RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

Ships/Dept. Name: RA no*: Rev No.* 00 Date: XX-XX-XXXX

Work / Activity Details : BUNKERING

Sect.1. Risk Assessment Table

New Likelihood Rating(B1)

New Severity Rating(A1)
(after additional control)

(after additional control)

Residual Risk ( A1 x B1)

Severity** Rating (A) of

Likelihood** Rating (B)

(Refer Table in Sect.2)

Decision to proceed
consequences with

Agreed time frame

existing controls

with work Y/N

Risk Level**
RA Criteria
Person

(A X B)
(People/ Additional
Sub Task/Activity Hazards Identified Consequences Existing Control Measures Responsibl
Environment/ Controls (if any)
e
Property/Process)

Approach of Wrong approach Property Collision 1.Necessary fendering and 1. Master to Master Prior 4 1 4 Y
bunker barge of Barge. Damage to ship closely observing the approach personally approac
structure of bunker barge, 4 2 8 supervise h of
2. Ship side clear on the Bunker Barge barge
intended side of barge berthing. Movements.
3.Weather conditions monitored 2. Engines
4.Communication established standby.
with barge.
5. Duty Officer & other Qualified
Personnel standby.

Environment Oil pollution As above + SOPEP gear ready 4 1 4

from ruptured
fuel tank
1.Supervised by Duty Officer
Rope over - 2.Mooring ropes in good
Mooring
tensioning, condition
Operation – People Personal Injury 5 1 5
parting and 3.Safe Mooring practices
double banking
related accidents 4.Good communication
5.PPEs
Moorings not Environment Relative Frequent tending of moorings 4 1 4
tended to movement supervised by Duty Officer
changing between own
draft/tide vessel and
barge resulting
in hose rupture
and pollution.
 RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

New Likelihood Rating(B1)

New Severity Rating(A1)
(after additional control)

(after additional control)

Residual Risk ( A1 x B1)

Severity** Rating (A) of

Likelihood** Rating (B)

(Refer Table in Sect.2)

Decision to proceed
consequences with

Agreed time frame

existing controls

with work Y/N

Risk Level**
RA Criteria
Person

(A X B)
(People/ Additional
Sub Task/Activity Hazards Identified Consequences Existing Control Measures Responsibl
Environment/ Controls (if any)
e
Property/Process)

1. Bunkering Checklist followed.

Oil spill from 2.High level of Supervision.
Opening
manifold/hose or 3. Experienced personnel
connections, Environment Pollution/Fines 4 1 4
from connection involved in bunkering operation.
fitting spool
during bunkering 4. New joints used and all bolts
piece/hose.
fitted.
1.Proper tools kept ready prior
Use of wrong or
operation.
worn out tools
People Personal Injury 2.PPEs 3 1 3
during securing of
3.Controls as above
connections
1.Crane operated by
Unsafe Hose 1.People 1.Personal Injury experienced person.
4 1 4
Crane operation 2.Sling checked for wear & tear
3.Good communication
2.Property
2.Property Damage to crane or ship fittings 3 1 3
Damage
1)Sufficient Qualified personnel
1.CE personally
& strict manifold watch under
checking line
C/Es supervision through out
settings prior
bunkering.
every
2)Compliance to SMS
interruptions in
bunkering procedures and
operations.
checklist TEC/006.
Receiving Leakage or 2. CE closely
Environment Oil Pollution 3) Bunker lines pressure tested 4 2 8 Ch. Engnr. 4 1 4
Bunkers overflow of oil monitoring
& maintained as per PMS.
topping up.
4) SOPEP Gear standby
3. Scupper
5) Soundings taken instead of
plugs checked
relying on remote gauges.
for effective
6) Compliance to bunker policy
sealing.
on max. intake per tank.

1.PPEs
Slips and Falls 2. Good Lighting
People 3 2 6
from spilled oil 3.Prompt cleaning
4.Cordon off slippery areas
1.Elimination of Ignition sources
Flammable 2.Intrinsically safe equipments
People/Property Fire/ Explosion 5 1 5
atmosphere 3.No smoking signs.
4.Precautions against overflow
Exposure to H2S People Personal Injury 1. Addnl. Special precautions 4 1 4
 RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

New Likelihood Rating(B1)

New Severity Rating(A1)
(after additional control)

(after additional control)

Residual Risk ( A1 x B1)

Severity** Rating (A) of

Likelihood** Rating (B)

(Refer Table in Sect.2)

Decision to proceed
consequences with

Agreed time frame

existing controls

with work Y/N

Risk Level**
RA Criteria
Person

(A X B)
(People/ Additional
Sub Task/Activity Hazards Identified Consequences Existing Control Measures Responsibl
Environment/ Controls (if any)
e
Property/Process)

as given in TOM- 2.02.07 –

watch for signs of fatigue, stay
when taking
clear of airpipes, against wind
bunkers with high
direction when ullaging, gas
sulphur content
tests on deck, medical
emergency equipment ready.
1. Bunker barge soundings to
Ineffective
be checked before & after
Bunker Quantity monitoring may
bunkering.
and Quality result in receiving Process Off-hire/claims 4 1 4
2. NOP issued
disputes less quantity
bunkers
1. Samples to be collected &
sealed /signed as per SMS
procedures and sent to lab for
analysis.
2. NOP issued
Bunker quality Off Damage to 3. Bunkers not to be consumed
Property 5 1 5
spec. Engines until confirmation received from
lab that fuel is fit for use.
4. Minimum reserve of old stock
bunkers maintained.
5. Mixing with previous
bunkers avoided.
1..Bunker shore lab analysis
includes tests for high TAN to
Presence of high
detect fatty acids and further
fatty acids in Damage to
Property tests if TAN high. – TOM - 5 1 5
bunkers of W. Engines
1.11.03
African coast
2. Controls as above

Hose to be emptied and valves

closed, Suitable spill 3 2 6
Hose Leakage of oil on containments to be in place,
Environment
Disconnection deck Pollution Proper communication to be
established with barge
personnel

Same as for opening hose

Wrong or worn
People Personal Injury connection above 3 2 6
tools, improper use
 RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

New Likelihood Rating(B1)

New Severity Rating(A1)
(after additional control)

(after additional control)

Residual Risk ( A1 x B1)

Severity** Rating (A) of

Likelihood** Rating (B)

(Refer Table in Sect.2)

Decision to proceed
consequences with

Agreed time frame

existing controls

with work Y/N

Risk Level**
RA Criteria
Person

(A X B)
(People/ Additional
Sub Task/Activity Hazards Identified Consequences Existing Control Measures Responsibl
Environment/ Controls (if any)
e
Property/Process)

1. All bolts fitted tightly.

Pollution - from 2. Joint condition
Manifold Blank not leaks when ensured good
Environment 4 1 4
fitted back properly bunker taken on 3. Supervision by Duty
other manifold Engineer.

Casting off the Mooring related People Personal Injury Same as described above for 5 1 5
barge accidents Mooring operation.

 *Numbering guidance: a. New RA No. if it is a fresh case. b. Old RA No. with new date if no change is hazards. c. Old RA No. inserting Rev. No & new date if there are additional Hazards
(Refer Sect 1.6 of RA/MOC Manual for details)
 ** Refer RA Matrix (Sect.2 Table 1,2,3,4 of this Form and Sec. 1.5 of the RA/MOC Manual) for Hazards / Consequences Evaluation(Likelihood/Severity) to People, Environment and/or Property / Commercial aspects as applicable to
arrive at ratings of (A) & (B).
 *** Refer Risk Level table (Sect.2 Table 5 of this form) and Sect 1.4.7 of the RA & MOC Manual .If results are either in yellow or red consider additional measures to mitigate the risk.
 ‘Contingency Plans’ to limit the impact of unplanned occurrences/ failure of control measures to be discussed and recorded in the section below.
 During review of the RA process, if scope for improvement of the documented QHSE procedure for the operation/activity is identified, same should be recorded in the comments section below and office notified
for appropriate action.
Contingency Plans : Oil Pollution
Comments :
Signed:

Head of The Department Date

Reviewer’s Comments:
Signed:

Name / Position / Signature Date