Technical Session 2 – Risk, quality and environment Part 2

Technical Session 2 – Risk, quality and environment Part 2

 Chair:    Captain Pernilla Bergstedt (Sweden)
Vice Chair    Mr Michael Skov (Denmark)

Risk Assessment using IWRAP, Mr Ómar Frits Eriksson, Danish Maritime Safety Administration

Presented by Mr Ómar Frits Eriksson.
The IALA risk management toolbox encompasses two methodologies, one of which called PAWSA and carries out a qualitative risk assessment; the other is called IWRAP and carries out a quantitative risk assessment.  The two methods can be used individually, sequentially or in parallel.
While PAWSA can be characterized as mature and well proven, IALA experienced some initial difficulties with IWRAP.  Further development of the tool was needed and through the dedicated effort of a team of IALA members, research institutes and universities, a revised quantitative tool, named IWRAP Mk2, was developed and validated.
The presentation described the basic principles behind IWRAP Mk2.  Examples of its use in the Malacca Straits were shown and explained.  The advantages of the tool were highlighted and its limitations  discussed.  The causation probability equals the probability that the navigator fails to take evasive action when the ship is on a collision or grounding course.
In conclusion, the way forward is to develop further the IALA risk management toolbox, which was outlined and the relevant conclusions and recommendations will be given to the IALA membership.  The members were recommended to use the IWRAP Mk2 tool and provide feedback, which will assist continual development.
The key points of the presentation were:
1    The IALA risk management toolbox encompasses two methodologies, one of which called PAWSA and carries out a Qualitative risk assessment; the other is called IWRAP Mk2 and carries out a Quantitative risk assessment.
2    Basic principles behind IWRAP Mk2.
3    Advantages and disadvantages of WRAP Mk2.

Use of the IALA Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA) Model in a Coastal Environment, Mr Mahesh Alimchandani and Mr Paul Brandenburg, Australian Maritime and Safety Authority

Presented by Mr Mahesh Alimchandani.
The global demand for Australian commodities has seen shipping activity in Australia - both at the ports and offshore – has increased significantly over recent years.  Despite the recent global economic slowdown, forecasts for the long-term upward trend for commodity exports from Australia remains intact.
Shipping activity in the iron ore and petroleum rich region in the north-west of Australia is projected to increase exponentially over the coming decades.  This is also the case in Queensland where natural resources – predominately coal, but soon to include LNG - are exported in increasingly large quantities.
The resultant increase in volume (and change in mix) of shipping traffic, some of it through environmentally sensitive areas, implies that the degree of risk is increasing.
While the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) and the States already have risk mitigation measures (such as ship routeing measures, port procedures, pilotage, VTS, aids to navigation etc.) in place, the increase in shipping volumes and off-shore activity requires the risk to be re-examined.
AMSA and Western Australia’s Department of Transport (WA DoT) are developing a comprehensive maritime management plan for the north-west coast of Australia.  This will be characterised by a set of recommendations, which different agencies will be responsible for implementing.  For its part, Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ) endeavours to ensure that it has the appropriate intervention plans in place to reduce risk from increases in shipping traffic to an acceptable level.
As a first step in developing these plans, a broad-based risk assessment was conducted for three designated areas in the middle of 2009, using IALA’s Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA) model.  This identified major waterway safety hazards, estimated risk levels and consequences, evaluated potential mitigation measures and has set the stage for the implementation of selected new measures to reduce risk.
Owing to the widespread consultation process, both as part of the PAWSA workshop and at a more detailed level following the workshop, the resultant recommendations will have strong stakeholder ‘buy in’.
PAWSA was chosen because it is easy to use and endorsed by IALA as well as being used by many port authorities throughout the world.  PAWSA also provides a consistent approach to risk assessment.  The PAWSA process has proved to be a valid model for reviewing risks in Australian waterways and in comparing and deciding on appropriate mitigation measures to reduce risk.
This presentation reported on the outcomes of the three PAWSA workshops, which were very positive.
The key points of the presentation were:
1    There is evidence of increased shipping activity at the commodity exporting ports and off-shore in Australia.  The resultant increase in volume (and change in mix) of shipping traffic, some of it through environmentally sensitive areas, implies that the degree of risk is increasing.
34    AMSA, working in co-operation with the states of Queensland and Western Australia, used IALA’s PAWSA model to conduct three broad-based risk assessment workshops in 2009.
35    The PAWSA process proved to be a valid model for reviewing risks in Australia’s waterways and in comparing and deciding on appropriate mitigation measures to reduce risk.
36    AMSA and Western Australia’s Department of Transport (WA DoT) are developing a comprehensive maritime management plan for the north-west coast of Australia.  For its part, Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ) endeavours to ensure that it has the appropriate intervention plans in place to reduce risk from increases in shipping traffic to an acceptable level.

