taken into account (see figure 6). Watchkeeping and navigation do not take place in port whereas activities with respect to loading/discharging/cargo care 5 (including preparing activities) are not performed at sea. Tasks regarding administration, communication and organization & leadership are mostly executed in port. Finally, masters have somewhat more off-duty time on days when they are in port or both in port/on shore and at sea/of shore than on days when they are at sea/of shore. 4 This outcome may appear illogical, but can be seen as a consequence of the facts that other more active activities that are done in combination with watchkeeping, like navigation, are scored instead of watchkeeping. 5 Note that the category loading/discharging/cargo care consists of the following activities: (Supervision of) loading, (Supervision of) discharging, (Supervising of) bunkering, Cleaning tanks/holds. Stability calculations, Ballasting/deballasting instructions, Ballasting/deballasting operations, Maintenance and checking of cargo reefer containers, Shifting hatches and other cargo related tasks, as indicated.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 30 time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training on-shore off-shore both 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 6 Time-use of the master per 24 hours (minutes) by in port/on-shore or at sea/off-shore. 1 st Officer Figure 7 shows that 1 st officers working in a 2 watch schedule report to have the most off-duty time (see the next paragraph for more explanation). The 1 st officers spend most of their on watchkeeping and navigation. Navigation tasks are conducted most in day duty (logical) and considerately more in a 2 watch system than in a 3 watch system. Watchkeeping activities are not performed by 1 st officers working in day duty (also logical) and slightly more in a 3 watch than in a 2 watch system. Watchkeeping, as well as activities regarding loading, discharging and cargo care are mostly executed by 1 st officers working a 2+3 watch/ other watch system. time use 1st officer per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Navigation Watchkeeping Loading/discharging/cargo care Administration Safety, Security and Training Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership 2 w atch 3 w atch day duty 2+3 w atch/other Command & Control 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Figure 7 Time-use of the 1 st officer per 24 hours (minutes) by type of watch schedule.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 31 When the distinction between being in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore is taken into account (see figure 8) it becomes clear that 1 st officers have the most off-duty time on days that they are in port/on-shore. This result should be interpreted with care, because it could be the case that there have been ships waiting in port before actively involved in loading/discharging/cargo care activities. This corresponds reasonably well with the results observed for the master. Tasks regarding loading/discharging/cargo care are most often conducted in port/on-shore, whereas no time at all is spent on watch keeping in port/on-shore (which could also be a consequence of our earlier remark on the watchkeeping scores). time use 1st officer per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Navigation Watchkeeping Loading/discharging/cargo care Administration Safety, Security and Training Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership on-shore off-shore both Command & Control 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Figure 8 Time-use of the 1 st officer per 24 hours (minutes) by type of watch schedule. 2nd officer, 3rd officer, dual purpose officer For the 2 nd officer, 3 rd officer and dual purpose officer no data are available regarding the 2 watch system, which is to be expected. Figure 9 shows that 2 nd /3 rd officers/dual purpose officers spend most time on watchkeeping, but less when working day-duty. Maintenance activities, and also loading/discharging/cargo care are relatively often performed working day-duty.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 32 time-use 2nd/3rd officer and marof per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Maintenance Communication Navigation Loading/discharging/cargo care Safety, Security and Training Administration Organization and Leadership 3 w atch day duty 2+3 w atch/other Command & Control 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Figure 9 Time-use of the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer per 24 hours (minutes) by type of watch schedule. As to the time-use patterns in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore, it should be noted that there is only one day of data available from a 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer being both in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore during a day of participating in the study. Figure 10 further shows that maintenance activities are most often performed in port/on-shore. time-use 2nd/3rd officer and marof per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Maintenance Communication Navigation Loading/discharging/cargo care Safety, Security and Training Administration Organization and Leadership on-shore off-shore both Command & Control 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Figure 10 Time-use of the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer per 24 hours (minutes) by in port/onshore or at sea/off-shore. Chief engineer Only chief engineers working day duty or in a 2+3 watch/other watch schedule were participating in the study. Most chief engineers, and all 2 nd and 3 rd engineers in this study work day duty. Chief engineers working spend most of their time on mainte-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 33 nance, administration and watchkeeping, and also on organization and leadership. In a 2+3 watch/other watch system they spend more time on administration and in day duty more on watchkeeping (see figure 11). time use chief engineer per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Maintenance Administration Watchkeeping Organization and Leadership Loading/discharging/cargo care Navigation Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control day duty 2+3 w atch/other 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Figure 11 Time-use of the chief engineer per 24 hours (minutes) by type of watch schedule. There are no striking differences in time-use between days engineers when they are at sea/off-shore as compared to when they are both in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore (no data available for days only in port/on-shore), except that watchkeeping appears to take somewhat more time when they are both in port and at sea (see figure 12). time use chief engineer per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Maintenance Administration Watchkeeping Organization and Leadership Loading/discharging/cargo care Navigation Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control off-shore both 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Figure 12 Time-use of the chief engineer per 24 hours (minutes) by in port/on-shore and at sea /offshore.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 34 2nd, 3rd engineer In this study, only data from 2 nd and 3 rd engineer s working day duty are available. Therefore, their time-use is visible in figure 4. Regarding the difference between in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore days, it should be kept in mind that there are only data from one in port /on-shore day (see table 3). Altogether, figure 13 shows no notable differences in time use between in port/off-shore and at sea/on-shore days. time use 2nd/3rd engineer per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Organization and Leadership Watchkeeping Administration Communication Command & Control Navigation Safety, Security and Training off-shore on-shore 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Figure 13 Time-use of the 2 nd /3 rd engineer per 24 hours (minutes) by on-shore/off-shore. 2.3.3 Effort In the time-use questionnaire, participants are requested to indicate for each quarter of an hour how effortful they considered the activity to be they were engaged in (on a rating scale from 1, not effortful, to 10, extremely effortful). For each activity the average effort was computed. These averages are presented in figure 14. For an overview of the effort attributed to the subcategories of activities, please see Annex D. Figure 14 shows that off-duty activities are considered least effortful (2,0). The average effort experienced in work activities varies between 3,8 (communication) and 5,4 (maintenance). Activities regarding loading/discharging/cargo care are on average rated 5 for effort (see figure 2). In figure 15 and 16, the averages for the categories of tasks are further itemized for the master and officers and for the engineers, respectively. However, also in this case data available for each of the different ranks is rather limited, which implies that observed differences should be interpreted with caution. Figure 15 shows that maintenance and loading/discharging/cargo care tasks are considered more effortful by the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer than by the master and 1 st officer. Communication tasks, by contrast, are considered more effortful by the 1 st officer.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 35 Mean effort of activities (1= not effortful; 10 = extremely effortful) Maintenance 5,4 Loading/discharging/cargo care 5,0 Command & Control Navigation Safety, Security and Training 4,8 4,8 4,7 Watchkeeping Organization and Leadership 4,3 4,5 Administration Communication 3,9 3,8 Off-duty activities 2,0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Figure 14 Mean effort attributed to off-duty and work activities. Mean effort of activities by rank (1 = not effortful; 10 = extremely effortful) Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Command & Control Navigation Safety, Security and Training Watchkeeping Organization and Leadership Administration Communication Off-duty activities master 1st officer 2nd/3rd officer/marof 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Figure 15 Mean effort attributes to off-duty and work activities for the master and officers. Regarding differences in effort between the chief engineer and the 2 nd /3 rd engineer, Figure 15 shows that the chief engineer considers most tasks somewhat more effortful. Differences are most striking for loading/discharging/cargo care and for organization and leadership. 2.3.4 Transferability For each quarter of an hour, participants are asked to indicate whether the task they were currently executing might be delegated to someone else (1 = no, 2 = possibly, 3 = certainly). If a task could possibly or certainly be delegated, they were asked to indicate to whom that could be. This latter question was open-ended, but a number of examples were given in the questionnaire (i.e., someone on-shore, rating, 3 rd officer).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 36 Mean effort of activities by rank (1 = not effortful; 10 = extremely effortful) Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Command & Control Navigation Safety, Security and Training Watchkeeping Organization and Leadership Administration Communication Off-duty activities chief engineer 2nd/3rd engineer 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Figure 16 Mean effort attributes to off-duty and work activities for the engineers. General picture Figure 17 gives an overview of the extent to which tasks are considered to be transferable. This figure only depicts the main categories of activities. For transferability of subtasks within each category, please see Annex F. Figure 17 shows that especially tasks regarding safety, security and training are transferable according to the participants in this study. However, it should be noted that only a limited amount of time is spent on these activities (see figure 1). About half of the participants consider activities with respect to loading, discharging and cargo care to be transferable. Some of the activities with respect to organization and leadership 6 are also transferable for about 50% of the time. Participants relatively often indicate that tasks regarding command and control can be delegated to someone else. However, the number of participants engaging in this type of activities is rather small (see figure 1). Tasks regarding watchkeeping and administration are less often judged to be transferable. No one believes that navigation tasks are certainly transferable, although 28% thinks that these tasks may be transferable. 6 Subactivities of organisation & leaderschip are: Daily management of the ship, Organize and manage the crew, Daily work planning meetings, Meetings with crew and officers, Meeting safety committee, Planning daily work of all technical crew/officers, taking into account the requirements of the legislation on hours of work/rest, Provide work directions for Oiler s, Wiper s and general marine helpers in the repair and maintenance of the engineering plant operations., Supervising and directing all technical matters, Inspection of the ship, Monitoring shipboard operations, Check loading, tank cleaning and discharge plans, Ensure compliance with all applicable laws, federal and company regulations, Plan and schedule operations, Outsource maintenance and repair work, Supervise executed work by contractors.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 37 In the next sections, transferability of tasks is discussed for each rank. Transferability of tasks all ranks (% yes) Safety, Security and Training 11% 72% Loading/discharging/cargo care 21% 54% Organization and Leadership 7% 53% Command & Control 13% 47% Communication 6% 43% Maintenance 23% 42% Watchkeeping 20% 26% Administration Navigation 0% 16% 26% 28% transferable may be transferable 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Figure 17 Transferability of tasks. Master Figure 18 shows that the extent to which the master considers tasks to be transferable corresponds very well with the general picture presented in figure 17. In 90% of the cases, activities regarding safety, security and training are considered to be transferable. Tasks with respect to loading/discharging/cargo care are transferable 75% of the time. Navigation is never judged to be certainly transferable, but might be transferable for 21% of the time. Transferability of tasks master (% yes) Safety, Security and Training 0% 90% Loading/discharging/cargo care 13% 75% Organization and Leadership 11% 56% Command & Control 15% 54% Communication 8% 47% Maintenance 0% 43% Watchkeeping 11% 30% Adm inis tration Navigation 0% 22% 19% 21% transferable may be transferable 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Figure 18 Transferability of tasks: master 1st Officer Just like the master, the 1 st officer assesses that tasks regarding safety, security and training could relatively often be delegated to someone else (see figure 19). Tasks regarding organization & leadership and communication are also relatively often believed to be transferable. For these last two groups of tasks, the percentages are higher

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 38 than those reported by the master. Administrative tasks are never considered to be certainly transferable by the 1 st officer, whereas the master considered these tasks to be transferable in 22% of the cases. Maintenance tasks are believed to be may be transferable for 43% of the time. Tasks regarding command & control are not performed by the 1 st officer. Transferability of tasks 1st officer (% yes) Safety, Security and Training Organization and Leadership Communication 0% 0% 0% 67% 67% 67% Loading/discharging/cargo care Watchkeeping 22% 22% 32% 33% Maintenance 0% 43% Administration 0% 17% Navigation Command & Control 0% 0% 0% 25% transferable may be transferable 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Figure 19 Transferability of tasks: 1 st officer 2nd, 3rd officer and dual purpose officer In contrast to the other ranks discussed so far, the 2 nd /3 rd officers and dual purpose officers think that especially maintenance activities can be delegated to someone else (80%; see figure 20). Tasks regarding safety, security and training are only considered to be transferable 40% of the time (as opposed to 67% reported by the 1 st officer and 90% reported by the master), but another 40% think that these tasks may be transferable. As tasks regarding organization and leadership and command and control are (almost) not performed by 2 nd /3 rd officers and dual purpose officers, no statements regarding their transferability can be made for this rank. Transferability of tasks 2nd/3rd officer/marof (% yes) Maintenance 20% 80% Safety, Security and Training Watchkeeping 8% 36% 40% 40% Administration 17% 33% Loading/discharging/cargo care 31% 69% Communication 0% 20% Navigation 0% 33% Organization and Leadership Command & Control 0% 0% 0% 0% transferable may be transferable 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Figure 20 Transferability of tasks: 2 nd /3 rd officer

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 39 Chief engineer As the chief engineer devotes most of his time to maintenance, watch keeping and administrative tasks and does not spent so much time on the other tasks, it is only possible to discuss the transferability of the three tasks mentioned. Figure 21 shows that these tasks are not very often considered being certainly transferable. Maintenance and watchkeeping activities could be delegated for almost 30% of the time, whereas administrative tasks are only considered to be transferable in 9% of the cases. This latter type of activities is however said to be may be transferable for almost 30% of the time. Transferability of tasks chief engineer (% yes) Maintenance 27% 25% Watchkeeping 23% 31% Administration 9% 28% Loading/discharging/cargo care Organization and Leadership Command & Control Navigation Safety, Security and Training Communication 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% transferable may be transferable 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Figure 21 Transferability of tasks: chief engineer 2nd and 3rd engineer 2 nd and 3 rd engineers report that tasks regarding safety, security and training and tasks regarding loading/discharging/cargo care can always be delegated to someone else. Activities with respect to organization & leadership and command & control are also relatively often said to be transferable, although the actual time spent on these activities is very limited (see figure 22). Transferability of tasks 2nd/3rd engineer (% yes) Safety, Security and Training Loading/discharging/cargo care 0% 0% 100% 100% Organization and Leadership 17% 67% Command & Control 0% 50% Communication 33% 33% Maintenance Watchkeeping Administration Navigation 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% transferable may be transferable 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Figure 22 Transferability of tasks: 2 nd /3 rd engineer

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 40 2.3.5 Transferability in relation to time and effort With respect to the transferability of tasks, it is interesting to look at combinations of transferability and time and transferability and effort, as the best results in terms of diminishing fatigue can probably be achieved by delegating tasks that are effortful and/or require a lot of time. Therefore, in the present section, the transferability of tasks as indicated by the master and the 1 st officer is discussed in relation to effort and time, in both the 2 watch and the 3 watch system. For each rank-type of watch combination, the tasks are classified according to their time, effort and transferability. For example, a number 1 is assigned to the task requiring the least effort and a number 10 is assigned to the tasks requiring the most effort. In the same way tasks are arranged according to the amount of time they require (1 = least time, 10 = most time) and the extent to which they are transferable (1 = least transferable, 10 = most transferable). Values of 0 indicate that no time is spent on the activity and/or that no data regarding its transferability or effort are available. Master Figures 23 and 24 show the transferability and time needed for the tasks, respectively the transferability and effort of tasks for the master in the 2 watch system. The figures show that whereas navigation and watchkeeping tasks take relatively much time and effort, they are not considered to be very much transferable. Loading/discharging/cargo care activities on the other hand are judged to be transferable, but they are not considered very effortful, nor do they demand a lot of time. Activities regarding organization & leadership are the most transferable activities. Although these activities are relatively effortful, they do not take a lot of time. Maintenance activities are the most effortful activities and are also believed to be transferable to a relatively large extent. These activities do not take a lot of time as well. Master in 2 watch system: Transferability and time of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Safety, Security and Training Organization and Leadership Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Administration Watchkeeping Navigation Command & Control (May be) transferable Time Figure 23 Transferability and time of tasks of the master in the 2 watch system

