The
Secretary also reported
that a proposal for a
new layout of the EDTC
Internet page had been
made by Akin Savas Toklu
(Turkey) and was now
available on the
following address:
www.Toklu.net/edtc/documents/36.html
The
Secretary had noted some
minor correction and
would communicate these
to Mr. Toklu. All
members were invited to
visit and the view the
page and pass any
comments they may had to
the Secretary. Any such
comments need to be with
the Secretary by the end
of December this year as
it is the intention to
replace the current
Internet side with the
new effective early in
2010.
Action: EDTC Members
7. EDTC
WORKSHOP 2010
The
Workshop Committee held
a meeting in Malmoe,
Sweden in the spring of
2009 and in a report to
the Executive Board
proposed that the
workshop be held in
Brussels, Belgium simply
because this is were EU
conducts most of its
meetings, but also
because it was easily
accessible by low cost
carriers from most parts
of Europe. .
The
Executive Board had
discussed the report and
ha proposed the
following:
·
Topic of the workshop
would be inland/onshore
diving and the freedom
of movement of workers
within the EU,
·
EDTC should aim at a
participation of between
100 and 150
participants,
·
EDTC would charge a
nominal fee for
participation to cover
costs only,
·
Inland/onshore diving
companies should be
given the opportunity of
having a small stand
presenting their
services,
·
The Chairman would
approach Mrs. Angelilli
(who have been
re-elected to the EU
Commission and now serve
as one of 12 Vice
Precedents) for support,
·
EDTC would investigate
the possibility of
arranging the workshop
at a EU venue, but if
this precluded the
participation of
exhibitors, the
possibility of holding
it at a central Brussels
hotel would be
considered,
·
EDTC would look into the
possibility of having
two parallel sessions.
Topic for one session
would be a presentation
of the result of the
National Regulation
Project, the other a
medical session.
The
Chairman advised that he
had received a message
from Mrs. Angelilli
through Pasquale
Longobardi saying she
would host a meeting in
2010 as long as it was
not in April 2010.
The
Chairman would seek a
meeting with Mrs.
Angelilli as early as
possible in order to
discuss the plans
further. Planning by the
workshop committee would
proceed in the meantime
aiming at arranging such
a conference in the
spring of 2010 (Post
meeting note: The
meeting with Mrs.
Angelilli have not yet
taken place and it is
thus more realistic that
the workshop will be in
the latter part of
2010.
Action; Workshop Members
8.
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
The
Chairman advised that as
he had spent most of
last year in China he
had been prevented from
working actively with
the National Regulations
Project. However, the
other members in the
committee had been
active and would present
the status under agenda
item 10.
He
further advised that as
there were no diving
regulations where he was
working in China he had
presented the EDTC
standard to the Chinese
and that they had been
adopted for use on the
diving project in which
he was involved.
9. REPORT
FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
MEDICAL COMMITTEE
After
reporting the
difficulties to get into
cooperation with the
European Committee for
Hyperbaric Medicine (ECHM)
and accepting the wish
of last years EDTC
committee to the try to
find a solution with
Jacek Kot, the
representative of ECHM
(and new EDTC medical
member), it was reported
that a first step into
the right direction
could be achieved. ECHM
had decided to
officially create task
force with the aim to
restart the joint
medical subcommittee
later, in order to
achieve finally a new
revised common standard
for medical training in
diving AND hyperbaric
medicine. This task
force (composed of Jordi
Desola, David Elliott,
Alessandro Marroni,
Willi Welslau, Jacek Kot,
Pasquale Longobardi and
Jürg Wendling) had a
first meeting
immediately before the
medical subcommittee of
EDTCmed in Aberdeen a
few weeks previously.
The participants of this
meeting concluded that
the medical training
standards of 1997/99
should be the basis for
a further revision,
being aware that
recreational and
professional diving
medicine has many things
in common; however the
big part of general
diving medicine was also
necessary for training
in clinical hyperbaric
medicine. The second
conclusion was that a
revised list of topics
had to be elaborated
with more précised
training objectives for
the various training
modules (David Elliott
volunteered to prepare
this for working divers
and Willy Welslau would
do that for hyperbaric
medical doctors
(including recreational
diving medical
advisors). Having done
this, it should be
possible to start to
define the common basic
module for the two
specialising training
directions; however this
would probably take a
lot of time.
