John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are mindful that while we are dealing with the issue of defective EPIRBs or faulty marine beacons, a search is continuing for a fisherman missing off the Wexford coast. I attended the funeral of Shane, Paul and Kenny Bolger in June 2013. They were three brothers who died when their boat capsized in Tramore Bay. It is a day I will not easily forget. Their boat was equipped with an EPIRB. I spoke to a number of fishermen at the time and the suggestion back then was that the bow of the boat did not submerge and for that reason, the emergency signal did not go off. There might be some doubt about that. There are growing concerns that similar devices made by one particular manufacturer, GME, could be defective. The company has admitted that a microprocessor malfunction has been identified as the cause of a number of these EPIRBs not working properly.

There is an internal inquiry within the Department about concerns raised about EPIRBs three years ago and the actions that were taken or should have been taken at that time. I understand the Department raised concerns this year with the manufacturer and also contacted the company in 2010. Some people with whom I have spoken have questioned why the Department waited for the company to issue an alert before issuing its own.

The relevant international certifying authority is Bureau Veritas, which determines whether such products comply with the EU marine equipment directive.

To be honest, I am more interested in ensuring that everyone who is registered as having an emergency position indicating radio beacon, EPIRB, understands that there is a potential problem with the reliability of that safety beacon. I am not just referring to GME EPIRBs, but all EPIRBS. The company has issued an alert and the Department has issued a safety alert, but this matter deserves more than just an advisory. Even though EPIRBS are supposed to be tested every month, it is not done in every case. If there are doubts about EPIRB reliability, the Department should contact each registered individual and alert him or her to the potential danger while the inquiry takes its course.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for raising this important issue. As they will be aware, an EPIRB is used to alert search and rescue services in the event of an emergency. It does this by transmitting a coded message via satellite and earth stations to the Coast Guard rescue co-ordination centres. All of a vessel's radio equipment, including EPIRBs, must comply with international standards, which are set out in EU Council Directive 96/98 EC, known as the marine equipment directive or MED. The testing and placing of EPIRBs is done in accordance with this directive. The MED provides for common standards for safety equipment across the EU and allows for internationally recognised independent competent bodies to assess the compliance of equipment with testing standards. The MED also operates within the wider context of EU product certification, which places an obligation on manufacturers to place only safe products on the market. Given this, the role of member states is limited.

Manufacturers generally provide a warranty to cover the operation of the equipment under which it will be repaired or replaced in the event of faulty operation, subject to the equipment not having been tampered with. Vessel operators return faulty equipment through the local distributor to the manufacturer as part of the normal market operation. National maritime administrations - my Department in Ireland's case - are not involved directly in this process.

As part of the vessel surveying and certification process, the Department or a surveyor or organisation appointed on its behalf checks to see that an EPIRB is in place and is operating where the vessel is required by law to be fitted an EPIRB. Aside from the survey, it remains an operator's responsibility to ensure that the EPIRB remains fully functional, including undertaking periodic self-checks, usually monthly, to ensure the equipment continues to function properly. The regular testing of the smoke alarm in a home would be a comparable example of the ongoing self-testing required with EPIRBS, except that where an EPIRB battery is dead, it should not be changed by the operator. It should only be changed by a designated technician.

As part of its routine vessel survey arrangements, a radio surveyor from my Department became aware of a defective EPIRB when carrying out a survey on a passenger ship in June 2013. Subsequently, officers in my Department became aware of two further defective EPIRB units. On foot of this, my Department opened contact with Sartech Limited in the UK, the distributor for Ireland and the UK of the relevant EPIRB. My Department advised Sartech of the defective units that had come to light and had them sent to GME, the manufacturer's head office in Australia, for testing. My Department subsequently followed up with GME Australia during October 2013. My Department became aware of another unit failure, which was also sent to Australia for testing.

GME Australia advised that its initial testing had shown defective microprocessors and it was going to commission an independent analysis of its circuit design. My Department considered that a safety alert should be issued by the manufacturer. GME subsequently agreed and issued its safety alert on 4 November 2013. My Department issued a marine notice on 11 November to draw attention to this alert. Ireland was the first country in the world to do so. My Department also requested the Paris Memorandum of Understanding, MoU, the international organisation governing port state control throughout Europe, to promulgate the safety alert to the other member states and also informed the European Commission. This represented a precautionary and expeditious approach by the Marine Survey Office, MSO, as we were the only country to initiate action regarding these particular EPIRBS.

EPIRBs must be certified as meeting the relevant EU standard by an approved independent competent body. In the case of the GME EPIRBs, Bureau Veritas is the relevant organisation. It issued the appropriate certification confirming compliance with the directive.

