Overlapping ENC data ICENC Policy and progress ICENC

Overlapping ENC data: IC-ENC Policy and progress IC-ENC Chairman – Capt Marc Van Der Donck IRCC 9, June 2017 1

Agenda Context IC-ENC Overlapping Data Policy WENDWG : outcome, further activities Conclusions 2

Context IHO Resolution on Elimination on overlapping ENC data ◦ RHC asses areas with significant navigational differences: demonstrable risk to safety of navigation ◦ “The RHC may seek the assistance of a Regional Coordination Centre to assist in this assessment” Overlap real issue ◦ Unpredictable behaviour in ECDIS ◦ Agreed Logic rules (far) in the future ◦ Better to treat at source Powerpoint Title 6/12/20211 6/04/2012 3

IC-ENC Overlapping Data Policy 4

Summary of IC-ENC approach A check for Overlaps is performed at each validation. If one is identified… Is it possible to resolve? ◦ Liaise between IC-ENC members ◦ Liaise between IC-ENC member and other RENC or non. RENC member Yes (technical) – great, all part of the RENC service , problem prevented! 5

Summary of IC-ENC approach No (geopolitical? ) –issue ENC is last resort First: risk Assessment performed, reporting to both producers Second: facilitation to reduce risk level before issue of ENC 6

Facilitation to reduce risk level before issue of ENC IC-ENC will then facilitate the work of the two producers (e. g. by coordinating the exchange of data) to align the content of the affected ENCs to be as consistent as possible with each other, noting any fixed national production policies This is to reduce, as far as possible, the level of risk resulting from variation in the charting of identical entities and/or identical geographic areas 7

Summary of Release: After completion of this process (up to the pragmatic level of achievable agreement between the affected producers), issue overlapping ENC, but via a structured process: ◦ List overlap in README. TXT file to VARs ◦ Update Overlaps and Gaps Analysis spreadsheet Includes risk assessment Distributed to HO, RHC, WENDWG, IHO-secretariat as required Policy can be found here: 8

Summary of Risk Assessment Structure The following criteria are assessed by the ICENC Validator: ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ Content differences between the two ENCs Geographic Location Shipping Density Size of Overlap Scale of the ENCs Routing patterns ECDIS behaviour 9

Summary of Risk Assessment Structure An ‘Overall severity of Risk’ is reached; ◦ Low, Medium, High. ◦ Structure, combination of Rules Use band 1, always low Judgement call validator Dominant criterion 10

Tracking Spreadsheet Powerpoint Title 6/12/20211 6/04/2012 11

Summary table (April 2017) ( ) : previous period 12

The 5 m international tolerance: an example 13

The 5 m international tolerance: Buoy part of ENC 1 14

The 5 m international tolerance: Buoy not part of ENC 2 15

WEND WG: outcome, further activities 16

OUTCOME WENDWG 7 Endorsed IC-ENC’s policy with further discussion at IRCC IC-ENC and Region F ENC Co-ordinator (France) to work together on MBSHC region as a pilot study Each nation is responsible for assessing the risk of its overlaps ◦ IC-ENC’s report is only for guidance. 17

IC-ENC Activity since WENDWG 7 March/April 2017: National report provided to each member who has overlapping ENC data ◦ National list of overlaps ◦ Asked permission to share ENC data as required April 2017: Attended Region F Charting Work Group (at IHO Assembly) ◦ Briefed on policy developments ◦ MBSHC overlap report and cover letter issued to all MBSHC members, in preparation for RHC meeting 18

IC-ENC Activity since WENDWG 7 May 2017: Discussed at IC-ENC Technical Conference ◦ HOs have found the report very useful, are using it to work towards resolving the overlaps identified in the reports. ◦ Several nations highlighted that although they want to resolve all of the overlaps identified in their reports, significant effort and time is required to do so. ◦ Malaysia described their multi-lateral approach to coproducing ENCs in certain regions, e. g. the Malacca Straits. This requires co-ordination effort, but means there is no overlapping data. Example of best practice. 19

Future IC-ENC Activity September 2017: Steering Committee meeting ◦ Review of policy / progress / value versus effort ◦ Review of Region F trial Ongoing: IC-ENC members to review and respond to national reports 20

Conclusions Making an assessment of each instance of overlapping data is important and valuable ◦ simply reporting the ‘number of overlaps in a region’ is useful, but is a little too crude). IC-ENC’s risk assessment is for guidance only ◦ The responsibility remains with the ENC Producers Local factors may take precedence IC-ENC’s efforts on overlap can only be directed towards IC-ENC members data ◦ There are many remaining overlaps outside of this 21