About Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

There is an opinion growing ever strong that the responsibility for training and for the maintenance of skills and the knowledge up-to-date lies with the individual seafarer.

"As part of continuing professional development (CPD) it is proposed to place the onus on individuals to ensure that they are competent in operating the equipment under their direction and provide the mechanism for them to achieve this." Harry Gale (Nautical Institute).

So what is the CPD? Here is what Wikipedia says on it.

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) can be defined as the conscious updating of professional knowledge and the improvement of professional competence throughout a person's working life. It is a commitment to being professional, keeping up to date and continuously seeking to improve. It is the key to optimizing a person's career opportunities, both today and for the future (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2000)).

 CPD should be engaging, informative and progressive, embracing 'best practice' and easily digestible knowledge. It should neither be excessively demanding nor uninteresting. It should stimulate a desire to learn more about your profession and participate in it (The Association of Personal Assistants).

According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development CPD should:

• be continuous - professionals should always be looking for ways to improve performance
• be the responsibility of the individual learner to own and manage
• be driven by the learning needs and development of the individual
• be evaluative rather than descriptive of what has taken place
• be an essential component of professional and personal life, never an optional extra

New Inspection Regime by Paris MoU in brief

The New Inspection Regime (NIR) comes in force on 01.01.2011.

Good operators who meet a number of certain conditions can now enjoy a lesser burden. For them a time window between port state control inspections in EU+Norway+Iceland ports can be extended up to 36 months.

Conversely, there is tougher enforcement imposed on substandard ships that, in the worst case scenario, may be forced to leave the region.

A ship’s risk profile will be based on criteria such as:

• type


• age


• flag


• class society


• inspection history


• managing company (the ISM manager).

The “ISM manager” implies the company bearing the responsibilities as per the International Safety Management Code. The company performance factor is calculated basis the Paris MoU region inspection results only.

In addition to the above NIR imposes a new tool for State control officers
(PSCOs) across the Paris MoU region - the PSC Targeting and Information System ('THETIS').

An important new feature of THETIS is the direct processing of ship call data and keeping all the relevant information in its database.

The system receives ship arrival and departure information from the Member States through SafeSeaNet, the EU's vessel traffic monitoring and information system. THETIS will then use the ship call information received from SafeSeaNet to automatically calculate and assign to each ship in the database a risk profile which is continuously updated. Thus appointing inspections in all ports and anchorage areas of the PMoU region by indicating the ships due for PSCO's visit.

Furthermore, THETIS calculates the 'achievement level' of the inspection  commitment of each Member State, monitors missed inspections, and at the same time allows for recording of the reasons for missed inspections.

How it works now with THETIS (source - EMSA)

In order to be able to run NIR wef 01.01.2011 the system started data collection yet since 17.06.2010.  Therefore from 01 January 2011, any ship flying a black or grey listed flag and having two or more detentions since 17 June 2009, will be "particularly susceptible to banning". In case such a ship is detained after 01.01.2011 again, the ship will be banned from all ports in the region for at least three months time.

Besides the above NIR becomes the part of the amended appeal and review procedure. However this mostly is a behind-the-scenes activity for many seamen.

Modified appeal and review procedure (source - EMSA)

Aconcagua - sting in the tail

Reproduced by the permissions from TT Club according to the relevant Terms & Conditions http://www.ttclub.com/

There have been a number of dramatic incidents at sea in the past two decades involving major fires and explosions on container ships, resulting in significant damage or even sinking, and crew injuries, sometimes fatal. These incidents have frequently been linked to the carriage of packaged dangerous goods and one particular substance has featured in many of them. Whilst it is the incidents and their immediate aftermath that grab the headlines, there is eventually often a legal judgment as to liability and one such judgment was recently published.

