Introduction - Stour Sailing Club · Web viewMussel Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy...

Report No: 15UK1098Commercial-in-Confidence

Issue No: Draft AStour Mussel Farm NRA

Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson Wright

Stour Mussel Farm Navigation Risk Assessment

Report Number:15UK1098

Issue:01

Date:28 September 2015

MARINE AND RISK CONSULTANTS LTD


Stour Mussel Farm Navigation Risk Assessment

Prepared for:


62 Burnham Road

Leigh-on-Sea

Essex

SS9 2JS

Author(s):

James Hannon

Checked By:

Dr Ed Rogers

Date

Release

Prepared

Authorised

Notes

28/09/2015

Issue 01

JH

ER

Issue to client

Marine and Risk Consultants Ltd

Marico Marine

Bramshaw

Lyndhurst

SO43 7JB

Hampshire

United Kingdom

Tel. + 44 (0) 2380 811133

28 September 2015

Executive Summary

Marine and Risk Consultants Ltd (Marico Marine) have been appointed by Wash Mussels/Parkinson Wright Solicitors to Conduct a Navigational Risk Assessment (NRA) in relation to the River Stour Mussel Farm Project. The purpose of the NRA is to provide reassurance to the local stakeholders and Statutory Harbour Authority that the navigational risk has been appropriately assessed, and where necessary mitigation measures are provided to ensure risk is not increased.

A proposal has made by Wash Mussels Ltd for the location of 5 sub tidal mussel farms at predetermined points along the River Stour. The river users enjoy a clutter free environment and although there is a degree of small commercial traffic there is a good history of vessel types coexisting on the river with little issue.

Concerns raised by river users highlight some navigation hazards that may pose a particular issue to them as a direct result of the addition of the farms and the associated vessel operations. This report forms an independent assessment of navigation impact and considers the impact that this operation will have of all river users including the Harbour Authority.

Two separate NRAs were undertaken, the first assessing the current navigational situation (pre mussel farm) and the second being the navigational situation with the addition of the farms and associated operations (post mussel farm).

The results of the NRA indicate that although there is a slight change of profile for craft and users of the river as a result of the introduction of the mussel farms, the overall navigational risk remains low with any increased risk to navigational safety also being low The NRA indicates that no additional risk controls are necessary as the risks are low. Wash Mussels Ltd are committed to going beyond the minimum control requirements with a view to alleviate any stakeholders concerns where possible and to also ensure that the existing good record of safety is preserved. The following control measures should be considered to ensure this:

An agreement between the farm operator and the SHA (MoU) for clear communications to river users;

Local recreational stakeholder engagement to ensure all aspects of the project are communicated effectively to recreational users;

Restricting operations to daylight and less busy periods, such as weekdays;

Crab pots (if used) should be placed in accordance with SHA policies and should be clearly marked; and

Any further mitigation measures appropriate to improving the safety of navigation during harvesting operation.

Contents

Executive Summaryii

Contentsiv

Abbreviationsvii

1Introduction1

1.1Draft Working Plan for Stour Mussel Proposal2

2Navigation on the Stour4

2.1River Users4

2.2Aids to Navigation4

2.3Current Impact on Navigation4

2.3.1Commercial Vessel Tracks and Movements on the Stour5

2.3.2All Vessel Tracks and Movements on the Stour9

2.4Local Regulations11

2.4.1General Directions for Navigation12

2.4.2Reporting12

2.5Harbour Patrols12

2.6Vessel Traffic Services13

2.6.1Harwich VTS Level of Service13

2.7Pilotage13

2.8Notice to Mariners13

2.9Anchorages and Moorings14

2.9.1Small Craft Moorings14

2.9.2Shotley Marina15

2.10Tidal and Prevailing Conditions16

2.10.1Prevailing Wind Conditions16

3Consultation with Stakeholders17

3.1Commercial Vessel Stakeholder Meeting17

3.2Recreational Vessel Stakehodler Meeting19

4Assessment of risks Navigation Risk Assessment Methodology21

4.1Methodology21

4.2Hazard Categories23

4.3Risk Matrix Criteria23

4.3.1Frequency23

4.3.1Consequence24

4.4Risk Treatment Criteria25

5Risk Assessment Results27

5.1Risk Assessment Summary - Combined27

5.2Risk Assessment Current Situation28

5.3Risk Assessment with Mussel Farm Operation30

5.4Additional Control measures30

6Conclusions32

7Recommendations33

Figures

Figure 1: Proposed Mussel Farm Locations.1

Figure 2: River Stour (Jacques Bay) viewed from Wrabness (looking west).6

Figure 3: River Stour viewed from Wrabness Beach (looking east).6

Figure 4: Site 1 Inbound/Outbound Transits.7


Figure 6: Site 3 & 4 Inbound/Outbound Transits.8


Figure 8: Site 1 Inbound/Outbound Transits (all Vessels).10


Figure 10: Site 3 & 4 Inbound/Outbound Transits (all Vessels).11


Figure 12: River Stour Chartlet (HHA publication).13

Figure 13: Top Left: Bathside Bay small craft moorings, Top Right: Shotley small craft moorings, Bottom Left: Holbrook small craft moorings, Bottom Right: Manningtree small craft moorings.16

Figure 14: Wrabness small craft moorings.17

Figure 15: MARICO hazard identification and risk assessment process.23

Figure 16: Frequency/Consequence Chart.24

Tables

Table 1: Mussel Farm Operations.3

Table 2: River Stour Navigation Marks (East to West).5

Table 3: Type of commercial vessels used for main channel track analysis.7

Table 4: River Stour Small Craft Moorings.16

Table 5: Stour Tidal Range.17

Table 6: Initial Hazard Identification Matrix.25

Table 7: Hazard Frequency Ranges.26

Table 8: Consequence Categories (Costs in ).27

Table 9: Risk Matrix.28

Table 10: Top ten ranked hazards for both risk assessments combined.29

Table 11: Ranked Hazard List Current Situation.31

Table 12: Ranked Hazard List with the mussel farm in operation.35

annexes

Annex ADirection of Tidal StreamsA-1

Annex BRisk Assessment provided by Phillip Barnes (Commodore Stour Sailing Club) and Paul Rodhouse (RHYC)B-1

Annex CHazard Logs for the Current Navigational SituationC-1

Annex DHazard Logs for the for the Navigational Situation with the Addition of the Mussel Farms and OperationsD-1

Annex EOrganisation ReportE-1

Annex FRanked Hazard Lists for the Current Navigational SituationF-1

Annex GRanked Hazard Lists for the Navigational Situation with the Addition of the Mussel Farms and OperationsG-1

Abbreviations

Abbreviation

Detail

AIS

Automatic Identification System

ALARP

As Low as Reasonably Practicable

CCTV

Closed Circuit Television

CHA

Competent Harbour Authority

D&B

Design and Build

HW

High Water

ICW

In Collision With

IMO

International Maritime Organisation

ITT

Invitation to Tender

Kt

Knot (unit of speed equal to nautical mile per hour, approximately 1.15 mph)

LW

Low Water

M

Metre

Marico Marine

Marine and Risk Consultants Ltd

MCA

Maritime and Coast Guard Agency

ML

Most Likely

NAABSA

Not Always Afloat But Safe Aground

Nm

Nautical Mile

NRA

Navigation Risk Assessment

PEC

Pilotage Exemption Certificate

PWC

Personal Water Craft

RIB

Ridged Inflatable Boat

SHA

Statutory Harbour Authority

SMS

Safety Management System

STCW

Standards of Training Certification and Watchkeeping

VHF

Very High Frequency (radio communication)

VTS

Vessel Traffic Service

WC

Worst Credible



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson Wrightvii

Introduction

Wash Mussels Limited has made an application to the Secretary of State in accordance with section 1 of the Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967 for an order conferring the right of several fishery under section 1 of the Act. The Secretary of State has prepared a draft Order and served a copy of it on the applicant in accordance with paragraph 1 of schedule 1 to the Act. There are five proposed locations for the mussel farms located within the River Stour (see Figure 1 for locations).

