RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION FOR BETTER SAFETY: CASE STUDY OF KEMAMAN PORT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46754/umtjur.v3i2.206Keywords:
Port safety, safety, risk assessment, risk matrixAbstract
The increase in awareness and responsibilities among stakeholders in a port environment has made safety evaluation an operational priority. Operating a port is a high-risk activity with underlying potential for accidents and loss of lives, besides causing massive property and environmental damage. Kemaman Port has multiple operations and handles volatile chemicals that may lead to disaster if an accident were to occur due to negligence. Therefore, the safety tools at the port have to suit a terminal specialized in handling liquid chemicals. To determine risk level at the port, assessment may be conducted using the hazard identification method (HAZID) to determine the hazards and risk matrix. The “As low as reasonably practicable” (ALARP) principle should be adhered to in determining which risk is tolerable or intolerable. In this study, the hazard and risk data at Kemaman Port were obtained through literature review and engagements with experts. As a result, eight main hazards were identified and the risk matrix was used to find the highest frequency and consequences of the hazards, besides the risk probability during operations. The overall results may demonstrate a significant improvement to the safety of port operations.
References
Chlomoudis, C. I., Kostagiolas, P. A., & Pallis, P. L. (2012). An analysis of formal risk assessments for safety and security in ports: Empirical evidence from container terminals in Greece. Journal of Shipping and Ocean Engineering, 2(April 2017), 45–54. Retrieved from http://www. davidpublishing.com/davidpublishing/ Upfile/3/20/2012/2012032080998401.pdf.
Cho, H. S., Lee, J. S., & Moon, H. C. (2018). Maritime risk in seaport operation: A cross-country empirical analysis with theoretical foundations. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 34(3), 240–248. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2018.09.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2018.09.010
Cirjaliu, B., Weinschrott, H., Gaureanu, A., & Boatca, E.-M. (2016). A proposal for risk assessment management in a transport company. Procedia Economics and Finance, 39(November 2015), 229–234. https://doi. org/10.1016/s2212-5671(16)30317-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30317-3
Gratt, L. B. (2012). Risk analysis or risk assessment; a proposal for consistent definitions. Uncertainty in Risk Assessment, Risk Management, and Decision Making, 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 4684-5317-1_20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5317-1_20
Grote, M., Mazurek, N., Gräbsch, C., Zeilinger, J., Le Floch, S., Wahrendorf, D. S., & Höfer, T. (2016). Dry bulk cargo shipping — An overlooked threat to the marine environment? Marine Pollution Bulletin, 110(1), 511–519. https://doi.org/10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.05.066
Haapasaari, P., Helle, I., Lehikoinen, A., Lappalainen, J., & Kuikka, S. (2015). A proactive approach for maritime safety policymaking for the Gulf of Finland: Seeking best practices. Marine Policy, 60, 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpol.2015.06.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.003
Maanu, K., & Ora, K. (2004). Final guidelines for port & harbour risk assessment and safety management systems in New Zealand maritime safety authority of New Zealand maritime safety keeping your sea safe for life.
Office, B. R. D. (n.d.). Proposals for developing a common approach to risk assessment. Common Approach to RA – Overview PP v0.3.
Parra, N. M., Nagi, A., & Kersten, W. (2018). Risk assessment methods in seaports: A literature review.
Perkovic, M., Gucma, L., Przywarty, M., Gucma, M., Petelin, S., & Vidmar, P. (2012). Nautical risk assessment for LNG operations at the port of Koper. Strojniski Vestnik/Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 58(10), 607–613. https://doi.org/10.5545/ sv-jme.2010.265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5545/sv-jme.2010.265
Trbojevic, V. M., & Trbojevic, V. M. (2001). Linking risk assessment of marine operations to safety management in ports. MTS Conference.
Trbojevic, Vladimir M., & Carr, B. J. (2000). Risk-based methodology for safety improvements in ports. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 71(1–3), 467– 480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304- 3894(99)00094-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(99)00094-1
Zhang, J., Teixeira, Â. P., Guedes Soares, C., & Yan, X. (2018). Quantitative assessment of collision risk influence factors in the Tianjin port. Safety Science, 110, 363–371. https:// doi.org/10.1016/J.SSCI.2018.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.05.002
Zuritah, A. K., Roslina, M., Norazli, O., Astuty A., Mohd N. M., Siti H. A-B., & Firdaus M-S. (2020). Risk management framework for handling and storage of cargo at major ports in malaysia towards port sustainability. Sustainability, 12(2), 516. https://doi. org/10.3390/su12020516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020516