Realistically a credible
basis for a restart of
the joint medical
subcommittee would be in
one or two year’s time.
It was
reported that the
EDTCmed corresponding
members gave positive
input, appreciate the
consensus work and they
were ready to give the
EDTCmed Committee input
either from their
experience, or for being
in compatibility in
future years. Peter
Bennett representing the
Underwater and
Hyperbaric Medical
Society of the USA gave
the EDTCmed Committee
information about the US
practice and welcome our
activities in so far as
he would try to spread
the information in the
relevant circles in the
US.
The
Committee discussed a
few points that would be
part of the revision of
training standards,
however concerning
medical advisors of
working divers and so
not concern of
controversial debates
with the hyperbaric
medicine delegates:
a)
What additional proofs
would a candidate for a
"Certificate of
competence as Diving
Medical Advisor" need
after having obtained a
"Diploma of Diving
Medical Advisors" course
(Level IIa)?
- Some
experience in treatment
of diving accidents. Of
course in first line
this concerns
decompression injuries,
however many combined
and non-decompression
related accidents happen
and are as important for
the doctor. We agreed
that the candidate
should write all
supervised activities
down in a log book and
that, when it comes to
apply for the
certificate of
competence he should
have some "logged
experience in management
of diving accidents"
(which means that some
experience must be real,
part of it may be
scenarios or
simulations, as the
number of diving
accidents is fortunately
very low). The
supervisor must be
responsible for an
adequate distribution
and an evaluation score
weighting the various
alternative elements
could be a good tool.
-
Occupational medicine:
The candidate must have
some certified minimal
experience in relevant
aspects of occupational
medicine. The list of
relevant elements will
be prepared for our next
meeting.
-
Assessment of working
divers: Each candidate
should have some
experience in assessing
divers, in particular
after diving accidents
or in difficult
situations. The group
proposes "10 in-depth
assessments of working
divers including some
resume diving
assessments" as a
minimum, written down in
a log book and audited
by a supervisor or
examination board.
b)
Who should certify the
diving medical
advisors?: There was a
consensus that
certification should be
based on national
structures. So our
standards should give
the guidelines while the
precise conditions
should be "as determined
by the national EDTC
delegates". Of course,
if ECHM agrees to keep
the national coordinator
for these purposes per
nation, then it would be
a national coordinator.
Best would be to have
this one linked to a
national Governmental
Authority, University
board, or if not
available: a national
professional Board.
c)
Expert competency: There
was an evident need for
acknowledged experts
responsible consultants
for diving medicine. A
combined title Diving
and Hyperbaric Medicine
was not really
realistic; however these
two competencies must be
equivalent, for some
expert’s maybe a
simultaneous or double
qualification. Proposed
that we should create a
"Board of Consultants"
as an autonomous body,
who would evaluate the
candidates, eventually
give proposals for
additional upgrading
activities and finally
accept the candidate as
a new member of the
board. As the board
would be autonomous, it
would decide on
consensus and this
enables a reasonable
growth of the number not
exceeding what is
necessary and not
diluting the quality of
that expert level. The
board will not
|represent EDTC or any
other formal
organisation.
So the
group of EDTC medical
delegates remained
active, although the
majority of delegates
were unfortunately not
able to participate to
all the general
meetings. Participation
to our "subcommittee"
workshops was excellent
(50 - 75% generally
participate), so that
the achieved consensus
was credible. The
Committee would continue
it’s discussions of pure
working diver’s related
affairs and would wait
for the task force ECHM
to give them a signal
for a joint medical
subcommittee in the
future.
10.
REPORT FROM THE NATIONAL
REGULATIONS PROJECT
Mark van
Esch gave the following
report on behalf of the
National Regulation
Project.
The
project group have had
two meetings, the first
in Stockholm, Sweden in
June 2008, the second
meeting in Grenoble,
France in January 2009.
In the
second meeting a change
of objective and method
had been adopted and the
development of a basic
model risk assessment
implemented.
The
project group had been
successful in obtaining
14 national regulations
and had also been trying
to obtain fund for
translation into a
common language.
However, the project
group was still missing
national regulations
from some member
countries and invited
the members to provide
copies of their
regulations.
