434-10

Risk Assessment Data Directory

Report No. 434 – 10March 2010

I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f O i l & G a s P r o d u c e r s

Water transport accident statistics

Publications

Global experience

The International Association of Oil & Gas Producers has access to a wealth of technical knowledge and experience with its members operating around the world in many different terrains. We collate and distil this valuable knowledge for the industry to use as guidelines for good practice by individual members.

Consistent high quality database and guidelines

Our overall aim is to ensure a consistent approach to training, management and best prac-tice throughout the world.

The oil and gas exploration and production industry recognises the need to develop consist-ent databases and records in certain fields. The OGP’s members are encouraged to use the guidelines as a starting point for their operations or to supplement their own policies and regulations which may apply locally.

Internationally recognised source of industry information

Many of our guidelines have been recognised and used by international authorities and safety and environmental bodies. Requests come from governments and non-government organisations around the world as well as from non-member companies.

DisclaimerWhilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication, neither the OGP nor any of its members past present or future warrants its accuracy or will, regardless of its or their negligence, assume liability for any foreseeable or unforeseeable use made thereof, which liability is hereby excluded. Consequently, such use is at the recipient’s own risk on the basis that any use by the recipient constitutes agreement to the terms of this disclaimer. The recipient is obliged to inform any subsequent recipient of such terms.

This document may provide guidance supplemental to the requirements of local legislation. Nothing herein, however, is intended to replace, amend, supersede or otherwise depart from such requirements. In the event of any conflict or contradiction between the provisions of this document and local legislation, applicable laws shall prevail.

Copyright notice

The contents of these pages are © The International Association of Oil and Gas Producers. Permission is given to reproduce this report in whole or in part provided (i) that the copyright of OGP and (ii) the source are acknowledged. All other rights are reserved.” Any other use requires the prior written permission of the OGP.

These Terms and Conditions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Eng-land and Wales. Disputes arising here from shall be exclusively subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.

RADD – Water transport accident statistics

©OGP

contents

1.0 Scope and Application ........................................................... 1 1.1 Scope ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Application ...................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Definitions ....................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Summary of Recommended Data ............................................ 2 2.1 Personnel Risk ................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Vessel Accident Frequencies ........................................................................ 3 2.3 Oil Spill Frequencies ...................................................................................... 4 3.0 Guidance on use of data ........................................................ 5 3.1 General validity ............................................................................................... 5 3.2 Uncertainties ................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Application of frequencies to specific locations ......................................... 5 3.3.1 Personnel Risk ........................................................................................................... 6 3.3.2 Ship Accidents and Oil Spill Frequencies ............................................................... 6 4.0 Review of data sources ......................................................... 6 4.1 Basis of data presented ................................................................................. 6 4.1.1 Personnel Transport .................................................................................................. 6 4.1.2 Vessel Incidents and Accidents.............................................................................. 10 4.1.3 Oil Spills .................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 Other data sources ....................................................................................... 13 4.2.1 Personnel Transport ................................................................................................ 13 4.2.2 Vessel Casualties ..................................................................................................... 15 4.2.3 Oil Spills .................................................................................................................... 15 4.2.4 Dangerous Goods Transport .................................................................................. 15 5.0 Recommended data sources for further information ............ 16

6.0 References .......................................................................... 16


©OGP

Abbreviations: ACDS Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances BSP Brunei Shell Petroleum CALM Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring DNV Det Norske Veritas E&P Exploration and Production ERRV Emergency Response & Rescue Vessel FAR Fatal Accident Rate GB Great Britain GT Gross Tonnage IR Individual Risk LMIS Lloyd’s Maritime Information Services MBC Marine Breakaway Coupling MSMS Marine Safety Management System NPC National Ports Council OGP Oil and Gas Producers P&I Protection & Indemnity QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment SAFECO Safety of Shipping in Coastal Waters SMS Safety Management System SPM Singe Point Mooring SSB Sarawak Shell Berhad UK(CS) United Kingdom (Continental Shelf) USCG United States Coast Guard


©OGP

1

1.0 Scope and Application 1.1 Scope This datasheet provides information on water transport accident statistics for use in Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA). The data sheet includes guidelines for the use of recommended data and a review of the sources of the data. The data in this sheet are intended for three main uses: • Assessing the risk of personnel on board vessels; • Assessing the frequencies of vessel/ship accidents; • Assessing the frequencies of oil spills. Relevant personnel are crew boat passengers being transported to offshore facilities and crew who work on vessels. The main focus in terms of vessel types is on supply vessels, stand-by vessels (now commonly known within the UK as Emergency Response & Rescue Vessels (ERRV)), crew vessels, anchor handling vessels, diving support vessels and tankers. Drilling rigs, flotels, and production and storage vessels are not included.