At about 0230 local time on 30 December 1998, an explosion took place in #3 hold of the ‘Aconcagua’, a 2,216 TEU container ship on a voyage off the coast of Ecuador. The fire caused the crew to abandon ship and widespread damage was caused to the ship and the cargo it was carrying. The cause of the explosion was the self-ignition of 334 kegs of Calcium Hypochlorite
(CH) which were stowed in a container. Although widely used around the world to purify swimming pools and to provide potable water in emergency disaster areas, amongst other things, it has three UN Numbers allocated to it and is placed in class 5.1 (oxidising agents) of the IMDG Code. In particular, it is heat sensitive in the concentrated form in which it is shipped and care is
needed in how it is packaged and stowed within the container, as well as where it is stowed on the ship. This consignment was UN 1748 and ‘its critical ambient temperature of decomposition may be as low as 60 degrees Celsius’. This meant that it was safe to be carried in containers and on or under deck in container ships.

This particular container was stowed in a hold next to a fuel tank and, as such bunkers have to be heated to enable the fuel to be used, the apparently inevitable happened and the CH exploded.

The company that was both the time-charterer and the carrier under the bill of lading admitted negligence due to the incorrect stowage and made payments to the ship owner in settlement of the claims for damages arising from the explosion. However, based upon expert evidence the court found things were somewhat different. At the time of loading of the ship in Busan, it was not the intention to use any of the fuel in the tank in question during that part of the voyage and it was only on 22 December that it was decided by the ship’s officers to heat the tank and transfer some of its fuel to a settling tank. The fuel was heated to and kept at 55 degrees Celsius. Even then, due to the level of fuel in the tank falling below the tank top by 25 December, the maximum temperature that the container would have been subjected to would have been in the high thirties Celsius.

It was concluded, therefore, that the fact that the CH self ignited and exploded was not due to it being stowed against the fuel tank and UN 1748 as declared should not normally have ignited at the temperatures experienced. That of itself indicated that the chemical may have been abnormal. In fact, tests carried out on samples indicated that the manufacturers of the chemical
could on occasions produce CH with an abnormally low critical ambient temperature (CAT).

Accordingly, the judge concluded that the CAT of the cargo shipped on ’Aconcagua’ was probably below 35 degrees Celsius and, had it not had an abnormally low CAT, the explosion would not have occurred. It was in effect a rogue material. Applying this conclusion to the relevant provisions meant that the charterer was entitled to an indemnity from the shipper for damage to the ship arising from the explosion.

Since 1998, and following further major incidents at sea, the form of packaging, the maximum weight contents of each package and the number of packages in a container have all been more closely specified by the IMDG Code. Regretfully, incidents still occur and shipping companies are increasingly and reluctantly deciding to refuse to carry this cargo.

The lessons of the final judgment on this incident are that manufacturers of CH must be much more careful in the quality of the product that they ship and at all times correctly classify and declare it. Shipping companies need to have well found systems for checking the declarations (CH has many different trade names) and for ensuring that any containers carrying CH are stowed in the most appropriate position in the ship.

The much wider implication is that shippers can be held to be responsible and liable for accidents at sea – which may leave freight forwarders and NVOCs exposed where recourse or enforcement against the actual shipper is not possible. Where a ship is badly damaged or even sunk, such liability can result in substantial damages and in this instance it amounted to more than USD27 million.

Rescue at sea - La Cavernae

That happened during my voyage on board PCC Pioneer Leader off California Peninsula. A power boat with Mexican fishermen was noted giving signals. They waived with the life-jackets, raised the life-jackets up and down and signalled by raising the stretched arms. Guys had run out of fuel and out of supplies, and their boat been drifting further away from the coast.

In compliance with the COLLREGS and SOLAS our ship responded to the signals. As per Ships Security Plan, our CSO, the US Coastguard and Charterers were informed, ship initiated slowing down to manoeuvring.

A small rescue operation took almost 7 hours, which all constituted the deviation and off-hire. The fishermen were in satisfactory condition and asked only for fuel, food and water so they could reach land on their own.
We supplied all the above on their request, and received in return the documented evidence that they were OK to proceed coastwise on their own. The paper provided also contained their names and the name of the boat.