Figure 1: Proposed Mussel Farm Locations.

The River Stour commences at Harwich and stretches its way westward forming the boundary between Essex and Suffolk. The river has plenty of areas for anchoring, has a boatyard at Mistley where there are also mud moorings, commercial quays and a small public quay that dries at low water. Coasters operate from the commercial quays using the buoyed main channel to navigate, this channel narrows and shoals to almost drying as it approaches Mistley.

Stakeholders have expressed concern regarding the safety of navigation for the river users as a result of the location of the proposed mussel farms and the related operations including the presence of the additional vessels used to manage and harvest the mussels. The requirement for Wash Mussels Limited to undertake a Navigation Risk Assessment (NRA) is to provide a comprehensive study to ensure stakeholders that where necessary adequate risk mitigation measures are in place to allow for the continuous safety of craft navigating in the River Stour.

The navigational risk assessment process was split into the following phases:

1. Determination of the current navigational state of the River Stour. (i.e. nature of the river, navigational channel, types of user and vessel, existing legislation/procedures, etc.);

2. Understanding of proposed mussel farm operation for the 5 proposed sites on the River Stour;

3. Consultation with local stakeholders and site visit to better understand local issues;

4. Hazard Identification and Categorisation;

5. Assessment of risk;

6. Determination, where necessary of additional mitigation measures;

7. Conclusions; and

8. Recommendations.

Draft Working Plan for Stour Mussel Proposal

Wash Mussels Limited have indicated that the time spent working with vessels on the farms will be kept to within the working week, Monday to Friday and during the hours of daylight. Operations will not be undertaken on weekends or during bank holidays when leisure activities are at their peak. Activities that require vessel operations for longer durations are mostly conducted during off peak leisure seasons, such as Spring and Autumn. Operations (if required) in the summer are very minimal.

Table 1 outlines the operational programme of the project over the trial period of 5 years.

Table 1: Mussel Farm Operations.

Year

Season

Operation

Duration

1

Autumn

Clear 1 hectare square in each of the five sites (if seed mussel quantity is available)

2 days

2

Spring

If required lay crab pots (2 lines per 1 ha square)

1-2 days

Remove crab pots

0.5 day

2

Summer

Run starfish mop of hectare squares affected if required

0.5 day

2

Autumn

Clear a second 1 hectare square in each of the five sites (if seed mussel quantity is available)

2 days

3

Spring

Lay crab pots if required (2 lines per 1 hectare square)

1-2 days

Remove pots

0.5 days

3

Summer

Run starfish mop of hectare squares affected

0.5 day

3

Autumn

Harvest by dredge Year 1 sown mussels from 5 x 1 hectare squares

4 days

Clear 5 x 1 ha squares

2 days

Relay seed mussel in 5 x 1 hectare squares

1 day

4

Spring

Lay crab pots if required (2 lines per 1 hectare square)

1-2 days

Remove pots

0.5 days

4

Summer

Run starfish mop of hectare squares affected if required

0.5 days

4

Autumn


4 days

Clear 5 x 1 hectare squares

2 days

Relay seed mussel in 5 x 1 hectare squares

1 day

5

Spring/

Autumn


Harvest by dredge Year 4 sown mussels from 5 x 1 hectare square (if order not renewed).

4 days

4 days

5

Autumn

Clear perhaps 5 x 1 hectare squares

(only if order renewed)

2 days

2-5

20 monitoring visits each year using grab and sampling for local authority environmental health

0.5 day

Navigation on the Stour

The navigable channel commences (see Figure 1) at its widest point wide (700m) off Harwich International Port and narrows as it heads west to Mistley where it all but dries out at low water. The channel is well marked with lit buoys and beacons and there are a number of small craft moorings north and south of the channel. Harwich International Port is located on the southern side of the entrance of the River Stour. The river in this area is at its busiest with relatively high amounts of commercial traffic using Felixstowe and Harwich International Port.

The area is covered by Admiralty Charts 1594 (River Stour to Erwarton Ness to Manningtree) and 1491 (Harwich and Felixstowe).

River Users

The main current River Stour users can be spilt into the following categories:

Coasters/commercial vessels using Mistley;

Large ferries and cruise ships (Harwich International Port);

Dredgers; and

Recreational craft/charter fishing boats.

Aids to Navigation

The Local Lighthouse Authority for the River Stour is Harwich Haven Authority (HHA) who is responsible for correct maintenance and provision of Aids to Navigation (AtoN). The River Stour main channel is clearly marked by navigational marks (see Table 2).

Current Impact on Navigation

The principal navigational features that have an impact on users of the River Stour are as follows:

Coaster/general cargo berthing operations at Mistley;

Dredger operations in sediment placement areas;

Coasters navigating the main channel to and from Mistley;

Ferry and cruise ship movements at Harwich International Port;

Large ship mooring buoys on the southern edge of the main channel at Copperas Bay;

Use of recreational craft;

Regular use of the river for sailing events and races;

Fishing charter vessels;

Boatyard (Mistley Marine) with mud moorings;

Public quay at Mistley;

Large vessel anchorage north of Harwich International Port;

Explosive anchorage;

Sailing and yacht clubs; and

Shotley Marina and associated traffic.

Name

Type

Light Characteristics

Parkeston

Lateral Buoy (Starboard)

Fl(3) G 10s

Harwich International Port

North Cardinal

Q

Ramsey


LFl G 10s

Erwarton

South Cardinal

Q(6) + FLl 15s

No 1


QG

Holbrook

South Cardinal

VQ(6)+LFl 10s

No 2

North Cardinal

Q

River Stour Lee


QG

No 4

Lateral Buoy (Port)

QR

No 5


Fl G 5s

No 6

Lateral Beacon (Port)

Fl(2) R 5s

No 7


QG

No 8

Lateral Buoy (Port)

QR

No 10

Lateral Buoy (Port)

Fl R 5s

No 9


Fl G 5s

No 11


QG

No 12

North Cardinal

Q

No 13


Fl G 5s

No 15


Fl(2) G 5s

Baltic Wharf

Jetty Marker

FR

Table 2: River Stour Navigation Marks (East to West).

