Objectives And Aims

Objectives And Aims: Following an accident that occurred about 36 hours ago on a 23m fishing vessel, the report will:

•    Determine what object fell on the fishing vessel
•    Assess the damage caused on the fishing vessel
•    Prepare a risk assessment as required by the port authority
•    Determine the safety precautions to be taken during the survey
•    Determine the possibility of injuries to people during the incident

After all the above have been determined and investigated, the most suitable solution and action will be identified and recommended to the owner of the vessel. The survey -as requested by the owner of the vessel (The Principal) – will be conducted in accordance with the term and conditions. Other terms will be outlined by the working contract. 

In about 36 hours ago, an incident occurred at the sea dork whereby a heavy object – yet to be established- fell on a fishing vessel causing damage to its main deck. As a result, the vessel could no longer be refrigerated and seawater intruded the fish hold through a hole caused by the object. On this note, the vessel was moved to a nearby port that deals with timber loading. Here, the vessel was detained by the port state control and the owner has requested that a risk assessment report is conducted. The assessment is a requirement by the port authority. Furthermore, the report will be used by the owner in determining the necessary repairs to be made.

Risk assessment is a critical factor and has been highlighted in various countries and localities. Some countries require the owners of the vessels to conduct regular assessments so as to ensure that the safety of the crew is not compromised (Choi, et al., 2014). The assessment mainly involves looking into detail all the equipment and machinery used in the day to day operations of the ship and looking into anything that may be deemed suspicious (Calabrese, et al., 2012). After identification of any hazard, the owner must come up with strategies and methods to protect the crew and any other personnel from harm (World Health Organization, 2005)

It is very important for the person assessing the damage to be well acquainted with the layout of the ship. Various pieces of literature have indicated that the owner of the ship is usually the ideal person to conduct the assessment because he is well conversant with the ship but in the case whereby he/she hires a third party, it is his responsibility to ensure that the latter is well acquainted (Martins & Lobo, 2011). Therefore, prior to the actual assessment of the hazard, it is my duty and responsibility to know the whole layout of the ship. This can be done by ensuring that one of the crew members acts as a guide and more to this, provides all the necessary information about the health and safety of the ship. This factor is very useful for my overall wellbeing and safety.

Incident Description

The second aspect will involve looking at the risk in detail. The assessment has to cover every inch of the risk and this can be done by observing the chain of activities that have led to this risk. Each detail provided by the owner is a valuable piece of information on the risk assessment. The purpose of obtaining information from the owner is for the record and reference purposes (Montewka, et al., 2014). The initial details ensure that the records may be clarified after the final assessment. As a matter of fact, it is the responsibility of the owner to obtain the reports after every assessment and provide the records in subsequent analyses (Jasionowski, 2011).

Finally, prior to the actual assessment, there is the aspect of personal protective equipment. Depending on the level of risk and hazard associated with the assessment, the owner may provide protective paraphernalia. However, it is my responsibility to check that the sizing and its condition is very good. Some hazards such as toxic substances may call for protective equipment but the effectiveness will depend on their working condition. Furthermore, life jackets should be provided where there is a risk of drowning.  

The assessment of a ship is a very intricate process that involves a step by step movement into each compartment. There are a number of standards such as the IHR (2005) which tries to describe the standards that are to be attained by the different quarters that are used by the crew members. The standards try to describe the hygiene, accommodation catering etc. and therefore outline the procedure for inspection as well as the responsibilities of the operator. Moreover, the ILO maritime labor convention (2006) focuses on the environmental conditions under which each of the workers is to be subjected to and mainly focuses on the social as well as the working and living conditions inside the ship. Other articles within the convention go to the extent to describe other provisions such as recreational facilities. However, the main emphasis is on the safety conditions within the ship which should be maintained.

According to the standards, the areas that should be taken into consideration during the risk analysis include the service areas and the gallery, the living quarters, the stores, the child care facilities (if present), the medical supply area and facilities, the recreational centers such as spas and swimming pools, the waste departments, the room that houses the engine, the water supply area, the disposed sewage and waste among others. These are the crucial quarters of the ship and should not be compromised with (World Health Organization, 2005).

Importance of Risk Assessment in Ship Operations

As in our analysis, the risk assessment may be conducted in five stages (vassals, 2006) which include: identifying the hazards, identifying risk associated with the hazard, identifying potential outcomes, providing good judgment and providing control measures (Choi, et al., 2014). The following paragraphs try to provide more detail into the stages stated.

To begin with, the risk assessment begins by identifying all the hazards present (Vassalos, 2007). As with the vessel whereby the only hazard is the unknown object, intensive research will need to be conducted on the different aspects of the material. Identifying the material properties enables the assessment process to move in a sequential manner since it is the individual properties that pose a risk. Toxic materials pose the highest level of risk (Montewka, et al., 2014). The material has been described as heavy in nature which is why it caused damage to the main deck. The other hazard that accrues from the damage caused by the object is seawater intrusion. Seawater intrusion is a major hazard to the boat because of the ability to corrode metals very fast (Ruponen, et al., 2015).

The second stage in the risk assessment mainly involves identifying the different risks that may be attributed to the hazards (Martins & Lobo, 2011). It is important to separate, by definition, risks and hazards. A hazard, in this case, refers to the object that has caused damage to the ship. However, it may also include the intrusion of seawater into the ship or any other undesirable aspect that may be encountered during the assessment of the ship. These hazards are responsible for the risks that may arise thereafter.