The weather was fine. We managed to pass a heaving-line to the boat from the second attempt. All the correspondence and transfer was done by means of the line. Most of the effort actually took the procedures and documentation itself.

Down below I post the photos of that operation.

In addition to the above I would like to express my gratitude to all my former-USSR captains who used to conduct the actual SAR exercises, particularly to my old captain from 1997 - Capt. N. Kovatch, Master of m/v Amitie, who often used to train officers in slowing down and manoeuvring at open seas during moderate or near gale weathers. Under command of the Soviet-school captains we often used to train in salvage operations, in approaching a smaller floating objects (flotsam rafts, etc.), in passing heaving-lines. That training gave me a lot of confidence later. Thank you!

В деталях о событии на русском

 Seamen of PCC "Pioneer Leader", Pacific Ocean off Mexican Coast

Latest technologies on NYK Pure Car Truck Carriers (PCTC)

 

For me it was always an honour to sail on NYK ships, as for NYK almost every new ship is a lab to try out new technology. I was lucky to join two brand new PCTC's: Sirius Leader in 2000 and Cetus Leader in 2006. Each time I acquainted myself with the latest equipment or design.

Japanese see everything from the practical point of view, therefore they introduce as the innovations for a few ships only, as the modernisations for all the fleet.




Nowadays NYK competes for the environmental goals. Company does not look for turning a ship into a fantastic spaceship in a big jump somewhere and sometimes, instead they take gradual and continual steps for improvement ship by ship ever the same direction -> Green. And this perseverance that they move ahead is real Fantastic.

Incoterms (Инкотермс) 2010

DE 

 

EN
New Incoterms 2010 include 11 core terms instead of 13.
The following has been revoked:
- DAF (Delivered At Frontier)
- DES (Delivered Ex Ship)
- DEQ (Delivered Ex Quay)
- DDU (Delivery Duty Unpaid)

New terms incorporated are:
- DAT (Delivered at Terminal - ru. Поставка на терминале)
- DAP (Delivered at Place - ru. Поставка в пункте).

The regulations take effect 01.01.2011.

The books worth reading on the Incoterms and much more are available at Amazon.com :

Bubble theory at a glance

The latest crisis hit mercilessly. Everyone felt the strike, from the stock markets and banks to small enterprises and even more humble residents. They say it is due to a bubble. After personally losing hefty sum of money within the 2-week devaluation spree of our local currency, I interested myself in bubbles. So did many of my neighbours and friends who never paid attention to world economics, price of commodities or the realty estates markets abroad.

Then, what is actually price (or economic) bubble?
I found a very simple illustration based on the recent events in Japan.

Japanese 'Land prices' bubble

The curve depicts the bubble growing from 1980 till 1991-1992, then shutting down by 2005. Everything under the curve is the questionable value or the overhead of funds. The depicted graph above shows a rather slow sloping down. Often bubble closes slower than grows, example the gold price bubbles. However, sometimes bubbles bust like the one of Brent Crude oil presented below.

'Brent Crude' bubble

What is the driving force of a bubble?
There are many answers to the question, but I catch on the common axis - People.
People with their relations, notions and interactions cause the bubble phenomena. Among them are investors, speculators, and common people.
Why they do this? The answer gives the greater fool theory (also called survivor investing behaviour). It is all about the belief by one who makes an investment on the assumption that there will be "a greater fool" to sell the assets/securities off to. In other words, buying something not because you believe that it is worth the price, but rather because you believe that you will be able to sell it to someone else at an even higher price.

Thus, the more people participate, the more amplitude the wave has, the easier smart guys make their money out of the losses of the rest. So it comes now to the smart guys that use social psychology and human behavioural patterns to benefit.

Who are the smart guys?

