船舶のリスク管理 2015
Risk management of ships 2015
吉田公一 Koichi Yoshida
1951年 東京 上野 初音町の生まれ Born in Ueno, Tokyo
1976年 東京大学工学部船舶工学科卒業 Guraduare Univ. of Tokyo
国際海事機関(IMO) 会議参加 1980年から
現在
海洋環境保護委員会 大気汚染防止及温室効果Gas作業部会議長（現在）
海上安全委員会 公的安全評価方法専門家会議議長（現在）
防火小委員会 (FP) 議長(1994-2003)
国際標準化機構(ISO) 活動参加 1980年から
海洋環境保護技術委員会(ISO/TC8/SC2) 議長（現在）
火災安全-火災発生及発達技術委員会 (ISO/TC92/Sc1) 議長（現在）社団法人 日本船舶品質管理協会 船舶艤装品研究所 (1976-2002)(独) 海上技術安全研究所 (2002-2012)
一般財団法人 日本舶用品検定協会 (2012-) 調査研究部 専任部長
yoshida@rime.jp k-yoshida@hakuyohin.or.jp
横浜国立大学 統合的海洋教育・研究センター 客員教授
Koichi-yoshida@ynu.ac.jp1Schedule• December 10, 2015
– About IMO– Risk and safety of ships– Ship’s risk management for marine environment
protection 1– Ship’s risk management for marine environment
protection 2 - Ships and Global warming 2.1• January 14, 2016
– Ship’s risk management for marine environment protection 2 - Ships
and Global warming 2.2– Ship’s risk management in distress– Harmonization among marine environment protection,safe navigation of ships and maritime economicalactivities
2IMO
国際海事機関
4 Albert Embankment
London,United Kingdom

Safer Ships
Secure Marine
Cleaner Ocean
Safety of Life and Ships at Sea
Prevention of Marine PollutionActions to improve safety in maritime operations would be more
effective if carried out an international level rather than individual
countries acting unilaterally.
A conference held by the United Nations in 1948 adopted a convention
establishing IMCO (Inter-governmental Maritime ConsultativeOrganization).
IMCO officially established in 1958 when Japan accepted the IMCO
Convention by which the condition of establishment met!
IMCO changed the name to IMO: International Maritime Organization.3

Technical bodies within IMOMaritime safety Committee(MSC)
Marine Environment
Protection Committee(MEPC)

Sub-Committee on Ship Design andConstruction (SDC)
Sub-Committee on Ship Systemsand Equipment (SSE)
Sub-Committee on Navigation,
Communication, Search and Rescue(NCSR)
Sub-Committee on Carriage ofCargo and Containers (CCC)
Sub-Committee on Pollution
Prevention and Response (PPR)
Sub-Committee on Human element,
Training and Watchkeeping (HTW)Sub-Committee on Implementationof IMO Instruments (III)International rules and Instruments developed in IMO• Mandatory instruments: 強制力のある国際規則– International Conventions 国際条約– International Code: 国際コード– Resolutions referred to as mandatory instrument: 強制力のあるものとして条約等が引用する決議• Non-mandatory recommendations and resolutions: 強制力のない勧告、決議– Resolutions taken at Assembly, Committee: 総会・委員会決議– Circular documents: 回章文書

IMO has established International Maritime Rules
Rules for safety at Sea
International Convention for the safety of Life at Sea(SOLAS) 1974:海上人
命安全条約
International Convention on Load Lines (LL)1966:満載喫水線条約
The Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing
Vessels (SFV), 1977： トレモリノス漁船条約
International Convention for Safe Containers (CSC), 1972:コンテナ安全条
約Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions atSea (COLREG) 1972：海上衝突予防条約
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification andWatchkeeping for Seafarers ( STCW )：船員の訓練・資格証明・当直基準
条約

Rules for prevention of pollution
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships(MARPOL)：海洋汚染防止条約
International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems
on Ships (AFS)：船舶の有害防汚方法規制条約
International Convention for the Control and Management ofShips‘ Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM)：バラスト水管理条約
The Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe andEnvironmentally Sound Recycling of Ships：安全及び環境保護に健全な船舶リサイクルに関する条約

船舶のリスク管理
Control and management of risk on ships• 船舶が直面するリスクと、これを回避・低減するための法的仕組み
Risks to which ships encounter, and regulatory
framework to diminish and control risks• 船舶リスク低減のための仕組みの作成方法
Methodologies to establishing the framework to diminish andcontrol risks on ships• リスクへ取り組む考え方
Approach for encountering risks

8

RISK and HAZARD•“Hazard” is a situations, phenomenon or things which may results in damage, loss orunwanted outcome. Hazard should always exist. “Hazard” is a potential to threaten human
life, health, property or the environment.