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 41 Master in 2 watch system: Transferability and effort of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Safety, Security and Training Organization and Leadership Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Administration Watchkeeping Navigation Command & Control (May be) transferable Effort Figure 24 Transferability and effort of tasks of the master in the 2 watch system Time, effort and transferability for the master in a 3 watch system are presented in figures 25 and 26. Figure 25 shows that activities that are most often performed (i.e., organization & leadership, administration and watchkeeping) are the least transferable. Activities regarding command & control are considered as relatively effortful and are relatively often believed to be transferable as well. The least time is spent on activities regarding communication, but these activities are among the most transferable ones. Safety, security and training tasks do not require much time either, but these are together with communication the most transferable ones. Master in 3 watch system: Transferability and time of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Navigation Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Administration Organization and Leadership (May be) transferable Time Figure 25 Transferability and time of tasks of the master in the 3 watch system

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 42 Master in 3 watch system: Transferability and effort of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Navigation Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Administration Organization and Leadership (May be) transferable Effort Figure 26 Transferability and effort of tasks of the master in the 3 watch system 1st officer For the 1 st officer in the 2 watch system, watchkeeping seems to be the task that is most transferable (not yet taking into consideration to whom this could be transferred). This activity demands a relatively large part of the time, but it is not considered to be very effortful. Tasks with respect to loading/discharging/cargo care can also be delegated according to the participants, but these activities do not stand out as regards the time and effort they require (see figures 27 and 28). Navigation is considered to be mediocre transferable. It was transferable, it could have resulted in saving a lot of time and effort. 1st officer in 2 watch system: Transferability and time of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Organization and Leadership Maintenance Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Loading/discharging/cargo care Navigation Administration Safety, Security and Training (May be) transferable Time Figure 27 Transferability and time of tasks of the 1 st officer in the 2 watch system

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 43 1st officer in 2 watch system: Transferability and effort of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Organization and Leadership Maintenance Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Loading/discharging/cargo care Navigation Administration Safety, Security and Training (May be) transferable Effort Figure 28 Transferability and effort of tasks of the 1st officer in the 2 watch system The 1 st officers in a 3 watch system also think that watchkeeping tasks are among the most transferable tasks: they require a lot of time and are quite effortful. In the 3 watch system activities with respect to navigation are considered relatively well transferable.. These activities are the least effortful, and require an average amount of time compared to the other activities (see figure 29 and 30). Loading/discharging/cargo care is considered less transferable but a lot of time and effort can be gained. 1st officer in 3 watch system: Transferability and time of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Navigation Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Administration Organization and Leadership (May be) transferable Time Figure 29 Transferability and time of tasks of the 1 st officer in the 3 watch system

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 44 1st officer in 3 watch system: Transferability and effort of tasks 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Safety, Security and Training Communication Command & Control Watchkeeping Navigation Maintenance Loading/discharging/cargo care Administration Organization and Leadership (May be) transferable Effort Figure 30 Transferability and effort of tasks of the 1 st officer in the 2 watch system Transferable to whom Besides mapping the tasks that can and cannot be delegated, it is also informative to examine the question to which tasks might be delegated if they are considered transferable. Table 4 gives an overview of this issue. The table shows that tasks regarding command & control, organization & leadership, administration, communication, and safety, security and training are mainly transferable to the 1 st officer. Activities regarding navigation and loading, discharging and cargo care can mainly be delegated to the 1 st officer and the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer. Maintenance activities can mainly be delegated to the engineers, and for watch keeping, the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer is most often mentioned as the one tasks can be delegated to. Table 4 The ranks to which tasks can be delegated 1 st officer 2nd/3rd officer/dual purpose officer 1st engineer 2nd/3rd engineer Chief engineer/ oiler oiler mate other bosun command & 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% control organization & 60% 18% 22% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% leadership administration 61% 13% 13% 4% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% communication 70% 16% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% safety, security 60% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 13% 13% & training navigation 39% 44% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 0% Loading, discharging, 30% 45% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% cargo care maintenance 11% 11% 23% 32% 3% 16% 5% 0% 0% watch keeping 15% 50% 3% 10% 0% 14% 0% 7% 0%

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 45 2.3.6 Sleep & Fatigue Each time participants complete a part of the time-use questionnaire, they are also asked to report about their level of fatigue on a 10-point scale (1 = not fatigued at all, 10 = very fatigued). Their quality of sleep is assessed after each off-duty period (0 = good quality of sleep, 1 = bad quality of sleep). Sleeping, and resting but not sleeping are subcategories of activities within the main category off-duty activities. NB: the use of the word fatigue (as is used in the questionnaire) should not be interpreted as if the person in question is over-tired (see footnote 1). Fatigue refers to the level of tiredness in a range form 1 to 10.. General picture Table 4 shows that on average, participants sleep about 8 hours per 24 hours. Again, reported differences are not statistically significant and should be interpreted with caution. Hours of sleep vary according to rank: whereas a chief engineer sleeps less than 7 hours per 24 hours, a 1 st officer on average reports to sleep about 9 hours per day. This latter group of workers nonetheless reports only 17 minutes of resting but no sleeping per day. The table also shows that the general fatigue levels at work vary between 4.26 and 5.44 on a 10-point scale. This means that seafarers score themselves in the centre between not fatigued and very fatigue. The scores of fatigue at work are generally higher than fatigue levels during off-duty time (4,66 vs. 2,86). This difference is visible for master and officers, but not for the engineers. The engineers scores on fatigue do not drop during off-duty time. Despite the fact that the 1 st officer gets the most hours/minutes of sleep, the levels of fatigue during work are highest in this group (5,44). The respondents rate the quality of their sleep as very good in all ranks. The next section comprises a more in-depth analysis of sleep and fatigue per rank. Table 5 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for all participants. GENERAL TOTAL RANK master 1st officer 2nd/3rd officer/dual Chief engineer 2nd/3rd engineer purpose officer Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 501 490 544 525 403 470 Resting, but not sleeping 53 55 17 94 23 38 (minutes/24 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 4,66 4,26 5,44 4,84 4,75 4,33 10 = very fatigued) Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not 2,86 2,54 3,50 2,19 4,67 4,00 at all; 10 = very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad) 0,17 0,12 0,25 0,14 0 0,33

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 46 Master Table 6 shows that masters working in a 3 watch system sleep more (551 minutes) than masters in other watch systems or masters working day duty. Fatigue at work is highest among those working day duty (5,75) and those working in a 2 + 3 watch or other watch system (6,33). Whereas in the first group fatigue decreases substantially during off-duty time (1,83), in the latter group, fatigue during off-duty time remains relatively high (4,86). Quality of sleep is generally good, except for those working in a 2+3 watch/other watch system (0,40). When differences between in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore are taken into account, it becomes clear that masters sleep the least on days that they are both in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore (440 minutes). Their work-related fatigue is highest on days that they are in port/on-shore. Table 6 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for the master MASTER Total Watch schedule Sea. Shore or both 2 3 2 + 3 Day In At both watch watch watch, other duty port/onshore sea/offshore Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 490 444 551 463 499 510 503 440 Resting, but not sleeping 55 61 26 58 83 68 53 48 (minutes/24 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 4,26 2,86 3,82 6,33 5,75 6,13 3,38 4,60 10 = very fatigued) Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not 2,54 1,90 2,08 4,86 1,83 1,83 2,60 2,94 at all; 10 = very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad_ 0,12 0,03 0,08 0,40 0,06 0,02 0,14 0,18 1st officer For the 1 st officer the results should be interpreted with care. Their response number is quite low (see table 3). Whereas the master obtains the most sleep if he works in a 3 watch system (see table 5), the 1 st officer obtains the least sleep in this system (489 minutes). The reported sleep time is highest in the day duty group (655 minutes). Work-related fatigue is also slightly higher for 1 st officers in this watch system (5,75) than the others and quality of sleep is worst in this group as well (0,47). Fatigue drops the most during off-duty time for those who work day-duty and also considerably for those in the 3-watch system. Just like masters, 1 st officers sleep least on days when they are both in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore (465 minutes) and work-related fatigue is relatively high on in port/on shore days (7,20).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 47 Table 7 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for the 1 st officer 1 st OFFICER Total Watch schedule Sea. Shore or both 2 3 2 + 3 Day In At both watch watch watch, other duty port/ sea/ Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 544 604 489 528 655 633 528 465 Resting, but not sleeping 17 15 0 29 0 0 27 19 (minutes/24 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 5,44 5,00 5,75 5,63 5,00 7,20 5,00 4,25 10 = very fatigued) Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not 3,50 4,38 3,75 3,25 1,00 3,40 3,63 3,38 at all; 10 = very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad_ 0,25 0,35 0,47 0,16 0 0,32 0,15 0,40 2 nd /3 rd officer, dual purpose officer For the 2nd/3rd officer and dual purpose officer the results should be interpreted with care. Their response number is quite low (see table 3). 2 nd and 3 rd officers and dual purpose officers working day duty report to obtain the least sleep per 24 hours (423 minutes; see table 8). However, time devoted to resting but not sleeping is highest in this group (139 minutes). Work-related fatigue is highest among those working day-duty (6,38), but during offduty time their fatigue drops considerably.(to approximately the same level as to those working in other watch schedules (2,29)). Quality of sleep is generally good. Sleeping time is lowest on days that one is both in port/on-shore and at sea/off-shore (203 minutes) and work-related fatigue is highest on these days (8,00). These findings correspond very well with the results for the master and 1 st officer. Table 8 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for the 2 nd /3 rd officer and dual purpose officer 2 ND /3 RD OFFICER, DUAL PURPOSE OFFICER Total Watch schedule Sea. Shore or both 3 watch 2 + 3 watch, other Day duty In port At sea both Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 525 578 638 423 545 542 203 Resting, but not sleeping 94 96 0 139 70 105 101 (minutes/24 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 4,84 2,86 5,25 6,38 5,67 4,17 8,00 10 = very fatigued) Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not 2,19 2,71 1,13 2,29 2,17 2,14 3,00 at all; 10 = very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad_ 0,14 0,13 0 0,21 0,03 0,20 0,17 Chief engineer For the engineers the results should be interpreted with care. Their response number is very low (see table 3). For that reason, there is not enough data available to give a more in-depth analyses. As stated earlier, the most interesting result is the higher fatigue level during off-duty time. The last two columns of table 9 show that fatigue during work and off-duty time is higher on days during which one is both on-shore/in port and off-shore/at sea.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 48 Table 9 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for the chief engineer. CHIEF ENGINEER Total Watch schedule Sea, Shore or both 2 + 3 Day At sea Both watch, other duty Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 403 390 409 398 405 Resting, but not sleeping (minutes/24 23 53 8 0 34 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 10 = very fatigued) 4,75 6,50 3,00 3,00 6,50 Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not at all; 10 = 4,67 5,50 3,00 3,00 5,50 very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad_ 0 0 -- -- 0 2nd, 3rd engineer For the 2 nd and 3 rd engineer, only data regarding day duty are available. Furthermore, sleeping time seems lower during in port/on-shore days, quality of sleep seems worse during these days and fatigue during off-duty time seems higher in these periods. There are no differences regarding fatigue at work (see table 10). Table 10 Sleep time, sleep quality and fatigue for the 2 nd /3 rd engineer. 2ND, 3RD ENGINEER Total Watch Sea, Shore or both schedule Day duty In port at sea Sleeping (minutes/24 hours) 470 470 555 453 Resting, but not sleeping (minutes/24 38 38 60 33 hours) Fatigue work (1 = not at all; 10 = 4,33 4,33 5,00 4,20 very fatigued) Fatigue off-duty time (1 = not at 4,00 4,00 2,00 4,40 all; 10 = very fatigued) Quality of sleep (0 = good, 1 = bad) 0,33 0,33 0,17 0,37 2.4 Summary and conclusions This study aimed to obtain insight in the time-use and effort expenditure of masters, deck- and engineer officers on board of ships and investigated if some of the tasks could be delegated to other workers. In this chapter a summary will be given and an overview of our main conclusions. 2.4.1 Conclusions on delegation of tasks The results of this chapter can be used to select the tasks that can have the most effect in preventing fatigue. Our assumption is that delegation of tasks that take the most time and effort in combination, will make the largest difference. Conclusions can be drawn for the master and the 1 st officer in the 2 and 3 watch system at the level of categories. There is not enough information available to draw conclusions neither for the engineers nor for the subcategories. The conclusions based on the 2- watch and the 3 watch data, have to be interpreted with caution due to the amount of respondents. First we will sum up the results on time, than the results on effort, and at last we will combine these with the results on transferability to come up with tasks most suitable for delegation.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 49 Time Regarding time-use, the results show that, on average, masters and deck officers spend most of their working time (on-duty) on watchkeeping activities and that engineers devote most of their time to maintenance activities. Activities with respect to safety, security and training generally take the least time of seafarers daily time-budgets. The master spends most his time on watchkeeping, even slightly more working in a 3 watch system than in a 2 watch system. This outcome may appear illogical at first, which can be seen as a consequence of the seafarer scoring the more active activities that are done in combination with watchkeeping, e.g. navigation, instead of pure watchkeeping. Navigation tasks are indeed most common among masters working in a 2 watch or 2+3 watch /other watch system. Time on administration tasks is executed equal in all watch systems. Tasks related to loading/discharging/cargo care are mostly conducted by masters working day-duty. Masters also spend time on command & control, the most in the 2+3 watch/other watch systems. Generally, masters conduct most administrative tasks in port and have most off-duty time in port as well. The 1 st officers spends most of their on watchkeeping and navigation. Navigation tasks are conducted most in day duty, and considerately more in a 2 watch system than in a two watch system. Watchkeeping activities are not performed by 1 st officers working in day duty and slightly more in a 3 watch than in a 2 watch system. Just like watchkeeping activities regarding loading, discharging and cargo care are mostly executed by 1 st officers working a 2+3watch/other watch system.1 st officers working in a 2 watch schedule reported to have the most off-duty time, which appears to be in port.. We do not know if there have been ships waiting in port that have influenced these figures. 2 nd /3 rd officers/dual purpose officers spend most time on watchkeeping, but less when working day-duty. Maintenance activities, and also loading/discharging/cargo are relatively often performed working day-duty. Maintenance is mostly executed in port. Most chief engineers, and all 2 nd and 3 rd engineers in this study work day duty. Chief engineers working spend most of their time on maintenance, administration and watchkeeping, and also on organization & leadership. In a 2+3 watch/other watch system they spend more time on administration and in day duty more on watchkeeping. Effort With respect to effort, the results of this study show that off-duty activities are generally not considered as effortful, as to be expected, whereas maintenance activities are on average the most effortful work tasks. This pattern of results is also observed for the master. Within this rank, also navigation tasks are considered as rather effortful. Generally, 1 st officers report to consider loading/discharging/cargo care activities among the most effortful ones, and also indicate that tasks with respect to safety, security and training are effortful. Just like the 1 st officers, 2 nd /3 rd officers/dual purpose officers indicate that loading/discharging/cargo care tasks are relatively effortful, but they consider these tasks as even more effortful than the 1 st officers. Maintenance activities are effortful as well within this group. Also in this case, the average effort attributed is higher than the effort attributed in the other ranks. Tasks with respect loading/discharging/cargo care are judged as most effortful by the chief engineer and they consider these tasks as more effortful than the 2 nd /3 rd engineer. This latter group of workers considers tasks with respect to communication as most effortful.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 50 Transferability In general, tasks that are considered to be most suitable to be delegated are those regarding safety, security and training. These tasks require nonetheless only a limited amount of daily work time. In a lesser extend loading/discharging/cargo care, organization & leadership and for 2 nd /3 rd officers tasks with respect to maintenance are considered effortful. Most interesting is what tasks are transferable, take a lot of time and are effortful. For the master and the 1 st officer in the 2 watch and in the 3 watch system, a closer look has been taken at the combinations of transferability on the one hand, and time and effort on the other. For the master in the 2 watch system, these analyses show that tasks regarding organization & leadership and maintenance are among the most suitable for delegation: these tasks are considered to be transferable and are also considered relatively effortful, but do not require a lot of time For the master in the 3 watch system, tasks with respect to communication and safety, security and training are considered to be most transferable. Only a limited amount of time is spent on the first group of activities, but these activities are considered as rather effortful. Time and effort for safety, security and training are average. In the 2 watch system, the 1 st officer thinks that activities regarding loading/discharging/cargo care can also be delegated according to the participants, but these activities do not stand out as regards the time and effort they require. Navigation is considered to be mediocre transferable and it can result in saving a lot of time and effort. In the 3-watch system, tasks with respect to watchkeeping are the most transferable ones, they require a lot of time and are quite effortful. In the two watch system watchkeeping activities are also considered transferable, but these are not the most effortful tasks. Also loading/discharging/cargo care is considered less transferable but a lot of time and effort can be gained. When examining to whom tasks could be delegated, it becomes clear that tasks with respect to command & control, organization & leadership, administration, communication and safety, security & training are mainly transferable to the 1 st officer. Activities regarding navigation and loading, discharging & cargo care can mainly be delegated to the 1 st officer and the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer. Maintenance activities can mainly be delegated to engineers, and for watchkeeping, the 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer is most often mentioned as the one task can be delegated to. Selection of measures Based on the results and a discussion in the project group on feasibility, a selection is made of tasks for delegation most likely to be effective: transfer of maintenance activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system; transfer of watchkeeping activities from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer/ 2nd officer in 3-watch system; transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to 1 st officer or the Engineer(s) in 2-watch system; transfer of safety & training activities from master to the 1st officer in the 3-watch system. Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care activities from 1 st officer to 2 nd /3 rd officer/dual purpose officer