The answer to the above question is also easy to find out. Just have a look at the same Brent price pulse overlaying a so-called theoretical bubble pattern.

Brent bubble matches the theoretical pattern

This is so far the only example known to me that the actual curve matches the theoretical bubble so closely. Presume that there should be more, basis which the theoretical curve was derived. A study of the theoretical bubble discloses the names of the smart guys.

Economic bubble in theory

The guy with the smart money is Mr. Investor in a Greater Fool. Contrary to to the contrarian investing the greater fool investors count on greed and psychology, i.e. on the same grounds that bear financial pyramids.


What will be the conclusions of my review?
1. Perhaps that knowledge helps in many cases to avoid being a greater fool.
2. It may help to find the mean trend masked by the bubble's crest.
3. It can help to plan the investment allowing for less risk.


P.S.
Additionally for the Russian speaking readers of this post I provide the last diagram in Russian.

KPIs for Ports and Terminals

It is really necessary to set up KPIs in order to ensure an efficient and profitable terminal operation, although handling too many in order to screen performance might be counter-productive. KPI's for Ports and Port Terminals are absolutely necessary and required to satisfy all ports Stakeholders specifically for the Environmental , Health , Safety and Security considerations , Operational , Efficiency and Financial / Economical / Legal , Legislative considerations.

All processes should be made measurable in Quality , Time and Cost / Revenu/

There are many KPIs used:

* In operations on vessel handling time (measures how shipping lines' contracts are met)
* Crane productivity (measures how shipping lines' contracts are met)
* Dwell times
* Cost per cargo handled, mainly labour, maintenance, energy (measures internal efficiency performance)
* Equipment technical/maintenance
* Mean time between failure (MTBF)
* Reliability/availability of equipment
* Kilometer/moves per equipment (measures technical state and maintenance needs)
* Health, Safety like lost time injuries
* Security - ISPS breaches
* Minimum teus per FTE (full time equivalent) employee i.e. we never want the teus per FTE to fall below this level
* Maximum cost per TEU
* Average crane rate
* Truck turn time
* Yard occupancy

They may overlap or measure the same in a different manner. All operators measure them most likely slightly differently.
There is no standard way of measuring crane rate. Some terminals measure it using time of first lift to time of last lift; another might use start of shift to end of shift; a third might use either of the above but deduct breakdowns, and so on. You cannot look at the quoted rate from one terminal and be certain it's been calculated the same way as the quoted rate from another.
From a Security point of view, in a port operations environment, KPI's are fundamental in measuring, and most importantly managing, compliance, costs, performance, and continual improvement. At DP World they have embraced and implemented an international security management standard (ISO 28000) that allows to do this.
Example of KPI for the third parties:
Jacobs Engineering Ireland Ltd. uses KPIs in terms of gauging their support to Port clients. Client identifies desired performance indicators, Jacobs tracks adherence to same.

A.O. Chepok

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

How to estimate length of a roll (canvas, plastic film, etc.)?

This problem arises once you have to estimate the length of material in a roll without unrolling and spreading it for length measurement.

To solve the problem, you need to know the thickness of the material - T, take the measurements of the inside core on which the material is spun - d, and take the measurements of the outside roll dia - D.

Total length - L equals to the sum of each individual circumference length:

A.O. Chepok

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Risk Management Generated Problems

Risk Management is a must for the Maritime Industry, as it always was before. There are too many factors influencing the processes: people, complex machinery and electronics, forces of the Nature and forces of God.
The question arises that Risk Management as a formal procedure becomes too formal and too stiff for some everyday activities in order to suit the ever declining quality of judgement and ever increasing demand for loss prevention. Here under formalisation meant the process of providing a documented proof of the Risk Assessment actually carried out. Sometimes it is a stupid over-burden, often because of the latter suffers either the quality or feasibility of the Risk Assessment itself.