•“Safety” is the situation where unacceptable risk does not exist (ISO/IEC Guide 51).
– There is no case where 100% safety is established.

•“Risk” is a quantity of combination of possibility of occurrence of loss or unwanted
outcome and the magnitude of the outcome.
R= C x P
whereR : risk
C : magnitude of loss or drawback (number of loss of life, cost of loss of property,
damage to environment (amount oil spill), etc.)
P : possibility of happening C (e.g., occurrence of C per year)•In order to reduce the risk (R), reduce C and/or P.

Hazardprobability

Damage/LossRisk and benefit on ships Part 1
Obtain products by low price, carry them by sea, andsale them at high priceHigh Risk at sea transport but high return
Silk road
Asia-Europe sea transport in 16 and 17 centuries
East India Company of England and Holland
Insurance system started in 17th century: Lloydcoffee house in London UKRisk and benefit on Ships Part 2
Carrying high value matters
Carrying mass products
Development of passenger ships (19th and 20th century)
High risk/High returnsecure and low risk transport
Accident of Passenger ship “Titanic” April 14, 1912 at North AtlanticOcean
1914 SOLAS International Convention for the safety of Life at Sea

Risk of death in Japan• Risk = probability of occurrence ｘ magnitude ofoccurrence– In 2015, number of death by road traffic accident was 4117
(death within 24 hours after the accident)– Population of Japan in 2010 was 127,110,047 (by national
surveillance in 2015) (National Surveillance is being
conducted every 5 years)– probability=4117÷1271 M=3.24x10-5(/year)– Risk = 3.24x10-5(person/year)
Compensation for death by road traffic accident• Japan: about 100,000,000 Yen = 108 Yen• Risk on insurance =3.24･10-5x 108 = 3240 (Yen/year)• In 2015, total death of Japanese = 1,290,000
1.01 person died per 100 or 10.1 x10-3

12

Examples of acceptable risks
Authority

Description

Criterion per year

HSE(1999)

Max. tolerable risk to workers

10-3

Max toretable risk to the public

10-4

Negligible risk

10-6

Netherlands

Max tolerable risk for existing situations

10-5

Bottelberghs(1995)

Max tolerable risk for new situations

10-6

New South Wales

Sensitive developments(hospitals, schools,etc.)

5*10-7Australia

Residential, hotels, tourist resorts, etc.

1*10-6

DUAP(1997)

Commercial, retails, offices, etc.

1*10-5

Sporting complexes, active open space

1*10-5

Industrial

5*10-5Western Australia

Sensitive developemnt(hospitals, schools,etc.)

5*10-7

EPA(1998)

Residential zones

1*10-6

Non-industrial(commercial, sporting, etc.)

1*10-5

Industrial

5*10-5

1 .0 E- 02
1.0E-02

Passenge r
Passenger

Risk ofships

Frequency,
f of
mo refatalities
fatali ties (perFrequency,
f ofNN
orormore(pership-year)
ship-year)

Tanker
GeneralCargo
Ge neralCargo
BulkCarrier
BulkCarrierAll
BC & Cas.+ESP+Solas
MinAllBC&ALL
Cas.+ES P+S olasMini

1.0E-03
1 .0 E- 03

All
AllBC&Al
BC & lCas.+ESP+Solas
Cas.+ ESP+SolasMax
Max

Unacceptable

Example1.0E-04
1 .0 E- 04

Not acceptable less than 10-2
Acceptable over 10-4
1.0E-05
1 .0 E- 05

As Low as Reasonably
Practicable (ALARP)

Acceptable
1.0E-06
1 .0 E- 06
11110
0100
100

Numbe r o f fatalitie s, N

Number of fatalities, N

1000
1000

14Costa Concordia••

全長２９０メートル▽全幅３６ｍ▽総トン数１１万２０００トン▽乗客定員３８００人▽乗組員数１１００人 ▽デッキ：１４層▽客室数：１４３０室▽巡航速度：２０ノット▽船籍：イタリア▽就航
年：２００６年
イタリア中部トスカーナ州沖で2012年1月13日
夜座礁し、１４日には船体の半分が海面下に没した.

15

フェリー「ありあけ」 傾斜/乗揚げ 2009-11-13
フェリーは横波を受けて積み荷が崩れ、右に約２２度傾いた。さらに４５度近くまで傾いた状態で北西の陸側へ約３２キロ流され、同９時５０分ごろ、御浜町の七里御浜の沖合約２００メートルで座礁、横転した。船体が損傷したとみられ、重油が南西へ幅５０メートル、長さ約２．７キロにわたって流出している。
ありあけは９５年建造で総トン数７９１０トン、全長約１６７メートル、最大幅２３メートルの大型フェリー。１２日午後５時に東京都江東区の有明ふ頭を出発し、１３日午後９時４０分に志布志港に到着予定だった。
津地方気象台によると、三重県南部には１２日午前から継続的に強風・波浪注意報が出ており、尾鷲市では１３日午前６時に高さ３．７１メートルの波16が観測された。

世越:SEWOL
April 16,20142014年4月16日午前8時58分頃、韓国仁川の仁川港から済州島へ向かっていた、清海鎮海運(チョンヘジンかいうん、청해진해운) 所属の大型旅客船「セウォル（世越: SEWOL）」が、全羅南道珍島郡の観梅島（クヮンメド）沖海上で転覆し、沈没した。事故が発生したセウォルは、修学旅行中の安山市の檀園高等学校2年生生徒325人と引率教員14人[3]の他、一般客108人、乗務員29人の計476名が乗船し、車両150台余りが積載されていた。
現場周辺は水深27m-50mで目立った暗礁はなく、16日午前時点で視界は良好、波高約1mと、航行の安全に影響するような自然条件はなかった。
該当船のセウォルは1994年に日本で建造され、当初、鹿児島県のマルエーフェリーが鹿児島-沖縄航路で「フェリーなみのうえ」（全長145メートル、幅22メートル、6586総トン、旅客定員804人）として運行していたもの。長崎県の林兼船渠において1994年6月に竣工し、翌7月の定期点検時に建造時の5,997総トンから6,586総トンに改造、マルエーフェリー時代は5階建てで、船底に最も近い1階部分に貨物甲板、2階に乗用車約200台分の車両甲板、3階にレストランや案内所、売店などがあり、客室は3階より上にあった。
2012年10月1日にマルエーフェリーを引退した後、韓国の清海鎮海運に売却された。その際、最上階部分船体後方に客室を増設したり、船首右舷側の貨物用ランプウェイを取り外すなどの改造が施され、重心が日本時代より高くなり、定員数は804人から921人に、総排水量は6,825トンにそれぞれ増加[33]、車両180台、20フィートコンテナ152個を積載可能な船舶として、清海鎮海運は「
17韓国最大のクルーズ船」と幅広く宣伝[、2013年3月15日より「セウォル」として仁川−済州間週2往復の定期運行を開始、定員を活かして団体旅行にも利用されていた。

Naphtha tanker collisionraises safety fears over
Malacca Strait 2009-08-20

The 2005-built product 70,246 dwt tanker
Formosaproduct Brick , carrying a 58,000 tonne
cargo of naphtha, caught fire after it collided withthe 1998-built, 73,207 dwt panamax bulker
Ostende Max at 2130 hrs on Tuesday 20 Aug.
2009, 20 miles off Port Dickson in Malacca Strait.
Sixteen of 25 crew were able to escape as aseries of explosions rocked the tanker but nine18
others remain missing.

Balcony Fire“Star Princess”
March 2006

19

Container ship
Napoliin January 200720

Container ship
MOL ComfortMay 201321

海難分類 （example）
衝突
遭難
火災/爆発

浸水

乗揚

機関故障
転覆

沈没
海賊22STATISTICS OF CASUALTIES ON SHIPS
Casualties of Passenger Ships/Ferries and Number of Life Lost (1975-1996)
Casualty type
NumberCollision
136
Contact
102
Grounding264
Flooding
92
Fire/Explosion
209
War
20
Mechanical Failure 129
others5
total957

Life lost
896
401
132
750
525
111702732

Life Missing
10903721392
511
1
1702402

Life Lost and Missing
1005
401
504
2142
1036
123405134*Kaneko, F., Ohta, S., Dai, X., Fukumoto, M., Probabilistic Assessment Method ofShips: Part 2: A Risk Evaluation Methodology for FSA, No.6-3 Journal of theSociety of Naval Architects of Japan 1999
23

IMO Rule making process
Now and Future

PastInternational maritime
Rules has been developed
To avoid accidents which
Had happened.
Re-active

Goal Based Standardand Approach

Maritime accident shall be avoided
Before such accident happens
Pro-active

Formal Safety
Assessment

Establish Acceptable Level of Risk
in Maritime
Risk exists.
There is no case where risk is ZERO.

24

例：Fire safety, How to think about?
• Fire needs three fundamental elements
FuelOxygenFIRE
Heat• There are always many fire hazard, such as– Heat source: engine exhaust piping, galley cocking
appliances, electricity, passengers cigarette materials, etc.
– Fuel: fuel and other oils, combustible materials,
25

Fire safety, How to think about?
• Fire safety can be obtained in two ways:– Prevention– Mitigation
Preventing hazard
From becoming fireHazard

X

Mitigating damage
caused by fireFIREXDamage

26

船舶の火災安全規則の目的

regulation 2 of chapter II-2 of SOLAS
海上人命安全条約（SOLAS） II-2章（火災安全）の安全目標は.1 発生の防止: 火災及爆発.2 火災危険性低減: 人命損失
.3 火災損害低減： 船体、貨物 及 環境
.4 火災及爆発 封じ込め、制御 及 抑制
.5 避難経路確保: 乗員 及 乗客27

船舶の火災安全に関する基本要件

regulation 2 of chapter II-2 of SOLAS
1.

熱的構造仕切りによって、船舶を主垂直区域及び水平区域に区切る

2

熱的構造仕切りによって、 居住区域をその他の区域から分離する

3

可燃材料の使用を制限する

4

火災を、その発生場所で検知する

5

火災を、その発生場所に封じ込め、消火する

6

避難経路及び消火のための経路を防護する

7

消火設備を、常に使用できるように備える

8

貨物の可燃性蒸気への着火の可能性をなくす

28

Part A一般 General
Regulation 1 適用 Application,Regulation.2 一般原則 general principles,Regulation.3 定義 Definitions

Part B

火災及び爆発の防止 Prevention of fire and explosion
Regulation 4 着火の可能性 Probability of Ignition,Regulation 5 火災発達の可能性 Fire growth potentials,Regulation 6 煙及び毒性 Smoke and toxicity

Part C

火災の抑制 Suppression of Fire
Regulation 7 火災感知及び警報 detection and alarm
Regulation 8 煙の伝播の制御Control of smoke spread
Regulation 9 火災の封じ込め Containment of fire
Regulation 10 消火 Fire fighting
Regulation 11 構造耐火 Structural integrity

Part D

避難 EscapeRegulation 12 乗員及び乗客への周知 Notification of crew and passengers,
Regulation 13 避難経路 Means of escapePart E

運航要件 Operational requirements
Regulation 14 使用の備えと保守 Operational readiness and maintenanceRegulation 15 使用説明、船上訓練 Instructions, onboard training and drills
Regulation 16 操作 Operations

Part F

同等設計及び配置 Alternative design and arrangements
Regulation 17Part G

海上人命安全条約（ SOLAS） 防火規則
第 II-2章

同等設計及び配置 Alternative design and arrangements

特別要件 Special requirements
Regulation 18 ヘリコプタ設備 Helicopter facilities
Regulation 19 危険物の運送 Carriage of dangerous goods,
Regulation 20 車両区域、特別区域及びRo-ro区域の保護
Protection of vehicle, special category and ro-ro spaces
Regulation 21 海難の程度、安全な帰港及び安全エリア
Casualty threshold, safe return to port and safe areas,
Regulation 22 火災後の運航可能性の設計基準
Design criteria for systems to remain operational after a fire casualty,Regulation 23 旅客船の安全センター Safety centre on passenger ships

29

Rule making process in IMO from now onRisk based
goal

Goal Based Standard

Set-up goals formaritime safety andmarine environment
protection
Acceptable risk level