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 51 The measures that have not been selected due to practical considerations are: The transfer of watchkeeping from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer/ 2nd officer in the 2-watch was not found realist in the project group, because in such a watch system there would be no-one available to delegate to. The transfer of communication activities from master to the 1st officer in the 3- watch system was not considered as most effective in the project group, because transfer of communication may have even more burdensome consequences in the specific situation of international communication at sea. In the time use study, the option has been given to indicate to whom tasks could be transferred to in port/on shore. There were no suggestions done for transferring tasks to shore. The option of transferring tasks to software is not included in the time use study. These options, shore and software, have been discussed further in the workshops at the conference with delegates form the shipping industry. In the workshop the question was asked what activities and subtasks would be most interesting (feasible and practical) to delegate from master to another crew member, shore or to software in the 2- watch system. The results of the workshop (see Annex J) give 2 additional suggestions: transfer of loading/discharging and administration to shore in al watch systems; transfer of administration to software in all watch systems. In Chapter 4, we will use these outcomes, when we select a set of measures for further analysis on their consequences for the sector. Conclusions on fatigue and sleep First, we like to emphasize that the use of the word fatigue (as is used in the questionnaire) should not be interpreted as over-tired. Fatigue refers to the level of tiredness in a range form 1 to 10.. On average, participants sleep about 8 hours per 24 hours. Hours of sleep vary across ranks: chief engineers sleep substantially less than 1 st officers. Generally, masters and officers sleep least on days during which they are both in port and at sea. The respondents rate the quality of their sleep as very good in all ranks. The seafarers score themselves in the centre between not fatigued and very fatigue. For master and officers, fatigue levels are generally higher during work than during off-duty time. Their work-related fatigue is highest during in port days. For engineers the levels of fatigue do not decrease substantially after work. Some other interesting fatigue results are: Despite the fact that the 1 st officer gets the most hours/minutes of sleep, the levels of fatigue during work are highest in this group (5,44 between a 1 to 10 scale). Fatigue at work is highest among those working day duty (5,75) and those working in a 2+3 watch/other watch system (6,33). Whereas in the first group fatigue decreases substantially during off-duty time (1,83), in the latter group, fatigue during off-duty time remains relatively high (4,86). Quality of sleep is generally good, except for those working in a 2 + 3 watch or other watch system (0,40). Whereas the master obtains the most sleep if he works in a 3 watch system (see table 6), the 1 st officer obtains the least sleep in this system (489 minutes). Just like masters, 1 st officers sleep least on days when they are both in port and at sea (465 minutes) and work-related fatigue is relatively high on port days (7,20). Sleeping time is lowest on days that one is both in port and at sea for 2 nd /3 rd officer, dual purpose officer (203 minutes), their - work-related fatigue is high on

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 52 these days (8,00). These findings correspond well with the results for the master and 1 st officer, although on a lower level. Based on the fatigue and sleep results, the main conclusion is that fatigue scores work out quite well for most of the groups. Also the quality of sleep is considered to be good enough. The largest gain in handling fatigue appears to be at the days that ships arrive or depart in port. The varying fatigue levels across rank and watch systems ask for more research, especially considering 2 nd /3 rd officers/dual purpose officers at the days in port and at sea. Also the engineer s lack of drop of fatigue levels during off duty time fatigue asks for further attention. At last, based on the results, it shows that flexible watch system do not seem to guarantee less fatigue. More research should be done with respect to this aspect. General conclusions At last, this study showed us that there is significant opportunity for transferring tasks/delegation, e.g. to other crew members, shore etc. On the other hand there is not yet sufficient information to enable clear policy to inform the specific details on how or when to delegate workload in order to reduce fatigue-related risk. This still depends on a more detailed understanding of the relationship between the person, time and situation and the resultant fatigue-related risk. Monitoring the process of evaluation is generally considered to be very important because measures of delegation could have adverse outcomes. For example, the delegation of communication could have lead to more complexity. The more communication is delegated the more complicated and unclear the communication can become, especially in a multicultural context. Therefore the crew will end up with extra complexity at last. For this reason, we skipped delegation of communication as a proposed measure to combat fatigue. Actually, it is good fatigue management, that is also needed as to contextualize these types of task allocation process In the following chapter, we will discuss fatigue management and its potential to prevent and manage fatigue. Ideally, a good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute workload when somebody inevitably ends up tired. Delegation may be a way of fatigue proofing (the management of fatigue related errors) in a way that is attractive to the industry, cost effective and realizable in the short-term. Important is not to forget that delegation is just a part of a solution.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 53 3 Phase 2: the study on Fatigue Management 3.1 Introduction and goal In the report of 2005 on fatigue in shipping (Houtman, 2005), a Fatigue Management System is advised in the shipping industry provided it is implemented as an integrated part of the ISM code and thus integrated as part of a comprehensive Safety Management System. Such a program or tool should enable and support shipping companies to take measures to manage fatigue and thus further improve safety onboard ships (IMO, 2001b). In other transport branches, e.g. road transport and aviation, the implementation of a Fatigue Management System, sometimes called Fatigue Management Tool, Fatigue Risk Management System, or Fatigue Management Program, is similarly seen as a promising measure for reducing fatigue. But overall the question remains: what defines a Fatigue Management System at the practical level? A Fatigue Management System (FMS)' can be seen as a set of measures related to organizational and safety policies that collectively reduce fatigue-related risk. Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems, tools or programs are comparable in that the main shift is away from compliance with a prescriptive set of rules toward an integrated hazard management system. Although the concept of a system or a program suggests that it could be a stand-alone form of hazard management in and of itself, it should be seen as an integral part of safety management and could thus be seen as a specific part of the ISM code. It should allow organizations to be flexible in their fatigue management. Moreover in all times an administrative burden should be prevented. Also one can say: fatigue management is not some document or system but it is actually a process, which has to start with the discussion of when fatigue actually becomes a risk in the specific organisation. Then, the next step is to explore possible custom-made solutions to these risks, in participation with the industry. Implementation of fatigue management will always be confronted by the specific circumstances in an industry. At this point, it is important to briefly mention an important distinction. Whilst discussion often centres on fatigue management systems many authors feel that one should really consider fatigue risk management systems. One really does not want to manage fatigue per se but one wants to manage the risks that result from fatigue. For the remainder of this report the acronym F(R)MS may be used to refer to a Fatigue (Risk) Management System. In this chapter we will provide a framework for fatigue management. We hope to give answers to questions like: what is a Fatigue (Risk) Management System, what are possible elements and what does it look like? We will present potential and effective elements as a result of our search of experiences abroad or in other sectors. This will be a reflection of the (international) state-of-the-art of thinking on fatigue management approaches. We hope it will provide new insights in how to handle fatigue and that this will encourage the sector to make use of them.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 54 The origin of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems When you look back how fatigue has been managed over the last 100 years, you see a certain development. In the past fatigue has been managed mostly through working hours restrictions. There has been a lot of arguing in the last 100 years over minimal hours of work regulation. Complex hours of work regulations have resulted, which regulate for instance hours of work, hours driving, hours of rest and the frequency of breaks. More and more one realizes that these discussions have not leaded to lasting solutions. Working hours and so fatigue have become a strategic issue with limited progress. Realizing that there was actually no progress, there was a growing urge to do it differently. Regulators, policymakers and employers became more and more aware of the fact that it was time get rid of the limitations of the past and look for new methods in preventing fatigue. The financial and economic consequences of changes in working hours have become increasingly unacceptable for companies. Especially since accident rates seem to have been in continuous decline. Legislation on the issue seems to have reached a point where the costs of further legislative changes are considered to be higher than the potential benefits. A major turn in thinking has been the view of fatigue as a hazard like one of the other hazards in the company. As other hazards are more effectively managed, than it should work for fatigue too. At this point one realizes that fatigue is a risk with a frequency and a consequence and it should be managed just like any other risk the company faces. At this moment, one can see that the approach where regulators tried to manage fatigue by prescribing how many hours a person is allowed to work, is ending. Recent views (see Dawson) say that proper and effective fatigue management is about regulating, measuring and managing the opportunity to obtain sufficient sleep rather than prescribing the hours that someone works. Instead of regulation, promoting fatigue management can be an incentive for companies reduce fatigue risks themselves and thus keep flexibility in the way how to do it. There are examples in practice that show that this works, but is quite complicated. There are no golden solutions. It is the process together with all involved parties, employers and employee that has to create a custom made approach. Often it is the perceived threat of more inflexible regulation that triggers this movement towards a more flexible, risk based approach. Translating successful F(R)MS initiatives to the shipping industry requires that the programs: are tailored to the shipping culture; integrate/include with ISM; minimize administrative burden; take a comprehensive approach to the chain of causal events that can precede a fatigue-related error or incident. A F(R)MS that is risk based and complements the existing safety management system has significant potential to meet these requirements.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 55 In the following paragraphs we will describe the method and results of our study on fatigue management practices. These are a result of our literature search and the expert interviews. This will result in a framework for Fatigue management. 3.2 Methods 3.2.1 Literature and internet search on fatigue management In order to find good and best practices for preventing and managing fatigue, a search for information in literature and on the internet was performed. Academic databases were searched for literature on fatigue countermeasures and evaluations of those countermeasures. Databases that were searched are PsycInfo, Science direct and Pubmed. A search for academic texts was also performed in GoogleScholar. More information and documentation on fatigue prevention and managing measures was searched with Google. When the documentation provided links or literature references on fatigue management and prevention, these links and references were also used to find more information. The keywords that were used during the search were: fatigue, fatigue management, alertness management, fight fatigue, fatigue countermeasures, fatigue & marine (& sleep), fatigue & maritime (& sleep), fatigue & sea, fatigue & shipping, fms, fmp, crew endurance management, vermoeidheid zeescheepvaart, müdigkeit, sicherheit, vigilance. The emphasis of the search was on information on preventing and managing fatigue in the marine/maritime industry, but information from other industries was also used. This search was supplemented with additional information from experts who were interviewed by telephone. 3.2.2 Interviewing experts on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems International experts on fatigue were interviewed on their experience with fatigue management practices. The experts were found through a network of experts from earlier international research on fatigue measures (Jettinghof, 2005). Furthermore, experts were found during the literature and internet search. People who appeared to have worked on projects concerning fatigue (in the marine/maritime industry) were contacted in order to ask if they were willing to participate in the study and provide us with information on preventing and managing fatigue (in the marine/maritime industry). They could provide us with oral information or with literature references and URL s of websites. The focus in the interview was on actual experiences with the implementation of fatigue management programs, their effectiveness and underlying conditions. We have arranged telephone interviews with experts in UK, US, Finland, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The list of interviewed experts is added in the Annex. The scope of the programmes has been the (international) implementation of fatigue programs within and outside the transport sector (e.g. shipping, road transport, aviation, petrochemical industry). In the interviews we asked for: publications that could be used in the internet search, the state of the art regarding initiatives on fatigue management (in the maritime industry and/or other sectors) and their initiators,

