Captain Bailey started his career at sea with BP Tanker Co. Ltd. in September 1971 and stayed wJth them until gaining his Mates Certificate. During thIS time he served on aU cLlsses of vessel within the BPfleet. rangmgfrom oil tankErs of 16, 000 dwt to VLCCs of 215,OOOdwt. In the heady days of the late 1970., when Jobs were ellSJer to find, heJoined Sea Containers on their fleet oftnnovative ,.If
sustaining ro-rolconfLliner ships. This represented a very significant change from ott tankers. With ali ships chartered to a variety of operators, hejound it most interesting la work in a very different commercial environment. He studiedjor his Master's Certificate at Plymouth in 1982 and gained his ftrst command
In
1983.Afl£r a period with the National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabw as chiefofJicer on their ra-ra/container vessels and a perIOd ashore as a marine and cargo surveyor covering South Waiesports he joined SeaUnk British Fern'es in 1988. Since then he has worked at every Stena Line U K port - prabably the only person in their current fleet to have done so. In 1990 the company introduced their own guidelines on working hours andfaligue and, as one of the first mau/masters appoinl£d in the company, he took command of the ship while the day master took his eight hour break. Captain Bailey was promoted tofoiJ master In 1992.
He gainedfast craft experience with Hoverspeed on the introduction of the Hoverspeed Great Britain at Portsmouth J!'I 1990 and with Stena Line when the Sea Lynx was introduced to Holyhead In the summer of 1993. Before transferring to the HSS he was senior master on the SUna Combna - one of the multi-purpose ferries operating from Holyhead to Dun Laoghaire.
Captain Bailey is chairman a/The Nautical Institute Command Working Group and now works ashore independently as a consultant,
~ecialising mostly in training.
Introduction
THE
SHIPPING INDUSTRY,by its very nature, is a highly risky business and is not 100"/0 accident or incident free. To reduce accidents, incidents and claims, the shipping industry needs to move forward utilising risk- based management techniques.
The majority of prudent and 'professional' seafarers seem to have an inherent, innate ability to understand and assess the risks that the j ob places before them.
The fact that they undertake this 'intuitiverisk analysis' without formal guidance or training is a credit to these seafarers and to their professionalism. They are highly competent personnel who take their ships to sea and deliver their cargoes without accident or incident.
There is a need for improvement in day-to-day operational teclmiques on board ship. In the extremely efficiency-conscious and cost-conscious commercial climate of the late 1990s there is a need to reduce accidents, incidents and claims, both by their number and by their monetary value.
It
is the aim of this chapter to look at how risk management techniques can best be imp lemented aboard the ship. In doing so, consideration will be given to all aspects of day-to-day shipboard operations.
Risk, risk management and risk assessment
What, then, is risk management?
Ithas been defined as "the systematic application of management policies, procedures and practices to the tasks of identifying, analysing, assessing, treating and monitoring risk" where risk has been defined as "the chance of something happening that will have an impact upon objectives".
Itis measured in terms of consequence and likelihood.
142 THE NAUTICAL INSTITUTE
Ifwe take adequate steps to eliminate or minimise any risks that may be involved, the objective will effectively be achieved.
Risk assessment is defined as "the process used to determine risk management priorities by evaluating and comparing the level of risk against predetermined standards, target risk levels or other criteria".
Our primary aim is to avoid risk: where this cannot be avoided, we must evaluate the unavoidable risks and take action to reduce their effect.
Itis desirable to develop a strategy whereby day -to-day operations are considered from a 'risk' point of view - ifthey can go wrong, what effect will this have? If an operation or procedure has the potential for significant consequences, it must be given a higher level of priority than one that is unlikely to happen and, even ifand when it does, it will not have an adverse impact on the voyage.
A risk assessment is intended to be a simple but meaningful exercise to determine, after careful examination of an operation, what processes may cause harm, what precautions can be taken and whether more could be done to prevent harm. The process need not be over-complicated and it may be appropriate to use a simple proforma to record the findings ofthe assessment.
The assessment of risks must be 'suitable and sufficient'. The degree of effort required by the risk assessment should depend on the degree of harm that may occur and whether there are current control procedures to ensure that the risk is as low as reasonably practicable.