Commercial Vessel Tracks and Movements on the Stour

Commercial vessel movements for vessels using the main channel to Mistley were studied, see Figure 4 to Figure 7. Using Automatic Identification System data, the tracks of three coaster sized vessels were plotted and their tracks logged to provide details of the passage through the river for their arrival and departure to/from Mistley. The data indicates that as expected the vessels navigate using the main channel and at no time do they enter any of the areas marked out as proposed sites of the mussel farms.

The details of the three coaster sized vessels used are in Table 3 and are typical of the vessel types that use T W Logistics Ltd (TWL) at Mistley.

Figure 2: River Stour (Jacques Bay) viewed from Wrabness (looking west).

Figure 3: River Stour viewed from Wrabness Beach (looking east).

Table 3: Type of commercial vessels used for main channel track analysis.

Name

Type

Length Overall

EEMS SPACE

General Cargo

87.2m

SEA RUBY

General Cargo

77.8m

KORIANGI

General Cargo

81m

Figure 4: Site 1 Inbound/Outbound Transits.


Figure 6: Site 3 & 4 Inbound/Outbound Transits.


All Vessel Tracks and Movements on the Stour

In addition to the analysis of the track data for commercial traffic using the main channel to Mistley, an analysis was also undertaken of all vessels using the River Stour and Harwich International Port. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 8 to Figure 11.

This data indicates that very little traffic enters the proposed site (Part 1) with all traffic using Harwich International Port navigating to the south of the area and not entering the site.

The data does show tracks passing through the areas, however, these are smaller shallow draft craft and the frequency and volume would suggest that the mussel operations would not pose a significant issue with regards to navigation.

The data also shows that the majority of vessels navigate in or near the main channel and very seldom enter any of the proposed sites.

Figure 8: Site 1 Inbound/Outbound Transits (all Vessels).


Figure 10: Site 3 & 4 Inbound/Outbound Transits (all Vessels).


Local Regulations

HHA has statutory powers to regulate commercial and leisure vessels within the HHA Area of Jurisdiction which includes the River Stour (see Figure 12), and is responsible for the navigational safety and traffic regulation of all vessels bound to and from the Haven Ports of Felixstowe, Harwich International, Harwich Navyard, Ipswich, and Mistley. All vessels arriving at or sailing from the Haven Ports, or on passage through the Harwich Seaward Area, must report to Harwich Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) and comply with VTS Rules. The Reporting Procedures and VTS Rules are set in the General Directions for Navigation and published in the Admiralty List of Radio Signals.

Figure 12: River Stour Chartlet (HHA publication).[footnoteRef:1] [1: Figure 12 source HAA website. ]

General Directions for Navigation

In March 2011 Harwich Haven Authority (HHA) exercised its powers under Section 32 of the Harwich Harbour Act 1974 and updated the General Directions for Navigation.

The General Directions are to be construed in conjunction with the HHA Byelaws, Pilotage Directions and HHA Local Notices to Mariners. It is the duty of the Master of a vessel to which a General Direction applies to comply with that Direction.

Reporting

All vessels of more than 50 GT entering or leaving the Harwich VTS area must report to Harwich VTS when passing the appropriate reporting points indicated on Admiralty charts.

Harbour Patrols

The HHA maintains a regular patrol of the Haven throughout the year. In addition, during the summer months weekends, between the hours of 0800 to 1800, these patrols are maintained to provide assistance and advice to yachtsmen, and to ensure that the main channel is kept clear for the transit of commercial shipping. The weekend Harbour patrol launch maintains a listening watch on VHF Channel 71.

Vessel Traffic Services

Harwich VTS is operated from Harwich VTS Operations Centre on a continuous 24-hour basis to provide a safe and efficient regime for vessel traffic, and protection for the environment. The river and its approaches are continuously monitored by trained personnel using Radar, VHF and CCTV to build a comprehensive traffic image of the area. Harwich Operations Centre also provides the co-ordination and communications centre for the Haven Ports Pilotage Service. Harwich VTS provides Traffic Organisation and Navigational Assistance Services with the authority of the Harbour Master. Failure, without good cause, to obey an instruction given by Harwich VTS with the purpose of preserving marine safety, may constitute an offence.

Harwich VTS Level of Service

Harwich VTS is a UK designated port VTS and provides the following levels of service:

Traffic Organisation Service to prevent the development of dangerous maritime traffic situations, and to provide for the safe and efficient movement of vessel traffic within the Authoritys area; and

Navigational Assistance provided on request or when deemed necessary by Harwich VTS to assist on-board navigational decision making, and to monitor its effects. It does not relieve the Master of his responsibility for the safe navigation of the vessel.

Pilotage

HHA is a Competent Harbour Authority (CHA) within the meaning of the Pilotage Act 1987, and under Section 7 of the Act, has powers to issue Pilotage Directions to the Masters of vessels in the Haven Ports Pilotage Area.

HHA manage and regulate the requirements for the provision of pilots within the River Stour, which fall into the CHA area. Pilot Exemption Certificates (PEC) are issued for master and mates operating within the CHA upon completion of satisfactory assessment and examination. All commercial vessels using the Stour currently take a pilot, there are no PEC holders using the River.

Notice to Mariners

HAA issues Notices to Mariners (NtMs) to provide essential, up-to-date information and advice to those navigating within the HHA area of jurisdiction. Subjects include (but are not limited to) notification of works and events which may impact on navigation and notification of new and updated rules and regulations for navigation.

Anchorages and Moorings

The River Stour is tidal and moorings do dry out at low water. Most moorings are along the edge of the channel and large craft are not permitted to moor in such a position where they may swing into, and block the channel.

On the Essex side of the river no moorings are permitted below the commercial quay at Mistley. On the Suffolk side of the river no moorings are permitted east of Bexford's factory.

Small craft are permitted to freely anchor on the river as long as they are clear of the main channel and moorings.

Small Craft Moorings

Small craft mooring areas in the River Stour are laid out in Table 4, and their locations are shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14.

Table 4: River Stour Small Craft Moorings.

Location

Type

Ownership

Notes

Bathside Bay

Mud

Swinging

10 x Trot (Harwich and Dovercourt Sailing Club)

Sealink

Harbours

Limited

The whole of Bathside Bay is scheduled for reclamation and development. Temporary moorings may be laid within the bay with the consent of the Harbour Master.

Shotley

Swinging

Mud

Shotley

Sailing

Club

These moorings may be used for commercial craft such as fishing parties or charter boats. Mooring numbers are limited.

Holbrook

Moorings

Mud

Private

Moorings numbers are limited.

Manningtree

Moorings

Mud

Stour

Sailing

Club

Wrabness

Moorings

Mud

Private

The mooring area is limited in size and working at full capacity.

Figure 13: Top Left: Bathside Bay small craft moorings, Top Right: Shotley small craft moorings, Bottom Left: Holbrook small craft moorings, Bottom Right: Manningtree small craft moorings.

