Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Managing Risks
Managing Risks
DREDGING IN INDIA
MANAGING RISKS
03 – 09 - 2014
PRESENTATION BY
Devdatta Bose – Group Sector Head
Mihir Parekh – Manager
TATA Consulting Engineers
4th Floor, Tower A, 247 Park, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai 400 083
2 RIRISK IDENTIFICATION
3 ESTIMATING CONSEQUENCES
4 II IMPACT ANALYSIS
6 RISK DESCRIPTION
8 • RISK MITIGATION
9 • CONCLUSION
If the event would have multiple consequences (for example, excessive noise would have
consequences for the local community as well as the environment), the consequence values were
recorded for each of the categories. These were then summed for each risk issue. For example, a
value of 1 for Environment consequences and a value of 10 for Social consequences give a total value
of 11 for the total consequence of the risk issue.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED 5
IMPACT ANALYSIS
IMPACT ANALYSIS
IDENTIFIED RISKS
1 Disturbance of the Works – Port operations / Naval exercises / Wave, wind and tidal forces
2 Unforeseeable Conditions – Uncertainty about quantity and character of physical obstructions
3 Site and Security – Not possible to secure site,
4 Certifying Progress and Completion
5 Time
6 Insurance
7 Instructions of the Engineer
8 Defects
9 Design
10 Permits, Licenses and Approvals – Coordination with multiple statutory / port authorities
40%
Cash Flow -
Lumpsum Assured Depth type contract is 30% Lumpsum
not advisable in capital dredging projects 20%
where heterogeneous material is expected
10%
to be encountered
0%
Time
PROBABILITY
PROBABILITY (P) SEVERITY (S)
0.3 M 0.03 0.3 3 30 300
Very High
0.1 L 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Very High Death / severe
VH VH
Likely to occur often environmental or 0.01 VL 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
financial damage > 50 M$
VL L M H VH
High High
Will occur several Severe Injury / major 0.1 1 10 100 1000
H H
times during the environmental or SEVERITY
project financial loss > 25 M$
Medium (moderate) Medium (moderate)
M Occur once during the M Light injury or system
project damage > 1 M$
Low Low
L Unlikely, but might L Light injury or system
occur once damage > 0.5 M$
Very Low
Very Low No injuries / irrelevant
VL VL
Not expected at all environmental or
financial loss < 0.1 M $
100
100
MAJOR IMPACT Risk
30 30
10 10 10
10
Impact Level
Residual Risk
MODERATE IMPACT
3 3 3 3
1 1 1 1 1 1
1
MINOR IMPACT
0.1 0.1
0.1
NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT
0.01
Discussion may arise between those involved in a dredging project (client, permitting
agency, conservation organisations or environmental NGO’s etc) on how to assess and
manage risks. Risk perception varies between groups and individuals and is value driven.
There is no quick solution to this potential conflict; early and open communication is
considered essential.
Thorough site investigations are a must before embarking on a dredging project – bathy,
side scan, seismic profiler, magnetometer, marine boreholes, modelling studies etc.
Choice of appropriate type of contract with optimum risk sharing between the contractor
and client
Using international best practices in estimation and design as highlighted in CIRIA and
PIANC publications
Using standard FIDIC documents (2010 RECOMMENDED) for preparing tenders. Minimal
changes to standard FIDIC general conditions.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED 22
mparekh@tce.co.in
devdattab@tce.co.in
CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED