Determining Risk Based on Voyage Type

Voyage Classification by Vessel Type Regulatory Reform Project Determining Risk Based on Voyage Type Prepared by Brad Judson March 2004 GeoInfo Solutions Ltd

Contents 1.0 Introduction...1 1.1 Background...1 1.2 Objectives...1 1.3 Scope...1 2.0 Methodology...3 3.0 Consultation...4 3.1 Classification practice, legislation and recommendations...4 3.11 Research questions...4 3.12 Findings...4 3.13 Stakeholder issues and comments...5 3.2 Summary of similar projects, methods, criteria and applications...6 3.21 Canada...6 3.22 International...7 3.3 Definition of sheltered waters in shipping regulations...9 3.31 Canada...9 3.32 International...9 4.0 Data and risk factor feasibility...11 4.1 Waterway risk factor data summary...11 4.11 Risk factors identified by the Regulatory Reform Project...11 4.12 Consolidated waterway risk factors and data sources summary...11 4.2 Waterway risk factor data feasibility...12 4.3 Marine risk model feasibility...17 5.0 Recommendations...25 5.1 Recommended criteria for defining sheltered waters...25 5.2 Recommended method or guidelines...26 ii

1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background The Canada Shipping Act, 2001 (CSA 2001) was ratified by Parliament in November 2001. As a result, Transport Canada s Marine Safety Directorate must put in place a regulatory system that conforms to the new Act. To support the latest statute, new regulations must be developed, and existing regulations must be reviewed for currency and, if necessary, revised. Canada s marine regulatory program must be reformed before the new Act can be brought into force. The Regulatory Reform initiative has fifteen project teams comprised of a Technical Authority along with technical subject matter experts from headquarters and the regions. The Voyage Classification by Vessel Type project team has undertaken to streamline, review, revise and consolidate regulations and orders governing home-trade, inland and minor waters voyages into one set of definitions that, under the CSA 2001, can be used by all the project teams. 1.2 Objectives The main objective of the Voyage Classification by Vessel Type project team is to create a risk-based methodology for establishing voyage limits. In order to attain this goal, research is required to resolve two main issues: 1. What risk factors of the maritime environment can reliably be used to quantify sheltered waters?, and 2. What guidelines will inspectors use for identifying specific areas as sheltered or not sheltered? The establishment of such a methodology will promote consistent application of voyage limit across Canada and ease the burden of interpretation on Transport Canada inspectors. 1.3 Scope The scope of this project is to complete a risk-based study to accomplish the following two tasks: 1. Assess risk factors of the maritime environment a) Identify sources of information for assessing waterway risk factors and suggest additional factors to be considered in assessing risk in the maritime environment. 1

b) Determine the feasibility of using the defined risk factors to determine voyage limits by asking: How available is the information? How valid are the sources and information? How impartial are the sources? Is the information available in sufficient detail? 2. Recommend guidelines to be applied by Transport Canada, Marine Safety personnel for the assessment of specific areas as sheltered or not sheltered and the criteria for inclusion. 2

2.0 Methodology The various data and information products that are available to support safe navigation in Canada will be described in terms of the feasibility of using these products to support voyage classification. Existing and emerging best practice for conducting voyage classification will be examined through interviews and research. In addition to Canadian methods, international practice and methods will be researched. It is intended that the results of this analysis will lead to a recommended method or guideline to classify waters as sheltered or not. 3

3.0 Consultation 3.1 Classification practice, legislation and recommendations Consultation with stakeholders and independent research was conducted to identify existing definitions of sheltered waters, current practice for classification of sheltered waters as well as to seek advice for improvement. Consultation was focused on the Canadian vessel operators and organizations, Transport Canada inspectors and international contacts. A list of Canadian stakeholders was provided by Transport Canada. These stakeholders were contacted by email. Additional research identified the waterway classification practice in Australia, which is has interesting similarities to Canadian practice; consultation with those in Baltic countries revealed the state of marine risk research, but no formal method of waterway classification. 3.11 Research questions Industry and international contacts were invited to comment by email or telephone on three questions: 1. Have you any issues or comments regarding the voyage classification limitation of vessels? 2. What improvements do you suggest to the process? 3. Do you support a risk-based methodology or criteria to promote the consistent determination of sheltered water areas? Further consultation of international contacts sought knowledge in Australia, Sweden, Finland, Estonia and Russia of any studies or projects in which compare the risk in different waterways based upon risk factors. Transport Canada contacts were invited to comment by email or telephone on seven questions: 1. Are you involved with the establishment of areas designated as minor waters or sheltered waters? 2. What policy process is applied when classifying sheltered or minor waters? 3. Are you involved with the application of voyage limits to vessels? 4. What process and criteria are applied when assigning a voyage limit to a vessel? 5. Is the process consistent across Canada? 6. What improvements do you suggest? 7. Do you support a risk-based methodology or criteria to promote the consistent determination of sheltered water areas? 3.12 Findings Definition and designation of sheltered waters requires the input of local or regional knowledge, 4