In carrying out a risk assessment it is necessary to
identifY whether a hazard exists in the first place. The
hazard then needs to be categorised according to its potential consequence and according to its likelihood of occurrence. Is it already covered by procedures and satisfactory precautions to control the risk? Ifso, what are those procedures? If it is not, what procedures and precautions need to be put into place?
There are no fixed rules about who should carry out the risk assessment but it is recommended that suitably experienced personnel, using specialist advice if awropriate, should carry it out.
Once a risk assessment has been carried out, it should be monitored when the work is taking place.
Have the procedures and precautions put into place been adequate? Ifnot, a further risk assessment should be canied out to review the original assessment and to make further recommendations.
All risk assessments should be held on file. When the task has been completed it may be possible to 'close out' the risk assessment but, if the task is regular or routine, the risk assessment should be kept 'live'. It should be reviewed at periodic intervals to ensure that it remains relevant and that the recommended procedures continue to apply.
To be effective, risk management must combine knowledge, experience and lateral thinking. One man alone cannot achieve all this and it is desirable that there is aworkable framework in place that encourages teamwork and interaction between the members of the team and the ship's managers.
On board risk management In port
Where, then, does the management of risk begin?
It is difficult to awreciate a finite starting point but, for the purpose of this chapter, we shall assume that it
starts when the Notice of Readiness (NOR) is tendered.
The NOR may be considered to reflect the commitment of the ship to the 'risk' of the voyage.
The NOR may be tendered at the same time that the pilot boards on arrival in the loading port or when the first rope is landed ashore. These times are as good as any but there may be a number of procedures that still have to be completed before the vessel can load cargo. In other words, the vessel may not be 'ready in all respects': if the NOR has been tendered and the vessel is not ready, there may be financial penalties.
Whether these penalties will have a significant outcome on the success of the voyage can only be realised at the end of the voyage.
The Charter Party (CIP) will specify criteria that will determine the commercial success of the voyage.
To ensure the best possible management of the risk of the voyage, the master must be given adequate information regarding the terms of the OF. He cannot be expected to fulfil his obligations in ignorance of the terms and conditions of the CIP.
Cargo operations need to be considered in the light of the 'risk'. The prudentriskmanager should be aware of the intended procedures. He should discuss these with the terminal superintendent/stevedore and the ship's staff in order to minimise the risk to the overall operation. In the meantime, what else is happening on board the ship?
The navigating officer will prepare the passage plan for the intended voyage. If properly carried out, this passage plan is a formal risk assessment procedure. It should allow the vessel to be safely navigated at all times throughout the voyage, highlighting areas where there are levels of greater risks. The prudent master will ensure that his intentions and requirements have been followed through before committing his vessel to the voyage.
While preparing the passage plan, has the navigating officer ensured that the charts and publications to be used are fully up-to-date? There is still an unacceptably high incidence of reports of ships with out of date nautical charts and publications. This may lead, in many ports, to detention of the vessel or heavy financial penalties until the matter is rectified
During the port stay the ship will require to take bunkers. Accidents occur during bunkering operations and the obvious consequence of these accidents is pollution. Any pollution incident will attract a fmancial consequence. The prudent risk manager will ensure that procedures for bunkering operations are in place and that they are strictly followed. He will also ensure that personnel designated to carry out this task have a complete understanding of the procedures and of their responsibilities.
Maintenance ofkey plant and machinery may also take place while the ship is in port. Do the port regulations allow for the ship to be immobilised? Will theworkbe completed in time for the ship to sail when expected? Ifit cannot, can the ship stay at the current berth or will it be necessary to be towed to another berth or to an anchorage? Will there be a long-term effect on the ability of the ship to complete the intended voyage?
This evaluation should not be done only by the chief engineer but he must consult with the master, the ship's agent in the port and, probably, with his principals. This consultation must be open, honest and realistic in its assessment if it is to have the desired effect of minimising the impact of any failures to complete the work.
Preparations for departure
The prudent master will have a good appreciation of the risks associated with port departure and he will have taken the opportunity to check with his heads of departments that they, too, are ready for sea. As we have already seen, risk management is a team effort and this concept should be brought into use at every possible opportunity.