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 56 If initiatives or programs were identified, we asked respondents to focus on the following issues: the underlying philosophy, target groups, effectiveness, organisational or societal structures that can facilitate fatigue initiatives, economical /training & educational consequences of Fatigue Management Systems and preconditions. When no implemented programs were known, we asked for an evaluation of the top-10 measures already mentioned in the internet search. (See the Annex for the interview protocol) 3.3 Results: literature and internet search on fatigue management The literature and internet search on fatigue management has resulted in an overview of programs aimed to prevent or reduce fatigue (sorted by type of measure, sector and country). This overview of literature is included in Annex A. Here we will show type of elements most mentioned in fatigue management programs. This provides an indicator of frequently used elements. This doesn t necessarily say anything about the quality of these measures. This table shows that of the 36 programs found, 11 originated from the marine/maritime/shipping industry, 10 from the road transport/trucking industry and 5 from the aviation/air transport industry. Most programs were developed and implemented in the USA/Canada (15) and in Australia/New Zealand (10). A wide variety of specific fatigue-related measures is mentioned in the programs that came up in the literature search. These can be divided in reactive measures (measures specifically aimed at reacting to fatigue as it arises) and those that are aimed at preventing fatigue in a proactive way (long term prevention of fatigue) Measures to prevent acute fatigue are shown in the table below. This table (table 11) shows that especially napping and caffeine intakes are often advocated as reactive countermeasures for fatigue. Most of the other measures are aimed combating fatigue by stimulating the senses (e.g., conversation, stretching, music, bright lights). Table 11 Reactive measures to fatigue Times mentioned napping, 10-30min 20 caffeine (strategic, when necessary) 10 music and other irregular sounds 4 muscle activity, stretching 4 conversation, interaction 4 technological devices 4 cool dry air 3 developing techniques for staying alert (e.g. mental games). 3 bright lights 2 something new and different 1 drink (water) 1 eat something (not too heavy) 1 We divided the proactive measures that are advocated to prevent fatigue into those regarding a) sleep and rest, b) scheduling, c) work characteristics/ the workplace, d) health and e) other measures. Some measures may be classified within two or more of these categories. If that was the case we put them in the category we found it most applied to.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 57 As to the measures concerning sleep and rest, a good sleep environment or appropriate areas for sleep and rest are most often mentioned. Allowing for 7 to 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep is also relatively often applied as a measure to prevent fatigue. Table 12 Proactive measures to fatigue: Sleep and rest Times mentioned good sleep environment/ appropriate areas for sleep/rest 14 7-8hrs (uninterrupted/deep) sleep per night 8 2 consecutive nights recovery sleep 6 adequate sleep, quality of sleep 5 as least as much continuous sleep during each 24-hour period 5 as normally at home; work out how much you need and get enough light meals within 4 hrs of the sleep period, 5 pre-sleep routine 4 relaxation techniques/ no strenuous exercise 4 sleep at night 4 get rid of sleep debt asap 4 6 hrs continuous sleep (10pm-8am) 3 avoid caffeine or alcohol prior to sleep 3 anchor sleep (at least 4h, every day at the same moment), 2 at least 7 continuous hours of rest in any 24-hour period, preferably 1 between 10pm and 8am. consume heaviest meal after waking up from anchor sleep, 1 avoid sunlight and bright artificial light during sleep period 1 min 4 nighttime sleeps per 7days 1 Opportunity for adequate sleep for at least two nights 1 Work out how much sleep you really need ) 1 A second group of steps that can be taken to deal proactively with fatigue, consists of measures with respect to scheduling. Within this group of measures rostering, scheduling and trip planning is most often mentioned (see Table 13): schedules and trips should be planned in such a way that workers have sufficient opportunities to recover from work. The other measures mentioned in table 13 are to a large extent specifications of this rather general recommendation. For example, short breaks or rest periods, (which are second in rank of most often mentioned measure) may need to be implemented in workers schedules. This applies to duty times (also second in rank) as well. Measures can be conflicting; working 14 hours per 24 hours at most is mentioned in 4 fatigue-prevention programs, whereas 5 of those programs advocate working no more than 12 hours per 24 hours.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 58 Table 13 Proactive measures to fatigue: Scheduling rostering, scheduling, trip planning, 18 short breaks/ rest 14 Change/set duty times (start, duty time, breaks, sleep, night work, irregular work etc (reset biological clock by) use(ing) light management, adapt to Times mentioned shift work and working at night Minimize irregular or unfamiliar work rosters. 5 workload management (not excessive hrs); max limit working 5 hrs or min rest periods max 12 work in 24hr day 5 at least 24 hours notice to prepare for working time of 14 hours 4 or more. When working a continuous rotating shift system of 5 days or 4 more there must be 24 hours of non-working time between shift changes. min10hrs rest max 14hrs work 4 sleep and waking routine (incl meals etc) 4 after 2 consecutive night shifts, more than 1 day/ 48hrs off 3 min 2days off in 14 days/ 1 day off in 7 days 3 min 6-7hrs or more time not working 3 sufficient # days off after extended period of work 2 max 4-5 hrs work per shift/stint 2 non-work breaks of 15 min after every 5hrs of work; 2 recording of work hours 2 consider individual differences. 2 The work schedule should consider not only the hours of work, 2 but also other factors affecting fatigue, such as vessel tasking, weather conditions, circadian factors, and the amount of sleep obtained. Sufficient time off needs to be provided between successive 42-1 day cycles. max 6 hrs work per shift/stint (outer operating limit) 1 min of 16 hr of rest per 48 hr period. 1 if delayed then more than 12 hrs but not more than 16 hrs and 1 the pilot shall receive a rest period of twelve hours plus four hrs for each hr that the pilot s period of duty exceeds 12 hrs. - A Marine Pilot shall not be rostered on duty for more than 15 1 consecutive days. A third group of measures that can be taken to prevent fatigue are those related to the work characteristics and the workplace of the worker. Table 14 shows the frequency with which each of the measures in this domain is mentioned. The most often cited measure is the general recommendation to provide workers with an adequate working environment and adequate working conditions. Second in row is the more specific advice to increase crewing levels. 14 7

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 59 Table 14 Proactive measures to fatigue: work characteristics/ the workplace Times mentioned adequate working environment/ working conditions 9 increased crewing levels/ staffing arrangements (e.g. a master 5 plus two bridge watch keeping officers and sometimes a lookout) provide access to proper nutrition, 3 Selection of watch keepers according to their capacity to adapt 3 to irregular schedules/ consideration of crew preferences and age in scheduling work task type and length (not too boring, not to mentally challenging), schedule difficult task or provide support 2 no high risk operations during circadian dip (0300-0600); 2 varying tasks/working demands 2 consideration of shift work characteristics, 1 opportunities for physical activity, 1 consider travelling and preparation time), 1 Create a work environment that promotes alertness 1 Implement engineering and administrative controls to avoid or 1 greatly reduce exposure Structure hours of work to avoid the hottest or coldest periods 1 of the day Adjust time factors to incorporate the additional physical requirements and challenging environmental and physical condi- 1 tions Another group of measures that can be taken to prevent fatigue relates to the workers health. In this category (see table 15), fit for duty is the most often cited measure. Exercising and a healthy diet are relatively often mentioned as well. Table 15 Proactive measures to fatigue: health Times mentioned fit for duty 11 exercise 7 regular, well-balanced meals, rich in lean proteins and vegetables, but low in sugar, white flour and fat, 7 Provide information and assistance to promote management of 6 health. (Ensure that medical assessment includes consideration of) 6 sleep disorders and other fatigue related conditions. regular assessment of a commercial vehicle driver s health by a 5 suitably qualified medical practitioner do not begin work period with sleep debt, 3 Identify health problems that affect the ability to work safely, 3 e.g. diabetes. Provide appropriate employee assistance programs if necessary and practicable 3 educate in healthy lifestyle 3 learn to recognize, acknowledge and act on your signs of 2 sleepiness.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 60 Times mentioned avoid cold- and heat-related illness and motion sickness and 1 stress. Provide additional fluid/nourishment 1 be healthy 1 Some of the measures cited in the fatigue prevention programs could not be classified within one of the aforementioned categories. These are shown in table 16. Education and information turn out to be the most important of these (mentioned 18 times), but also measures regarding a worker s private life fall within this category. Table 16 Proactive measures to fatigue: other Times mentioned education/training, information about sleep, fatigue en strategies to manage both, nature of fatigue problems that are likely 18 to be found on different types of vessels/ lifestyle necessary for piloting, shift work, work & rest scheduling (relevant and specific to targeted group) pilot should manage off duty time and lifestyle; 3 manage your fatigue at home/when not at work 3 educate / inform spouses/partners/family 3 - Where a pilot is on Standby, a minimum of 4 hours Marine 1 Pilotage duties is recorded irrespective of the actual hours worked. Some of the countermeasures and parts of the fatigue management programs and the like can be directly implemented in the marine/maritime industry. However, some of the measures should be adapted to this industry or are simply not an option. For example, napping seems to be the most used and advised countermeasure to fatigue, but bridge personnel ought to be awake every minute of their watch period and cannot take a nap when it is necessary. 3.4 Results: expert interviews on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems. The interviews have led to valuable information on the status of fatigue management programs. We have found some very interesting practices. On the other hand, the amount of experiences with actual implemented programs and their effects was somewhat disappointing. In the following paragraph we will describe the main potential ingredients of successful Fatigue Management Systems according to the experts. As already described diverse names are given to the program, e.g. Fatigue management Tool, Fatigue Management Risk System, Fatigue Management system, Crew endurance management, etc First we will describe some general comments on fatigue management as a whole an then we will describe the potential effective ingredients. 3.4.1 The old and the new approach to fatigue management It was found in the interviews that there is a changing perspective on how to handle fatigue. This has led to the perception of an old and a new approach to fatigue man-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 61 agement. The old approaches to fatigue and fatigue management used to be aimed at the direct cause of fatigue, e.g. a person who is already fatigued. Well known measures against fatigue were used, such as drinking caffeine, taking a nap and maybe a training on awareness and countermeasures (caffeine, goodtime sleep, hygiene, sleep disorders). This is now seen as too narrow an approach, which is too much focused on the employee and on the direct causes of fatigue. New insights lead to the need to look at the chain of events further away in time and location from when one is actually fatigued. The main aspects of the old approaches are: Aimed at the direct cause of fatigue, e.g. a person who is already fatigued. Individual responsibility. Well known measures against fatigue were used (drinking caffeine, napping, training on awareness). Restrictions in the amount of working hours. Reactive. The main aspects of the new approaches are: need to look at the chain of events further away in time and location from the actual event: initiated from within the organization s policy (safety management); shared responsibility; counter-measures are defined at several levels, aimed at schedulers, operators (e.g. drivers) and executives/managers; how to assess personal fatigue risks (early warning signals); proactive. The emergence of new fatigue management systems has been based on the idea that fatigue should be prevented before someone gets tired. Next to the direct causes of fatigue there are indirect causes in the organization that can prevent fatigue before a situation occurs in which fatigue may lead to unsafe situations. Now the total shipping processes comes in place together with new involved parties as management and planning. Not only the officer s action, but also organizational policy decisions, the design of working procedures and various aspects of regulation can influence the level of fatigue on board. The old fatigue training programs are also called first-generation programmes. Over the past 30 years a number of fatigue training programmes have been developed in the USA, Australia and in Europe. These first-generation programmes have tended to focus on raising awareness of the dangers of fatigue and what the employee can do to minimize their fatigue. Topics covered generally include the importance of sleep, the dangers of operating whilst fatigued, and the short term countermeasures that can be implemented, such as napping and the strategic use of caffeine. The primary limitation of these first-generation training programmes is that the focus is on the at-risk individual: the training is limited to providing short term countermeasures, while the underlying factors that contribute to the individual s fatigue are left unresolved. Moreover, earlier training programmes fail to address fatigue within a broader context of risk management or within a company Safety Management System (Clockwork consultants, UK).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 62 In the UK one speaks of a conventional approach for managing employee fatigue, that is through prescriptive regulations: Hours of Work Limitations, e.g. the Working Time Directive, and for drivers, the EU Drivers Hours Rules. 7 Whereas hours of work limitations try to provide simple rules that will cover all individuals and all work situations, the reality is that the same hours of work will cause varying levels of fatigue in different individuals due to personal circumstances (e.g. age, physical condition, home circumstances), social activities and responsibilities, workload and the different tasks each individual is performing. By relying on hours of work limitations to dictate when an individual should and should not work, schedulers may assume that if a shift pattern is legal, then it will be safe. Moreover, the reliance on legal rosters as a fatigue countermeasure has tended to place the responsibility for managing the problem on the individual: the roster is legal, so therefore it must be safe, and it is left up to the individual to ensure he/she uses their off-duty time to obtain adequate sleep. Nowadays one speaks in terms of so-called Fatigue Risk Management System as an alternative to prescriptive regulation. A Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) is an evidence-based and dynamic approach for managing the possibility of loss of people, property, profit and production due to fatigue. As stated before by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority in Australia, it is a system put in place by an organisation to manage: a) The risk of employees becoming fatigued. b) The consequences arising should they do so. The distinction between the old and the new approach has led to tools and programs that are initiated from within the organization s policy to prevent unsafe situations caused by fatigue. In these program countermeasures are defined in a proactive way and aimed at several levels, e.g. schedulers, operators (e.g. drivers) and executives/managers. With this philosophy, fatigue management policy and measures can be widely extensive (see for example the toolkit transport (in Annex I) as an example. In this way it is likely that fatigue management measures will be connected to safety procedures, HRM policies or general management. Think of measures, like training modules, procedures, (roster-) scheduling, communication or analysis of incidents and accidents. Finally, the distinction between acute and cumulative fatigue may be interesting. (E.g. used by the USCG, 1998). This distinction confirms the importance of a new approach to fatigue in which underlying causes of fatigue within the organisation are tackled, before anyone falls asleep. Acute fatigue is limited to the effects of a single duty period, such as a 9 to 5 hours working day, which may result in a 'micro sleep' (just being away for a split second) or actually falling asleep. Cumulative fatigue occurs when there is inadequate recovery between these duty periods. Thus, cumulative fatigue usually presents a picture of day-to-day changes for the worse. It is clear that causal factors as well as preventive measures may be very different, dependent on the type of fatigue. In order to actually fall asleep, one often is chronically fatigued and has accumulated a sleep deficit over time. Chronic fatigue therefore, is considered to be a precursor of acute fatigue, but environmental factors may additionally be important. Falling asleep will occur sooner when 7 Clockwork consultants, UK