In order to demonstrate how the malignant bureaucracy chafes the process, let us examine an execution string connecting the two points:

Fig.1. A sample work task process

Further analysis allows to put a Risk Management point somewhere on this string. For the sake of our purposes we are not going to detail out any other points or to delve into the philosophy of iteration and continuation. Therefore the process have the following looks:

Fig.2. Next level of the process detail

Conscious or sub-conscious Risk Management is present all the time at everyday operations. We consider Fig.2. illustrates a process with a “normal” everyday risk management.

Our interest in the topic indicates that quality of the “normal” everyday risk management is not satisfactory and there is need for improvement. One of the goals we set to achieve is to make the risk assessment a standard documented procedure, i.e. to make risk assessment explicitly conscious. Practically it is done when the procedures have been incorporated into a Safety Management System. Real life shows that our process from Fig.2 because of the new properly documented “quality” Risk Management procedure now looks like in Fig.3:

Fig.3. Work task process with Quality Risk Assessment

Increase in circle area means increased effort to done, other words the increased workload for a particular person (let us call this person – Onboard Risk Manager [ORM]). Same time, ORM has all the same skills and all the same available resources despite the increased work. So it results in just ORM's spending more man-hours. On the other hand we achieve better process control, better safety, and better quality (?).
Question: Is there any problem in this?

Yes, there is. Workload on modern seamen have finally come under the scrutiny of the fatigue studies. Either appointed for a particular task or defined on a permanent basis, ORM is a person entitled to appropriate level of decision-making, often an officer highly exposed to fatigue events. His working (non-emergency) timeframe have maximum permissible man-hours. Though permissible is less than possible, due to the fact that today seafarer’s working day is completely saturated with tasks, we encounter such a situation when limit of number of tasks not has been only reached, but is consciously overstepped. Effective prioritization helps, but through leaving the other equally important tasks to wait for the opportunity.

In order to be able to cope with the increased man-hours quality Risk Assessment needs dedicating more men or hours.  The other way lies in enhancing the procedure.
Even being over-optimistic we cannot expect more men onboard. We could hope for more hours though, but these can be provided only basis re-prioritization. The most plausible solution seems to me the enhanced technique of the Risk Management itself:

1. Preparing the Risk Management Templates for standard onboard practices.
2. Developing better automation and document management procedures to replace the implemented.
3. Upgrading risk assessment skills of all the ORM personnel with custom-tailored training programmes (until now there are only the Risk Management Awareness programmes).
4. Providing access for seamen to a searchable Knowledge Base, which gives comprehensive reference to how-to’s and do-not’s of the onboard operations  (these elements are still not present to the desirable level of usefulness).

Conclusions. 
While we definitely need improving the Risk Management effectiveness, we have to realize that it leads to a problem of extra workload for the ship’s staff. There are few remedies to counteract: by allowing more time for proper risk assessment and/or by enhancing the Risk Management procedures.

A.O. Chepok

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Toyohashi - On the borders of Toyota's empire

Tahara, Toyohashi, prefecture of Aichi, Japan - this is the address of Lexus or Toyota may be coming from. Thousands of Toyotas and Lexuses are being made there.

If one starts tracking the shipping documents, he may find that cars in tens of thousands are being discharged from or loaded to PCC at Toyohashi previously renown as a timber port. So what is Tahara then?

Tahara is a port district where Toyota Motor Corp. has established its own car factory with own test track, open air storage and water front facilities. All this is known as Toyota's Tahara Terminal. Heart of Toyota lies somewhat to North, in Toyota City. There are concentrated its five oldest car factories. But output of any of those does not match the output of the 6th factory in Tahara, where production amounts to seven thousand cars per day: mainly Lexuses, Priuses, Highlanders & 4-Runners. It should be mentioned that there is one more factory built in Moji, city of Kati Kyushu, Fukuoka. Moji is the latest 7th factory producing generally Toyota trucks, fork lifts and buses. Therefore Tahara stays Toyota's largest single manufacturing site of passenger cars in Japan.

