1 / 35

Briefing at: Consequence Analysis Workshop October 30, 2012

Briefing at: Consequence Analysis Workshop October 30, 2012. What is a Risk Assessment? Project Background Work Plan Vessel Traffic Study Results Outreach Efforts Questions?. What is a Risk Assessment? . What can go wrong?. What is a Risk Assessment? . How likely is it?.

geona
Download Presentation

Briefing at: Consequence Analysis Workshop October 30, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Briefing at: Consequence Analysis Workshop October 30, 2012

  2. What is a Risk Assessment? • Project Background • Work Plan • Vessel Traffic Study Results • Outreach Efforts • Questions?

  3. What is a Risk Assessment? • What can go wrong?

  4. What is a Risk Assessment? • How likely is it?

  5. What is a Risk Assessment? • What are the impacts?

  6. What is a Risk Assessment? • Can the risk be reduced or the impact mitigated?

  7. Project Background • 1999 Safety of Navigation Forum – Homer • 2000 Ports and Waterway Safety Assessment • 2006 Sea Bulk Pride Grounding • 2006 Cook Inlet Vessel Traffic Study • 2007 Navigational Safety Forum – Anchorage • 2008 Risk of Vessel Accidents and Spills • 2009 Aleutian Island Risk Assessment

  8. Project Background 2007 Navigational Forum – Consensus Points • Cook Inlet RCAC should move forward with a risk assessment, • Engaging in the political process will be necessary to obtain funding, and • Public participation and outreach will be critical to the success of the risk assessment.

  9. Project Background National Academy of Sciences Transportation Research Board Special Report 293

  10. Work Plan • Limits and Bounds • Organization and Management Structure • Project Steps/Tasks • Timeline • Deliverables

  11. Limits and Bounds Substances • Oil • Cargo, Crude Oil or Refined Product • Fuel, Bunkers

  12. Limits and Bounds Vessel Types • Containerships • Bulk carriers • Gas carriers • Car carriers • Cruise ships and Ferries • Crude oil tankers • Product tankers • Tank barges and tugs • Cargo barges and tugs • Chemical carriers • Tugs • Offshore Supply Vessels • Mobile Drill Rigs • Government Vessels

  13. Limits and Bounds Accident Types • Collisions • Allisions • Powered Groundings • Drift Groundings • Foundering • Structural Failures • Mooring Failures • Fires

  14. Limits and Bounds Geographic Region

  15. Organization Management Team • Mike Munger, CIRCAC • Steve Russell, ADEC • LT. Kion Evans, USCG • Burt Lahn, USCG Project Managers • Nuka Research and Planning Group, LLC.

  16. Organization Advisory Panel • Fisheries • Local Government • Mariner, Pilot • Mariner, Salvor • Mariner, Containerships • Mariner, Tug and Barge • Mariner, Tank Ship • Mariner, General • Non-Governmental Org. • Resource Manager • Subsistence User

  17. Tasks • Project Communications • Facilitate and Support Manage Team and Advisory Panel • Vessel Traffic Study • Baseline Accident and Spill Study • Consequence Analysis Workshop

  18. Tasks • Identify Risk Reduction Options • Evaluate Risk Reduction Options • Prioritize Risk Reduction Options and Prepare a Final Report

  19. Timeline

  20. Deliverables • Vessel Traffic Study (Completed) • Spill and Causality Study (Completed) • Consequence Workshop Report (Fall 2012) • Risk Reduction Recommendations • Final Report

  21. Vessel Traffic Study Objectives • Characterize Vessel Traffic Utilizing Cook Inlet in 2010 Base Year (≥ 300 Gross Tons), • Predict Vessel Traffic Until 2019

  22. Vessel Traffic Study Findings • 480 ship port calls • 80% of the calls were made by 15 ships • 218 million gallons of persistent oil and 9 million gallons of non-persistent oil were moved on 83 tank ship voyages to or from the Nikiski and Drift River terminals

  23. Vessel Traffic Study Findings • 36% of all persistent oil moved was fuel oil on dry cargo ships calling at Anchorage • 102 oil barge transits moved 366 million gallons of nonpersistent oil; the greatest amount of oil moved by a single vessel type

  24. Vessel Traffic Study • AMHS ferries 23% • Horizon Lines container ships 22% • TOTE Ro-Ro cargo ships 22% • Crude oil tank ships 15.5% • Refined product tank ships 4% • Bulk carriers 4% • Gas carriers 2.5% • Cruise ships 3% • Fish industry 1%

  25. 45 450 million gallons of persistent oil were move in 2010

  26. 566 million gallons of non-persistent oil was moved in 2010

  27. Spill & Causality Study Objectives Studied Historical Incidents and Vessel Traffic to Define: • Baseline (2010-2014) and; • Projected (2015- 2020) annual spill rate Scenario Development

  28. Spill Rates • Vessel Types • Tank Ships • Tank Barges • Non-Tank/Non-workboat vessels (Cargo, Cruise ship) • Highest forecasted spill rate of 1.3 per year • Workboats (OSV, Towboat/Tugboat) • Highest baseline spill rate of 0.96 per year • Sum of the four vessel types is 3.9 spills per year

  29. Scenarios • Defined for 2,112 unique combinations of vessel types and spill factor subcategories. • Majority of scenarios have low to very low relative risk level. • Tank ships have lowest baseline spill rate, but have the most risk from an oil spill.

  30. Scenarios for Workshop • Total of 6 scenarios • 2 Upper Cook Inlet: Knik Shoal & Port of Anchorage • 2 Mid Cook Inlet: Drift River & Nikiski • 2 Lower Cook Inlet: Barren Islands & Port of Homer

  31. Outreach Efforts • Email Contacts • Advisory Panel Solicitation • Public Meetings • Website

  32. www.cookinletriskassessment.com

  33. Questions?

More Related