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 63 the tasks and working conditions are dull, monotonous, and when the temperature is high. On the other hand, one is unlikely to fall asleep in a hectic environment, and when a lot of activity takes place. Ergonomic equipment, machines and software that is designed according to ergonomic standards may also limit negative consequences when the seafarers behaviour is impaired due to fatigue. The situation of chronic fatigue is quite different, incorporating a wide set of risk factors like long working hours, working at night, high job demands, the noise on board or in the cabin, and social relations at work. Additionally personals variables like personal characteristics and life style may be contributing to the actual. Chronic fatigue may entail quite a different set of preventive measures. Preventing the accumulation of fatigue over time can deal with working schedules, the quality of the sleeping cabins, the social relations on board, the demands (e.g. number of tasks) imposed upon a person and the autonomy to handle these demands, and with other kinds of organisational measures. The new approach to fatigue management is promising and in general fatigue management systems are seen as relevant instruments, but it should be said that their effectiveness is not yet proven (Dawson & McCullouch, 2005). The main reason for this lack of scientific proof is the custom made approach and the phasing required for successful implementation. Figure 31 Fatigue in shipping (source: the International Maritime, Human Element, Bulletin, Issue No. 13 January 2007). 3.4.2 Ingredients of a F(R)MS recommended by the experts A general comment that has been often heard in the expert interviews is that a fatigue management system is most effective when several measures work together as a system. However, in the following paragraph we will describe several measures separately. First we will describe high-level aspects that appear to be an essential part of every fatigue management system. These are overall training programs, management commitment & communication and using a systems approach. In the next paragraphs we will describe these aspects.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 64 Subsequently we will go into more specific measures using a distinction between proactive and reactive measures. 3.4.3 High-level aspects of a F(R)MS In this section several high level aspects of an F(R)MS will be discussed. Overall training programs In every Fatigue Management System, whether it is the old or the new generation, training is an important component. It is therefore important to explore and discuss the contents of these training programs. In this chapter fatigue training programs will be discussed both in general and in depth for two influential programs. The content of the training mostly gives information on recognizing fatigue and sleepiness. Additionally training programs try to make individuals aware of the causes of fatigue. For example, when you fly to Tokyo to join a ship, time zones and bad sleeping during the flight can influence performance on the ship. This type of easily forgotten causes of fatigue is often highlighted in training programs. There are different stages of training, from instructions aimed at self-awareness of fatigue, to collective training of signs of fatigue in other people (for everybody). Also there should be training for masters and senior-officers: how do you manage fatigue on a vessel? It is important to learn to recognize when a person is not functioning well, and addressing that without it being a matter of penalizing them. It is a matter of how you can recognize and avoid problems caused by fatigue. Also experiences in the transport sector show that training for drivers is useless when managers and schedulers don t get the same training. One of the interviewed experts has had the experience that training works for a stable crew, but not when crew changes on board. When a stable crew has gone through a training program, you see that the program works and the collected data also showed that the program does work. But when crew on board changes, you have to train again. You have to have a program that is consistent, that is always there, that has an education arm and that is being implemented across the fleet. In the US Coast guard, leaders are educated in particular, because good safety management systems require leaders with knowledge of the program and the capacity and skills to support implementation. Also, it is mentioned that fatigue should and can be more a part of maritime training courses. For that trade unions have a large role to play as well. In the first generation of fatigue training family members have also been a target group. It was thought that family members could help employees cope with fatigue. But in this way the focus is still on the driver as the source of the problem. With the new approach to fatigue management the focus is more on the context of the driver and the conditions in which he has to his job. For example a training that is aimed at how to act in an emergency situation, doesn t deal with the context of the situation when it is not integrated in the organization. The FACT approach (Clockwork consultants, UK) appears to be an effective program with a lot of training aspects is. The following subjects are dealt with in their training: 1. Focusing on the context of fatigue management systems: fatigue policies, - explaining responsibilities of employees and responsibilities of management.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 65 2. Focusing on the problem of fatigue, examples of big accidents, e.g. Chernobyl. Then focusing on the sector (e.g. aviation) and then focusing on the company itself (custom made). 3. Information on sleep loss and circadian rhythms. 4. Preventive strategies are brought back to the experience from somebody that works for the company and the shift pattern of that company. Tailoring is very important. 5. How to identify signs of fatigue: what to look for: - physical appearance; - cognitive signs; - how fatigue affects different kinds of performance e.g. impaired memory. 6. Driver fatigue: a critical time (e.g. for pilots) is when they drive home after work. 7. Fatigue reporting systems: - hours of work & consequences; - fatigue reporting form. Aspect 1-6 is about raising awareness, the last aspect focuses on what can you do about it. The final section of this training contains a competence assessment (online exam) to test their ability to apply what they have learned, based on scenario s. For example: The scenario: a flight is delayed, everybody is tired and somebody has still a long way to go by car. The question: make a strategy for how to deal with this. Example: The Fatigue Awareness and Countermeasures Training (FACT) program is a web-based training program developed by Clockwork Research. It improves upon first-generation approaches by providing employees with guidance on how to manage fatigue risk both at work and away from work, presented from within the context of the company s Fatigue Risk Management System. The FACT program has the following aims: To raise employees awareness of the Company s FRMS; their responsibilities and those of the Company with regard to fatigue; Train employees how to assess personal fatigue risk and to identify the early warning signs of fatigue in others; Provide employees with information on the operational procedures that are to be followed when fatigue risk is identified; Train employees to understand the reporting procedures that they should use to report instances of personal fatigue, or general concerns regarding fatigue; Provide strategies that employees can implement personally to manage fatigue risk; and Improve employees understanding of sleep and fatigue Upon successful completion of the training students are directed to an online assessment which tests their ability to apply the lessons they have learned to manage fatigue risk on a personal and organizational level. To ensure that competency rather than memory is tested the FACT assessment is in the form of a series of real-world scenarios involving fatigue, which students must answer by devising strategies and solutions that manage the problem.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 66 Another successful approach is the German alertness management training SAFE-T. (http://www.wach-am-steuer.de/english/methodik.html) for truck drivers. It consists of an introduction session, two training blocks and a final review session. It was first executed as a cooperative project of the truck fleet of Ford Transport Operations with the Berufsgenossenschaften. Content of the training is fatigue-related topics such as individual signs of fatigue, causes of fatigue, adequate and inadequate reactions to fatigue, frequently occurring sleep disorders, tips for better sleep, combining shift work with family life and general health tips. Example: SAFE-T stands for S elf-responsibility (support of own decision making) A dvice (hints for daily life) F eedback (learning by doing) E valuation (evaluation of training success) T raining (instead of just gaining knowledge) A computer program called Alert was used during the training to demonstrate the effects of sleep deficits, long duty hours and night work on fatigue and the effect of countermeasures, e.g. breaks, naps, and appropriate sleeping times. Training and counseling of fleet management personnel in alertness management is part of the second phase. With the support of the computer program Alert schedules were analyzed in terms of risk to suffer from micro sleep. Strategies to improve the schedules were demonstrated. Only the program for truck drivers has known effects. The truck drivers reported being less tired after the training. But after some time the effect was attenuated. Training effects were analyzed using questionnaires and a sleep and fatigue diary. The results show that the training improved the drivers' alertness management skills as well as their knowledge about sleep, fatigue and shift work. After the training the drivers rated their competence in avoiding fatigue higher and all trained drivers were willing to apply what they had learned during training. Furthermore, a decrease of fatigue during night shift was observed and the drivers tended to sleep longer during night shifts. These effects were of statistical significance. Refreshment training is essential to sustain these training effects. The aforementioned training programs can be a basis for implementing alertness management programs nationwide in the trucking sector. There is now also the possibility to adapt the training to other target groups such as bus drivers, train drivers, cab drivers, fleets and ships.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 67 Figure 32 Wach am steuer Example: ALERT is a computer program used in the training of drivers and schedulers to demonstrate the effects of inappropriate schedules on fatigue and performance. At the same time it can be shown how (small) changes in schedules can have large impacts on fatigue, i.e. reduce phases of decreased alertness. Second, experiments are being conducted investigating the effect of the time on task component on fatigue. Management commitment & communication A general measure that is effective FMS should contain specific activities that pay explicit attention to management commitment and communication. This can be done by: Strategic integration: for example, earlier experiences with the implementation of Fatigue Risk Management in airlines, were focused on available data and how these data could be used in a strategic way so that the effects of fatigue to safety, or even business continuity, could become more apparent Genuine commitment from the senior level in the companies backed by adequate education of everybody who is in the program. Also assertiveness is important (that you are able to say, look I am fatigued we need to manage the risk in a clear and unambiguous way and now!). Recognition is one thing, but assertiveness is the second. You have to be adequately empowered in order to identify that you have a fatigue problem to other employees or to a line manager. On the other hand, if one person cannot do the job because of fatigue, another person may have to do a lot more work. In essence it all comes down to the question - what is a safe level of fatigue and staff in order to do the job. Management has to provide that there are sufficient people to cope with these issues. A business case on fatigue: show companies/managers in what way fatigue management will make them money or improve their organisation. There is a wide range of effects beyond the reduction of accident likelihood. Examples can be: staff retention, productivity, morale, organisational commitment, etcetera. Articulating the long term beneficial effects of fatigue management can help build upper echelon commitment. This helps to make fatigue management a part of the job. CEO commitment: a very important aspect of all approaches is that the CEO has to publicly and explicitly commit to the approach. It has to be a public statement. On this subject, there is still a lot of cultural work to do. It is middle management

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 68 that may often have an implicit believe that we have to pretend to be safe, but only when there are no costs involved. Fatigue should be a Key Performance Indicator - if a company works with Key Performance Indicators. The top 10 fatigue problems should for instance be part of 3 monthly management team discussions. An applicable saying in this context is: People do what the boss inspects, not what the boss expects. Another saying is: Culture eats strategy for breakfast. The integration of a fatigue management system in the existing culture is very important. An effective FMS adapts to the current cultural value system : If it is SIX SIGMA, fit it in. Is spreadsheet management or graphics leading? Use spreadsheets and graphics! If the culture is a racy based culture (information is processed by telling stories), also fatigue management should be communicated through storytelling rather than through burdensome text-based policy manuals etc. It is important to adapt the fatigue management approach to the organizational culture in order to reduce change resistance.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 69 Example: In New Zealand a guideline is developed for smaller vessels, particular for fishing vessels: http://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/fatigue/fatigue_publications.asp. Get your sleep, reduce your risk is the message underpinning all the fatigue management resources produced by MNZ. These resources cover most vessel types in SSM because they have the most fatigue-related accidents. Their brochure covers what is fatigue for seafarers and how to manage it, including: - the importance of sleep; - what causes fatigue; - your legal obligations; - strategies for getting enough sleep. Systems approach A fatigue management system will not work as a single measure method. It should be a systems approach. An example of a systems approach is found in the Crew Endurance Management System (Comperatore, US). This program was developed from a systems approach, in this program it is believed that fatigue can not be managed using just one countermeasure. It is a combination of practices, education, environmental improvements in the workplace and the rest areas. This approach focuses on the pressures that impact the individual in his/her operational working environment. Individual care, environmental stressors, the work and the rest environment all need attention to guarantee the improvement of performance or the prevention of fatigue. In this approach, Crew Endurance is managed by analyzing stressors and their relationship on 3 layers (Comperatore, 2007): 1. doctrine (operational goals, safety culture, profit objectives); 2. organization (info on workload and work schedules); 3. personnel/agent (individual behaviour and choices, e.g. leisure time activities, diet choices, staffing numbers and personnel training). Stressors that jointly influence workers health and performance are identified and targeted. They are the base for a plan to reduce the daily incidence of the specific key noxious stressors. A working group should be installed to identify and implement potential changes in the execution of duties, environmental improvements, policies and workplace practices that may protect and improve health and performance. The approach is not just against fatigue, the program manages all the stressors affecting the worker. If you look at the approach, what is prescribes is that you make it your work to understand the various stressors and their impact. In order to, for example, prevent fatigue you have to know which stressors affect the individual, how these stressors interact, and what is the incidence of the stressors in the workplace is. Example: The United States Coast Guard has developed a Crew Endurance Management (CEM) programme. This programme is research based and oriented toward vessels with a structured routine (to the extent that this is achievable in any maritime operation). CEMS is a generic maritime fatigue management programme. Implementation of CEMS requires the training of fatigue experts within industry, and the use of onboard fatigue management coaches is highly recommended. Originally developed with a focus on larger Coast Guard vessels, CEMS has been applied in the US towing vessel industry. A demonstration project in the towing industry showed improvement on a number of measures over a six-month period (United States Coast Guard, 2005).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 70 3.4.4 Proactive measures as potential ingredients of an FMS The following measures are examples of proactive measures as an ingredient of a Fatigue Management System. Working hours & Shift System assessment An important proactive measure often found in F(R)MS s is that of assessing working hours and estimating the related fatigue risk. The main idea is that one inputs a work schedule into a (computer) program which calculates the expected risk of fatigue. The analyses performed are based on factors like, the length of the working hours, the timing of shifts (circadian elements) and recuperation periods (cumulative fatigue), frequency of breaks, the content of work, early morning shifts, etc. Using these factors it is possible to analyse work patterns with respect to safety and fatigue both prospectively and retrospectively. The FAID software tools for instance are used regularly in retrospective analysis of actual hours of work. Example: Fatigue Audit Inter Dyne (FAID) is designed for use by individuals, dispatchers or administrators involved in scheduling workers and constructing rosters. With an increasing corporate recognition of the risks involved with roster related fatigue, and the public awareness of the impact of these risks, there is a need to proactively address the problem of fatigueinducing work practices. FAID can be used as part of a fatigue risk management system to improve worker alertness and workplace safety. It is suited to many uses including the aviation industry, railways, truck transport and other areas where shift work and extended hours are potential problems. The philosophy is: if the work is regular analysis can be prospective, where it is irregular it is most appropriate to asses retrospectively. Figure 33 shows some example FAID output. Figure 33 Example FAID output