Sheltered waters is dependent upon the sea and weather conditions at a particular time, Sheltered waters is dependent upon vessel type, The approach and methodology for waterway classification should be risk-based, The approach should include consultation with stakeholders, and The risk tool should be usable by both inspectors and stakeholders so that local knowledge and stakeholder input can be considered. 3.13 Stakeholder issues and comments Local Knowledge Local knowledge is applied when assigning a voyage classification to a vessel. Ship inspection courses are getting the same message across Canada: objective is consistency. Regional knowledge should be part of a risk study. Marine Risk Factors A distance offshore indicator for sheltered waters is problematic, e.g., one mile offshore can be fully exposed to seas. What is sheltered waters for one vessel is not necessarily sheltered for another: sheltered waters is dependent upon vessel type. Neither the Fraser or Pitt rivers, nor Vancouver harbour, nor Roberts Bank should be included as "sheltered waters". Both the weather and tidal conditions often combine to make these areas as rough and dangerous as any experienced in over 30 years in the west coast towboat industry. The accident rate for a given type of ship should be considered in the establishment of zones. A limitation can be put on the safety certificate to say something like " vessel not to be operated in wind conditions exceeding 15 knots and/or wave height exceeding 2-3 feet". Will voyages be defined based on regional differences, taking into account the different climatic and geographic conditions in the regions, or pre-defined on a national basis without consideration of such criteria? Classification Method Risk analysis is an important element in the development of regulation. The concept of a risk-based approach is supported as long as marine employees and representatives have input to ensure that all risks are considered. A simple, four category voyage classification system (unlimited, near coastal 1, near coastal 2, and sheltered waters) will lead to uniform interpretation across the nation and would also facilitate the movement of vessels across Canada and also led to uniformity in the application of rules for the construction of boats. A team of three or four people on each coast, with some knowledge of the coast should designate which waters are "Near Coastal" and which are "Sheltered Waters". They should use risk management methods but the primary criteria should be local knowledge. 5

There is some expansion of the existing HT IV waters limits. For example, there is a current Board of Steamship Inspection Ruling which permits some trade outside of the present limits to allow HT IV vessels to transit between Vancouver Harbour, Howe Sound and the Fraser River. This has very worked well for the industry and it is felt that it would be appropriate for these voyages to be recognized and placed within the regulations under the Sheltered Voyages definition. Consultation The voyage classification and active consultation is very important for the St. Lawrence region and for stakeholders either in the cargo or in the passenger business. The concept of a risk-based methodology to promote consistency in the determination of sheltered waters is agreed to, however, we suggest that prior to any final determination of such limits that consultation with the industry takes place. Designation of sheltered waters and the potential to negatively impact the number of would be entrants into the certificated mariner field. 3.2 Summary of similar projects, methods, criteria and applications Selected references in this section are analyzed further in Section 4.3. 3.21 Canada Canadian Standards Association (CSA) - CAN/CSA-Q850-1997 Risk Management: Guideline for Decision Makers - Transport Canada standard risk management framework - no marine risk analysis tools - no consideration any specific marine risk factors Transport Canada - Pilotage Risk Management Methodology (PRMM) - Framework is based on the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Q850 standard - No marine risk analysis tools - Methodology consists of ranking hazard probability and consequence magnitude - No consideration any specific marine risk factors Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) - Marine Aids Preliminary Threat Rating - Primary method used to assess waterway risk based upon the level of service of navigation aids and waterway risk criteria - Relative risk method - Variables with risk rating scales include: wind, wave height, current, visibility, channel width and orientation, depth, under keel clearance, distance from hazard, distance to other vessels, vessel size and type Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) - Canadian Waterways National Manoeuvring Guidelines: Channel Design Parameters 6

