View non-flash version
www.sname.org/sname/mt July 2013 Management of the work of each PT is the responsibility of an individual designated as the convener,? and is carried out at both the international level and the individual member country level. e convener of a PT will typi- cally assign specic chapters? of the standard to member countries, which then direct their own SCs to complete the assignment within an allotted time. When drafts of each chapter of an emerging standard have been completed, the PTs review and make comments and modi- cations through a series of meetings held both in-person and electronically. Typically, a PT will have one in-per- son meeting annually and several virtual meetings using webcast and telephone com- munications. In the U.S., the SCs typically follow the same schedule of one annual meeting and a number of electronic meet- ings. Currently, three of the PTs (PT62600-1, PT62600-100, and PT62600-200) have issued technical specications, which is an interim stage that enables general comment and modication of the document before its des- ignation as a standard. e remaining eight PTs are at various levels of completion leading to the issuance of a technical specication. As the sector develops, the need for more stan- dards will be identied and, therefore, more PTs will be formed. It is expected that U.S. participation on TC-114 will continue indef- initely, but for at least the next 20 years. Fairness and consistency Within the IEC there is an independent body, the Conformity Assessment Board (CAB). is body is responsible for ensur- ing that standards developed by the various IEC technical committees are applied fairly and consistently such that global adoption of technologies is facilitated through the creation and operation of a trustworthy sys- tem of certication and verication. e U.S. currently has three representatives on CAB working group 15 (WG 15), which is develop- ing the certication system that will be used in conjunction with the technical specica- tions and standards developed by TC-114. e objective of CAB WG 15 is to make standards relevant and widely adopted by making them accepted, trusted, and readily accessible around the world. The term accepted? emanates from the standards themselves and is a measure of their quality and fairness. e term trusted? stems from a robust set of detection and enforcement tools IEC has available that ensure that the certi- cation processes are not corrupt or corrupted. e term readily accessible? involves, for example, automating the processes by which certicates can be posted and veried online. If conformity assessment processes meet these criteria, the standards developed by TC-114 will be widely adopted and enforced, which benets the marine and hydrokinetic (MHK) industry by reducing fragmentation and the temptation of countries to use stan- dards as trade barriers. Key initiatives CAB WG 15 is working on several key initiatives to develop a unique conformity assessment system to serve the MHK industry. These include adopting a systems? approach, which means allowing for dierent levels of confor- mity assessment. These levels include first party certication (self-enforcement and doc- umentation); second party certication (for example, verication of test results by orga- nizations such as Garrad Hassan); and third party certication by classication societies well known to the shipping industry such as GL, DnV, BV, Lloyds, KBS, and ABS. e systems approach also includes devel- oping and implementing a well-designed framework for conformity assessment. is involves ensuring that conformity assessment processes can be applied at discrete stages of the technology or project development life- cycle; for example, at the concept phase; site assessment; manufacturing and assembly; transportation; installation; commissioning; operation and maintenance; and retrieval. e goal is to provide technology and project developers a means of promptly reducing risk at each stage so as to move quickly to the next. Another CAB WG 15 initiative is to apply standards in a risk assessment context. Thinking of conformity assessment in a risk assessment context means making sure that overly onerous certication require- ments are not applied in situations where, for example, a failure mode eects analy- sis would indicate minimal impact. Other examples include dierentiating between when guidelines versus standards may be applied; ensuring there is a clear distinction between conformity assessment processes related to safety (certify) and performance (verify); and establishing a risk-weighted documentation roadmap. is last includes a feasibility study; a prototype certicate; a type certicate; and project certication. A Resolute Marine Energy wave energy converter is deployed for an ocean test program at Jennettes Pier in Nags Head, North Carolina. Testing such as this would use several standards being developed by TC-114. CRITICAL ROLE