Idea of establishing Tahara Terminal lies in the necessity for Toyota to create logistic hubs for its production. Whatever is manufactured in Toyota City for export is being driven by truck car carriers either to Nagoya or to Toyohashi, where cars to be loaded on PCCs.

So it came natural that Tahara factory was born during the time of Toyota's further expansion to be not only a shipping but as well as a large production centre.

Every day the huge fields are filled with cars carried from Toyota City or produced locally at Tahara.

Every day PCCs are coming alongside the terminal and load thousands of Toyotas for exporting abroad. Full load of one ocean size car carrier normally constitutes 4,000 to 5,000 "Class D"-size vehicles. Tahara berth presently can accommodates three 200m-long PCCs at a time.

The main carriers employed by Toyota are NYK, K-line, MOL and its own TFS (Toyo Fuji Shipping). Car carriers in Toyota service are usually less than 15 y.o., have high rating of perfomance and cleanliness. This is mainly the reason why Tahara is berth for modern and new PCCs, leaving old ships outside of the line.

Normally it takes ten hours to load 5,000 units on a ship, thus meaning rate of 500 units per hour through two ramps.

To be able to achieve (and often exceed) this rate of loading it requires about 180 people involved at a time, out which 140 are drivers. Being given the computer generated stowage and flow plans a team of quality control checkers and tallymen are engaged for real-time progress and stowage position relaying to central hub computer.

Traffic flow is regulated by team of traffic marshals or "signalmen". Stowage at the spot done by drivers and their foremen. Drivers are being moved from decks to outside stock yards by dedicated cars called 'taxies' or 'cabs'.
Lashings put by lashmen, then quality of lashings are checked by lashing checkers and ship's crew.

Outer and internal ramps set and re-adjusted by ship's staff. Finally, all the operation directed by Port Captain, Ship's Boss, Chief Officers, Chief Stevedore and his deputies.

It would be unfair to describe Toyohashi only as Toyota's gates.
Toyohashi port is also one of largest hubs for General Motors & VWT (VolksWagen Transport) cargo.

Toyohashi is traditionally a timber port. Moreover it is a ship construction site too. Many of the latest generation ocean PCCs for NYK and Eukor were born right at Toyohashi Shipyard.

Opposite to Tahara Terminal there is situated Akemi Terminal - a VWT stronghold for import to Japan. VWT chartered K-line ships for Akemi, which discharge about 1,000 of cars every week: VWs, Bentlies, Audis and Porsches.
The main competitor to Tahara Terminal in respect of cargo volume handled are the public wharfs of Jinno (to the North of Tahara across the harbour). Jinno cargoflow is shared among all major carriers: NYK, MOL, WWL, Hoëgh Autolines, K-line, and Eukor. Piers are used mainly for transhipment of such brands as Mercedes Benz, BMW, Ford & GM. Amount of cargo being loaded and discharged daily varies between 1,000-2,000 units.

Then the last important player is the Container Terminal. It handles small box ships to and fro, which are almost invisible due to ever presence of numerous car carriers in the harbour.

About agents. Ships calling Tahara and Akemi are served by Sogoport Agency. Jinno calls are shared between Sogoport and the other Toyohashi agency - Suzuyo.

For further reference:
Tahara Terminal vessel berthing schedule for March 2007

A.O. Chepok This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Formal agreements under anti-corruption legislation

Brokers to sign formal agreements under anti-corruption legislation

As implementation of the UK Bribery Act (due April 2011) draws closer, shipbrokers are signing formal agreements with their principals, in response to a worldwide trend towards stricter anti-corruption legislation.