Figure 14: Wrabness small craft moorings.

Shotley Marina

Shotley Marina is situated on the north side of the River Stour where it meets the River Orwell and comprises of 350 berths. The marina approach is via a marked maintained channel and a lock controlled entrance. Users of the marina tend to navigate east of the Stour and visiting vessels arrive from the Haven approach. Therefore, it is considered that the mussel farms, which lie to the west of the marina, are unlikely to impact on the traffic using the marina.

Tidal and Prevailing Conditions

Tidal flows within the River Stour are no greater than 1.3kts on a Spring Ebb and 1.2kts on a Spring Flood. The strongest streams are in the channel off Erwarton Ness. The direction of the streams run westerly on the flood and easterly on the ebb (see Annex A for plots).

The tide height and range is shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Stour Tidal Range.

Tide

Height

Range

Mean High Water Springs

4.1m

3.7m (Mean Spring Range)

Mean Low Water Springs

0.4m

Mean High Water Neaps

3.4m

22.3m (Mean Neap Range)

Mean Low Water Neaps

1.1m

Prevailing Wind Conditions

The prevailing winds come from between the south and the north-west, and the strongest winds nearly always blow from this range of directions. Spring time also tends to have the majority of winds from the north east.

Consultation with Stakeholders

Consultation meetings with river users and the SHA (HHA) were undertaken during the site visit on Wednesday 1st July 2015.

Commercial Vessel Stakeholder Meeting

The first of these meetings were with the HHA as the Statutory Harbour Authority for the river Stour and TWL Mistley as the main berth operator at Mistley.

The meeting was held at the HHA offices in Harwich, and the following were present at the meeting:

Capt. Neil Glendenning - Harwich Harbour Master;

Mr John Brien Harwich Harbour Authority;

Ms Isoldt Harris TWL (Mistley);

Mr James Hannon Marico Marine; and

Dr Edward Rodgers Marico Marine.

The meeting involved a discussion based around the intended operation of the proposed mussel farm sites and the type and size of vessel that would be used to harvest the mussels. The location of the sites were analysed as were the requirements for marking the sites. Capt. Glendenning stated that he would have concerns related to additional buoyage to be placed in the Stour and also stated that there was no apparent need to mark the sites with buoyage.

It was noted that the marking of the sites could introduce an additional 26 buoys to the river. There was also concern expressed regarding the location and marking of crab pots, however, HHA have powers within their byelaws to regulate the placing and marking of such pots. HHA have already written a response to the serval order outlining their opposition to the marking of the sites with buoys and made reference to the minimal approach taken in marking the channel in the Stour to maintain safe navigation. The Harbour Master was keen to keep the Stour uncluttered from additional buoyage.

The limitations on the freedom of navigation, mooring and anchoring were discussed. It was pointed out that the freedom of navigation and anchoring would not be affected, this was preserved by Section 7 of the Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967.

The liability of a master or pilot (including recreational craft crew), damaging the mussel beds due to their vessel running aground was discussed. It was pointed out that as a matter of law, they would not incur any liability for damage to the mussel beds resulting from accidental or emergency groundings and/or re-floating of a vessel.

It was noted that the current commercial traffic to and from Mistley remained within the main navigation channel and that these vessels took a mandatory pilot supplied by the CHA (HHA).

Capt. Glendenning pointed out that there was slight concern regarding the southwest extremities of site 3 and the northwest extremities of site 4 (Holbrook No. 2 area) extending south and north of the main channel buoy line respectively. There was concern that this would restrict sea room available in the main channel for larger vessels which were constrained by their draught and the harvesting vessels restricted in their ability to manoeuvre during times that the fisheries are active. He asked if the applicant would consider replotting the positon of these sites to take this into account.

The commercial anchorages in the area were seldom used and the most of the large traffic movements took place off of Harwich International Port in a deep water area south of site 1. It was noted that this area had the highest large commercial movements involving ferry, cruise ship and Trinity House service vessel traffic. This included large vessels turning for the berth. It was also noted that this area was monitored closely by VTS.

HHA operate dredgers for sediment replenishment and one of the dredging discharge tracks runs on a lines crossing site 1, site 3 and site 4. The implications of a dredger and mussel dredger operating in the same area was discussed with regards to COLREGS and give way vessel requirements, this is taken into account in the NRA. There was a discussion regarding the size of site one possibly restricting sea room for recreational vessel passing north of turning vessels in the deep water pocket.

Capt. Glendenning asked for a consideration on reducing the site 1 area in order to clear the southern edges of the area out of the deeper part of northern edge of the main channel.

In addition to the concerns express by HAA, Isoldt Harris raised concerns regarding the possible navigational restrictions to the current vessels arriving and departing Mistley and whether it would impact on the use of larger vessels if TWLs business grew and future demand required the use of larger vessels. There was also concern regarding the reduction of speed for vessels navigating and possibility of delays for arrivals and departures.

The question was asked regarding whether future dredging activities (maintenance and capital), would be affected due to the placement of the mussel farms.

It was noted that with the exception of the extremities of site 3 and the northwest extremities of site 4, the impact to navigation would not increase. Both HHA and TWL were generally happy with the proposed operation:






Recreational Vessel Stakehodler Meeting

A further stakeholder meeting was undertaken at the Royal Harwich Yacht Club (RHYC) with representatives from the RYA, local yacht and sailing clubs, recreational fisherman and charter owners. The meeting was chaired by the Chairman of Harwich Area Sailing Association (HASA), Brenda Read.

Present at the meeting and sitting on the top table were the following:

Brenda Read, meeting chairman and Chairman of HASA;

Peter Scott Partner, Quality Solicitors Parkinson Wright;

James Hannon Marico Marine;

Dr Ed Rogers Marico Marine;

Graham Osbourne - Wash Mussels Ltd; and

Representatives for the local clubs and stakeholders present at the meeting were:

Chris Edwards RYA Regional Representative;

Tim Goodwin;

Derek Davis;

Graham Pugh;

Nigel Mower;

Peter Thomas;

Paul Rodhouse;

Phil Barns;

Graham Prior;

John Cooledge;

Peter Holborn;

David Card; and

Chris Brown.

The meeting was called by Marico to discuss navigational concerns. Although some navigational concerns were expressed, the meeting mostly consisted of issues relating to the consultation process and DEFRA consultation.

A list of hazard (12 in total), complete with analysis had been complied by Phillip Barnes (Commodore Stour Sailing Club) and Paul Rodhouse (RHYC) and was handed out to all present. This document was discussed briefly. The risks highlighted in this document which includes grounding, collision, entanglement and drifting vessels have been categorised into the wider River Stour NRA.

The contents of this document are contained in Annex B.

Mr Edwards (RYA) expressed concern regarding the placement of mussel site marker buoys. James Hannon responded by advising that the HHA Harbour Master had strongly opposed to the marker buoys. Mr Peter Scott also advised that they had met with DEFRA and there was no requirement for surface marker buoys to be placed on any of the sites.