Action: Member Countries
The
project group was also
working on a
presentation of
acceptable certificates
as many countries would
only accept nationally
endorsed certificates
from other countries.
However, a problem also
appeared to be mastering
of (a common) languages.
The list referred to
above would be modelled
on the list published by
the Health & Safety
Executives in the United
Kingdom.
11.
NATIONAL REPORTS
Please
note that the majority
of the presentations
referred to below have
been attached to this
Minute.
a) Estonia (Aleksei
Usanov)
Aleksei
Usanov advised that
there were about 10
commercial diving in
Estonia. Typically these
will employed between 3
and 15 professional
divers, with GT Project
AS (GT Corporation)
being by fare the
largest of them all.
Most underwater work in
Estonia was associated
with building and
maintaining the main
ports, of which there
were 5, as well as some
smaller ferry ports.
Some work was also
performed in association
with ship inspections
and maintenance. GT
Project AS also operates
in other of the Baltic
countries, in the Balkan
and the Caspian Sea.
Work was
in progress to align
labour regulations,
medical services,
technical regulations,
safety and education to
applicable EC codes and
standards.
b) Norway
(Olav Hauso)
Olav
Hauso advised that a
long term diver medical
follow-up study have
been initiated by OLF
together with IMCA. The
study was based on
questionnaires (initial
and annual), and the
data is anonymous. Hauso
presented a slide
showing an overview of
the totality of health
follow up elements.
Besides the OLF/IMCA
initiative, he pointed
at the annual medical
control of the diver’s
health and the 3 yearly
follow up that is a
continuation of a
similar activity which
has been in place for
some contracts in the
Norwegian sector for
some 10-12 years. An
important element as
well is the collection
of activity data that
would enable research
projects to be done.
The
ownership of all the
data was with each
individual diver, but he
was expected to bring it
along when he started
employment with a new
employer. The data was
confidential and was
only available to
medical personnel.
Hauso
went on to advice that a
judgment by the court
case between a group of
so called ”pioneer
divers“ (1970-1990) and
the Norwegian Government
as reported previously
was expected at the High
Court within the next
few weeks. (Post
meeting remark: The
Norwegian Supreme Court
has since the meeting
took place ruled against
the divers.)
He then
presented a number of
slides presenting the
volume of international
deep diving to various
depths versus Norwegian
diving, showing that
Norwegian diving was
just a minor part of the
total figure.
c) Poland (Jacek
Kot)
Jacek Kot
advised that new Polish
diving regulation based
on the French diving
regulations had been
issued for use. However,
many of the parties
involved in diving were
very unhappy with the
new regulations and they
were now subject for a
court case. A ruling was
expected within a year
and it was also expected
that some aspects of the
regulation would be
changed.
He also
advised that the
Association of Polish
Professional Divers
whished to become a
member of the EDTC. The
Secretary advised that
he had received an
application and that the
application had been
approved by the
Executive Board. The
Secretary would
consequently write to
the association
confirming their
membership as soon as
Jacek Kot could confirm
the name and address of
their nominated
representative.
The
chairman explained that
there are some problems
coming up with the
certification of polish
divers in Germany.
Therefore he asked for
the papers for Diver
Training Standards in
Poland, Diver
Certification and for
the Health and Safety
Regulations.
Action:
Jacek Kot/Secretary
d) Turkey (Murat
Egi)
Murat Egi
advised that a change in
Turkish Regulations now
allowed a cross-over
from Sport Diving
Instructor to Commercial
SCUBA Diver. He also
advised that there were
two new commercial
diving schools in
Turkey, namely Mustafa
Kemal University (2 year
college) and the
Bosporus Commercial
Diving School. The
latter was the first
non-governmental
commercial diving school
and was set up as an
affiliate to the
Ministry of Education.
An
electronic system for
managing, controlling
and recording dives was
also presented. The
system including manual,
logs, checklists and
risk assessments and was
thus paper free.
He also
advised that new Turkish
diving regulations had
been issued. These
required a doctor to be
on site for dives deeper
than 40 msw.
These
regulations were also
the subject of a court
case. Turkey would have
them translated into
English, but only when
the court case had been
concluded. A copy would
then be submitted to
EDTC for inclusion in
the Internet site.