Thirdly, the assessment has to consider all the outcomes resulting from the occurrence of the risk. Risks tend to have a significant negative impact on the operations and in this case, seawater intrusion may lead to engine failure, corrosion of various components among others. On the other hand, the hole made by the heavy object may lead to total failure of the ship among other negative implications. Therefore, it is important to determine all the outcomes associated with the risks identified.

The fourth stage will involve statistical analysis in order to determine the severity of the risks and the likelihood of occurrences (Ruponnen & Lasksomnen, 2017). The different risks have different possibilities of occurrence and have different levels of severity. Therefore, by analyzing the different risks in term of the severity and possibility of occurrence, proper measures can be put in place to ensure that the outcome is not so damaging (Manderbacka & Ruponen, 2016). The hole made by the heavy object is likely to have a number of risks associated with it such as degradation of the internal ship environment, degradation of the components of the ship among others. All these should be looked into with the most severe ranked as the highest in the risk assessment chart (lavender, 2011). The chart provides a reference point to the dangers that are associated with the different risks. Severity is the most important tool in assessment and priority is given to those occurrences that have the highest impact, even though their likelihood of occurrence may be minimal (carter, 2011). Other activities may occur at a higher frequency but their devastating impact is very low.

Risk Assessment Stages

The final step is the solution. In this, the assessment should provide control measures that aim at providing a platform from where the safety of workers can be assured. However, this should be based on an assessment. There are three scenarios that may be observed in this case: the controls are adequate, the controls are inadequate or the controls are not available (Ruponnen & Lasksomnen, 2017). The risk assessment should, therefore, provide a benchmark from which the controls will be installed. However, the installation of these controls may not be immediate because of lack of capital etc. but should be added to the action plan so that it may be implemented in the future.  

There are various guidelines that stipulate under which conditions and to whom any information obtained from the survey may be disseminated to. Furthermore, the survey may be a contract that is legally binding and any breach of information may result in law suits. The details of the survey, under which conditions the information is to be disseminated are outlined by the owner and the contract.

The contract, alongside the owner, provide the specifics about information dissemination (Gluck, 2017). More to this case is the fact that the injured crew member is not present and the solicitor is in his/her place. Taking all the variables into consideration and considering the contract stipulations, it would be unprofessional to provide the solicitor with information if the contract or the owner does not specify so. On the other hand, the contract may indicate that the member and his solicitor may be provided with information. If this is the case, then the information may be granted to the solicitor with the proof of his/her association with the injured crew member. Therefore, the contract stipulations should act as the guidelines in information dissemination

Introduces the reader to the report. The details include the surveying company, the ship to be surveyed and the owner.

Gives a shallow explanation of the survey. In this, the section provides an overview of the purpose of the survey.

Provides an in-depth description of the ship surveyed. All these details should have the acknowledgment of the owner.

The section will provide an in-depth description of all the activities that were conducted during the survey. The sections investigated should all be provided in detail. 

Gives information about the defects observed during the survey. All this should be in accordance with the details provided in the previous section. The findings in each section and compartment are indicated here. 

Provides details about the drawbacks encountered during the survey and other factors that may have led to a shallower analysis. The limitations may either be cash-based, time-based or any other factor that may prevent a more detailed survey. 

Summarizes the whole report and provides recommendations. All this should be in line with the control chart provided by the owner. Therefore, the details of the survey, as well as the necessary recommendations, are provided in this section.  

References

Calabrese, F., Corallo, A., Margherita, A. & Zizzari, A. A., 2012. A knowledge-based decision support system for shipboard damaged control. Expert system application.

Carter, T., 2011. Mapping the knowledge base for maritime health: 2. a framework for analysis. International maritime health.

Choi, J. et al., 2014. Damage scenarios and onboard support system for damaged ships. International journal of naval architecture ocean engineering.

Gluck, S., 2017. Benefits of contract employment. [Online]

Available at: smallbusiness.chron.com/benefits-contract-employment-2557.html

ILO, 2006. Maritime labor convention. s.l., s.n.

Jesionowski, A., 2011. Decision support for ship flooding crisis management. Ocean engineering.

Lavender, k., 2011. Goal-based ship safety-application in large ship cruise design.

Manderbacka, T. & Ruponen, P., 2016. The impact of inflow momentum on the transient roll response of a damaged ship. Ocean engineering.

Martins, p. T. & Lobo, V. S., 2011. Real-time decision support system for managing ship stability under damage. s.l., s.n.

Montewka, J. et al., 2014. A framework for risk assessment for maritime transportation systems-a case study for open sea collision involving RoPax vessels. Reliable engineering systems.

Ruponen, P. et al., 2015. A study on leakage and collapse of nonwatertight ship doors under floodwater pressure. Maritime Structures.

Ruponnen, P. & Laaksonen, j., 2017. A method for breach assessment onboard a damaged passenger ship. Applied ocean research.

Vassals, D., 2006. Passenger ship safety: containing the risk.

Vassals, D., 2007. Safe return to a port-a framework for passenger ship safety. s.l., s.n.

World health assembly, 2005. International health regulations. s.l., s.n.

World Health Organization, 2005. Handbook for inspection of ships and issuance of ship sanitation certificate. s.l.:s.n.