According to the International Transport Intermediaries Club (ITIC), the typical document presented to brokers will detail the principal’s prohibitions concerning the payment of bribes, in addition to other inducements. A ban on ‘inappropriate entertainment’ will also be included and brokers must observe the principal’s policies while allowing their records to be audited.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 (as amended) has been operating in the US for a number of years, where provisions are frequently inserted into contracts. It is expected that once the legislation comes into force in the UK, if an individual acting for a company (whether they be a third party agent, broker or employee) gives or receives a bride, the company must demonstrate it has adequate procedures in place to prevent such dishonest practices. If a company is unable to do this, they may face a fine or criminal prosecution.

Andrew Jamieson, ITIC Claims Director, said: “In recent times, a tendency has developed for companies to issue formal agreements setting out their ‘ethical trade policies’. ITIC has seen agreements from principals based in many different countries. These documents are often in the form of separate agreements sent to brokers to sign, although sometimes the provisions are included as part of commission agreements. Whatever the format, it is important to make sure that these agreements are not used as an excuse to insert other rights, obligations or responsibilities.

“Brokers reviewing these agreements should ensure that the text does not make them responsible for the acts of others in the chain. It is one thing to confirm you have not paid or received a bribe, but it is quite another to provide an undertaking that no-one else has. It is unlikely that brokers will be able to avoid signing these types of agreements, and the greater emphasis on regulatory compliance will make them more common. Brokers should ensure that the provisions are limited to their own actions and that any rights granted to the principal are reasonable and directly relevant to the transaction in question,” Mr Jamieson added.

Ship-Management International magazine

Wikipedia on the UK Bribery Act

The Bribery Act 2010 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was introduced to Parliament on 18 November 2009. The bill was passed into the statute book on 8th April 2010.

The Acts defines four new criminal offences:

• offering or paying a bribe
• requesting or receiving a bribe
• bribing a foreign public official (a specific offence required to comply with the OECD Convention)
• a corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery being undertaken on its behalf.

The act defines ‘bribery’ in wide terms, to capture the differing ways in which bribes are made or received. It sets out several scenarios, or “cases”.

The one which is expected to apply to most businesses is the offence of giving a bribe, specifically:

"The defendant offers, promises or gives a financial or other advantage intending to induce another person to perform improperly one of their functions in their position of trust and responsibility, or as a reward for improper performance"

The legislation applies to all companies, partnerships and individuals based in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as foreign companies and individuals doing business in the UK.

! It has a global reach, applying to acts or omissions taking place anywhere in the world.

Wikipedia on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977FCPA) (15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq.) is a United States federal law known primarily for two of its main provisions, one that addresses accounting transparency requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and another concerning bribery of foreign officials.

Persons subject to the FCPA

Issuers – Includes any U.S. or foreign corporation that has a class of securities registered, or that is required to file reports under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934

Domestic concerns – Refers to any individual who is a citizen, national, or resident of the United States and any corporation and other business entity organized under the laws of the United States or having its principal place of business in the United States

Any person – covers both enterprises and individuals.

Requirements

The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA make it unlawful for a U.S. person, and certain foreign issuers of securities, to make a payment to a foreign official for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business for or with, or directing business to, any person. Since 1998, they also apply to foreign firms and persons who take any act in furtherance of such a corrupt payment while in the United States.

The meaning of foreign official is broad. For example, an owner of a bank who is also the minister of finance would count as a foreign official according to the U.S. government. Doctors at government-owned or managed hospitals are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA, as is anyone working for a government-owned or managed institution or enterprise. Employees of international organizations such as the United Nations are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA. There is no materiality to this act, making it illegal to offer anything of value as a bribe, including cash or non-cash items. The government focuses on the intent of the bribery rather than on the amount.

Regarding payments to foreign officials, the act draws a distinction between bribery and facilitation or "grease payments", which may be permissible under the FCPA but may still violate local laws. The primary distinction is that grease payments are made to an official to expedite his performance of the duties he is already bound to perform. Payments to foreign officials may be legal under the FCPA if the payments are permitted under the written laws of the host country. Certain payments or reimbursements relating to product promotion may also be permitted under the FCPA.