Assessment of risks Navigation Risk Assessment MethodologyMethodology

The NRA methodology, used for this assessment, has been specifically developed for navigational use in ports/harbours. It is fundamentally based on concepts of the Most Likely (ML) and Worst Credible (WC) scenarios that reflect the range of outcomes arising from a navigation hazard (see Figure 15).

Figure 15: MARICO hazard identification and risk assessment process.

The NRA process is based on the Formal Safety Assessment methodology as adopted by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and follows the requirements of the Port Marine Safety Code. The NRA used the proprietary Marico Marine Hazman II programme to undertake the risk assessment process.

IMO guidelines define a hazard as something with the potential to cause harm, loss or injury, the realisation of which results in an accident. The potential for a hazard to be realised can be combined with an estimate or known consequence of outcome. This combination is termed risk. Risk is therefore a measure of the frequency and consequence of a particular hazard and in order to compare risk levels a matrix is used.

At the low end of the scale, frequency is extremely remote, consequence insignificant and risk can be said to be negligible. At the high end, where hazards are defined as frequent and the consequence catastrophic, then risk is termed intolerable. Between the two is an area defined As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP). The IMO guidelines allow the selection of definitions of frequency and consequence to be made by the organisation carrying out the NRA. This is important, as it allows risk to be applied in a qualitative and comparative way. To identify high risk levels using a quantitative mathematical approach would require a large volume of casualty data, which is not generally available.

Figure 16: Frequency/Consequence Chart.

ALARP can be defined as Tolerable, if the reduction of the risk is impracticable, or if the cost of such reduction would obviously be highly disproportionate to the improvement. It can also be defined as Tolerable, if the cost of reducing the risk is greater than any improvement gained. This is showed pictorially in Figure 16.

Hazard Categories

In order to ensure that all hazards associated with the Project were identified (and allocated a Hazard Reference number), a matrix of generic hazards was used, which focused on the risk exposure (see Table 6).

Table 6: Initial Hazard Identification Matrix.

Hazard Ref.

Hazard Category

Hazard Title

1

Collision

HHA Dredger in collision with Recreational Craft

2

Collision

HHA Dredger in collision with Coaster

3

Collision

HHA Dredger in collision with a Ferry/Cruise Ship

4

Collision

Recreational Craft in collision Recreational Craft

5

Collision

Recreational Craft in collision with Coaster

6

Collision

Recreational Craft in collision with Ferry/Cruise Ship

7

Collision

Coaster in collision with Coaster

8

Collision

Coaster in collision with Ferry/Cruise Ship

9

Collision

Mussel Dredger in collision with Recreational Craft

10

Collision

Mussel Dredger in collision with Coaster

11

Collision

Mussel Dredger in collision with a Ferry/Cruise Ship

12

Collision

Mussel Dredger in collision with a HHA Dredger

13

Grounding

Recreational Craft

14

Grounding

Coaster

15

Grounding

HHA Dredger

16

Grounding

Ferry/Cruise Ship

17

Grounding

Mussel Dredger

18

Navigational Contact

Recreational Craft in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

19


Coaster in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

20


Ferry/Cruise ship in Contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

21


HHA Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

22


Mussel Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

Risk Matrix CriteriaFrequency

In this study, each hazard was reviewed with respect to cause and effect, with frequency of occurrence derived for notional most likely and worst credible hazard events based on Table 7.

Table 7: Hazard Frequency Ranges.

Scale

Description

Definition

Operational Interpretation

F5

Frequent

An event occurring in the range once a week to once an operating year.

One or more times in 1 year.

F4

Likely

An event occurring in the range once a year to once every 10 operating years.

One or more times in 10 years

1 - 9 years.

F3

Possible

An event occurring in the range once every 10 operating years to once in 100 operating years.

One or more times in 100 years

10 99 years.

F2

Unlikely

An event occurring in the range less than once in 100 operating years.

One or more times in 1,000 years 100 999 years.

F1

Remote

Considered to occur less than once in 1,000 operating years (e.g. it may have occurred at a similar site, elsewhere in the world).

Less than once in 1,000 years

>1,000 years.

0. Consequence

Consequence (or impact of risk realisation) was assessed in four key categories:

People - Personal injury, fatality etc.;

Property - Port and third party;

Environment - Oil pollution etc.; and

Stakeholder/ Business - Reputation, financial loss, public perception, etc.

Consequence is assessed against most likely and worst credible outcomes. It should be noted that in terms of property, the risk assessment process by necessity considers that the loss of a large commercial vessel is of wider implication than the loss of a private leisure cruiser. This assessment criterion is not intended to undervalue damage suffered by the leisure user, whose personal loss may be very significant in relative terms, however, it is recognised that the loss of a commercial vessel often has a wider implication in terms of business and negative media exposure.

The rating applied is such that the consequences are of broadly equivalent value across the categories (see Table 8).

Table 8: Consequence Categories (Costs in )[footnoteRef:2]. [2: Tiered oil spill response levels were adopted by the International Maritime Organisation International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990.]

Risk Treatment Criteria

Risk scores are calculated for each hazard under the most likely and worst credible scenarios for each of the consequence criteria (people, property, environment and business) based on the scores in the hazard log, using a risk matrix (see Table 9). This generates eight individual risk scores per hazard which are documented in the Ranked Hazard List. The individual risk scores for each consequence category are then combined, using a proprietary algorithm in Hazman II, to derive an overall risk score. The overall baseline risk scores are used to create a ranked hazard list. All risk scores, whether individually related to a hazard consequence category, or overall combined for an individual hazard are scored on a scale of 0 (low risk) to 10 (high risk) (see Table 9 for more details).

Table 9: Risk Matrix.

MATRIX OUTCOME

Risk Definition

Action Taken

0 & 1

Negligible Risk

A level where operational safety is unaffected.

2 & 3

Low risk

A level where operational safety is assumed.

4 ,5 and 6

As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

A level defined by study at which risk control in place is reviewed. It should be kept under review in the ensuing Safety Management System.

7 & 8

Significant Risk

A level where existing risk control is automatically reviewed and suggestions made where additional risk control could be applied if appropriate. Significant risk can occur in the average case or in individual categories. New risk controls identified should be introduced in a timescale of two years.

9 & 10

High Risk

A level requiring immediate mitigation.

Risk Assessment Results

A complete review of all vessel traffic types and marine operations for the Stour was undertaken in order to identify a list of hazards. Each hazard was assessed using the method explained in Section 4.

Two assessments of risk were undertaken:

Risk Assessment for the current navigational situation; and

Risk Assesement for the navigational situation with the addition of the mussel farms and their operations.

The hazard logs for the current navigational situation are in Annex C, and the hazard logs for the navigational situation with the addition of the mussel farms and their operations are in Annex D.

Hazards are ranked in accordance to the level of overall risk.

Risk Assessment Summary - Combined

The top ten hazards of both the current navigational situation and the navigational situation with the mussel farms and their operations combined are shown in Table 10, the complete combined ranked hazards of both risk assessments are shown in Annex E.