- Guidelines are based on the Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses (PIANC) - Approach Channels: A Guide for Design Fleet Technology Ltd. - Design Minimum de Sécurité (DMS) - Waterway relative risk analysis method - Excel software - Variables with risk rating scales include: vessel size and type, current, wind, ice, depth, underkeel clearance, squat, shiphandling, traffic, bank and bottom profile, navigation aids, marks and methods - Applied to St. Lawrence River, the Bosporus Strait and numerous ports in the South Pacific. GeoInfo Solutions Ltd. - Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating - Based on port risk analysis software developed for and applied to a marine traffic risk assessment of Victoria Harbour - Relative risk method - Interactive online web software - Variables with risk rating scales include: visibility, wind, wave height, ice and freezing spray, weather, currents, depth, tide range, proximity to dangers, unmarked dangers, traffic, proximity to refuge, proximity to assistance, quality of positioning, radio or MCTS coverage, casualty rate, casualty type, human impact, environmental impact Consulting and Audit Canada - Operational Research and Criteria Analysis (ORCA) - Excel & MapInfo software - Relative and absolute risk methods requires a user to provide risk rating scales - Includes data covering 104 waterways in Canada - Data includes: traffic frequency, petroleum, chemical and other cargos, visibility, wind, wave height, ice, icebergs, harbour presence, waterway type, turns and hazards, accident and search and rescue history - Complex and data costly to maintain 3.22 International Helsinki University of Technology - Winter Navigation Risk Model (Baltic) - Hazard identification, probability and consequence risk assessment, risk control - Studies which compare the risk in different waterways based upon risk factors have not been done in Finland - Waterway attributes used by Helsinki include: waterway type (coast, archipelago, open sea), depth, wind, current, temperature, ice conditions, traffic restrictions, ship type, proximity to other ships, proximity to ice breaker assistance - Like Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Q850 (see below) 7

International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) - Risk Management Guidelines 2000 - A risk management framework like Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Q850 - Uses Operational Research and Criteria Analysis (ORCA) as implementation example Australia/New Zealand standard AS/NZS 4360:1999 Risk Management - Like Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Q850 Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses (PIANC), International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH), International Maritime Pilots Association (IMPA), International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) - Approach Channels: A Guide for Design - Waterway risk approach, but output is a channel width required for safe navigation no other risk measure is provided - Applies to approaches and channels - Variables with risk rating scales include: vessel speed, wind, currents, wave height, navigation aids, bottom profile, depth, cargo type International Maritime Organization (IMO) - Collision Regulations (COLREGS) - Identifies safe speed factors: visibility, traffic density, manoeuvrability, lighting, wind, sea, current, proximity of hazards, under keel clearance - No risk ratings and not a model or method Det Norske Veritas (DNV) - Marine Accident Risk Calculation System (MARCS) - A software program used to estimate the frequency and consequences of oil spills from tankers - Software is similar to the Marine Navigation Safety System (MNSS) developed by GeoInfo Solutions Ltd. for the analysis of risk in the Strait of Canso. Note that the MNSS software was subsequently enhanced to become the Design Minimum de Sécurité application. - Applied to a risk assessment of Prince William Sound by Det Norske Veritas - Waterway attributes used by MARCS include: proximity of coastline and shoals, tug availability, vessel speed, accident frequency, Vessel Traffic Service assistance, visibility, wind, current, sea state - Complex. Analysis is provided by Det Norske Veritas BMT Reliability Consultants Limited - C-RISK - Microsoft Access software - Relative risk analysis method for ports and harbours - Risk factors are recorded, but not linked to the risk matrix report output 8

3.3 Definition of sheltered waters in shipping regulations 3.31 Canada Canada s Home-Trade, Inland and Minor Waters Voyages Regulations defines sheltered waters in terms of time of year and distance offshore: a home-trade voyage, Class IV, means a home-trade voyage in the course of which a steamship does not go beyond certain sheltered waters specified in the inspection certificate, or, in fine weather, on short voyages so specified, beyond the limits of those sheltered waters, between May 1st and September 30th in any year. minor waters voyage, Class I, means a minor waters voyage in the course of which a steamship goes anywhere within the limits of a minor waters voyage as defined in the Canada Shipping Act. a minor waters voyage, Class II, means a minor waters voyage made in certain lakes or rivers that are specified in the inspection certificate, and the greatest width of which does not exceed 2 miles, or a voyage in the course of which a steamship does not go beyond the limits of certain sheltered waters specified in the inspection certificate, or on short voyages so specified, beyond the limits of such lakes, rivers or waters, in fine weather, between May 1st and September 30th in any year, provided that, where a voyage is made in any lake or river that has a width in excess of 2 miles for a short distance only and it appears to the Board to be unreasonable to have such a voyage classed as a minor waters voyage, Class I, the Board may, in its discretion, class that voyage as a minor waters voyage, Class II. Canada s Minor Waters Order lists sheltered waters on the sea coasts of Canada as minor waters of Canada. These include here only in summary form: British Columbia: Various inlets, harbours and sounds New Brunswick: Various bays, harbours and sounds Newfoundland: Humber Arm Nova Scotia: Bras d'or Lake, Annapolis Basin, Digby Gut and Halifax Harbour Northwest Territories: Kugmallit Bay Prince Edward Island: Charlottetown and Summerside harbours and Cardigan Bay 3.32 International The Australian Uniform Shipping Laws (USL) Code provides five classes of permitted area of operations for commercial vessels: A, B, C, D, and E. These are described as: A Unlimited; B Offshore operations to 200 nautical miles of the coast; C Restricted offshore operations within a range of 30 nautical miles from sheltered waters or a safe haven; D Operations within declared partially smooth waters; and E Operations within declared smooth waters. 9

