Use of Technology to prevent accidents

1. TECHNOLOGY
1.
 Examine the role of technology in preventing
accidents
 Getting the most from the equipment you have:
Reducing the individual’s workload
2.
Evaluate the ways technology can improve Accident
Investigation
Importance of continued training for the effective
use of the Technology
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 1
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse

2. Why do we want good technology;
to improve safety, efficiency, reliability, quality of work
and performance (1)
Grounding occurred; the vessel was navigating on BA
charts? (2)
Grounding occurred; the vessel was navigating with
ECDIS? (3)
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 2

3.  Can we ensure equipment introduced will improve
safety, efficiency, reliability, quality of work and
performance and then still be cost efficient ?
 First we judge if the cost involved reducing the risk
is really beneficial. Equipment errors/flaws and
human error must be reduced to as low as
reasonably particle (ALARP) (4)
 But who is really deciding what is an acceptable
ALARP level; all regulatory Authorities (performance
standards)/Flag states, ISM code, Industry and the
Company
 A lot of decisions are left for the ship owners to
decide and control (5)
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 3

4.  So if the variability of equipment in
some circumstances could be a threat and if design
and regulatory Organizations cannot constrain
variability to prevent human errors, the Company is
obliged to implement preventive and protective
barriers (6)
 The way the Company can control human errors
onboard when using the equipment is to have as
many preventive and protective barriers in use so
the risk is reduced to ALARP(7)
 Therefore we need to implement/identify the barriers
before the human errors occur; the common practice
we use in Risk Assessments is to identify these
barriers
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 4

5. Minimum list of Risks for equipment to be evaluated on
a Risk Assessment:
1. Equipment error tolerances, capabilities and limitations,
visibility of errors, reliability, redundancy, monitoring,
user friendliness, un-expected side effects, overreliance
and levels of automation (LOA) and related old
equipment integration with the new equipment (8) (10)
2. Resilient equipment/installation: the ability of
equipment/system to adjust its functioning, prior to or
following changes and disturbances, so that it can
sustain operations even after a major mishap or in the
presence of continuous stress (9)
3. Crew training/office staff training sufficient?
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 5

6. 4. Equipment fulfilling at least regulatory requirements IMO,
Flag State, Industry Standards and Company demands
5. Maintenance/implementation in PMS?
6. Supplier support if problems occur / easy access to service?
7. Replacing/upgrading; investigate the previous problems with
the equipment?
8. Larger systems, is Supplier developing upgrades that can
later be implemented?
9. Yearly service costs /service contracts/spare part
availability?
10. The Company procedures must contain barriers for all
above (preventive and protective based on the level of risk)
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 6

7. Human error using a technology is a symptom of trouble with the equipmen
that has not been identified by the Company or regulated by the regulatory
Ny tekst
Organizations.
If an accident occur using the technology:
Investigate how people’s actions made sense at the time given the
circumstances that surrounded them.
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 7

8.  Credible data collection from equipment often form
the basis of the Investigators recommendations and
conclusions (11)

Article 8 / Investigative bodies
Article 13 / Preservation of evidence
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 8

9.  A lot of equipment onboard have electronic memory (12)
 VDR versus ECDIS; ECDIS is a great immediate tool for the
Investigator and include electronic logbook and a playback
function? (13)
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 9

10. TRAINING?
IMO, FLAG STATE, Industry and Company (14)
Article 8 / Investigative bodies
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 10

11. SUM UP:
Grounding occurred; the vessel was navigating with ECDIS.
1. Risk Assessments and related procedures only gets as good as the
knowledge of the persons creating these (risks related to a concrete
situation must be identified)
2. Look into the list with minimum risks that must be evaluated before
implementing equipment (slide 5 + 6 ).
3. Proactive risk identification of any technology/ equipment will
enhance safety a lot, do not wait for regulatory restrictions, if
procedures are implemented and equipment set up correctly then you
will also know what data can be retrieved in case of an accident.
4. Equipment Training for all is essential both for Company employees,
various Inspectors, Investigators and Crew.
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 11

12. QUESTIONS?
Questions?
www.nordictankers.com
kak@nordictankers.com
27-29.09.2011 LONDON Karen A. K. Kruse 12