1.2 Application This datasheet contains global data plus more detailed regional/national data where relevant or where available. When using these data, it should be noted that they may not be directly applicable to the specific location under study. Guidance on using location specific data is given in Section 3.3. The data presented are applicable to activities in support of operations within exploration for and production of hydrocarbons.

1.3 Definitions The primary source of ship accident data is the ship casualty database maintained by Lloyd’s Maritime Information Services (LMIS). Loss frequencies can be obtained by combining with fleet data from the Lloyd’s Register annual World Fleet Statistics [1]. These sources cover all self-propelled sea-going merchant ships over 100 GT. Accidents to the ship are defined in terms of the following severity categories: • Incidents Any event reported to LMIS and included in the

database. This is usually because the event may involve some cost to the shipowner and may lead to an insurance claim. In this analysis, the term “incident” is taken to include serious casualties, while the term “non-serious incident” excludes serious casualties. Incidents are only recorded in the LMIS database for tankers and passenger ships.

• Serious casualties Incidents involving total loss (see below); breakdown resulting in the ship being towed or requiring assistance from ashore; flooding of any compartment; or structural, mechanical or electrical damage requiring repairs before the ship can continue trading.


©OGP

2

• Total loss Where the ship ceases to exist after a casualty, either due to it being irrecoverable (actual total loss) or due to it being subsequently broken up (constructive total loss). The latter occurs when the cost of repair would exceed the insured value of the ship.

Incidents in the LMIS database are categorised according to the following codes: • Collision Striking or being struck by another ship, whether under

way, anchored or moored. This excludes striking underwater wrecks.

• Contact Striking or being struck by an external object, but not another ship or the sea bottom. It includes striking offshore rigs/platforms, whether under tow or fixed.

• Foundered Sinking due to rough weather, leaks, breaking in two etc, but not due to other categories such as collision etc.

• Fire/explosion Where the fire/explosion is the first event reported, or where fire/explosion results from hull/machinery damage. In other words, it includes fires due to engine damage, but not fires due to collision etc.

• Hull/machinery damage Where the hull/machinery damage is not due to other categories such as collision etc. Also termed “Structural failure” in sections below.

• War loss/damage Includes damage from all hostile acts. • Wrecked/stranded Striking the sea bottom, shore or underwater wrecks.

Also termed “Grounding” in sections below. • Miscellaneous Events not classified due to lack of information or not

included above, e.g. oil spill, flooding. Personnel risks are presented as Fatal Accident Rates (FAR), defined as fatalities per 108 exposed hours. 2.0 Summary of Recommended Data The recommended frequencies and associated data are presented as follows: • Personnel Risk (Section 2.1) – relevant personnel are crew boat passengers being

transported to offshore facilities and crew who work on vessels. • Vessel Accident Frequencies (Section 2.2) • Oil Spill Frequencies from tankers and during transfer operations (Section 2.3)


©OGP

3

2.1 Personnel Risk The recommended FAR for marine personnel (boat crew) is 3. Where crew boats are used to transport other personnel to and from offshore facilities, the risk to these offshore personnel can be expressed as follows:

FAR (fatalities per 108 exposed hours) = 30 + 26/Transit time per journey (hours). Section 3.3.1 illustrates the use of this FAR format1. These fatality rates for offshore personnel could be up to three times higher in certain parts of the world. For seafarers not directly connected to the offshore industry the fatality rates in some parts of the world could be a factor of up to 40 higher than the FAR of 3.

2.2 Vessel Accident Frequencies Table 2.1 Vessel Accident Frequencies (per ship year)

Vessel/Accident Type Total Loss per ship year

Serious Casualty per ship year

All Sea-Going merchant ships > 100 GT

3.0 × 10-3 9.3 × 10-3

Oil Tankers 1.9 × 10-3 1.1 × 10-2 Tanker fire/explosion 7.2 × 10-4 2.6 × 10-3

Table 2.2 Causal Breakdowns for Total Losses

Accident Type % of Total Losses

Foundered 48 Missing 1 Fire/Explosion 14 Collision 12 Wrecked/Stranded 18 Contact 2 Other 5 TOTAL 100

1. 1 It is important to note that this equation comprises 2 elements: one for the actual transit

(30) + one for embarking and disembarking (26/Transit time). The first of these is proportional to the transit time per journey; as the FAR is defined to be per 108 exposed hours, it is constant. The second is proportional to the number of journeys made, which is inversely proportional to transit time for a fixed total time exposure (i.e. 108 hours).


©OGP

4

2.3 Oil Spill Frequencies Table 2.3 Oil Tanker Oil Spill Frequencies

ACCIDENT TYPE OIL SPILL FREQUENCY

(spills per ship year)

OIL SPILL RATE (tonnes per ship

year)

AVERAGE OIL SPILL SIZE

(tonnes)

Collision Contact Fire/explosion War Loss Structural failure Transfer spill Unauthorised discharge Grounding

1.5 × 10-3

7.2 × 10-4

5.1 × 10-4

5.1 × 10-5

1.3 × 10-3

1.7 × 10-3

5.1 × 10-4

5.6 × 10-4

4.49 0.11 1.52

0.001 5.68 0.23 0.21 5.20

2922 148

2973 27

4435 133 408

9227 TOTAL 6.9 × 10-3 17.43 2522

Table 2.4 Offshore Crude Loading Spills (non-CALM systems)

SPILL SOURCE MEAN SIZE (barrels)

SIZE RANGE

(barrels)

FREQUENCY (spills per

cargo) Storage on platform 121 0.1 to 4000 1.1 × 10-2 Pipeline to loading facility 19 NA2 3.0 × 10-4 Loading buoy or facility 946 0.25 to 9400 3.0 × 10-3 Transfer hose and coupler 78 0.5 to 500 4.1 × 10-3 Tanker 4 2 to 5 6.0 × 10-4 TOTAL 237 0.1 to 9400 1.9 × 10-2

The following frequencies are given for pollution events during loading at Single Point Moorings (SPM; all categories including CALM included) in relation to Marine Breakaway Couplings (MBC): • 1 event (tanker breakout or surge event) every 3,518 operating days without MBC • 1 event every 5,621 operating days with MBC • Spill quantity with MBC fitted is 1/35 that without MBC Note that ‘operating days’ refers to the number of days a tanker occupies the SPM. Typically a shuttle tanker loading operation lasts less than 24 hours; it is suggested that operating days be used as a surrogate for number of cargoes loaded.

2 Only one event, hence no range


©OGP

5

3.0 Guidance on use of data 3.1 General validity If transport risk is a relatively small contribution to an overall risk study, the data above may be sufficient. However, if transport risk is the object of the study, local data become very important. It is strongly recommended that local data sources on accidents and transport risk are obtained. This is because there can be large local variations.

3.2 Uncertainties With respect to the personnel r isk values in Section 2.1, the main uncertainties are associated with estimating the exposed populations for each type of worker. These population uncertainties could lead to a factor of 2 in the uncertainty in the frequency estimates. Other factors which are relevant are the uncertainty in trends with time, the differences between different types of vessel (e.g. supply, standby, anchor handling etc.) and the uncertainties due to different locations around the world. Concerning vessel accident frequencies in Section 2.2, there are uncertainties over when a vessel loss is defined as a total loss. Statistics dealing with total loss of vessels may give lower figures for the latest years due to the fact that not all vessels will be written off immediately after an accident. In some cases, the vessel may be categorised as ‘out of service’, and after some time a decision to write it off or bring it back in service will be made. There is a lack of consistency as to the year the vessel may be written off; i.e. the year when the accident took place or the year when the decision was made. In some cases the source may change the rules as to which year the vessel will be classified as total loss without correcting the previous data. Attempts have been made to take account of this in the analysis below. The total population with regard to vessels is also difficult to assess. Most statistics available have been collected and registered with regard to the flag, and not the region where the vessels were sailing or where the accident took place. Worldwide frequencies have been used to overcome these problems. Oil spi l ls not resulting from ship damage (e.g. transfer spills) are not covered comprehensively in the LMIS database. Reporting of oil spills could be variable especially for smaller spills. North Sea data which are considered better reported than world averages have been used to try and reduce reporting uncertainty on transfer spills.

3.3 Application of frequencies to specific locations This datasheet contains global data plus more detailed regional data where relevant. When using these data, it should be realised that they may not be directly applicable to the specific location under study. It is therefore strongly recommended that local data sources on accidents and transport risk from governmental or other national or regional institutions are obtained before using the data given in this sheet. Should these local data not be accessible, or their reliability/applicability be uncertain, then the data in this data sheet could be used after factoring for local circumstances. However, data which have been adjusted to allow for local circumstances should always be used with caution: the assumptions made are likely to be judgemental and hence may reduce the reliability of the adjusted data vis–à-vis reality. Each assumption shall be clearly documented so that an audit trail is maintained.


©OGP

6

3.3.1 Personnel Risk

The Boat Crew FAR in Section 2.1 can be used in just the same way as all the other FAR data in these OGP datasheets. The FAR equation for transferring other personnel by crew boats in Section 2.1 can be understood through the following example. Assume a transit time of 1.5 hours. The FAR from Section 2.1 can be used to generate an individual risk per journey as follows:

IR per journey = FAR × 10-8 × Transit time per journey (hours) = (30 + 26/1.5) ×10-8 × 1.5 = 7.1×10-7

Hence the expression for IR per journey can be generalised to:

IR per journey = 2.6 x 10-7 + 3.0 × 10-7 × Transit time (hours) For the example journey above, with a transit time of 1.5 hours the individual risk is again 7.1 × 10-7 per journey. Location adjustments can make use of worldwide FAR data shown in Table 4.3 below. The data presented below in Section 4.1.1.2 are not sufficient to distinguish between transfers from shore to shore, shore to offshore and offshore to offshore. 3.3.2 Ship Accidents and Oil Spill Frequencies

The accident and spill rates in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 can be applied directly in generic risk assessments. Ship accident rates could however be dependent on factors such as location/ route, flag, ship operator SMS. If a detailed marine QRA is being undertaken the data would need to be reviewed for local relevance.

4.0 Review of data sources 4.1 Basis of data presented 4.1.1 Personnel Transport 4.1.1.1 Marine Personnel Associated with Offshore Industry Table 4.1 presents an analysis of fatalities on vessels operating on the UKCS [2].

Table 4.1 Location of Fatal Marine Related Accidents on UKCS, 1977-96

Location Events Fatalities Single point mooring 2 4 Barge 5 5 Diving support vessel 9 10 Supply vessel 13 14 Stand-by vessel / ERRV 3 4 Anchor handling vessel 3 3


©OGP

7

Based on these numbers of fatalities and estimates of offshore workforce together with a consideration of trends with time, [2] made an estimate of an FAR of 3 for boat crew working on the UKCS. Note that there is significant uncertainty on the percentage of the workforce in the various occupations and hence this FAR is probably +/- a factor of 2. There was insufficient exposure data in [2] to distinguish between crew in the different locations in Table 4.1. 4.1.1.2 Crew Boat Transfers The only data available on experience with crew boats is for Brunei Shell Petroleum (BSP) and Sarawak Shell Berhad (SSB) in Malaysia [3]. Operator 1 (Asia Pacific region) Experience

Operator’s crew boat experience during 1971-91 has been estimated as: 40,000 boat hours in transit 88,000 boat stages There were on average 7.3 passengers on each boat stage, giving passenger experience of: 292,000 passenger hours in transit 644,000 passenger transfer stages Here, a stage consists of an embarkation and a disembarkation. In this period there have been no fatalities on crew boats at all. Recent information indicates that between 1991 and 2008 there have also been no fatalities. Operator 2 (Asia Pacific region) Experience

Operator’s crew boat experience prior to 1991 amounted to at least: 2,000,000 passenger hours 2,000,000 passenger transfer stages As with Operator 1, Operator 2 had no fatalities associated with crew boats in that period. Recent information indicates that between 1991 and 2008 Operator 2 experienced one crew member fatality but no passenger fatalities. Given the limited size of these datasets they have been combined. Crew Boat Accident Frequencies

Where no accidents have occurred, the frequency may be estimated using statistical techniques based on the Poisson distribution. The most likely frequency is equivalent to assuming that 0.7 accidents have occurred to date, i.e. that the operation is 70% of the way to its first accident. The confidence interval on this value is of course very wide. Since accidents in transit (such as the boat sinking) arise from different mechanisms than accidents in transfer (such as crew members being crushed while transferring), it may be appropriate to assume that both parts of the operation are independent and 70% of the way to an accident. This is pessimistic (for crew boats) and requires careful sensitivity-testing.


©OGP

8

The above approaches yield accident frequency estimates for crew boats as given in Table 4.2 based on prior 1991 data. The 90% confidence intervals are also shown. The recent information indicates a further 17 years of operations by Operators 1 and 2 (referred to above) with no passenger fatalities. Thus as a sensitivity test one could half the values given below assuming that the marine operations have maintained their pre-1991 volume. Such a test would be within the 90% confidence band below. However, given that a significant event could cause multiple passenger fatalities it is recommended to maintain the values below as cautious best-estimates.

Table 4.2 Crew Boat Accident Frequencies (1971-1991)

Fatalities in Transit (Per Passenger Hour)

Fatalities in Transfer (Per Passenger Transfer

Stage)

Lower 5% value

Best estimate

Upper 5% value

2.2 × 10-8

3.0 × 10-7

1.3 × 10-6

1.9 × 10-8

2.6 × 10-7

1.1 × 10-6

4.1.1.3 Other Seafarers [4] provides fatality rates for seafarers on UK merchant vessels and compares these to other merchant fleets. For 1996-2005 there were 32 fatalities in accidents on UK vessels: • 23 personal occupational accidents while on duty • 8 off duty personal accidents • 1 in a shipping accident (an explosion) These numbers exclude deaths due to disease, suicide and unexplained events (e.g. disappeared overboard). The 32 fatalities equate to a rate of 11 fatalities per 100,000 seafarer-years (see Table 4.3 under UK 1996-2005). Assuming an average of 4000 hours onboard a vessel per seafarer year this equates to a FAR of 3. Table 4.3 indicates that this value is near the bottom of the range of surveyed fleets; values up to a factor 40 higher would be appropriate for other parts of the world.


©OGP

9

Table 4.3 Seafarer Fatal Accident Rates (from [4])

Merchant Fleet Time Period

No. of deaths from

accidents

Fatal Accident rate (per 100,000 seafarer-

years) India 1990-1996 282 426 Hong Kong 1990-1995 68 253 Singapore 1984-1989 101 162 Greece 1990-1994 339 162 West Germany 1960-1972 820 148 Norway 1990-1994 156 102 Poland 1985-1994 49 100 Singapore 1990-1995 98 99 West Germany 1974-1976 - 92 Denmark 1996-2005 72 90 Poland 1996-2005 52 84 Poland (2 main companies) 1990-1995 35 80 Poland 1960-1999 412 72 UK seafarers in non-UK fleets 1986-1995 63 66 Belgium 1996-2005 3 63 Denmark 1986-1993 63 62 Japan 1990-1994 121 58 Hong Kong 2000-2005 44 56 UK 1976-1985 407 53 Hong Kong 1980-1989 36 48 Isle of Man 1988-2005 33 44 Netherlands 1990-1994 15 39 Germany 1990-1994 35 39 UK 1986-1995 100 39 Sweden 1984-1988 27 37 Canada 1996-2005 16 22 France 1990-2004 6 20 India 1996-2005 26 18 Spain 1990-1994 7 16 Sweden 1996-2005 19 13 UK 1996-2005 32 11 Australia 1990-1994 3 10 Sweden 1990-1994 9 10

4.1.1.4 Effect of Location Overall FARs in exploration and production for oil & gas world-wide have been produced by OGP [5], The ratios of offshore FARs in the different areas are considered to be a suitable basis for modifying the fatality rates for marine personnel associated with the offshore industry above. Table 4.4 has the relevant values from the “Occupational Risk” datasheet. For other seafarers the values in Table 4.3 can be used.


©OGP

10

Table 4.4 FAR Multiplication Factors Offshore for Different Regions

Personnel

Africa Asia/ Austr-alasia

Europe

FSU Middle East

North America

South Americ

a All 1.22 0.56 1.05 0.69 0.82 1.52 0.92 Company 1.00 0.72 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 Contractor

1.17 0.53 0.88 0.68 0.84 1.86 1.10

4.1.2 Vessel Incidents and Accidents The most readily available analysis of accidents is in the Lloyd’s Register annual World Casualty Statistics. This gives the total losses in the current year and several previous years. Loss frequencies can be obtained by combining with fleet data from the Lloyd’s Register annual World Fleet Statistics. These sources cover all self-propelled sea-going merchant ships over 100 GT. Figure 4.1 shows the total loss frequency for all ships over 100 GT world-wide between 1974 and 1998. It shows a generally declining trend. Some of the fluctuations can be attributed to the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88, with particular effects on shipping in 1982) and the Gulf War in Kuwait in 1991. Based on this graph and allowing for the under-reporting effect of the last two years a total loss frequency of 3.0 × 10-3 per ship year has been estimated; this is the recommended value given in Section 2.2. Data for 1999 and 2000 gives total loss rates of 1.5 × 10-3 and 1.9 × 10-3 per ship year respectively. This indicates a potentially reducing loss rate with time which could be used as a sensitivity test.

Figure 4.1 Trend in Total Loss Frequency for All Ships


©OGP

11

LMIS also provides information related to specific ship types. Based on the worldwide LMIS database from 1992-1997 [6] made an estimate for oil tankers of a total loss frequency of 1.9 × 10-3 per ship year. Of this fire/ explosion caused total losses with a frequency of 7.2 × 10-4 per ship year. The serious casualty rates in Section 2.0 also come from this source. In terms of the impact of fleet on these rates, Table 4.6 (from [4]) can be used to derive modification factors. Fatal casualty rates per ship year can be derived for each of the fleets in Table 4.6. The maximum rate is 3.0 per 1000 ship years for Cambodia and 0.1 per 1000 ship years for UK and The Netherlands. The average rate is 0.8 per 1000 ship years. Thus a modification range of a factor of 4 above the world average and a factor of 8 lower than the world average is judged reasonable. The effect of ship age is illustrated in Figure 4.2 below for oil tankers [6]. The effects are expressed as the ratio of the frequency for specific age groups to the average frequency for the whole fleet. The graph plots these ratios on a base of ship age, using the mid-point of each group, and plotting the ratio for the 25+ age group at 27.5 years. This shows the pattern of low frequencies early in the ship’s life, rising in mid-life and declining for older ships. This reduction for older ships is attributed to a higher fraction of older ships being laid-up or used for storage, and hence being less exposed to hazards.

Figure 4.2 Effect of Oil Tanker Age on Accident Frequencies

[6] also reviewed the impact of size on oil tanker accident rates, but did not find a significant effect.


©OGP

12

4.1.3 Oil Spills 4.1.3.1 Tankers The oil spill data in Table 2.3 is based on a database of worldwide oil spills for 1992-94. They are assumed to refer to spills over 1 tonne, but it is likely that the spill frequency is under-estimated for smaller spill sizes. Figure 4.3 shows a frequency size curve for the spills based on 1992-97 data.

Figure 4.3 Frequency Size Curve for Oil Spills from Oil Tankers (1992-1997)

4.1.3.2 Offshore Loading Release or spill into the sea from vessels engaged in the offshore activities may have as its source spills during oil lifting/loading, accidental discharges overboard or ruptured tanks. Most reporting systems of accidental release or spill into the sea have few details of the unit involved or the cause of the accident. No reliable data has been found on accidental discharges or ruptured tanks. However, one study [7] on lifting/loading has been identified. It is based on UK offshore loading from 1975-93. It was noted that pollution incidents associated with lifting should be grouped according to the lifting system; and the study mainly covers non-CALM (Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring) systems, as the CALM system was a first generation system and have been phased out. This data forms the basis for Table 2.4. More recent data have been published by OCIMF 15. In 2006 OCIMF conducted a survey of member companies operating offshore terminals to collect information on MBC operating experience. The information given in Section 2.3 is based on survey returns from 9 operating companies representing 125,561 tanker/SPM operating days.


©OGP

13

4.2 Other data sources 4.2.1 Personnel Transport Passenger casualty data from the Department for Transport’s 2006 report [8] for UK registered merchant vessels gives a fatality rate of 0.3 per billion passenger kilometres and Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) of 43 per billion passenger kilometres. This is based on 1996-2005 averages. It could be used as a sensitivity test for crew boat passenger transport. The Department for Transport’s website (www.dft.gov.uk) contains a table from its Marine Accident Investigation Board showing the number of injuries from 1991 to 2004 on UK flagged vessels recorded by the Marine Accident Investigation Board as "Associated with Offshore Industry". This is shown in Table 4.5. As above there is a problem with exposed population; no data is given that would enable FARs or injury rates to be estimated. [4] also contains data about seafarer fatalities arising only from shipping casualties, i.e. not including personal accidents, from merchant fleets around the world. These are shown in Table 4.6.

Table 4.5 Injuries on UK flagged vessels Associated with Offshore Industry (1991-2004)

Injury Type Total Number of Injuries

Amputation of hand/ fingers/ toe 5 Bruising 49 Burns/ scalds – other 3 Chemical poisoning/ burns from contract or inhalation 4 Concussion/ unconsciousness due to head injury 7 Crush injury 32 Cuts/ wound/ lacerations 51 Death - confirmed 6 Dislocations 10 Eye injuries 5 Fracture – of the skull/ spine/ pelvis/major bone in arm or leg 31 Fracture – other 60 Hypothermia – body temperature too cold 4 Other 27 Strains – other strains/ sprains/ torn muscles/ ligaments 40 Strains – strained back 40 Unknown 38

Total 412

Koornstra [14] presents a passenger transport model which includes maritime transport risk. Reference risks for ferries and cargo/ passenger ships are first determined based on data from ships using European waters. Reference risks for hopper and supply boats are based on assumptions about how they compare to ferries and cargo/ passenger ships. Multiplication factors are then developed relating maritime fatality risks to the Gross National Income per person (GNI/p). The report proposes using an additional multiplication factor where there are strong indications that a trip by a particular ship in a specific region is relatively less safe or relatively safer than comparable ships in other countries with a comparable GNI/p level.


©OGP

14

Table 4.6 Fatalities Arising From Ship Casualties (from [4])

Merchant Fleet No. of deaths from

shipping casualties

(1996-2005)

(Corresponding no. of shipping

casualties)

No. of cargo ships in

2000

Mortality rate from shipping casualties per

1,000 ship-years (1996-

2005) Cambodia 76 (10) 335 22.7 Taiwan 54 (4) 370 14.6 Cyprus 154 (19) 1373 11.2 South Korea 116 (16) 1123 10.3 Syria 22 (5) 219 10.0 St Vincent 105 (21) 1147 9.2 Belize 98 (21) 1107 8.9 India 61 (6) 745 8.2 Indonesia 143 (16) 1924 7.4 Panama 393 (62) 5713 6.9 Honduras 61 (14) 899 6.8 PR China 175 (18) 2604 6.7 DIS (Denmark) 31 (7) 491 6.3 Malta 89 (18) 1452 6.1 Malaysia 40 (3) 768 5.2 Singapore 68 (11) 1677 4.1 Thailand 19 (4) 489 3.9 Turkey 38 (13) 1047 3.6 Antigua & Barbuda 27 (4) 756 3.6 Hong Kong 16 (5) 448 3.6 Ukraine 20 (5) 582 3.4 Greece 34 (11) 1055 3.2 Isle of Man 7 (2) 218 3.2 Vietnam 19 (6) 616 3.1 Norway 18 (5) 604 3.0 Bahamas 34 (11) 1157 2.9 Liberia 44 (10) 1523 2.9 Marshall Islands 8 (3) 291 2.7 Philippines 30 (7) 1093 2.7 Azerbaijan 6 (1) 228 2.6 Romania 5 (3) 219 2.3 UAE 7 (1) 337 2.1 Vanuata 5 (2) 248 2.0 Norway 10 (4) 648 1.5 Russia 36 (10) 2417 1.5 France 4 (1) 280 1.4 Italy 11 (5) 897 1.2 Egypt 4 (2) 353 1.1 Iran 4 (1) 369 1.1 USA 18 (8) 2412 0.7 Spain 2 (2) 334 0.6 Japan 28 (13) 5689 0.5 Canada 2 (1) 145 0.5 Germany 3 (3) 708 0.4 Netherlands 3 (1) 903 0.3 UK 0 (0) 811 0.0


©OGP

15

4.2.2 Vessel Casualties The Safety of Shipping in Coastal Waters (SAFECO) Project [9] provides an analysis of the LMIS database, giving frequencies of serious casualties for each major ship type, based on the period 1991-95. The UK Protection & Indemnity (P&I) Club produces a Major Claims Analysis, examining the causes of third-party claims over $100,000. A summary is on the P&I Club website www.ukpandi.com. It gives the number and value of claims, broken down by claim type, claim value, ship type, incident cause, ship age, flag etc. No population data is available. The Swedish Club website www.swedishclub.com includes a brief analysis of claims on hull & machinery and P&I insurance. It gives the number and average cost of claims, broken down by claim type. It also gives information on the number of vessels insured. 4.2.3 Oil Spills The US Coast Guard maintains a Marine Safety Management System (MSMS) database of oil and chemical spills in US waters reported under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. It includes spills into navigable inland waters and the sea up to 12 miles from the shore, and also spills threatening this area. It covers ships, pipelines and installations. It gives comprehensive coverage of spills since 1973, but also includes some earlier accidents. The USCG website www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nmc/response/stats/aa.htm gives summary statistics on the number and quantity of oil and chemicals spilled, broken down by spill size band, oil type, location, water body and source. The annual data mentions the largest individual incident in each year and its size. The database covers a wide variety of installations and marine environments. The summary statistics do not allow simultaneous breakdowns (say, for oil tankers in the Great Lakes), and no population data is available. As a result, no use is apparent for the internet data at present. USCG might give more useful results on request from the database itself. 4.2.4 Dangerous Goods Transport The National Ports Council [10] analysed incidents in 10 UK ports, obtaining incident frequencies. The ports were categorised as river (e.g. Thames, Medway, Mersey, Tees), estuarine (Southampton, Harwich and Milford Haven) and open sea (Swansea only). The analysis included many minor incidents, including 33% that caused no appreciable damage and 54% slight damage such as minor dents or split harbour facing timbers. Hence only about 13% of the incidents would be comparable with the LMIS incident category. The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances (ACDS) of the UK Health & Safety Commission produced a report in 1991 [11] which incorporates a detailed QRA conducted by DNV Technica of risks to people ashore from tankers and liquefied gas carriers in ports, including frequency data based on LMIS and NPC. AEA Technology published an analysis of Incident Probabilities on Liquid Gas Ships [12] using data from the LMIS database for 1975-87. This gives means and confidence limits for incident frequencies broken down by gas carrier type, size and age, and by year and cause of the incident, and expressed as frequencies per ship year and per voyage. It covers all reported incidents, but also identifies serious casualties.