Table 10: Top ten ranked hazards for both risk assessments combined.

Organisation Rank

Register

Rank

Hazard Ref

Hazard Title

Category

Inherent Risk

Residual Risk

1

Stour NRA (Current)

1

6


Collision

3.32

3.32

2

Stour NRA (With Mussel Farms)

1

8


Collision

3.32

3.32

3


2

7


Collision

3.3

3.3

4

Stour NRA (Current)

2

5


Collision

3.3

3.3

5

Stour NRA (Current)

3

4


Collision

2.74

2.74

6


3

6


Collision

2.74

2.74

7


5

16

Recreational Craft grounding

Grounding

2.65

2.65

8


4

20

Mussel Dredger in collision with HHA Dredger

Collision

2.65

2.65

9

Stour NRA (Current)

4

9


Grounding

2.65

2.65

10


6

17


Collision

2.57

2.57

Risk Assessment Current Situation

The top ten hazards for the current navigational situation are shown in Table 10. The complete ranked hazard list is shown in Annex F.

Table 11: Ranked Hazard List Current Situation.

Rank

Hazard Ref.

Hazard Title

Hazard Detail

Consequence Descriptions

Risk By Consequence Category

Risk Overall

ML

WC

Most Likely (ML)

Worst Credible (WC)

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

1

6


Recreational craft navigating in main channel whilst Ferry/Cruise Ship are moving or turning off Harwich International Port

Near miss/low speed glancing blow. Minor hull damage to recreational craft.

Heavy contact. Major hull damage to recreational craft. Sinking, loss of life.

0

2

0

0

3

6

5

6

3.32

2

5


Recreational craft navigating in main channel whilst coaster is navigating in main channel

Low speed contact, minor damage to recreational craft

Major damage to recreational craft, sinking, loss of life.

0

2

2

2

2

5

5

5

3.3

3

4


Leisure craft in contact with another.

Low speed glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull

Heavy contact, major hull damage, sinking. Loss of life.

0

0

0

0

2

6

6

6

2.74

4

9


Recreational craft out of position

Soft grounding, no damage, floats free on next HW

Hard grounding, hull damage, sinking, loss of life.

0

0

0

0

2

6

6

4

2.65

5

10

Coaster Grounding

Coaster/commercial vessel out of main channel

Soft grounding, refloats, no damage

Heavy grounding - minor hull damage.

0

0

0

2

0

0

5

3

2.49

6

2


Coasters transiting to Mistley using or passing in the main channel.

Low speed glancing blow. Minor damage.

Heavy contact, hull damage. Minor injury to crew member.

0

0

2

2

0

2

3

3

2.34

7

7



Low speed contact. no significant damage

Heavy contact - major hull damage, water ingress, minor injury

0

0

0

0

3

2

5

5

2.15

8

3


Contact with Ferry or Cruise Ship turning off Harwich Haven.

Low speed contact - minor hull damage.

Major hull damage - minor injury

0

0

0

0

0

3

5

3

1.95

9

1


Low speed glancing blow. Very minor damage.

Damage to hull, water ingress and possible sinking. Loss of life.

0

0

0

0

0

5

3

3

1.95

10

8


Coaster in contact with Ferry or Cruise Ship turning off Harwich Haven.

Low speed contact - minor hull damage

Heavy contact major hull damage, minor injury.

0

0

0

0

1

3

4

4

1.8

Risk Assessment with Mussel Farm Operation

This NRA considers both the most likely and the worst credible outcomes (set against likely frequency of the event happening in each case). This approach provides a more realistic and thorough assessment of risk, which reflects reality, in that relatively very few incidents result in the worst credible outcome. The assessment shows that introduction of the mussel farms slightly increased the number of hazards on the river. This is purely because of the presence of addition craft that would be used in relation to the mussel farm operation on the river. However the risk to navigation has not significantly increased and any additional risk was determined to be low.

The top ten hazards for the navigational situation with the mussel farm in operation are shown in Table 12. The complete ranked hazard list is shown in Annex G.

Additional Control measures

The NRA indicates that no additional risk controls are necessary as the risks are low. However, Wash Mussels Ltd are committed to going beyond the minimum control requirements with a view to alleviate any stakeholders concerns where possible. This should include, but not be limited to, the following control measures:






Table 12: Ranked Hazard List with the mussel farm in operation.

Rank

Hazard Ref.

Hazard Title

Hazard Detail



Risk Overall

ML

WC

Most Likely (ML)

Worst Credible (WC)

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

1

8


Recreational craft navigating in main channel whilst Ferry/Cruise Ship are moving or turning off Harwich International Port.



0

2

0

0

3

6

5

6

3.32

2

7


Recreational craft navigating in main channel.

Low speed contact, minor damage to recreational craft.


0

2

2

2

2

5

5

5

3.3

3

6



Low speed glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull.


0

0

0

0

2

6

6

6

2.74

4

20


Mussel Dredging and Sediment replenishment confliction. Sites 1, 2, 3 & 4.

Low speed contact, minor damage.

Heavy impact, major hull damage, sinking of mussel dredger.

0

0

0

0

2

6

6

4

2.65

5

16


Recreational craft out of position.

Soft grounding, no damage, floats free on next HW.


0

0

0

0

2

6

6

4

2.65

6

17


14 M Mussel Dredger in contact with Recreational Craft while engaged in operations.

Low speed collision, glancing blow. Minor damage.

Hard collision, major hull damage, sinking, loss of life.

0

0

0

0

2

5

5

6

2.57

7

13

Coaster Grounding

Coaster/commercial vessel out of main channel.

Soft grounding, re-floats, no damage.


0

0

0

2

0

0

5

3

2.49

8

19

Mussel Dredger in collision with Ferry/Cruise Ship

Mussel Dredger on transit or working southern edge of Site 1.

Low speed glancing blow, minor damage to mussel dredger.


0

0

0

0

3

5

5

5

2.34

9

18

Mussel Dredger in collision with Coaster

Mussel Dredger operating on main channel edge of mussel farm or on transit.

Glancing blow, minor damage.

Heavy contact, major hull damage, taking water, possible sinking of dredger.

0

0

0

0

3

5

5

5

2.34

10

4


Dredger operating on main channel edge of soil ground or on transit.



0

0

2

2

0

2

3

3

2.34

Conclusions

The five year mussel farm trail, once underway, is unlikely to generate a discernible increase in the navigational risk on the River Stour as:

The mussels lines are placed on the sea bed with no vertical risers or lines;

Maximum operational days associated with additional vessel movements within the trail period are less than 15 days per year, with 20 additional monitoring visits each year for local authority environmental health;

Fishing vessels engaged in farm operations are subject to MCA safety inspections;

Total usage of each site is expected to be less than 20% of the total licenced area;

The farms do not restrict navigation, they are not exclusion zones;

Wash Mussels Limited state that there is no intention to mark the sites with additional buoyage;

The area is monitored using VTS by HHA;

Large vessels using the river to transit to Mistley carry an authorised pilot with exceptional local knowledge;

The right to free navigation and anchoring is not affected;

Anticipated times that the mussel dredgers are expected to operate are at times when recreational usage is at a minimum;

HHA have powers within their byelaws (Clause 6) which regulate the marking and placement of crab pots;

The navigational channel is well marked;

The SHA and CHA is well managed by HHA;

Mussel dredger operations will adhere to COLREGs; and

There is no legal liability for vessels causing damage to mussel sites by running aground.

