Costa Concordia: How to Prevent the Next Disaster

 It's hard to believe that a modern cruise ship, in this age of technology, could end up on its side on the rocks, only a few hours after leaving port. Was it a bizarre one-time event, or could it happen again? Unfortunately, the answer is yes, it could happen again. But the good news is we already know how to prevent it.

 


On the evening of January 13, 2012, the cruise ship Costa Concordia departed the port of Citiavecchia, Italy bound for her homeport of Savona with 4,200 passenger and crew. A few hours later she lay on her side, wrecked on the rocks on the shore of Giglio Island. If early reporting is accurate, the answer as to why is the same as in many of disasters in the maritime industry: the human factor. There is already talk of changes to laws and regulations. The truth is we've got plenty of laws and regulations. What should be done is to look at what laws and regulations we already have and see what may be on the books that may have prevented it.


The International Maritime Organization (IMO) produced the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, in part, to address human factors in accidents. The ISM code has been mandatory for passenger vessels since July 1, 1998. Section 7 of the code refers to "shipboard operations." This section includes navigation. ISM manuals will vary since it is up to the owner/operator to produce their own policies and procedures. It requires careful risk assessment when producing ISM manuals to make sure that all the critical evolutions are accounted for in the policies and procedures and not just talk of hardhats and steel toed shoes. Certainly a cruise ship navigating close to a rocky coast is a risky evolution. The question for the investigators will be, did the company have adequate navigation standards which could have prevented the accident and if so, why did the captain and crew not follow the company policies and procedures?


The ISM Code is not easy to implement or enforce. It's not in the nature of ship captains to be governed by manuals. However, in order to minimize the risk of human error, certain high risk evolutions must be managed. The role of enforcement personnel, flag states and recognized organizations is critical. These governing bodies should also use a targeted risk based approach to ensure that all the high risk evolutions are addressed and that the policies and procedures are followed. The tools are already in place to prevent the next disaster. The question is, are we willing to do the work to do it right?