Action:
Turkish Delegation
e) United
Kingdom (Chris Sherman)
Chris
Sherman advised that the
list of approved
qualifications had been
updated. He also advised
that that the Approve
Code of Practices (ACOP’s)
were now available as .pdf
load downs from the
Health & Safety
Executive Internet site.
The HSE
currently had 3 research
projects running,
namely:
·
Diving helmet noise
research,
·
Differential pressure
hazards,
·
Human factors &
re-breather emergency
drills.
The
latter as a result of an
unacceptable fatality
rate in recreational
diving using rebreather
equipment.
f) IMCA
(Jane Bugler)
Jane
Bugler advised that the
following guidelines are
in the process of
updating
· DESIGN
(D011, D023, D024),
· Diving
Supervisor Manual
(D022),
· Safe use of
electricity underwater (AODC
035),
· Protection
of Water Intake Points
for diver safety (AODC
055),
· NURGOD (IMCA
034),
· Oxy-arc
cutting operations and
· High
Pressure Water Jetting (AODC
049).
A review
of examination papers
for the Diving
Supervisor Scheme was
also being conducted. A
full time certification
Administrator was also
now in place.
Mutual
recognition with ADAS
was to be extended to
include Life Support
technicians (LST) and
the mutual recognition
with DCBC had been
extended to include Bell
Diving Supervisors.
The
following new guidance
documents were under
development:
· Isolation
and barriers for safe
diver intervention,
· Guidance for
hyperbaric evacuation
systems.
There was
also development in
progress for monitoring
diver’s long term health
effects as reported by
Olav Hauso.
g) ADC
(Roger O’Kane)
Roger
O’Kane advised on a
project to develop a new
Guidance Protocol for
isolation of machinery
when diving in close
proximity to merchant
vessel. Some copies of
the Guidance Protocol
were made available,
however, if anyone
requires additional
copies they could be
obtained from him,
alternatively the
Secretary.
h) Canada
(David Parkes)
The Diver
Certification Board of
Canada (DCBC) has been
in operation since 2003
and provided a national
certification regime for
occupational diving
personnel, in order to
enhance industry safety
by demonstrating
personal competency.
DCBC certification was
based on a Canadian
National Competency
Standard developed by
the Canadian Standards
Association. Up to now
some 2500 certificates
has been issued.
Certificates issued were
renewable every 5 years
and may cover for many
jurisdictions.
i)
Australia (ADAS) & IDRF
(Paul Butler)
The
Australian Divers
Accreditation Scheme (ADAS)
was the Australian
national occupational
diver certification
scheme operating through
a Board under oversight
of the Federal
government. An ADAS
certificate was required
for all occupational
diving except
recreational at work. To
date some 8400 Diver,
Dive Supervisor etc had
been certified under the
scheme.
14 Diver
Training Establishment
were current accredited
under the ADAS scheme.
The scheme had recently
been expanded to
include: ROV operators,
Chamber Tunnel
Operators, Chamber Lock
Operators, Clinical
Chamber Operators, Firs
Aid, Construction
Induction and ALST/LST
IDRF was
a voluntary group of
diving regulators and
certifying agencies.
Current membership
consisted of: Australia,
Canada, France, Norway,
South Africa and United
Kingdom. Members had
agreed to work together
towards mutual
recognition and to
identify and implement
best practice in diver
training with the
objective of harmonising
cross border diver
training standards
outside Europe.
Work
performed to date
included a detailed
comparison between the
Australian Diver
Accreditation Scheme (ADAS)
and the Diver
Certification Board of
Canada (DCBC). A similar
study comparing all
members standard and the
EDTC standards was in
progress. The purpose of
this was clearly
identify what the
members required from
the other in order to
accept their
qualification.
The long
term objective was
however to move the
standard towards each
other with the ultimate
goal of achieving mutual
recognition.
IDRF was
currently looking into
certification with
improved security to
reduce the problems
associated with forged
certificates and log
book entries.
j) IDSA
(Alan Bax)
IDSA was
created in 1982 with the
purpose of both
improving the quality
and safety of Diver
Training and of
developing an
International system for
the recognition of Diver
Training Schools and
Qualifications.