Recommendations

It is recommended that good communications are maintained providing information on the time, location of operation and vessel numbers involved in the mussel farm operations, are shared with all port users to assist with de-confliction of commercial vessel transits and recreational activities. A MoU between the SHA for the provision of this information may assist in ensuring that all operations are considered, communicated and de-conflicted. The SHA can then choose to communicate this to the port users as it sees fit.

The mussel farm operational activities should be restricted to times when recreational use is at its lowest, such as week days outside of the peak leisure/recreational season. Weekend and evening operations, especially at peak recreational times should only be undertaken after consultation with the HHA.

Wash Mussels Limited will need to provide clear information regarding the total numbers of vessel movements, transit frequency and the locations for cargo discharge in order to provide information to the SHA to assist with de-confliction of operations. This will assist in reducing the chances of unwanted interaction between dredgers and river uses, commercial and recreational vessels alike.

HHA have expressed concern regarding the positioning of sites 3 & 4. The southwest extremities of site 3 and the northwest extremities of site 4 (Holbrook No. 2 area) extended south and north of the main channel buoy line respectively. This would allow operations to be undertaken in close proximity and possibly restrict available sea room in the main channel for larger vessels which are constrained by their draft (COLREGS 28) and navigating within a narrow channel (COLREGS 9) and the harvesting vessels restricted in their ability to manoeuvre (COLREGS 3) or engaged in fishing operations (COLREGS 26) during times that the fisheries are active. The applicant may wish to consider replotting the positon of sites 3 & 4.

HHA undertake sediment replenishment that involves dredging discharge across site 1 and sites 3 & 4. The implications of a dredger and mussel dredger operating in the same area was discussed with regards to COLREGS and give way vessel requirements. An agreed procedure for this operation is advised to de-conflict operations drawing from the requirements of Rule 8 of the COLREGS.

Consideration should be given to reducing the site 1 area in order to clear the southern edges of the area out of the deeper part of northern edge of the main channel.



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson Wright27

Direction of Tidal Streams

HW -5.00

HW -3.00

HW -2.00

HW -1.00

HW

HW +1.00

HW +2.00

HW +3.00

HW +4.00

HW +5.00

HW +6.00



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson WrightA-4

Risk Assessment provided by Phillip Barnes (Commodore Stour Sailing Club) and Paul Rodhouse (RHYC)

Risk Assessment provided by Phillip Barnes (Commodore Stour Sailing Club) and Paul Rodhouse (RHYC).

Assessment of risk to yachts of River Stour mussel culture

Top Twelve risks Cruising and Sailing Vessels

1. Leisure craft becoming entangled with the risers of fixed and temporary markers.

2. Disabled Leisure craft drifting down into the harbour on the ebb tide.

3. Small leisure craft being displaced by mussel farming activities and moving into areas currently used by larger and faster leisure vessels.

4. Larger leisure vessels displaced into the deep water channel at Parkstone Quay by the displacement of smaller craft mentioned at 3 above.

5. Collision between Leisure and Fishery vessels in the work areas.

6. Fishery boats forced out of the Wrabness channel by ships going to and from Mistly.

7. Conflict between fishery vessels avoiding ships in the Wrabness channel by entering the shallow areas either side of the channel and leisure craft.

8. Conflict between fishery vessels and leisure craft upstream of Parkstone quay.

9. Disabled fishery vessels drifting down into the harbour on an ebb tide.

10. Leisure sailing craft having to get out of the way of a working dredger or other work boat.

11. Leisure sailing vessels being unable to make a reasonable angle on the wind as they approach the Wrabness Channel particularly when there is s strong East or West element to the wind.

12. Local lifeboat being off station attending to an entangled leisure vessel up river when an offshore emergency is called.

Impact Probability

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

11

3

9

4

6

10

5

8

6

12

7

2

7

1

8

9

5

10

4

3

Impact: low = cuts and bruises; high = multiple deaths or Financial Loss low = -10s; high = -Ms

Stour Mussel Bed Application

Safety Issues of concern Analysis of the Impact and probability

1. Leisure craft becoming entangled with the risers of fixed and temporary markers. If fixed area markers are used along with pot markers the probability becomes quite high and the impact could be serious with life at risk and emergency declared.

2. Disabled Leisure craft drifting down into the harbour on the ebb tide. This could be very serious causing disruption and an emergency declared. Harbour masters opinion is bound to have a bearing.

3. Small leisure craft being displaced by mussel farming activities and moving into areas currently used by larger and faster leisure vessels. Particularly in area 1 there is a very high probability and the impact potentially serious see 4 below

4. Larger leisure vessels displaced into the deep water channel at Parkstone Quay by the displacement of smaller craft mentioned at 3 above. If area 1 is kept at the proposed size then the probability is very high and the impact potentially very serious. Skippers of larger faster craft will not want to go into the deep water channel but could be forced into it whilst taking avoiding action.

5. Collision between Leisure and Fishery vessels in the work areas. The probability is not very high because leisure skippers will see work boats in an area and largely decide to stay out of the area to be safe. Therefore the impact on leisure use is very high.

6. Fishery boats forced out of the Wrabness channel by ships going to and from Mistly. The impact not high unless the fishery boat goes aground in the shallow water or impacts with a moored or other leisure vessel. Probability is that it is bound to happen at some point.

7. Conflict between fishery vessels avoiding ships in the Wrabness channel by entering the shallow areas either side of the channel and leisure craft. The impact if something goes wrong is moderately high as is the probability because there is little room to manoeuvre at some states of tide.

8. Conflict between fishery vessels and leisure craft upstream of Parkstone quay. The impact on leisure use is moderately inconvenient as is the probability. 9. Disabled fishery vessels drifting down into the harbour on an ebb tide. Impact is low to moderate as is the probability. The dredger would be obliged to ask for professional Tug assistance. 10. Leisure sailing craft having to get out of the way of a working dredger or other work boat. The impact on leisure vessels would not be high but the probability would be.

11. Leisure sailing vessels being unable to make a reasonable angle on the wind as they approach the Wrabness Channel particularly when there is s strong East or West element to the wind. This is a nuisance factor for sailors with a high probability.

12. Local lifeboat being off station attending to an entangled leisure vessel up river when an offshore emergency is called. The probability is moderate to high and the impact is mostly on the RNLI. Their opinion should be taken into account. Even if they have a reserve boat available they may not be able to crew it quickly.



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson WrightB-5

Hazard Logs for the Current Navigational Situation



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson WrightC-1

Hazard Log for the River Stour (Current)



Risk Overall

Remarks

ML

WC

Rank

Ref

Affected Areas

Accident Category

Hazard Title

Hazard Detail

Affected Vessel Types

Affected Stakeholders

Possible Causes

Most Likely (ML)

Worst Credible (WC)

Frequency

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

Frequency

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

1

6

Harwich International Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel

Collision



All

Environmental Interests, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Tug Owners, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Logistics; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.



2

1

2

1

1

2

3

5

4

5

3.32

Recreation Craft in main channel due to traffic volume in area north of main channel.

2

5

Harwich International Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Collision



All

Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Tug Owners, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.



3

1

2

2

2

2

2

4

4

4

3.3

3

4


Collision



All

General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Low speed glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull.


5

1

1

1

1

3

2

4

4

4

2.74

Glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull

4

9

Mistley Approach Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Grounding



All

Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Vessel Owners


Soft grounding, no damage, floats free on next HW


5

1

1

1

1

3

2

4

4

3

2.65

5

10

Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Grounding

Coaster Grounding

Coaster/commercial vessel out of main channel

All

Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Tug Owners, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Logistics; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Soft grounding, refloats, no damage


3

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

4

3

2.49

6

2


Collision


Navigating in main channel whilst Ferry/Cruise Ship are moving or turning off Harwich International Port

Fishing Users, HHA, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Failure; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.



3

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

3

3

2.34

7

7

Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel

Collision



Environmental Interests, General Public, HHA, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners


Low speed contact. no significant damage

Heavy contact - major hull damage, water ingress, minor injury

3

1

1

1

1

2

3

2

4

4

2.15

8

3

Harwich International Main Channel Site 1

Collision



HHA, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.


Major hull damage - minor injury

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

4

3

1.95

9

1


Collision



All


Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Low speed glancing blow. Very minor damage.

Damage to hull, water ingress and possible sinking. Loss of life.

3

1

1

1

1

2

1

4

3

3

1.95

10

8

Harwich International Main Channel

Collision


Coaster in contact with Ferry or Cruise Ship turning off Harwich Haven.

Environmental Interests, HHA, Leisure Users, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.


Heavy contact major hull damage, minor injury.

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

4

4

1.8

11

12

Main Channel Harwich International Secondary Channel

Grounding

Ferry/Cruise Ship

Grounding outside main channel

All

HHA, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners, Tug Owners, General Public, Pilots

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Soft grounding, no damage.

Heavy grounding, some hull damage.

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

3

1.45

12

11

Site 2Secondary Channel Site 3 Site 5 Site 4 Site 1

Grounding

HHA Dredger Grounding

Dredger going aground outside main Channel

All

Ships Master/Crew, Pilots, Vessel Owners, HHA

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Soft grounding, no damage. Floats free next HW.

Heavy grounding, minor hull damage.

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

3

2

1.32

13

14

Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel

Contact Navigation

Coaster in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy

Vessel out of position

All

HHA, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Berth Availability; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.

Glancing pass, no damage.

Buoy run over, major damage to buoy. Loss of ground mooring.

3

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

0

14

15

Harwich International Main Channel

Contact Navigation

Ferry/Cruise ship in Contact with Marker/mooring Buoy


All

Pilots, Vessel Owners, Ships Master/Crew, HHA

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Logistics; Maintenance Failure; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.

Glancing pass

Buoy run down - major damage, loss of buoy.

3

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

0

15

16

Site 3Main Channel Site 5 Site 2 Site1 Secondary Channel Site 4 Mistley Approach Harwich International

Contact Navigation

HHA Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy


All

HHA, Vessel Owners, Ships Master/Crew

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Passing contact, no damage.

Buoy run over, damage or loss of buoy.

4

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

0

16

13

Mistley Approach Secondary Channel

Contact Navigation

Recreational Craft in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy


All


Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Dredger on mussel farm site; Berth Availability; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Failure to observe COLREGs; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.

Glancing contact, no damage.

Buoy riser entanglement in propeller resulting in drifting.

5

1

1

1

1

4

1

1

1

1

0



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson WrightC-6

Hazard Logs for the for the Navigational Situation with the Addition of the Mussel Farms and Operations



Wash Mussels Ltd/Parkinson WrightD-1

Hazard Log for the River Stour (With Mussel Farms)



Risk Overall

Remarks

ML

WC

Rank

Ref

Affected Areas

Accident Category

Hazard Title

Hazard Detail

Affected Vessel Types

Affected Stakeholders

Possible Causes

Most Likely (ML)

Worst Credible (WC)

Frequency

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

Frequency

Environment

People

Property

Stakeholders

1

8

Harbour Approach Harwich International Harbour Entrance Main Channel Mistley Approach

Collision



All

Vessel Owners, Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Tug Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Harvesting Operations; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Entanglement in Marker/Mooring Buoy; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.



2

1

2

1

1

2

3

5

4

5

3.32

Recreation Craft in main channel due to traffic volume in area north of main channel.

2

7


Collision



All

Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Pilots, Ships Master/Crew, Tug Owners, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Harvesting Operations; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Entanglement in Marker/Mooring Buoy; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.



3

1

2

2

2

2

2

4

4

4

3.3

3

6


Collision



All

General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Harvesting Operations; Berth Availability; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Entanglement in Marker/Mooring Buoy; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density; Wave.

Low speed glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull


5

1

1

1

1

3

2

4

4

4

2.74

Glancing blow, minor damage to vessel/hull.

4

20

Harbour Approach Harwich International Harbour Entrance Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4

Collision


Mussel Dredging and Sediment replenishment confliction. Sites 1, 2, 3 & 4

All

Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, HHA, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Entanglement in Marker/Mooring Buoy; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Failure to comply with VTS; Failure to notify Hazardous Cargo; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Logistics; Maintenance Failure; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Low speed contact, minor damage.


2

1

1

1

1

3

2

4

4

3

2.65

5

16

Mistley Approach Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Grounding



All


Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Harvesting Operations; Communications Failure (Equipment); Entanglement in Crab Pot lines; Entanglement in Marker/Mooring Buoy; Equipment Age; Equipment Failure; Equipment Quality; Failure to comply with Local Regulations; Human Error Control/Operational; Human Error Judgement; Human Fatigue; Hydrographical circumstances; Information Failure; Interaction with Ship/Bank; Maintenance Failure; Malicious Action by Third Party; Manning Levels; Quality and Qualifications; Traffic Density.

Soft grounding, no damage, floats free on next HW.


5

1

1

1

1

3

2

4

4

3

2.65

6

17

Harbour Approach Harwich International Harbour Entrance Mistley Approach Main Channel Secondary Channel Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Collision


14 M Mussel Dredger in contact with Recreational Craft while engaged in operations.

All

Any Regional Council, Environmental Interests, Fishing Users, General Public, HHA, Leisure Users, Ships Master/Crew, Vessel Owners

Adverse Visibility e.g. Fog/Mist; Adverse Wind; Avoiding Harvesting

Introduction - Stour Sailing Club · Web viewMussel Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy...

Documents

Transcript of Introduction - Stour Sailing Club · Web viewMussel Dredger in contact with Marker/Mooring Buoy...