The Australian national government provides guidance, but its states and territories are responsible for classifying which waters are smooth and partially smooth. Like Canada s Minor Waters Order, Australian states list areas of partially smooth and smooth waters. Partially smooth waters are where the wave height, under normal conditions, does not exceed 1.5 metres (Class D) and smooth waters are where the wave height, under normal conditions, does not exceed 0.5 metres (Class E). The National Standard for Commercial Vessels is being progressively introduced to replace the USL Code. United Kingdom s Recreational Craft Directive defines sheltered waters conditions as up to and including wind force 4 and significant wave heights up to, and including 0.5 metres. Lloyd s Classification of Ships Classification Regulations defines sheltered water as water where the fetch is six nautical miles or less. 10

4.0 Data and risk factor feasibility 4.1 Waterway risk factor data summary For the purpose of promoting safe and efficient navigation and operation of ships, risks that relate to voyage classification include, but are not limited to, grounding, collision with another vessel and striking a fixed object. In order to minimize these risks, voyage limits should be designed to minimize exposure to risk factors. 4.11 Risk factors identified by the Regulatory Reform Project depth of water geographic orientation/position hazards - shoal water - tides - current - tidal range - water temperature - ice conditions proximity to assistance time to reach place of refuge traffic weather and sea conditions within VHF coverage Canada Shipping Act, Rule 6 of the Collision Regulations and the marine risk model Design Minimum de Securité were also examined to identify any additional risk factors. The result was a summary list of risk factors analyzed in Section 4.2. 4.12 Consolidated waterway risk factors and data sources summary accident record MARSIS database of Transportation Safety Board of Canada currents tide and current atlases or tables of the Canadian Hydrographic Service ice conditions Ocean Sciences Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada; Canadian Ice Service, Environment Canada minimum depth of water navigation charts of the Canadian Hydrographic Service navigation positioning quality: navigation aids, level of service analyses, navigation charts Canadian Coast Guard, Superintendent of Aids to Navigation (of several regions); navigation charts of the Canadian Hydrographic Service proximity to assistance location maps of resources of Canada s Rescue Coordination Centres proximity to navigation hazards: shoals, structures, fixed objects, debris navigation charts of the Canadian Hydrographic Service 11

proximity to place of refuge navigation charts of the Canadian Hydrographic Service tides, tidal range tide and current atlases or tables of the Canadian Hydrographic Service traffic density traffic summaries of Marine Communications & Traffic Services VHF coverage VHF and MF radio coverage maps in Radio Aids to Marine Navigation, Canadian Coast Guard weather, wind, visibility and wave height Climate Research Branch, Environment Canada 4.2 Waterway risk factor data feasibility The feasibility of using each risk factor for voyage classification analysis is presented in a matrix where for each risk factor, comments are provided using the assessment criteria: impartiality, accuracy and availability, as well as usability. It is intended that usability be described in practical terms from the perspective and requirements of a ship safety inspector not a marine risk consultant. A thumbs-up or thumbs-down indicates the suggested feasibility of using the data. An example of the type of data required for input to a marine risk model is the frequency of occurrence of thresholds, such as the frequency of visibility of less than two nautical miles as a measure of the threat of restricted visibility. Historical extremes such as maximum current or minimum depth, proximity to shoals or response times of rescue resources are also required. Other data types are less quantitative, such as the level of service provided by navigation aids. In general, the approach to use marine risk factor data is feasible data is readily available and usable for all but three of the marine risk factors (Table 1). 12