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 71 The software program using the FAID model is commercially available to company risk managers to see if enough sleeping opportunities are provided. Based on the outcome, it is possible to identify if fatigue and/or staffing levels are safe or not. Then, the core question is: do we have the right balance? The FAID and FAID-safe family of products expanded upon just hours of work analysis, also including elements related to the general fatigue management system like the development of management competencies related to fatigue, the development of emergency plans, and the organisation of workshops on fatigue. Other authors and institutions have developed similar roster analysis modelling systems, for instance; the Sleep, Activity, Fatigue, and Task Effectiveness (SAFTE) model, developed for the US Department of Defence (DOD) (Hursh, et al, 2004) and HSE Fatigue Index, developed for the UK Heath and Safety Executive (Spencer, Robertson, & Folkard, 2006). The system developed for the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) additionally attempts to move from the prediction of fatigue to the prediction of risk directly (Spencer, Robertson, & Folkard, 2006). Fatigue models tend to base their predictions on experimental sleep research while the risk-index is based on real world risk research (e.g. observed relative incident risk in shifts). However the risk-index is a new development and explicitly not intended to replace fatigue modelling but is according to HSE to be used in conjunction (for more information on the risk- index and the tool, see: http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr446.htm.) In Germany mathematical fatigue models are developed to predict fatigue within the ALERT program. A system used primarily in road transport. The main determinants of fatigue are the time of the day (i.e. the circadian rhythm), time since last sleep and the time on a task. Fatigue resulting from performing a task superimposes on circadian and sleep-related fatigue. Breaks between tasks are supposed to "set back" fatigue to the value which is caused by the combined influence of the time of the day and sleep related factors. Also within Germany a computer program (the DLR-program "ALERT") has been constructed on the basis of these mathematical models. These programs can be used to predict phases of critically increased fatigue during a traffic operation. The program s enable drivers and schedulers to plan operations and rosters carefully to keep alertness at an acceptable level. According to one of the interviewed experts, the shipping industry as such needs a supporting tool to make a better planning and to discover causes of fatigue. In Denmark there are already initiatives (Andreas Northseth, Denmark) to develop such computer-based tools as well. This diagnosis and planning tool gives insight in distribution of tasks/workload/rest periods on board. Inspiration for this initiative was a more flexible way of manning ships. This tool could also be used for safe-manning. Roster analysis and modelling as provided by FAID, SAFTE, ALERT or the Fatigue/Risk Index can be used both retrospectively (e.g. are our rosters safe with respect to fatigue) and prospectively (e.g. can we schedule this trip for this driver at this time). Additionally these systems can provide insight into the fatigue risks of nominally legal work plans. The model might for instance communicate to planners that a roster is legal but ill-advised as it runs a real risk of excessive fatigue, especially at these days/times of the schedule. In this manner fatigue modelling can play an important part in any fatigue management program. Although all aforementioned fatigue models are based strongly on the very influential three process model developed in sleep science, they may differ in their scientific details leading to subtly different predictions. For mathematical fatigue models to be ac-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 72 curate, the impacts of the different determinants have to be quantified. To this end, fatigue data have to be obtained from drivers of different transport modes (e.g. truck, aeroplane, rail transport) at different times of the day, considering the time since last sleep and time on duty. Related to shift systems and rostering some experts underline the need for better enforcement of the existing rules and regulations in the shipping industry. Nowadays seafarers sometimes falsify documents regarding work and rest hours. Research shows that e.g. the working time directives quite frequently broken by companies (Cardiff report, Smith, 2006). From the documents it seems that everyone complies with the rules and regulations, but this picture does not match reality. This has been a discussion in Denmark in the end of 2007: how should we effectively enforce rules and regulations? If everybody complies then there wouldn t be a problem. The arrangement on working hours form a part of the ISM safety management systems on ships and within companies, but as long as the rules are not followed, this will not give solutions. Quote: In shipping one can question if it is hours of work or hours of rest that matters. On shore most is about hours of work, but in shipping industry hours of rest may be far more important. Actually we think it is the hours of rest that matter, also on shore. Some experts say: still, the best way to prevent fatigue in the shipping industry if the shipping industry worked in the same way as aviation, in which there are always two people available. The best way to prevent negative consequences of someone to fall asleep is to have a second person available, but they have to be comparable in ranking. Fit for duty Whose responsibility is it to check if someone is fit for duty? Logically it is the master. Seasickness is also an issue, but it is hardly ever talked about (if someone has been vomiting all night, he lost sleep). It affects performance. Fitness for Duty can be checked by means of tests applied before the start of duty which give information about the physiological and psychological status of the driver and his or per preparedness to drive. The prior sleep wake model (Dawson & McCulloch, 2005.) In Europe the Risk Management Approach of the human factors already existed for a longer time. Fatigue is integrated in the concept of Bridge Resource Management (like crew resource management training in aviation). This provides the opportunity to manage fatigue in irregular working conditions. The main issue is that there is no regulation of working hours, since this has appeared to be ineffective. Working hours are managed by the prior sleep wake model. By using this model a probability of fatigue risks can be given. According to this model, 3 questions will be asked prior before starting duty: 1. Did you have <5 hours of sleep in the last 24 hours prior to start? -> risk! 2. Did you have less than 12 hours sleep in the last 48 hours? -> risk! 3. Have you been awake longer than the hours you slept in the last 24 hours? -> risk! If there is a risk, the next step is to organize risk reduction activities based on risk assessment. A scoring system and a risk- based profile will lead to a decision matrix. There are 3 levels of risk: green, yellow, red. RED: if nobody else available, ship will be cancelled.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 73 YELLOW (a manageable increase of risk): fatigue countermeasures will be taken. Risk reduction has to equal risk activities, like e.g. increased level of supervision, task rotation (selection of tasks, staying in the office, etc). GREEN: ok. Actually, it is a semi quantitative risk model. The duration of development of the program is 2 to 3 weeks: countermeasures have to be developed, participation with the work floor and consultation. Very important in this approach is the sense of ownership of employees. They have to be actively engaged and involved (e.g. in the development of countermeasures). Fit for duty tests (Gundel) Before starting a potentially risky operation fit for duty tests may be presented to the driver on a Palm Computer. The test results indicate if the driver is in a proper state to drive, i.e. not fatigued to a critical extent. The data obtained are telemetrically transferred to a computer comparing the present performance with stored data on the driver's performance in a clearly awake state. Impairments can be reported immediately to both the driver and the scheduler. Requirements and kinds of fit for duty tests Fit for duty tests should be sensitive to the effects of fatigue or other performance degrading influences. Possible fit for duty tests are reaction time tests or the unstable tracking task. Most importantly, tests should be easy to perform and valid. Unfortunately, several problems arise similar to those mentioned with driver assistance systems. Problems of fit for duty tests First, it is necessary to find a behavioural parameter, which properly reflects fatigue or decreased fitness in a proper way. Second, one has to determine the critical threshold of the dependent variable above which the driver is advised not to drive. Due to large individual differences, this appears to be very difficult Additionally, an important discussion around this type of technology is on benchmarking data. This can be based on either (a) population data or (b) individual historical data. Depending on which is used sensitivity and specificity of the task is very different and legal defensibility of the use of population data could be a problem. Other proactive measures Good sleep environment/ appropriate areas for sleep/rest. In shipping the quality of sleep is also an issue (acoustic, temperature, vibrations). If there is too much noise in the port to sleep, there are several possibilities. A sleeping environment can be provided in onshore facilities. Also industrial earplugs can help.. There is a device available that can be used on the wrist for sleep quality duration a simple and effective help is acoustic isolation. Special diets: how you handle diet is important. Timing of eating can be a fatigue minimization strategy, e.g. you get tired after a full meal (see example of tool in article Flower in Annex B). In road transport Driver Assistance Systems serve the function to prevent fatiguerelated accidents by means of technical devices that give a warning signal in case fatigue arises (e.g. cameras recording eye-movements).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 74 Example: Swedish FMS- program in road transport by using technical devices as one of the elements (Lützhöft, 2007) 1. How does fatigue show?/how can you recognize it?/ how is the driving impaired? / what is going on? (fatigue is one form of impairment) 2. Can I have a system to defect it? (VTI systems technical systems) 3. When I have defected it what can I do? Examples of options are: - disable the car - Put all warning systems on a higher level? - Next station and can I take a nap there? - temperature/smell/music/vibration 4. Preventive, detecting first signs, early stages of fatigue, This is much more difficult. Especially it is difficult to build a system, detecting fatigue. For humans it is easy to see if someone is getting fatigued. It is more difficult to do it for example by camera, physiological measurement, ECG brainwaves, etc. Such systems are almost impossible to implement in real life. Camera systems are promising. The car manufacturers are developing such systems. E.g. LEXUS had drowsiness detection. There are comparable experiments in simulators for shipping. With physiological measurement not-normal driving is detected, e.g. the use of gear, the way the car moves on the road, speed, lateral position, steering wheel angle variation. This works now for 90%, it should work over 99% before the car manufacturers will use it without fear due to negative image and costs. 3.4.5 Reactive fatigue measures as potential ingredients of an FMS. Napping Napping (10-30 minutes): evidence from other sectors of transport. Professor Horne does research on this subject. When naps take too long (e.g. more then 20-30 mins) this can lead to more instead of less drowsiness. Short naps tend to avoid the lowered alertness, also known as sleep lag or sleep inertia, which is associated with waking up. Caffeine Caffeine can be effective, but works only for a short period. A combination of caffeine and napping is sometimes experimented with. In these prophylactic naps a dose of caffeine is followed by 15 minutes of naptime. The combined effect is thought to boost alertness for some time. Error management techniques (Dawson) Error management approaches can be used to assess (fatigue) risk of the crew and the captain. To do this, interviews are used to evaluate the risk of captain and crews. These interviews are based on human factors error management techniques. This method is derived from the error management approach in aviation. In shipping, there are successful fatigue management practices in which the pilot assessed the crew and the captain by behavioural observation, making use of casual conversation Culture differences, language aspects and hierarchical behaviour can be elements of the technique. For example Chinese crews have a tendency saying yes or speak worse English when they are tired. By knowing and recognizing these types of culturally biased errors, fatigue can be signalled in an early phase. In Indian crews, the cap-

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 75 tain may speak English very well, but they tend tot mishear numbers, have right left confusion, or have more trouble with the steering direction. Another aspect is hierarchical differences, e.g. authority gradience : Tired people tend to be more likely to comply. Tired senior people tend to be less likely to be receptive when they are challenged. In the error management technique, specific tasks are defined and used to measure the level of fatigue in the interviews. Codewords (so-called flags ) can be used to signal someone s fatigue. There is another way in which error management can be applied, which is called Formal Error Management Practices. In most work groups there is an informal fatigue error management practice. There are informal rules in organizations for reducing fatigue-related risk. In the Formal Error Management Approach we make them formal: a systematic approach for fatigue will exist, consisting of S.O.P. s (Standard Operating Procedures) or integrated in SMS s (Safety Management Systems). Fatigue reporting A lot of perspective for a better management of fatigue lies in a better incident reporting. If you don t know what happens, you can t prevent it happens again. In shipping only major accidents are registered while it is quite possible that incidents such as temporarily falling a sleep at night occur frequently. Not enough data on these types of incidents is available. It is thought that fatigue incidents appear to go largely unnoticed/unreported, and this could be a reason why people mostly tend to underestimate how serious fatigue can be. The underlying culture that is embedded in the organization is crucial in this. One of the most effective elements of an FMS, that can also be a great help to change a culture, is a Fatigue Report System. The importance of cultural influences is evident in road transport. A 12 hours shift/5days a week/every week is ridiculously long. It is illegal in Europe, but when in Africa the truck drivers still make shift like this. And, even in Europe, the average working week in road transport contains 55 hours, with highs up to 75 hours a week for international drivers (Jettinghof, 2003). It is the harsh culture in this sector that appears to be dominant. To improve the level of openness and so reporting, the advice is that a reporting system must be voluntary and separated from the normal incident reporting because of its legal implications. Confidential fatigue incident reports give information on the hotspots. In Australia, on the other hand, there is an employer duty of care and an employee duty of care. If the employee lies and there is an accident and the investigation finds out that that there is fatigue, they become potentially personally liable. In this context there is the notion of wilful blindness. You know something is going on, but you don t do anything about it. It is important to create the opportunities to be open, about work related fatigue and non-work related fatigue as well. Work related fatigue has to do with the rostering and the sleep opportunities. Non-work related fatigue has to do with the actual use of the sleeping opportunity by the employee typically outside the workplace. In Australia there is the responsibility of the employee to flag fatigue, this means that there is a certain way of saying that you have not been able to use the opportunity to sleep, e.g. because of a sick child at home. For example, there is an instruction to say I haven t had sufficient sleep (flag).

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 76 This is relevant in relation to legal issues, here the Australian Health & Safety law. The company is obliged to provide enough sleeping facilities. If it s not, it s liable. But, also the employee has the legal obligation to notify the organization if he hasn t had enough sleep. If the organization manages the fatigue, there is no punishment. Also data on near miss fatigue reporting should help, but companies often lack interest because it feels like negative publicity. In the US there are some good experiences since everything is recorded there for 1 year. This study shows that the problem is more serious than thought before. When fatigue is reported, people have the information to do anything about it. Then people understand they are responsible and accountable. Data is important, it monitors performance and physical performance and moreover these data can be related to the rostering. Fatigue reporting can make it harder to say: it cannot happen to me. When incident reporting is use to learn from the past and to prevent incidents in the future, it can also be seen as a proactive approach to fatigue. 3.5 A framework for fatigue management We have described the main ingredients separately, but in the interviews is often put forward that the programs only work as a whole. This will be explained by Reason s (Reason, 1995) Swiss Cheese model. The next picture shows the importance of different barriers at several layers to prevent fatigue within organizations. The so-called cheese model shows the importance of defenses in the organization in managing fatigue. It is based on Reason s quote: we cannot change the human condition, but we can change the conditions under which humans work. This is illustrated in the next picture. Figure 34 The Swiss cheese model (Reason, 2000) This model has been used as an analogy to describe safety risks. The different layers in the Swiss cheese model reflect the barriers (defenses) a safety system designed to prevent errors and therefore, accidents and/or injury. Defensive layers in organizations or

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 77 systems can be alarms or physical barriers procedures or preventive action form employees. Reason s Swiss Cheese model, (Wikipedia) The Swiss Cheese model of accident causation is a model used in the risk analysis and risk management of human systems. It likens human systems to multiple slices of Swiss cheese, stacked together, side by side. It was originally propounded by British psychologist James T. Reason in 1990, and has since gained widespread acceptance and use in healthcare, in the aviation safety industry, and in emergency service organizations. It is sometimes called the cumulative act effect. Reason hypothesizes that most accidents can be traced to one or more of four levels of failure: Organizational influences, unsafe supervision, preconditions for unsafe acts, and the unsafe acts themselves. In the Swiss Cheese model, an organization's defenses against failure are modeled as a series of barriers, represented as slices of Swiss cheese. The holes in the cheese slices represent individual weaknesses in individual parts of the system, and are continually varying in size and position in all slices. The system as a whole produces failures when all of the holes in each of the slices momentarily align, permitting (in Reason's words) "a trajectory of accident opportunity", so that a hazard passes through all of the holes in all of the defenses, leading to a failure. Mostly these layers achieve this, but there are always weaknesses. This is illustrated by the holes in the slices of Swiss cheese. Unlike cheese, these holes are continually opening, shutting, and shifting their location. If the holes in many layers momentarily line up at the same moment, hazards come into contact with victims, an accident occurs. At that moment there will be damaging consequences. Fortunately this will not happen most of the times. The holes in the defenses arise for two reasons: these are active failures and latent conditions. Active failures are the unsafe acts committed by people directly related to the in- cident of accident, this can be mistakes or procedural violations. Latent conditions are the suboptimal conditions within the system of an organization. They arise from decisions made by designers, builders, procedure writers, and top level management. These latent conditions enlarge the chance of potential errors in to the workplace. Examples are time pressure, understaffing, inadequate equipment, fatigue, and inexperience. These latent conditions may exist within the organization or system for many years before they combine with active failures and trigger an accident opportunity. Unlike active failures, whose specific forms are often hard to foresee, latent conditions can be identified and remedied before an adverse event occurs. Understanding and acting upon this leads to proactive rather than reactive risk management (Reason). The Swiss Cheese model shows us the importance of multiple measures to prevent risks. Also in the interviews it is mentioned that there is no way to successfully manage fatigue by using one countermeasure. Success is to be found in a systems approach. It is combination of practices, education, environmental improvements in the workplace and the rest areas. It is important to understand the operational environment where the individual is working and moreover what pressures impact the individual. In the chapter we have described potential measures in a systematic way. The figure below shows the 5 level model of fatigue management (Dawson & McCullouch,