The MarNIS Risk Concept, Mr Cees Glansdorp, CETLE

Presented by Mr Cees Glansdorp.
This presentation was partly based on the results of the EU research project Maritime Navigation Information Services (MarNIS), which was commissioned by the Directorate-General Transport and Energy of the European Commission of the European Union in the 6th Frame Work Program.  The project started in 2004 and was completed in 2009.  The project contained 2 major parts: Maritime Information Management and Maritime Operational Services.  Some aspects of the former are discussed in the publicly available condensed final report.
The MarNIS concept has been exercised at the MRCC centre in Milford Haven, UK and proved very effective.
The intent of the presentation was threefold:
•    To describe the principles of a MOS Centre that combines all the tasks of the authorities with respect to maritime traffic and transport in a member State under one roof;
•    To demonstrate the concept of dynamic risk as a basis for proportional measures taken by authorities;
•    To start a discussion on a risk method that is acceptable for all member States and that can be used by each member State when it is decided to implement a dynamic risk method.
The key points of the presentation were:
1    Maritime Operational Centre as focal point of all authorities involved with maritime matters under one roof.
37    SAR part according to IMO conventions.
38    VTM part includes monitoring, if necessary VTS and a maritime emergency manager.
39    Crucial decisions to be taken by a functionary similar to UK SOSREP.
40    Proposal for measures against High Risk Vessels when RISK is too high and the sea area suitable for implementation of remedial measures.

Business Case Analysis, Mr André Châteauvert, Canadian Coast Guard

Presented by Mr André Châteauvert.
The Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) is constantly taking steps to modernize its aids to navigation system.  In the recent years, these steps have been made in different areas from changing the nature of the aids being used, making sure that the aids still meet the needs of mariners and to effectively deliver and maintain its 17,200 aids.  In concert with these changes, decisions had to be made based on accurate information and sound analysis.  To this end, a detailed business case framework has been developed for the purpose of providing a common basis for making these decisions.
Under this framework, a typical business case analysis includes the following elements: Purpose and scope of the project, critical assumptions, guiding principles and constraints, a description of current situation and the list of options and associated impacts (operational delivery, life cycle management, infrastructure, human resources, and environment), a sensitivity analysis, a risk management, conclusions, recommendations, implementations and next steps.  The business case framework provides directions on business rules which include cost effectiveness analysis principles and a cash flow analysis using inflation and discount rates.
The key points of the presentation were:
1    Decisions from national authorities have to be made based on accurate information and sound analysis.
41    The business case analysis framework developed by the Canadian Coast Guard can help national authorities to make sound decisions related to the selection of service providers and the modernization of equipment.
42    The business case analysis framework consists in an 11-step approach, each step being fully explained.  This approach is conducted in a logical sequence to ensure that all required information is presented in a standardized format, to permit the national authority to arrive at a consistent and rational decision.

Measuring the Safety Performance of National Navigation Safety Systems, Dr Marc Thibault, United States Coast Guard

Presented by Dr Marc Thibault.
Measuring the performance of national navigation safety systems presents numerous difficulties.  Maritime nations, due to sustained international and domestic focus on marine safety, have safety regulations, standards, and data collection processes they can use to help them better measure the performance of their navigation safety system.
The presentation illustrated a conceptual framework that can help nations better measure their navigation safety system’s performance.  It applies this framework to analyze the performance of the U.S. Coast Guard’s navigation safety systems in preventing marine groundings in the U.S. navigable waters between 2003 and 2009.  It provided an overview of the Marine Safety System and its relationships to the Marine Accident Chain to show the prevention of groundings extends beyond navigation safety systems.  The presentation described how the U.S. Coast Guard currently measures the performance of the U.S. navigation safety system in preventing groundings and describes its limitation.
It showed how it can further improve the performance measurement of its navigation safety systems by analyzing how the frequency and severity of groundings in U.S. navigable waters varies with location.  Finally, it discussed the need, challenges and opportunities for further development of a navigation safety system performance measurement system.
The key points of the presentation were:
1    National navigation safety systems are part of a larger national Marine Safety Systems.
43    Navigation accidents, such as groundings, result from one of more failures in the Marine Safety Systems.
44    Nations do not need to know exact probabilities of navigational accidents in order to measure navigation safety system performance.
45    Nations can measure the performance of their navigation safety systems by analyzing how the frequency and severity of groundings vary by location.
46    Measuring the frequency and severity of grounding by location will help nations better assess the performance of their Marine Safety Systems.

Discussion – Technical Session 2 – Part 2 (papers 6 - 10)

In response to a question about what effect the workshops have had on future plans in dealing with increased shipping, Mahesh Alimchandani said that as a result of the workshops, a go-ahead has been given by the Government to put in place a universal ship vetting programme and that port operators are being encouraged use this programme in order to improve deep draught quality.
When asked about the use of depth in IWRAP Mk2, Ómar Frits Eriksson said that IWRAP does take depth into account.  An overlay of the sea chart is used and the depth is extracted.  The draught is obtained from AIS data and that information is used to measure power/drifting groundings; it is a 3D model.
Dr Marc Thibault was asked about the relative number of groundings set against targets, specifically on what basis are 'new' Targets presented?  He replied that once the targets have been published they are not used again hence the need for 'new' ones.
When it was asked if it would it be a good idea to being all these projects together, Ómar Frits Eriksson said yes, adding that he liked the MARNIS approach and that it might be a good idea for a future project.