Table 1. Marine Risk Factor Data Feasibility Risk Factor Usability Impartiality Accuracy Availability Accidents Currents Ice conditions Minimum depth of water - Not useable unless processed to determine an accident rate for a particular waterway - Data can be plotted to produce thematic maps using a geographic information system D - Maximum current is most easily read from nautical charts if a user has basic skills in chart use C - For Arctic waters, the Zone/Date System based on historic ice data provides a convenient way to assess relative ice risk - For the St. Lawrence River, Ice Bulletins provide ice type and concentration - For other waters, expert advice would be required because the analysis of historical maps of ice conditions is beyond the scope of voyage classification CD - Minimum depth of water is most easily read from nautical charts if a user has basic skills in chart use C - The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is independent of Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard - The Canadian Hydrographic Service is the lead government agency providing this information to mariners - The Arctic Ice Regime Shipping System and Zone Date System are developed jointly by government and industry - St. Lawrence ice data is based on observations - Ice atlases have been produced by consultants for the Canadian government - The Canadian Hydrographic Service is the lead government agency providing this information on charts to mariners - Useful probabilistic assessment of accident rates are possible through selection of serious accidents from minor accidents - The accuracy of maximum current speed and direction provided by charts is a sufficient indicator of relative risk of this factor - The Arctic Ice Regime Shipping System is based upon mariner best practice - the Zone/Date System has been in use throughout the last decade - Raw historic ice data products include ice charts with egg codes provided by experts in interpretation ice conditions from satellite imagery - The accuracy of the minimum depth provided by charts is a sufficient indicator of relative risk of this factor - MARSIS database of Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) - Data in digital form or regional summaries from the Macro Analysis Division in Hull - Historic accident thematic maps can be produced by TSB or consultants - Charts are available from the Chart Distribution Office in Ottawa - Canadian waters north of 60º are covered by Shipping Safety Control Zones based upon ship type and ice conditions - User package TP 12819 is available from Transport Canada Prairie & Northern Region, Ottawa - For St. Lawrence River, Ice Bulletins from Ice Quebec, Canadian Coast Guard - For other waters, historic maps of ice conditions and digital data available from: Ocean Sciences Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada; Canadian Ice Service, Environment Canada - Charts are available from the Chart Distribution Office in Ottawa 13

Table 1. Marine Risk Factor Data Feasibility (continued) Risk Factor Usability Impartiality Accuracy Availability Navigation positioning quality Proximity to assistance Proximity to navigation hazards - Expert advice on the level of service provided to a particular waterway should be sought from the Canadian Coast Guard - A sophisticated analysis of the quality of charts, aids to navigation, and natural marks is beyond the scope of voyage classification D - Proximity to assistance can be estimated using nautical charts and knowledge of the usual location of aircraft, vessel and boat assets of Canada s Rescue Coordination Centres (RCC) - Proximity to assistance should also consider locations where other vessels of opportunity are usually close at hand - Expert input of a most likely time to render assistance should be sought C - Proximity to the nearest depth contour line (rock or shoal) presenting a hazard to navigation for a particular vessel type on a usual or recommended route is most easily read from nautical charts if a user has moderate skills in navigation chart use C - Current government practice to assess navigation positioning quality or Level of Service (LOS) is based upon IALA standards; however, stakeholder discontent in the ability of the LOS procedures to depict relative safety led to the independent development of the Design Minimum de Securite method - Location of rescue resources in based upon expert knowledge - Location of other response vessels of opportunity (see traffic density risk factor below) - The Canadian Hydrographic Service is the lead government agency providing charts - The Level of Service (LOS) method is currently the only government accepted method of assessing navigation positioning quality in Canada - Rescue Coordination Centre maps provide only general locations of offshore assets as well as home base locations - SISAR data must be processed to calculate response times because raw data have input errors - The accuracy of the depth contours and location of rocks or shoals provided by charts is a sufficient to determine the relative risk of this factor - Level of Service (LOS) analyses for many waterways in Canada are available from the Superintendent of Aids to Navigation in each Canadian Coast Guard Region - For other areas, expert input is available from mariners - Location maps of response resources (vessels, aircraft) can be requested from Canada s Rescue Coordination Centres - Location maps are not regularly produced by Rescue Coordination Centres - Historical Search and Rescue (SAR) data with response times are maintained in the SISAR database - Location of response vessels of opportunity (see traffic density risk factor below) - Charts are available from the Chart Distribution Office in Ottawa 14

Table 1. Marine Risk Factor Data Feasibility (continued) Risk Factor Usability Impartiality Accuracy Availability Proximity to place of refuge - Proximity to an appropriate anchorage for a particular vessel type is most easily read from nautical charts if a user has moderate skills in navigation C - The Canadian Hydrographic Service is the lead government agency providing charts - The accuracy of the depth contours, the maneuvering room and the topography indicated on charts is a sufficient to determine the relative risk of this factor - Charts are available from the Chart Distribution Office in Ottawa Traffic density - Unfortunately, there is no consistent measure of traffic density - Expert or stakeholder input may enable a relative risk measure D - Vessel activity is recorded by numerous government sources - Marine Communications & Traffic Services (MCTS) vessel movement counts are reliable where recorded but do not capture small vessels consistently - Fishing vessel and small boat activity is less accurate as counts of registered vessels are used - Summaries of traffic movements are collected for vastly different sizes of waters and made available by Marine Communications & Traffic Services (MCTS) - DFO Fisheries Licensing Database - DFO Fisheries Catch and Effort Statistics - DFO Fisheries Database on Persons, Boats and Permits - Small Crafts traffic from Provincial Police Registration Records, regional, provincial and national boating associations Tides, tidal range - High and low water (range) is most easily determined from nautical charts if a user has basic skills in chart use - Tide extremes are most easily determined using Tides software but Tides Tables may also be used if a user has basic skills in navigation C - The Canadian Hydrographic Service is the lead government agency providing this information on charts and in booklets to mariners - The accuracy of the tide information provided by charts is a sufficient indicator of relative risk of this factor - A higher level of accuracy for historic tide extremes is available in tides tables - Charts and Tides Tables are available from the Chart Distribution Office in Ottawa 15

Table 1. Marine Risk Factor Data Feasibility (continued) Risk Factor Usability Impartiality Accuracy Availability VHF coverage - A user will need to establish the location of a waterway of interest on current VHF and MF radio coverage maps for Coast Guard radio - The resolution of the maps are small scale so if a user is in doubt, a government expert should be consulted C - The Canadian Coast Guard maintains this information - Radio coverage is based on theoretical predictions - VHF and MF radio coverage maps in Radio Aids to Marine Navigation, Canadian Coast Guard These maps are located in the following Coast Guard publications available from the Canadian Hydrographic Service: - Radio Aids to Marine Navigation Atlantic, St. Lawrence, Great Lakes, Lake Winnipeg and Eastern Arctic (2003) - Radio Aids to Marine Navigation Pacific and Western Arctic (2003) Weather, wind, visibility and wave height - This historic information is easily extracted from well-organized computer printouts of historical marine climatological summaries - For example, this information includes: - average percentage frequency during a month that visibility is less than 1.1 nautical miles - average percentage frequency of good shipping weather - average percentage frequency of wind speed in knots by direction - average percentage frequency of combined wave height in metres by direction C - The Climate Research Branch or Environment Canada maintains this information - Data is based on recorded field observations - Weather, wind, visibility and wave height data are available from the Regional Climate Services offices, Environment Canada (formerly the Canadian Climate Centre) - http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/contacts/index_e.html 16

4.3 Marine risk model feasibility Consultation with stakeholders has shown approval in principal for a risk-based method and stressed that the method requires the input of local or regional knowledge. This approach is consistent with Transport Canada risk management practice and the Canadian Standards Association Q850 risk management standard. The feasibility of applying a risk assessment method or guideline to voyage classification will be examined in terms of: applicability, usability and coverage of risk factors. An examination of marine risk management methods and practice in Canada, Finland and Australia has shown that these countries have adopted risk management approaches similar to that of the Canadian Standards Association Q850 standard. Canada and Australia have a nearly identical approach to voyage classification of waterways. Finland, Canada, Australia, and the United States employ similar methods of analyzing accident probability and consequence magnitude. This analysis focused on those software applications and methods that may be usable by Transport Canada Inspectors to assess waterway risk and classify waterways. Risk management frameworks such as Transport Canada s Pilotage Risk Management Methodology provide no marine risk analysis tools and do not consider any specific marine risk factors. For this reason, these frameworks are not analyzed further. The measurement of relative waterway risk is a very common marine risk management approach, however, the complexity of risk analysis methodologies are often a challenge for stakeholders to follow and analysts to use. This complexity clouds the validity of the results and the usability of these tools as the basis for decision-making. Nevertheless, the combination of the results of risk analysis tools and informed stakeholder input is the approach used by Transport Canada and other government organizations, such as the Canadian Coast Guard. For example, the Canadian Coast Guard uses a marine risk factor threat analysis to assess the level of service of navigation aids provided in different waterways. The preliminary threat analysis is open to stakeholder input before a final classification is made. Most all models or methods are proprietary to private companies and organizations and are provided to government under license, for example, the Design Minimum de Sécurité (DMS) 1 software application (Figure 1) is available from Fleet Technology Ltd. The use of highly complex marine risk models for waterway voyage classification, such as Marine Accident Risk Calculation System (MARCS) 2 by Det Norske Veritas (Figure 2), are not recommended because these consultant tools are not designed for end users. However, a simpler threat analysis approach using a ranking method, and accessible to stakeholders, will increase the credibility of a risk-based analysis because the method is transparent and the results are intuitive. For example, the Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating 3 by GeoInfo Solutions Ltd. (Figure 3). A feasibility analysis of 1 http://www.geoinfosolutions.com/projects/msdtool.pdf 2 http://www2.dnv.com/software/news/newsletter/softnews_5_99/soft1_rms.html 3 http://www.geoinfosolutions.com/risk/threats.html

these and other risk-based methods is presented in Table 2. A thumbs-up or thumbsdown indicates the suggested feasibility of using the particular model or software tool. Figure 1. Design Minimum de Sécurité Fleet Technology Ltd. 18

Figure 2. Marine Accident Risk Calculation System Det Norske Veritas Figure 3. Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating GeoInfo Solutions Ltd. 19