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 78 2005). This model and its levels provide a framework for the multiple measure approach as is reflected earlier by the layers of the Swiss cheese model. Hazard assessment Error trajectory Control mechanisme Adequate sleep opportunity? Adquate sleep obtained? Level 1 Level 2 - Rules of rostering - Prescriptive rules for hours of work - Modeling (FAID) -Prior sleep wake model Are there fatigue related behaviours? Level 3 - systems checklist - self reports - physiological monitoring Have there been fatigue related errors? Have there been fatigue related incidents? Level 4 Level 5 = actual incident - fatigue proofing strategies - SMS adresses 1-3 level errors in error analysis - Incident analyses system Figure 35 the 5 level model of fatigue management Dawson and McCulloch (describe a 5-level model, in which each level consists of practical fatigue measures and tools, tools to identify what the risks are, and how to get workload back in balance by redistributing work. The levels 1 to 3 are aimed at latent errors in the organization (long term, proactive). The levels 4 and 5 are aimed at active errors (short term, reactive and proactive). For example: Level 1 consists of tools for rostering and planning of (overtime) works. Level 2 consists of tools to identify insufficient sleep, for example sleep loss caused by a sick child during the night, or by attending a party on the weekend. Level 3 activities are aimed at (self-) reporting fatigue, e.g.: while talking to some employees in the workplace during a coffee break you observe that one of the staff on your shift is exhibiting symptoms consistent with fatigue. You are aware that this individual has been pushing it pretty hard lately. What do you do? Level 4 activities reduce risk through fatigue proofing countermeasures, e.g. when somebody has had sufficient sleep, but nevertheless has considerable difficulty in staying awake and because you are concerned that there may be a risk of a fatigue-related accident or injury while driving to or from work, you call a cab. Level 5 consists of incident reporting and analyzing, e.g.: when an incident report is filed, and the investigation indicates that the employee had reported insufficient sleep prior to the incident According to this model, there should be measures at several levels to prevent fatigue in order to be effective.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 79 3.6 Comments on the implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry In this chapter we will discuss the preconditions for good implementation of fatigue management. In the interviews and in the literature, many preconditions are mentioned. Moreover, it confirms that in every specific sector, i.e. the shipping industry, tailored solutions are needed. 3.6.1 Conditions for a successful implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry It is frequently mentioned that more regulation in working hours and shifts is certainly not a solution. There is so much regulation regarding related to fatigue, minimum rest hours, maximum working hours, ISM, voluntary systems. When problems with compliance to current regulations and the substantial individual differences in fatigue are taken into account it is doubtful that additional regulations will result in useful behavioural changes. Shipping has never been so much regulated as today. The advice is to stimulate a goal-based approach instead of adding more regulations. This supports the ideas of fatigue management as a part of a management system. Implementing a fatigue management system is can only be successful a certain preconditions are e met. The implementation of a fatigue management will be confronted by the same difficulties that may arise when implementing any management system. Moreover all the aspects that make it difficult to implement changes in the shipping industry, also have to be dealt with when managing fatigue in a different way. Still, this is no reason to be negative. In the interviews many reasons are given why implementing a fatigue management system in the shipping industry could be different - and harsher- than in other sectors. But often this is overestimated. It is a rumour that planes are regularly not allowed to take off because of fatigue. For example: in aviation, where the developments appear to be much faster when it comes to the prevention of fatigue (Dawson). Actually, a major airline has reported that in the last 18 years, it has happened two times that a plane has to be withdrawn. Also, at sea, there are options to prevent fatigue induced incidents, as long as some preconditions are met. In the interviews a lot of aspects were mentioned that are seen as essential for a good implementation. Some fatigue programs prescribe countermeasures, but these recommendations (e.g. when to see light, when not to see light) are very difficult to implement on your own. The organization has to provide a supportive environment for the worker, so that the worker can feel encouraged to perhaps change some of their bad habits. Fatigue has also to do with bad habits (watch TV late in the evening, drinking caffeine late in the evening). Interaction between the worker s effort and organizational support is important. Another problem faced in trying to prevent fatigue seems to be the (bureaucratic) culture, everyone is waiting for the regulators. A lot of the shipping companies are just interested in complying with legislation. On the other hand one is aware of the fact that no regulation can, in and of itself, solve this problem and that it is time to do something else. People should be actively involved in their own safety. It is important to give ship-owners and managers etc. tools to handle these issues, especially objective tools, like the computer program). If you want to change something, than you have to have the ship-owners with you, otherwise nothing would change. Therefore you have to give them tools from which they see the benefits.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 80 The general feeling is that best practices are already performed by ship-masters and seafarers who are aware of the problem of fatigue and also are aware about the rules and regulations and comply with these rules. So, if you are aware of the issue and comply with the rules and regulations, fatigue does not need to be a problem anymore. Important is that the ship-master acts as a responsible managers, and that he gives the right to sleep when someone is tired. To prevent resistance to change : you have to provide sufficient education so that the community starts thinking a little bit different. This takes some time. First, every member of the personnel should be involved, and there should be commitment from the management. Both employers and employees need to support the common objectives. They need to be educated about fatigue, it s risks and the best strategies for how to prevent and manage it. Feedback from personnel is essential. More than anything else, it is genuine commitment from the senior level in the companies backed by adequate education of everybody who is in the program. They have to be convinced that fatigue is a problem to work on. Finally, the program has to be evaluated and refined/adapted (if necessary) regularly. At last also assertiveness is important. You have to be able to say that you are fatigued. Recognition is one thing. But assertiveness is the second, you have to be able to say, look I have a problem. But if one person cannot do the job because of fatigue, another person will have to do a lot more work. In essence it comes down to the question of what is a safe manning level. You will always need to have sufficient people to cope with these issues. Summarized, the following aspects are important for a good implementation of a fatigue management system: The system should be objective and credible in the eye of their users: people have to trust the system. The new way of working should be easily approachable and tools should be easy to use (short and simple), preferably by the employees themselves. There should be genuine support in the environment, especially management and senior management The system should not reflect and possibly overrule bureaucratic culture. The involved employers and employees should be open for different thinking. Very important is the integration in existing procedures and culture: Culture eats strategy for breakfast. The program should be monitored, evaluated and refined As a concluding remark, one can say that commitment, assertiveness and education (especially recognizing signs of fatigue in yourself and your co-workers) together could be the most important factors to start with. Commitment of top management is necessary to decide for structural changes that help fatigue. Therefore employees need to be assertive enough to be open and share moments of fatigue and near misses. Above this it is important to feel responsible for each other and recognize signs of fatigue, together with being able to address it. This could be the beginning of a new way of thinking of fatigue, other than the inflexible regulation of working hours.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 81 3.7 Fatigue management measures in the shipping industry The above mentioned fatigue management measures and the conditions for a successful implementation, have been the input in one of the workshop of the invitational conference with delegates from the shipping industry. Criteria for selection of measures were: Effectiveness in reducing fatigue. Feasibility. Acceptance within the sector. Compatibility with existing procedures & regulation, e.g. the ISM code. In the workshop it was aimed to discuss the implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry. The conclusion of the group was that there is still not enough information on fatigue and its consequences. Fatigue is no problem can mean two things: 1) it is no problem, 2) we don t know what the consequences are. In the latter case, education is needed. This emphasizes the need for more insight in fatigue, its consequences and its costs. Other interesting remarks in the discussion were: we as an industry- are already managing fatigue, but we are not aware of it, and make fatigue a part of daily life, not a special case. Maybe the most important remark was that the industry needs to prove and show society that they have worked on the prevention of fatigue before a major disaster happens due to fatigue. In the latter case, fatigue management has become a part of their licence to operate. 3.8 Conclusions fatigue management This chapter has provided a framework for Fatigue (Risk) Management systems. (F(R)MS) work on Fatigue management. We introduced Fatigue Management as a way to contextualize the task allocation process in the last chapter of delegation. A good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute In this chapter we have described the most frequent ingredients of existing Fatigue Management Programs. Moreover we have given an overview of the most recommended ingredients and/or tools by international experts. Tools appear to be available that identify if the system is out of balance, what exactly the fatigue risks are, and what the organization can do to manage the risk of fatigue and how to bring activities back in balance (risk mitigation). This is preferably done is a way that it is integrated in the company s systems and S.O.P. s (Standard Operating Procedures). One of our conclusions is that fatigue is actually a process. It is not some kind of paperwork. An important aspect in preventing fatigue, is that fatigue should be seen as a risk, just like one of the risks (financial, safety, business continuity) in an organization. The occurrence of fatigue has a frequency and consequence. Fatigue has to be managements in such a way that the most severe consequences have to be prevented. Moreover, fatigue as a risk can be a part of a broader (safety) management system. Over the last years, one can speak of an old and a new approach to fatigue management.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 82 The old approaches: aimed at the direct cause of fatigue, e.g. a person who is already fatigued; Individual responsibility; well known measures against fatigue were used (drinking caffeine, napping, training on awareness); restrictions in the amount of working hours. The new approaches: need to look at the chain of events further away in time and location from the actual event; initiated from within the organization s policy (safety mgt); shared responsibility; countermeasures are defined at several levels, aimed at schedulers, operators (e.g. drivers) and executives/managers; how to assess personal fatigue risks (early warning signals). The common thought is that more measures ingredients are necessary to have an effective F(R)MS. The 5-level model of Dawson has given us a framework for the fatigue Management measures at all levels. Inspired by the philosophy of Reason s Swiss Cheese Model, the model reflects the range of tools or measures to take at all levels, starting from proactive prevention of fatigue to handling fatigue as it occurs. Moreover, management commitment, good communication and training on fatigue in all levels are necessary. The model is a framework for the variety of options to combat fatigue. At the end, it is the fit to the organisation s culture that is most critical for success. This study provided us with interesting options for the implementation of fatigue management in the Shipping Industry. Especially the measures that are compatible with the ISM code are interesting for the shipping industry. For example the integration of Fatigue in Incident reporting could be an interesting option. Another example is a fatigue management training program, compatible with the existing training and educations of seafarers, e.g. the BRM and the ERM training. Rostering analysis models could not only help the industry in signalling fatigue, it can also be the beginning of more flexibility in (watch) scheduling. At last, based on the expert interviews, it is concluded that managing fatigue has the same pitfalls as any other risk to be management. Therefore, first commitment of management and people involved is a precondition. Next there should be an open culture in which it is possible to address fatigue. At last there should be time to learn about fatigue, its cause and its consequences. This starts with training and education on how to recognize signs of fatigue, for yourself and your co-workers. These kind of measures could and should be an alternative for the more inflexible regulation of working hours.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 83 4 Phase 3: economic consequences and consequences for training The time use study and the fatigue management study have shown a series of options and alternatives to combat fatigue in the shipping industry. In this chapter the financial consequences of promising delegation measures and fatigue management measures in the sector as well as consequences for training and education in the sector are identified. Promising delegation and fatigue management measures are a result of the time use study in chapter 2 and respectively the fatigue management overview in chapter 3. Selection of the delegation and fatigue management measures is based on the results of both the time-use study respectively fatigue management overview and more specifically based on the input from sector representatives in the workshops of a conference organised to feed back the preliminary results of this study (phase 1 and phase 2). Criteria for selection of the measures were: Effectiveness in reducing fatigue. Feasibility. Acceptance within the sector. Compatibility with existing procedures & regulation, e.g. the ISM code. The results of phase 1 and 2 of this study and the sector input from the workshop have lead to the following selection of measures: Delegation 1. Transfer maintenance activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system 2. Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care & administration activities to shore in all watch- systems 3. Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer/ 2nd officer in 3-watch system 4. Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems 5. Transfer organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system 6. Transfer safety & training activities from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system Fatigue management 1. Implementation of fatigue management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process). 2. Fatigue Incident reporting (see ISM Code, section 9) 3. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry 4.1 Transfer maintenance activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system Based on the questionnaires and the workshop, it is expected that the master in the 2 watch system was involved in the preparation and coordination of maintenance work on deck to be carried out. Regarding the responsibilities for maintenance activities, two issues are relevant: Responsible for the correct execution of the work