To be
accepted by IDSA,
schools had either to be
recognised by their
National Diver Training
Programme or, where no
National Programme
existed, complete an
IDSA Audit
successfully. The
qualification cards
issued by accepted
schools would be
interchangeable between
countries; this would
not only greatly
simplify the movement of
divers across borders,
but also minimise the
need for each country to
produce a long, complex
list of the non-National
qualifications it would
recognise.
It would
also permit a more cost
effective method for the
continuation of Diver
Training. Not all
countries needed to
train divers to all
diving standards. Many
countries would only
wish to train to basic
SCUBA & Surface Supplied
Standards as they had no
requirement for more
advanced training.
Divers wishing to
progress, having
completed a basic course
in their own country,
would be able to
continue their training
at an IDSA School in
another country, taking
into account the
difficulties of
language; several
successful courses had
been carried out by IDSA
Schools using an
interpreter.
Standard
basic courses would
provide the basis of a
diver training pyramid
which would ensure that
all divers would have a
reasonable opportunity
to progress. They would
also provide those
Schools running advanced
courses with the maximum
choice of students which
would enable them to
achieve the highest
quality.
IDSA
members believed that
the IDSA training
Standards achieve the
Goal Setting targets set
out in the EDTC
Personnel Competence
Standards (PCS), and
consider much could be
achieved by close and
effective collaboration
in the future.
Alan Bax
appealed to EDTC to work
with IDSA. See also the
Chairman’s comments
under any other
business.
k) Denmark (Palle
Kristensen)
Palle
Kristensen advised that
Denmark was currently
revising their diving
regulations and that he
hoped to be able to
present it for the next
EDTC Meeting. The new
standard would be
aligned with the EDTC
Standards and would
raise the requirements
for risk assessments.
The new regulation also
aimed to be made
applicable for wind
farms where installation
up to know ha been under
the offshore diving
regulations while
routine maintenance had
been unregulated.
12.
ELECTIONS
The
Secretary advised that
three candidates had
been proposed for
election for the two
seats on the Board due
for election. The
nominees were:
· Roland
Vanden Eede, Belgium
(Medical)
· Jurg
Wendling, Switzerland
(Medical),
· OC Andersen,
Norway (Industry).
However,
before an election was
kicked off Roland Vanden
Eede announced that he
withdrew his
candidature;
consequently the two
present members of the
Executive Board Jurg
Wendling and OC Andersen
were re-elected for a
further 3 years.
The
Secretary was reminded
that the membership had
agreed in the Ravenna
meeting that when
calling for an election
he would advice if the
current incumbent was
prepared to stand for a
further period. This
would be done for
further elections.
13. ANY
OTHER BUSINESS
The
Chairman made references
to a diving course run
by an IDSA member in
Austria where German
students had attended in
the believe that this
would qualify them for
diving work in Germany.
As the course was
accepted, but not
formally endorsed by
Austrian Authorities,
the resulting IDSA
certificate was not
acceptable in Germany.
According to the German
state regulations the
training takes two
years. Therefore the
IDSA certificate is not
accepted. In the
beginning of 2009 we
have been informed by a
lawyer from Vienna that
an Austrian Diver with
an IDSA certificate was
not accepted by HSE UK.
The reason was that the
course was accepted, but
not formally endorsed by
Austrian Authorities.
Therefore there was no
reason for the company
in UK to except the
paper.
The
Chairman therefore
requested IDSA to ensure
that the limits in an
IDSA certificate was
clearly explained to
candidates before any
course started.
14. NEXT
MEETING
The
Chairman advised that he
had been in touch with
Petr Andrt of the Czech
Republic who had
confirmed that it was
still the intention of
arranging next years
meeting in the Czech
Republic, probably in
Prague.
The
Secretary was requested
to agree a date,
preferably in September
2010, and notify the
membership at the
earliest opportunity.
Post
meeting note: It has now
been confirmed that the
next meeting will held
on September 9th
and 10th in Prague.
Action:
Secretary
The
French Delegation then
advised that they would
like to be hosts for the
2011 meeting, and that
would most probably be
held in Marseille.
15.
ACKNOWLEGMENT
A warm
thanks was given to Lt.
Cdr. Tummas Sjurdaberg
of the Royal Danish Navy
for assistance and for
showing the EDTC Members
around at the Diving
School.
Also
thanks were given to the
following for sponsoring
the meeting:
