FORMAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF A FISHING VESSEL

Öz

FORMAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF A FISHING VESSEL

Öz

As the members of maritime industry awareness and sensitivity to the safety increase, more attention has been directed to ship safety. More people demand control over risk to which they are exposed and to model the uncertainties of risk and to seek measures of reduction. Therefore, this reality results in high cost in safety and money. The main purpose of the paper is to review the process of Formal Safety Assessment and to propose for a generic fishing vessel. In this circumference, a trial application of a formal safety analysis was attempted. An interactive risk table method is presented to produce an overall ranking for further attention in fishing vessel design and operation. Furthermore, a sample fault tree analysis is applied to find the relative importance of each component. Finally, some suggestions are made to reduce the risks and emphasized that more failure data needs to be collected on an industry basis and that much expert judgement from a qualitative point of view is required in order to control risks

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fishing Vessel,Fishing Vessel Safety,Safety Assessment,Fault Tree

Kaynakça

1. Devanney J. Formal Safety Assessment in Wonderland. Center for Tankship Excellence, {USA}, Feb 2013.
2. Henley, E.J. and Kumamoto, H., Probabilistic Risk Assessment. New York: IEEE Press.,1992.
3. Health & Safety Executive, HSE, Reducing Risk, Protecting People: HSE‟s decision-making process, Health & Safety Commission, 2001.
4. IEC (1994), IEC 60300-3-9: Risk analysis of technological systems, International Electrotechnical Commision, Geneva, 1994.
5. IMO, Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the imo rulemaking process. International Maritime Organization; 2002.
6. IMO, Revised guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.12, LONDON, UK; 2013.
7. IMO, Formal safety assessment, outcome of MSC 90. Draft revised FSA guidelines and draft HEAP guidelines. IMO; Aug, 2012.
8. IMO, Code of Safety for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels, Part A – Safety&Health Practices for Skippers and Crew, London: IMO, 1975a.

9. IMO, Code of Safety for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels, Part B – Safety&Health Requirements for the Construction and Equipment of Fishing Vessels, London: IMO, 1975b.
10. IMO, Final act of the conference with attachments including the Torremolinos International Convention for Safety of Fishing Vessels, International Convention on Safety of Fishing Vessels, London: IMO, 1977.
11. IMO, Voluntary Guidelines for the Design, Construction and Equipment of Small Fishing Vessels, an International Maritime Training Guide. London: IMO, 1980.
12. IMO, Document for Guidance on Fishermen‟s Training and Certification, An International Maritime Training Guide. London: IMO, 1988.
13. IMO, Torremolinos Protocol of 1993 relating to the Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977. London: IMO, 1995. Kontovas CA, Psaraftis HN. Formal safety assessment: a critical review. Mar Technol 2009;46(1):45–59.
14. Köse, E., Dinçer, A.C. and Durukanoğlu, H.F., “Risk Assessment of Fishing Vessel.” Tr. J. of Engineering and Environmental Science, TÜBİTAK , 22, 417- 428, 1998.
15. Loughran, C.G., Pillay, A., Wang, J., Wall, A., “A preliminary study of fishing vessel safety”, Journal of Risk Research 5(1), 3-21, 2002.
16. MAIB, Marine Accident Investigation Branch, Analysis of UK Fishing Vessel Safety 1992- 2006, November 2008. Smith, D.J., Reliability, Maintainability and Risk, 4th edn. Oxford: Butterworth-Heineman
17. 1992. Villemeur, A., Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety Assessment. Chichester: Wiley, 1992.
18. Wang, J., Ruxton, T. and Labrie, C.R., “Design for safety of marine engineering systems with multiple failure state variables”, Reliability Engineering and System 50, 271-84, 1995.