©OGP

16

AEA Technology published an analysis of Marine Incidents in Ports and Harbours in Great Britain [13] using data gathered directly from the ports for 1988-92. It gives incident frequencies broken down by port type, ship type, and by severity and cause of the incident, expressed as frequencies per ship visit.

5.0 Recommended data sources for further information For further information, the data sources used to develop the frequencies presented in Section 2.0 and discussed in Section 4.0 should be consulted. The references used for the recommended data in Section 2.0 are shown in bold in Section 6.0.

6.0 References 1. Lloyd’s Register 2005: World Fleet Stat ist ics 2004 , Lloyds Register –

Fairplay Limited, also corresponding annual reports for 1996-2003 data. 2. CMPT 1998: A Guide to Quanti tat ive Risk Assessment of Offshore

Instal lat ions , Centre for Marine and Petroleum Technology, London. 3. Spouge, J.R., Smith, E.J. & Lewis, K.J. 1994: Helicopters or Boats - Risk

Management Options for Transport Offshore , SPE Paper No 27277, Conference on Health, Safety & Environment in Oil & Gas Production, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Jakarta.

4. Roberts, S.E. & Williams, J. C. 2007: Update of Mortal i ty for Workers in the UK Merchant Shipping and Fishing Sectors , Report for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and the Department for Transport, Research Project 578.

5. OGP, 2007. Safety performance indicators – 2006 data, Report No. 391. Also corresponding reports for 2001-2005 data. http://www.ogp.org.uk/Publications/index.asp

6. DNV 2001: Formal Safety Assessment of Tankers for Oil , Project C383184/4.

7. E&P Forum 1996: Quantitat ive Risk Assessment Datasheet Directory , E&P Forum Report No 11.8/250.

8. Department for Transport 2006: Road Casualties Great Britain 2006, http://www.dft.gov.uk/162259/162469/221412/221549/227755/rcgb2006v1.pdf.

9. DNV 1997, SAFECO, WP III.2, Statistical Analysis of Ship Accidents, Technical Report 97-2039.

10. NPC 1976: Analysis of Marine Incidents in Ports and Harbours, National Ports Council, London.

11. ACDS 1991: Major Hazard Aspects of the Transport of Dangerous Substances, Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances, Health & Safety Commission, HMSO.

12. Borrill, E., Gould, J.H., Blything, K.W. & Lelland, A.N. 1994: Incident Probabilities on Liquid Gas Ships, AEA Report AEA/CS/HSE R1014.

13. Robinson, R.G.J. & Lelland, A.N. 1995: Marine Incidents in Ports and Harbours in Great Britain, 1988-1992, Report AEA/CS/HSE-R1051, AEA Technology.

14. Koornstra, M.J. 2008. A Model for the Determination of the Safest Mode of Passenger Transport between Locations in any Region of the World. Report for Shell International Exploration and Production B.V.

15. OCIMF 2008. Information Paper, Marine Breakaway Couplings , Oil Companies International Marine Forum.

For further information and publications, please visit our website at

www.ogp.org.uk

209-215 Blackfriars RoadLondon SE1 8NLUnited KingdomTelephone: +44 (0)20 7633 0272Fax: +44 (0)20 7633 2350

165 Bd du Souverain4th FloorB-1160 Brussels, BelgiumTelephone: +32 (0)2 566 9150Fax: +32 (0)2 566 9159

Internet site: www.ogp.org.uke-mail: [email protected]

434-10

Documents