Table 2. Risk Model Feasibility Risk Model Usability Complexity Validity Stakeholder Availability Design Minimum de Sécurité (DMS) (Figure 1) - Waterway relative risk analysis method using powerful algorithms to calculate factors such as vessel drift angle and squat - The software is based on an Excel spreadsheet which is used for data input and output - Data sources provided, but requires external data research - Since the approach uses digital forms rather than paper forms and look-up tables, it appears much too sophisticated for most users to use - Requires moderate skills in chart use and navigation to research data - Applied to St. Lawrence River, The Bosporus Strait, and numerous ports in the south pacific CD - The software organizes a complex navigation system into its basic components - Variables with risk rating scales include: vessel size and type, current, wind, ice, depth, underkeel clearance, squat, shiphandling, traffic, bank and bottom profile, navigation aids, marks and methods - Developed by mariners, shipowners, coast guard and scientists - integrated many existing and accepted models and best practices - Although this software is not a black box and its models are depicted graphically as well as mathematically to encourage understanding, stakeholders will find the algorithms difficult to follow - Stakeholder examine results but do not provide model input - Available in English and French from Ian Glen, Fleet Technology Ltd. in Kanata, ON (License fee) Marine Accident Risk Calculation System (MARCS) (Figure 2) - A software program that enables statistical quantification of number of accidents and related consequences (oil outflow, loss of lives, compensation of Canso. and clean up costs) - Applied to a risk assessment of Prince William Sound by Det Norske Veritas - Useable by DNV only - Similar to the CCG Marine Navigation Safety System (MNSS) developed by Canarctic to study the Strait MNSS was subsequently enhanced to become Design Minimum de Sécurité (DMS), a much more capable marine risk analysis tool D - Complex statistical models are used to estimate the frequency of accidents given accident scenarios - Waterway attributes used by MARCS include: proximity of coastline and shoals, tug availability, vessel speed, accident frequency, Vessel Traffic Service assistance, visibility, wind, current, sea state - Focus on estimating the frequency and consequences of oil spills from tankers limits any other use in its present form - Input by marine experts only (questionnaires) Available in English as a consulting service from Det Norske Veritas

Table 2. Risk Model Feasibility (continued) Risk Model Usability Complexity Validity Stakeholder Availability Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating (Figure 3) - Relative risk analysis method uses simple ranking process - Output report includes a graphical risk profile matrix Operational Research and Criteria Analysis (ORCA) (Figure 4) - Relative and absolute risk methods - Online web software - Multiple choice format and report output - Data sources provided, but requires external data research - Based on port risk analysis software developed for use by mariner workgroups for a survey and marine traffic risk analysis of Victoria Harbour - Requires basic skills in chart use and navigation to research data C - The software is based on an Excel spreadsheet and MapInfo map. Both are used for data output and display - Requires a user to provide frequency, risk rating scales - Includes data covering 104 waterways in Canada, but a user cannot define new waterways D - The software uses an intuitive tabular survey format - Variables with risk rating scales include: visibility, wind, wave height, ice and freezing spray, weather, currents, depth, tide range, proximity to dangers, unmarked dangers, traffic, proximity to refuge, proximity to assistance, quality of positioning, radio or MCTS coverage, casualty rate, casualty type, human impact, environmental impact - Complex and data costly to maintain - A user must provide weighting factors - Data includes: traffic petroleum, chemical and other cargos, visibility, wind, wave height, ice, icebergs, harbour presence, waterway type, turns and hazards, accident and search and rescue history - The risk ranking approach is much less sophisticated than that of the Design Minimum de Sécurité (DMS) - Very transparent. Users can see immediate results from interaction - Risk factor weightings could be adjusted if warranted from stakeholder input - Historic data included in the model is valid but only for the regions provided in the tool - Stakeholders could access and use this software online to understand an existing risk analysis, or to conduct their own risk analysis - Stakeholder examine results but do not provide model input - Available in English from GeoInfo Solutions Ltd. in Sidney, BC (License fee) - Available in English and French from Consulting & Audit Canada, Ottawa, ON (Maintenance via consulting contract fee) 21

Table 2. Risk Model Feasibility (continued) Risk Model Usability Complexity Validity Stakeholder Availability Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) - Marine Aids Preliminary Threat Rating (Figure 5) - Relative risk method C-RISK (Figure 6) - Relative risk analysis method for ports and harbours - risk factors are recorded, but not linked to the risk matrix report output - Primary method used by CCG to assess waterway risk based upon the level of service of navigation aids - Approach uses paper forms and requires external data research - Understood by technicians in the Coast Guard - Requires moderate skills in chart use and sophisticated knowledge of navigation aids to research data - Labour intensive and because it is paper-based, it is non-interactive CD - Microsoft Access software - Multiple choice format and report output - No data sources provided - Risk matrix is not based upon risk factors D - Variables with risk rating scales include: wind, wave height, current, visibility, channel width and orientation, depth, under keel clearance, distance from hazard, distance to other vessels, vessel size and type - The software uses multiple forms for data input - Accident categories are user configurable - Risk factor (cause) variables must also be configured; however, the risk matrix output is not related to risk factors - Risk matrix output is solely the result of accident frequency and consequence magnitude - Method promoted by International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) - Threat rating assignment is highly subjective - The approach is classic risk management where risk=probability x impact - The approach is not usable to compare waterway risk because the assessment of likelihood is subjective - There is no model linking risk factors to the likelihood of an accident - Stakeholders such as pilots and shipowners in the St. Lawrence region are at loggerheads over the assessment of risk in this waterway based on this method - Navigation aid assessment method too complex for stakeholders to follow - Stakeholders cannot view the risk analysis because the analysis resides in a MS Access database - Available in English and French from Canadian Coast Guard, Marine Navigation Services, Ottawa, ON (public property) - Available in English from BMT Reliability Consultants Limited, Fareham, U.K. (License fee) 22

Figure 4. Operational Research and Criteria Analysis Consulting & Audit Canada Figure 5. Marine Aids Preliminary Threat Rating Canadian Coast Guard

Figure 6. C-RISK BMT Reliability Consultants Limited 24

5.0 Recommendations 5.1 Recommended criteria for defining sheltered waters It is feasible that data for the following waterway risk factors be used by ship safety inspectors use for identifying specific areas as sheltered or not sheltered: currents minimum depth of water proximity to assistance proximity to navigation hazards proximity to place of refuge tidal range VHF coverage weather, wind, visibility and wave height Criteria for defining sheltered waters could be as simple as waterways experiencing waveheights up to one metre, where the fetch is six nautical miles or less, or waterways within two nautical miles of land. However, consultation has shown there are other factors to be considered when choosing appropriate criteria including: The definition and designation of sheltered waters requires the input of local or regional knowledge, and Sheltered waters is dependent upon vessel type and the sea and weather conditions at a particular time. Recommended criteria for each waterway risk factor are shown in Table 3. However, these criteria should be subject to further scrutiny by stakeholders and modification should be considered as appropriate. Waterway risk factor visibility wind wave height weather currents minimum depth of water tidal range proximity to navigation hazards proximity to place of refuge proximity to assistance VHF coverage Table 3. Possible criteria for defining sheltered water Criteria or threshold defining non-sheltered water 1 NM or less, 20% of the time or more (worst month) 20 kts or more, 30% of the time or more (worst month) 1 m or more, 20% of the time or more (worst month) Good shipping weather less than 70% of the time (worst month) Maximum current more than 5 kts Minimum underkeel clearance less than 2 m More than 4 m Less than 0.5 NM More than 1 NM More than 1 hour 20 NM or more to a VHF station 25

5.2 Recommended method or guidelines The method or guidelines inspectors will use for identifying specific areas as sheltered or not sheltered must consider the risk factors in the waterway. Most approaches to marine risk analysis focus on accident probability and consequence severity based upon the historical accident record. More often than not, that approach does not quantify risk factors. The method must use appropriate technology. Ship safety inspectors should not be expected to use the sophisticated analytical tools used by marine consulting firms this would be too time-consuming for waterway classification across Canada. The appropriate methodology must promote consistent application of voyage limit across Canada and ease the burden of interpretation on Transport Canada inspectors. Inspectors and stakeholders must be able to understand and have hands-on access to the waterway risk analysis method or tool. An appropriate risk-based method should be transparent to stakeholders not a black box containing complex algorithms. Consultation has recommended the following factors to be considered when choosing an appropriate waterway risk analysis method: The approach and methodology for waterway classification should be risk-based, The approach should include consultation with stakeholders, and The risk-based approach should be usable by both inspectors and stakeholders so that local knowledge and stakeholder input can be considered. For these reasons, it is recommended that further consideration be given to the Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating by GeoInfo Solutions (Figure 7). It is recommended that this risk tool be given a hands-on evaluation by inspectors and stakeholders to assess its acceptability and to recommend possible changes to thresholds defining sheltered waters for each waterway risk factor. The proposed cost to provide unlimited access to the software, for government and public stakeholders, for one year is $20,000 (hosted by GeoInfo Solutions Ltd.). During this time, Marine Safety could receive feedback and recommendations that could be used to modify the tool in future work. The online web application uses the combination of risk factors and impact assessment to graphically illustrate threat levels. Ideally, a waterway assessed as sheltered waters should be when all threats are in the white area and only a few in the yellow area of the threat matrix. The example shown in Figure 7 illustrates a waterway that might be classified as Near Coastal 2 since most threats occur at or below this threshold. 26

Figure 7. Waterway Preliminary Threat Rating Threat Matrix 27