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 84 Overall responsibility for the correct status of the particular item as part of the seaworthiness of the ship. Other ship officers can take over the responsibility for the correct execution of the work without legal consequences. However, the second issue remains with the master. This implicates that a final control of the work has to be done by the master himself. If maintenance work of specific deck items is transferred to engineers, there is a possibility that certain issues are unknown to them. The master or another deck officer may have to give instructions on how to perform the maintenance work, how to coordinate and control. On the other hand it is quite possible that engineers have more knowledge of maintenance activities than the master to begin with. After executing the work by the engineer, a report in one way or another has to be returned to the master as the overall responsible person. In other words a part of the maintenance work remains with the master. With an average of 30 minutes per 24 hours as derived from the questionnaires it is estimated that about 5 minutes remains with the master. Next to the time gain, this type of delegation relieve the feeling of responsibility. The transfer of maintenance work from master to engineer will not reduce the total cost of the master having a fixed salary without overtime arrangements. Extra costs will occur if this extra maintenance work is done by engineers in overtime. With an average over time rate of 50/hour (including company expenses) the total extra cost is estimated to be 25 per day per ship. 4.2 Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems Before arriving in port the loading and unloading of the cargo has to be planned in detail to ensure a safe and efficient process in port. The planning deals with the sequence of loading and discharging in ports to overcome over stowage of goods, the segregation of dangerous goods to comply with international regulations, the vertical weight distribution to overcome insufficient stability and the longitudinal weight distribution to control the draft and stress in the ship construction. Also the safe stowage and securing of cargo should be taken into account. The planning starts after receiving cargo orders from the ship owner, charterer or agent. Based on this information preliminary planning is made and returned to the sender. In most circumstances a number of times adaptations to the plan will be made, including the correspondence with the shore organization. Results of the planning have to be documented, including a list of dangerous goods and their planned location on board. The planning as a whole is a complex process where knowledge of the ship particulars and appropriate regulations is essential. To plan the entire loading and unloading process on break bulk, bulk carriers and tankers is the primary responsibility of the 1st officer. On container vessels this planning has been transferred to shore organizations. In case of damage to the cargo and ship caused by the cargo, the 1st officer and master can be held responsible in case of insufficient diligence. In other words who ever will take care of the planning, it is the responsibility of the master and 1st officer to control the final planning from a safety, efficiency point of view and to avoid risks of damaging the cargo during (un)loading and sea transportation as well as to maintain a safe situation for the ship. Of course, the complexity of the loading process varies amongst the type of ships and cargo.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 85 Loading and unloading of sea going ships is done by stevedores. These workers operate under the responsibility of the carrier or charterer. However, even under a charter party, the master and 1 st officer remain responsible for a correct and safe (un)loading, stowage and securing process, as well as for the control of the amount of cargo to be loaded or discharged. In such a case, the 1st officers will discuss the loading plan with the stevedore in advance of the operation. The master will receive cargo documents from the agent and has the responsibility to verify these documents with respect to correctness of the contracts and availability of cargo certificates with dangerous goods. If any damage to the cargo is observed remarks have to be made in the mate receipts. Next, the master has to contact the ship owner for further instructions on how to handle the damaged goods. In principle the control of documents and (un)loading can be done by qualified personnel from the ship owner. The preparation of the loading plan can also be done by shore personnel provided they have the stability/stress computer programs of the vessel available and the proficiency to work with these programs. Nevertheless, the master of the ship (and his 1st officer) remain responsible for the seaworthiness of the ship during (un)loading and during the sea voyage. This means that any prepared loading plan will be checked eventually by the master or the 1st officer, and communication with the shore organization is needed when changes have to be made to the plan. Also a final check regarding the stowage of dangerous cargo will remain with the master or 1st officer. Some recommended ship owners in the Netherlands make already use of a so called Super cargo who will plan the project cargo ashore and control the entire loading and discharging at each port. Loading plan proposals are sent by e-mail to the ship where the 1 st officer will check this plan regarding the stability and stress aspects. Final loading plans are established after mutual agreement between ship and super cargo. One super cargo can plan more than 1 ship ashore but in most of the circumstances cannot control the loading and discharging in each port of more than 1 ship. Supervision can be executed by locally recruited parties. Especially on the smaller short sea shipping ships preparatory tasks can be dealt with by the super cargo, meaning that opportunity for rest is created for the master and 1 st officer. With bulk cargoes the incorporation of a super cargo is not necessary. The experience with the super cargo is so far limited but it already is recognized that the 1 st officer is able to gain sufficient rest in port to start next voyage with a fresh condition. As long as the amount of different ship stability/stress programs is limited, the transfer of preparing the loading plans to the shore organisation is a realistic option. The preparation and control of loading and discharging has to be carried out by competence personnel. This can be former deck officers or specially trained shore personnel. The latter means extra education and training costs. The salaries of these shore personnel will not significantly differ from the ship deck officers, and is estimated to be 60 per hour including company expenses. The fixed salaries of master and 1st officer imply extra costs for the shore based personnel. The total time needed for the preparation and control for the shore personnel is similar to the time needed by ship personnel. The questionnaire used in phase 1 cannot give average figures for the time used for preparing and controlling cargo operations due to differences in sea/port time per questionnaire. The following figures are based on general experience.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 86 For the coastal trade of 5 days at sea and 1 day in port 8 hours of preparing plans and documents is estimated. The total time for preparation and control of 32 hours result in 32 * 100 = 3200 of extra costs for the ship owner in 6 day periods or 600 per day per ship. It is assumed that in every port ship owner representatives are available to take over cargo control activities. 4.3 Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer or the 2nd officer in 3-watch system Watch keeping tasks under normal circumstances are similar for each watch officer. Without any preparation 2 nd officers can take over the watch of the master or 1st officer. In the case that the dual purpose/ 2 nd officer should have limited experience in watch keeping on the bridge, the watch schedule is organized in such a way that the master is able to supervise his/her performance regularly (not during sleeping hours). Then the transfer of watch keeping activities is limited to specific hours. To organize the changed watch keeping division over the master, 1st officer and 2 nd officer a less traditional watch system may have to be introduced, but at the same time can be limited by the work/ rest hour regulations as mentioned in the former TNO fatigue report (report 20834). If on top of extra watchkeeping hours, the 2 nd officer also has to fulfill other tasks such as the control of safety equipment or passage planning. This also might raise conflicts with the allowable work hours/ day. To organize and maintain this more complex watch system extra work for the master or 1st officer is foreseen. Based on fixed salaries for the master and 1st officer extra costs will occur by overtime of the second officer. Based on an assumption of 2 hours extra overtime at a rate of 50 euro / day the total costs are 100 euro per day per ship. 4.4 Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems There are several options to reduce time and effort for administrative tasks, e.g.: software tools that support administration; outsourcing of administrative tasks, like crew lists and customs clearance certification to shore organizations; centralization and harmonization of information processes; standardization of forms used by port authorities. If we look at the documents to be completed, the various logbooks (as well as port related documents) and reports to be updated and written, we can conclude the following. A number of the documents can be derived from sensors on board; A number of the documents are duplicated in different log books; A number of the documents have to be filled out manually. From a technical point automation of production of the required documents and reports on board of a vessel is possible. However, potential problems or barriers for (complete) automation are foreseen as well. Are presented figures always reliable? The checks will often have to be done on board and will restrict the amount of time saved.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 87 How to respond in case the automated system fails? Back up procedures have to be available. Are automated logbooks effective and is automation acceptable by administrations and other inspection organizations? Automation of documents and reports can only be applied to standard reporting procedures. A probably more realistic approach is the combination of automatic documents and manually completion of certain items or forms. At least a final control of the presented figures have to be performed by the person responsible for the logbook. This measure may reduce labour costs but at the same time the development of a computer program, purchase and maintenance of sensors and training of users will be initial investments. It is difficult to indicate the cost of those investments but they will be significant. Most of the logbooks are filled out during the watch not affecting the labour costs. Automation will not result in a cost reduction when the master, the 1st officer, the 1st engineer and the 2 nd engineer do their administrative work during off watch hours. They have fixed salaries. On the other hand, automation and harmonization of administrative work on board of sea going vessels will result in a significant reduction of labour, particularly for the staff officers. 4.5 Transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system The master is responsible for the overall organization and leadership on board of the vessel. This overall task remains within his responsibility and cannot be transferred to other officers. However, related tasks such as daily work planning, inspection of safety and pollution prevention matters, maintaining hygienic standards etc. can be transferred to chief engineers. This transfer implies that the chief engineer has to be instructed on particular aspects to be able to fulfill these tasks properly. The chief engineer has to report his findings by oral and written report (ISM) to the master. With fixed salaries for master and chief engineer no extra labour costs are foreseen. Based on the research, the reduction of workload is limited, on the other hand it can relieve the feeling of responsibility.. 4.6 Transfer of safety & training activities from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system Based on the knowledge and experience of a 1st officer, the transfer of safety and training activities (including the guidance of cadets) from the master to the 1st officer can be done without any additional instruction or training. However, the questionnaires from phase 1 indicate that the total workload for the 1st officer is already up to the limits and may be in conflict with working time regulations. Transfer of supervising safety matters and training to experienced engineers is an option as well as to the 2 nd officer if they have sufficient practical experience related to these tasks. Extra costs will occur by extra overtime of the engineers or 2 nd officers. Based on the assumption that this kind of work takes on average 0.5 hour per day, the costs will be 0.5 * 50 = 25 per day per ship.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 88 4.7 Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process). Based on the available training programmes of FACT (Fatigue Awareness and Countermeasures Training), as offered by Clockwork Research UK, a number of options are available for implementation. The following training possibilities should be considered: 1. Individual training program for fatigue assessment: both classroom style and e- learning. The e-learning system is an on-line training system, which uses a personalized link to the FACT website for training modules. The training is completed by an online competence assessment. The training modules are tailor-made to the needs of the particular client and is adapted to the client s operations, work practices, shift pattern etc. The training period is flexible and may take in total several hours up to one day or more. Costs are dependent on the requirements for the training program. Communication costs for on-line studying by students on board of vessels is dependent on the type of communication used by the individual shipping company (GMDSS-email functions etc.). In principle it should be possible to send messages by e-mail through use of the standard communication systems used by the vessel. Costs would not be significant for this type, as long as a continuous on-line connection is not needed. 2. Classroom based train the trainer workshop for a company s trainer. This is a 2- day workshop where the individual is provided with materials to enable him to train the company s workforce. Training groups vary between 10 and 20 individuals per group. Costs are around 800,- per trainer. The shipping line would be required to appoint a member of staff for this function (ISM designated person?), who would be required to spend time on training, control and evaluation of the fatigue management system. 3. Development of an on-line FACT training program on fatigue management. This can be organised for large groups or companies. This will be also required for the implementation of fatigue management training in the regular ship-management courses, e.g. combined with ISM training. This is a one-time investment for e.g. the organisation of the training program by STC. Costs for the system itself are estimated at around 25.000 to 28.000. Additional costs relate to the time for the training organisation s trainer(s) and the implementation of the training system, as well as regular up-dating and control and evaluation of training results. In general, the definition and implementation of training on fatigue management will require careful, additional study due to the different types of shipping organisations and companies, and the need to connect with existing company systems. The exact impact of designing, implementation and control and evaluation of training courses on fatigue management are still somewhat unclear and may differ per company or organisation, including implementation into the existing regular ship-management training courses. 4.8 Fatigue Incident reporting The Fatigue Incident reporting function may be incorporated into the existing ISM Safety Management system. This will require careful instruction and system implementation of a fatigue management system. The reporting function itself is considered to have limited impact in time and effort, except time needed for evaluation and reporting.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 89 4.9 Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry The details and suitability of the FAID system for maritime purposes are still unclear. However, it is assumed that for companies the FAID version 2.0 will be applicable. It is unclear how and if the system may be incorporated into the existing on-board working time registration formats (activity focused) of companies, or if the existing company s registration system may be exchanged for the FAID rostering system, provided this is acceptable by the IVW. Costs for implementation will be dependent on the individual company s organisation and structure. In addition time on an on-going basis will be required for control and evaluation of the system s results. 4.10 Summary & conclusions The table below summarises the above findings related to the costs of potentially effective, feasible, acceptable and in principle compatible fatigue reducing measures. Table 17 Measure Effectiveness Cost in euro per Investment costs day per ship 1. Transfer maintenance activities from Limited time reduction 25 master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system 2. Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload 600 Possible training costs for the shore personnel 3. Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st off to the dual officer/ 2nd officer in 3-watch system Significant reduction in workload; Flexible 100 (based on 2 hrs) 4. Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload, but with limitations none Significant (investment & training) 5. Transfer Organization & leadership activities Limited none from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system reduction in workload 6. Transfer Safety& Training activities from Limited reduction in 25 master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system workload 7. Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, Significant effect because of more awareness 800 / ship for training of 1 person ERM training -group process). 8. Fatigue Incident reporting Limited time reduction 9. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry Effect dependent of implementation on board

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 90 Regarding measures 1-6 Regarding measures 1-6, the transfer of loading and discharging activities appears to be the most effective delegation measure, also taken into account that good rest periods in port means a safe situation to start the forthcoming sea voyage. The need to have shore personnel (a super cargo- available in each port to control the actual loading and unloading of the ship means significant additional costs but has advantages from fatigue point of view as well as cargo handling point of view. Other transferring measures are less effective regarding the total reduction in workload or time but if all of them can be applied, a significant improvement of the workload for master and 1st officer can be arranged. Extra costs by these measures are limited compared to the total costs per day. Reduction of administrative work on board will certainly reduce fatigue. Costs of development has restrained the development of automatic administrative computer programs and sensor equipment But nowadays there are already some good examples of administrative supporting programs. Also the use of broadband internet had become more and more common. In particular for this measure cooperation with Administrations and inspection organizations is essential. The incorporation of a super cargo, as experienced with ship owners like Flinter and Marin, are valuable options to reduce fatigue problems on ship with 2 watch systems. If the super cargo is not an option, the cargo handling activities should remain with the 1 st officer. Then, in the 2 watch system, more flexible multi-tasking is required. This is an option for the smaller ships, e.g. carrying break bulk. In other situations with more complexity, the 1st officer in port should remain free from any other task as well as during the period before arrival and after departure. This means that either one 1 extra officer is needed to take over his watch obligations in these periods or tasks should clearly delegated to for example the chief engineer. This extra officer can also take over other tasks from the master and 1st officer. With the availability of an extra dual purpose officer, maintenance work on deck and in the engine room can be carried out as well. Theoretically, with a well considered effort of this extra dual purpose officer, the total cost of 1 extra officer on ship originally having a 2 watch system could be limited and compared to extra shore personnel for loading and discharging activities, even negligible. Nevertheless, although the incorporation of 1 extra dual purpose officer may effectively reduce or prevent fatigue of master and officers, (senior) dual officers are hard to find now and will probably be even more limited available in the future. Moreover, the issue of accommodation will be a problem on the smaller ships, for the existing ships and the new build ships as well. NB: it is important to realize that transferring tasks can also be a way of shifting the problem of fatigue, e.g. when it leads to difficulties in (intercultural) communication. Therefore, the monitoring of delegations is necessary. Regarding measures 7-10 Regarding measures 7-10, transferring tasks/delegation or workload redistribution will be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). A proper and effective FRMS identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. And, a proper FRMS gives an answer to the question how bring the system back in balance (risk mitigating). Measures 7 9 are recommended fatigue management measures for the shipping industry to start with.

TNO report R08-.673 031.10575 91 To combat fatigue related risks, it is important to define measures in all levels of the 5 level model of fatigue management. In the chapters on fatigue management we have given more examples of possible fatigue management activities that identify if the system is out of balance, what exactly the fatigue risks are, the organization s S.O.P. s for managing the risk and how to bring it back in balance. For example, the combination of transferring cargo activities and integration of fatigue issues in into the BRM training will be most effective. To conclude: This study has given insight in how to handle fatigue risks in the shipping industry. The transfer or delegation of tasks can restructure crew members workload in such a way that major errors and incidents may be less likely to occur. This is also called workload re-allocation. In the time use study, we explored what tasks and activities of the master and officers could be delegated. Therefore their time use, effort and transferability required was assessed, and lastly the possibility to organize these tasks more efficiently was investigated. Based on signals from within the sector and our previous research, we anticipated that delegation of responsibility to lighten the master s and officer s workload may be an effective strategy to combat fatigue. Hence, adequate performance by master and officer is most crucial for major incident safety, since fatigue errors made by master/officer lead to the most direct consequences. As said before, the delegation or workload redistribution will be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). For a successful implementation of a FRMS. fatigue management has to be seen as a process, which start with the discussion of when fatigue actually gets a risk. The next step for the sector is the further exploration and exchange of ideas and (current) experiences, also abroad and in other sectors. This report gives the opportunity to share the (international) state of the art thoughts and ideas on fatigue management approaches. We hope this will encourage the sector to make use of them. At last, as is stated in the symposium: Maybe we are already managing fatigue but we are not aware of it. We have to make it visible! Nowadays, when a major shipping accident happens, people will ask: is there environmental pollution or not?. Should there be pollution, the first question will be: what have we done to prevent fatigue? Then we have to be able to show society that we are dealing with it.. When there is a threat of regulation, fatigue management may be a way to do it by the sector itself, and keep flexibility in the way how to do it. It is quite complicated. If there were already golden solutions, the sector would probably already have done it that way.