Preparations for taking the ship to sea should follow a structured procedure. In many ships, check lists are used extensively for many operations and the checklist can play a significant part. When the checks provide an answer that is not expected, there must be the opportunity to report the 'wrong answer' to an appropriate person who can take responsibility for correcting the fault.
Much has been written in recent times of the importance of the master/pilot relationship - it is equally important when considering the management of risk on board a ship. Shiphandling in confined waters with the assistance oftugs is a time ofhigh risk and the operation must be carefully thought out and discussed by the master and the pilot. The risk of the operation cannot be minimised without the fullest exchange of information and ideas from both the master and the pilot. This exchange must clarify exactly where responsibility lies at every stage.
Before leaving port, the master must be aware of the hours that have been worked by his watchkeeping officers and ratings immediately prior to taking the ship to sea. This does not only apply to the navigation watch - it has equal relevance to the engineering department and the master should ensure that all watchkeepers are suitably rested.
The effects of fatigue have the potential to create significant effects on the overall success of the voyage.
It is particularly so at the beginning of the voyage and, in many instances, it is not unknown that the master will take the first sea watch to allow the appropriate OOW to gain sufficient rest after particularly long hours during a port stay.
And so to sea ...
It may be considered that the safe navigation of the ship has the highest risk potential in terms of its effect on the outcome ofthe voyage. Collisions give rise to 17"/0 of P&l claims. The old adage that 'a collision at sea can ruin your whole day' is undeniably true and a collision will certainly have an impact upon our objective of completing the voyage safely and satisfactorily.
In the event of a collision, there are many procedures that will come into play, not least ofwhich will be the ship's emergency procedures. These are intended to provide an effective method of minimising loss or damage to the ship and the cargo, to the persons on board and to the environment in the event of an emergency.
The SOLAS requirement for regular exercises and drills is a risk management process. The prudent risk manager will ensure that the nature and content of these exercises and drills is varied so that he will have the opportunity to assess the capabilities of his crew, as well as the procedures. He will also ensure that there is a formal review process for each drill and exercise
144 THE NAUTICAL INSTITUTE
by 'debriefing'. This will provide the opportunity to discuss any mistakes that may have been made and how to learn from those mistakes or to improve the management of an emergency.
Personal safety on board the ship is an individual as well as a collective responsibility. Every person on board the ship has a responsibility to ensure that they carry outtheir duties safely. They mustnotknowingly put themselves or anybody else into an unsafe situation. Although this responsibility may be considered to be common sense, it can be reinforced by good shipboard practices and training.
It can also be reinforced through consultation. The shipboard safety committee provides a forum where safety-related issues are raised for discussion by all departments. This frequently provides an element of lateral thinking that may not otherwise have occurred.
Careful management ofsafety related issues will reap significant benefits. An increase in personal safety awareness should lead to a reduction in on board accidents and injuries. This in turn will lead to improved efficiency on board.
It is probably fair to say that the majority of ships will record, in some form or another, major incidents that occur on board the ship - for example, heavy weather damage to the ship or cargo or serious personal accident. Within the requirements of the ISM Code we also have the duty to ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken. This should also be viewed as a requirement to take preventative action to reduce the likelihood that the nonconformity will recur.
It is probable that the reporting oflesser incidents and, almost certainly, 'near misses' does not occur. A 'near miss' (in 'risk management speak') is defined as
"an unplanned event which does not cause injury or damage but could do so.' Examples of near misses include items falling from a height near to a worker or a short circuit in a piece of electrical equipment.
In an analysis of reported incidents carried out in the United States, the following were recorded. In the right hand column, they have been assessed on their approximate probability on an annual basis:
Serious injury 1 Once Minor injury 10 Monthly Prop erty damage 30 Weekly
'Near misses' 600 Twice daily FlF!J1re 21.1 AnalYSIS o/reported mClde nls
We are probably all well aware of the first three groups of incidents and we can readily appreciate their significance and occurrence. The 'near miss' is a concept that is much harder to appreciate. It may also come as something ofa shock to realise the frequency with which they are considered to occur. For effective
risk (and safety) management we must attempt to identify the near misses, record them and analyse them. We can then take positive steps to reducing Of' removing them from day-to-day shipboard operations.
In doing so we make a positive contribution to reducing risk and improving safety on board the ship.
Before we arrive at the port of discharge, let us return briefly to the people on board. How have they spent their off-duty time while the ship has been at sea What provisions have been made for them to be able to relax and to 'switch off? Good welfare management is an integral part of good safety and risk management. A common feature in all aspects of the risks of day-to-day shipboard operations is the 'human factor'. We are all human and all prone to the frailties that go with it! 64% of claims can be attributed to
'human factors'.
Personal inj ury
It is perhaps worth considering, at this point, the effects of personal injury on the overall operation of the vesseL as well as its implication on the effectiveness of our risk management.
From my own exp erien c e, I know that the immediate costs can be significant but there are other effects on the ship's operation that may not be immediately apparent. On passage from Fremantle to Singapore, the chief officer was washed overboard.
In the successful recovery of the chief officer, I was severely injured and it was necessary to divert the ship to land me ashore for hospital treatment. After several days in hospital, I was then repatriated to the U K - First Class (thank you, P&l Club!) - and was offwork for a further three months.
The ship had to sail short handed for a further four days, someone had to be called back off leave early to take my place, additional air fares and hotel bills were incurred, damages had to be made good, the ship's schedule was interrupted, cargo was delayed, . . . and so it goes on. At the time, we might have considered that this was an unfortunate incident - with a good outcome - but I do not suppose that we thought of it as a major incident.
No doubt, we can all relate to some incident that has led to personal injury of some form or another.
How could we have avoided those situations? What did we learn from those situations? What did we do afterwards? I suggestthat better risk management may have minimised the chance of the incident in the first place. Ifwe accept that, are we now assessing working practices more effectively? Have we ensured thatthere is a good 'safety culture' in place on board our own ship? Ifnot, we should do so very quickly.
Our experiences should be utilised as learning tools and we should react accordingly to prevent a recurrence ofthat situation. In many cases, personal injury will lead to claims against the owner or operator.
To defend the claim, or to minimise his liability, the shipowner relies on the ship's stafftoprovide him with the evidence surrounding the incident. It is essential that witness statements are taken, photographs (or video film) are taken wh ere appropriate and a thorough investigation by the safety officer is carried out as early as possible after the incident. The ensuing report should be as thorough as possible and, if any
doubts exist, these should be carefully investigated until the report reflects the fullest possible picture of the inc ident.
In all ships, Injuries to 'our own people' can be upsetting and disruptive. It is important to remember, however, that the truth must prevail. We must not be tempted to 'cover up' any relevant information - e.g.
the injured man was only wearing flip flops when he slipped and broke his arm is as relevant as the fact that the deck was greasy and that no warning signs were posted.
It would be possible to expand on this subject at great length but it is perhaps better to refer you to other publications. In particular, I would recommend 'The Manner's Role in Collecting Evidence 'published by The Nautical Institute.
Personal safety and accident prevention are very important to the P&l Clubs - almost all of them will publish guidance notes, videos, posters and the like to assist this process. If they are not on board your ship, you can always ask for them.
Welfare issues
STCW95 provides guidance on prevention of drug and alcohol abuse. This is not a requirement but it may assist companies in the development of their own policies. There are no easy answers and the prudent risk manager must ensure that he is aware of what is happening on board his own ship. He should be aware of the symptoms to be recognised in cases of both alcohol and drug abuse. He should also be aware of any national administration policies which may affect his ship and its crew when entering port or in territorial waters.
It is an essential part of prudent risk management that the manager is well acquainted with his staff. By taking an interest in people, the manager can significantly increase his response from those people.
The prudent risk manager will encourage his staff to gain a better understanding of the day-to-day shipboard operations. By providing the team with the knowledge and skills required, the individual load becomes lighter but the group result should become greater.
Well trained and recently trained staff are a great asset and they should be valued and treated as such.
When capable and competent staff are employed, the potential for good risk management of the ship and its cargo is high: when standards start to fall, there is