Pubic Demand

２０００ SOLAS II-2
is the first case

There should befreedom on design
to achieve goal

Method ofValidation ofthe Design

IMO: Formal Safety Assessment (FSA)Steps
FSA should comprise the following steps:
0. Definition of problem and ship model
1. Identification of hazards;
2. Risk analysis;
3. Risk control options;4. Cost-Benefit Assessment (CBA); and5. Recommendations for decision-making
Step 0 Definition of Problem
and ship model
Step 1
Identification of Hazard

Step 2
Risk analysis

Step 3
Risk control options

Step 5
Recommendations forDecision-making
Step 4
Cost BenefitAssessmentまず、安全の目標（ゴール）を Goal based approach in IMO Rule making process
GBS (Goal Based Standard)
設定してから、規則を構築する(Detail will be
discussed at thenext session)

TIER 1

安全・海洋環境保全のゴールの設定

GoalTIER 2

ゴールを達成するための基本的機能要件

Functional Requirement
TIER 3

Verificationof rules to Compliance CriteriaTIER４の規則がTIER2の要件に合致している
ことの検証

TIER 4
基本的機能要件をIndividual regulations in IMO mandatory
具現するためのinstruments, Technical Code, or Guidelines,
個々の規則
or Classification Rules
TIER 5

Industry standards, ISO and IEC standards,
Codes of Practice and Safety and Quality Systems for
Shipbuilding, Ship Operation, Maintenance, Training, Manning, .

32

IMOの規則作成ツールとしてのGBS••••

総合目標を定める(Tier I)
目標を達成するための性能要件を定める(Tier II)
規則の体系を構築する (Tier II and IV)
個々の規則を作成する。規則毎の目標を明示する(Tier IV)

進行中の作業対象
 救命設備規則（SOLAS 第III章）
 堪航性(maneouveability)
 復原性(Probabilistic approachはすでにSOLAS第II-1章に取り込んだが、目標が不明確）
 極海域航行船舶のコード（基準）Generic framework of IMO Goal-based Standard for rule
MSC Circularmaking
1394, 14 June 2011
GENERIC GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING IMO GOAL-BASEDSTANDARDS

Generic framework of Goal-based
Ship Construction Standard
Goal-based Ship
Construction Standard
for oil tankers andbulk carriers

Goal-based
Ship
Construction
Standard

Set-up Generic andProbabilistic GOAL
For Safety andEnvironmental protection

Goal-based Standard bySafety Level Approach

Goal-based Ship
Construction Standard
for other types of shiporconstruction in general

Goal-based Standard
for Subject
Other than structure
Fire Protection
Life Saving
Etc.

Safety of
Cargo

Safety of
Ship

Protection ofEnvironment

Safety ofpassengers

Safety of
Third parties
Safety of
The crew

Tier I

Manoeuver- Seakeeping Stability &ability
performance floatability

Emergency
Power
Habitability
protection
generation

Safety ofnavigation

Watertight Lifesaving Communication
Cargo
OtherFire
Ship
Propulsion
appliances
capability
systems
protection integrity
structure handling

SOLAS II-2 hasbeen developed
Goal andFunctional
requirement
In the regulation 2IMO DE
started

Structural strengthFatigue life
Residual strength
Protection against corrosion
Coating life--Tier II

New Passenger Ferry (RoPax)

Alternative Design and Arrangement for Fire Safety
Primary analysis

SOLAS Chapter II-2
Regulation 17

Fire scenario information
Quantify required performance
Quantify proposed system performance
Evaluate system performance
NONO

Performance ofproposed system
acceptableYES

All scenario
evaluated

YES

Select final designリスク管理：リスクを負う仕組み
実業者

保険会社

リスクを管理する
リスクを下げる努力を実行する

リスク検査機関
リスク管理の状態を検査する
リスクが一定値以下であることを確保する

リスクを査定する

Autonomous Ships 自立航行船舶
This description implies two generic alternatives that are combined in an autonomousship (see also figure below): the remote ship where the tasks of operating the ship are performed via a remotecontrol mechanism e.g. by a shore based human operator.
 the automated ship where advanced decision support systems on board undertake
all the operational decisions independently without intervention of a human operator.
 The Autonomous Ship is a symbiosis (combination) of the Remote Ship and theAutomatic Ship.

39

Autonomous Ships
自立航行船舶40