Following recent media reports, I asked my Department to examine concerns that it was aware in 2010 of similar defects in EPIRBs.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Excuse me, but the remainder of the Minister's response can be included in the record so that we can proceed.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

With the Acting Chairman's indulgence, I would be able to cover the key points in 35 seconds.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a large proportion, but I will make a rare exception for the Minister.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

According to my Department's report, in July 2010 the Department had sent a number of queries to the manufacturer's agent on foot of concerns about EPIRB defects arising from possible tampering or improper battery replacement. In the ensuing examination, no evidence emerged that suggested a serious defect within the equipment type such as that associated with the microprocessor finding as determined recently. There is no crossover between the issue raised in 2010 and the issue that emerged in 2013.

The mandatory carrying of EPIRBs is specified for certain categories of vessels, including fishing vessels and other international and domestic operating ships. As part of the vessel surveying process, checks are undertaken to see that the EPIRB is in place and operating. Aside from the survey, it remains the operator's responsibility to ensure that the EPIRB remains fully functional, including undertaking periodic self-checks. My Department will continue to examine EPIRBs on vessels as part of its normal surveying and will continue to issue marine notices to remind vessel owners to undertake the necessary periodic self-checks in line with manufacturers' recommendations. A marine notice addressing this matter was issued by my Department on 29 July.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

I am aware that concerns have been raised recently regarding EPIRBs in the context of the tragic loss of the MFV Dean Leanne earlier this year. I can make no comment at all as the Marine Casualty Investigation Board, MCIB, is currently carrying out its investigation and I await its report.

I am acutely aware of the number of tragedies occurring around our coastline and the lives that have been devastated by the loss of loved ones. We have the highest ever allocation - €67.9 million - for the Coast Guard in 2014, which will cover critical helicopter search and rescue services. I am also developing a new maritime safety strategy, as I am keen to build greater awareness about safety and the measures we can take together to help reduce risks. The central goal of the new safety strategy will be to reduce deaths and injuries, since each life lost at sea is one too many. I plan to launch my consultation paper shortly.

Last July, my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Coveney, and I launched a new safety initiative for fishing vessels. A key element in the initiative involves making personal locator beacons, PLBs, a requirement for each crew member. Shortly, my Department will also launch an updated code of practice for safety fishing vessels of less than 15 m in length. The code is also being amended to make it a mandatory requirement that all fishing vessels of less than 12 m will be required to carry an automatic float free EPIRB. The code will also provide for enhanced safety training, which will be provided by Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM. Additionally, BIM will provide funding to fishermen to fit this new equipment.

John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My understanding is that the company has advised the Department that it sold more than 150,000 EPIRBs between 2004 and 2012, with a failure rate of 0.11%. The reliability of these devices needs to be independently assessed. The Minister mentioned smoke alarms. If a particular brand of smoke alarm in public housing was found to be defective in any way, we would not just issue an alert. The likelihood is that we would have the brand recalled. Admittedly, this situation is a bit more complicated, but we need to determine quickly whether these safety beacons can be trusted. If we determine that there is an unreasonable risk, they need to be recalled.

We need to check to determine whether Bureau Veritas, the compliance agency, is satisfied with the company's explanation. We also need to ask about the testing methodology used by Bureau Veritas.

I agree with my colleague, Deputy Harrington, that the first step is to ensure that everyone who has an EPIRB understands that there is a potential risk. People need to be contacted by the Department individually while this situation is investigated.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputies made two suggestions. First, people with EPIRBs from the batches in question or made by this manufacturer should be contacted individually to ensure that they are aware. I am happy to take that suggestion on board and to carry it out. Through the normal marine notice process and the attendant media coverage, the majority of all vessel owners should be aware of the recent marine notice concerning these EPIRBs. However, as a precautionary measure and following on the Deputies' suggestion, my Department will inform everyone on the EPIRB register of the relevant notices to ensure that people are fully informed.

I will need to take advice on the question of independent testing by someone other than the manufacturer. I am unsure as to who the independent tester would be or even if it is possible to carry out independent tests on a device that has been already opened and examined.

It is important to state that EPIRBs can fail for a number of reasons. Sometimes they do not hit the water, which means they are not activated, while on other occasions they may be faulty. In addition, the battery may not be replaced properly or may have been tampered with. If that happens obviously it is serious. People put themselves at enormous risk if they cut corners by trying to repair devices or change batteries when they are not qualified to do so.

In its revised Estimates volume, my Department has given its highest ever allocation for the coastguard service, totalling €67.9 million. That will cover the critical helicopter search and rescue services. I am also developing a new maritime safety strategy as I am keen to build greater awareness about safety and the measures we can take together to help reduce risks.

The central goal of the new safety strategy will be to reduce deaths and injuries, as each life lost at sea is one too many. I am concerned that a country such as Ireland, which has a much smaller fishing fleet than Iceland, loses many more people at sea than Iceland. That does not happen with our passenger or cargo vessels, so we have a big problem there which needs to be addressed.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I introduced that topic incorrectly, stating that it was the EPERB, whereas I should have said EPIRB. I apologise for misleading the House.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not to be confused with the International Rugby Board.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the Minister's other hat.