html5-img
1 / 27

Marine Facility Security Assessment using CGEY s Risk Assessment Methodology

Overview. Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions. Security in Ports

ostinmannual
Télécharger la présentation

Marine Facility Security Assessment using CGEY s Risk Assessment Methodology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Marine Facility Security Assessment using CGE&Y’s Risk Assessment Methodology Marco Folpmers

    2. Overview Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions

    3. Security in Ports & Shipping is hot in today’s news IMO decision on a series of new security measures London - Governments have been given one and a half years to implement the security measures decided on by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on Friday. They must be ratified and brought into force by 1 July 2004 by 109 countries worldwide. It is expected that the practical implementation will raise considerable discussion, but there is no doubt that the working conditions in the ports and on vessels will change greatly. A conference described as 'historic' last week delivered a tightened-up version of the current Safety Of Life At Sea convention (Solas) and the introduction of an entirely new convention, International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS). The latter will have a particularly powerful impact on the state of affairs in the shipping industry, above all through setting requirements on terminal security for the first time. Security means chiefly: organizing safety. The IMO puts the associated responsibility on the shoulders of the national governments. Failing to implement the measures can lead to governments being made to accept some liability for any attacks and their consequences. The governments may delegate the implementation to a `recognized security organization´, for example municipal port operators. The body concerned must establish the security status of ports before drawing up a security plan. However, only governments have the authority to grant Declarations of Security, which certify that the security of premises conforms with the standards. Such a security plan must be comprehensive, with numerous procedures and measures to guarantee security: who is and is not permitted to enter a terminal, how to prevent weapons ending up in terminals and on vessels, what to do if there are signs of a security threat, how to conduct an evacuation, etc.. Each port also has to appoint a security officer, as do shipping companies, for the entire company and for each vessel. The security officer has to supervise observance of the security plans and is responsible for the training of the personnel on the terminal and the vessel. 17 Dec 2002 Nieuwsblad Transport IMO decision on a series of new security measuresLondon - Governments have been given one and a half years to implement the security measures decided on by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on Friday. They must be ratified and brought into force by 1 July 2004 by 109 countries worldwide. It is expected that the practical implementation will raise considerable discussion, but there is no doubt that the working conditions in the ports and on vessels will change greatly. A conference described as 'historic' last week delivered a tightened-up version of the current Safety Of Life At Sea convention (Solas) and the introduction of an entirely new convention, International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS). The latter will have a particularly powerful impact on the state of affairs in the shipping industry, above all through setting requirements on terminal security for the first time. Security means chiefly: organizing safety. The IMO puts the associated responsibility on the shoulders of the national governments. Failing to implement the measures can lead to governments being made to accept some liability for any attacks and their consequences. The governments may delegate the implementation to a `recognized security organization´, for example municipal port operators. The body concerned must establish the security status of ports before drawing up a security plan. However, only governments have the authority to grant Declarations of Security, which certify that the security of premises conforms with the standards. Such a security plan must be comprehensive, with numerous procedures and measures to guarantee security: who is and is not permitted to enter a terminal, how to prevent weapons ending up in terminals and on vessels, what to do if there are signs of a security threat, how to conduct an evacuation, etc.. Each port also has to appoint a security officer, as do shipping companies, for the entire company and for each vessel. The security officer has to supervise observance of the security plans and is responsible for the training of the personnel on the terminal and the vessel. 17 Dec 2002 Nieuwsblad Transport

    4. The ISPS Code imposes significant requirements on shipping companies, port operators and governments.

    5. Overview Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions

    6. Threats may imply risks for security objects, …...

    7. …. and therefore, risks should be mitigated …...

    9. The risk for a security object is determined by the likelihood and impact of the occurrence of a threat.

    10. Measures protect security objects against risks

    11. Marine facilities are affected by the marine facility section of the ISPS Code. Important part of the marine facility security is performing a Marine Facility Security Assessment (MFSA).

    12. Overview Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions

    13. CGE&Y developed a specific methodology for risk management for marine facilities

    14. CRAM MFSA consists of 3 major steps:

    15. Step 1: Prepare

    16. Step 2: Conduct

    17. Step 3: Improve

    18. The methodology is supported by our security assessment software tool which is used during the marine facility security assessments.

    20. In the software tool risks and measures are related to mitigate the risks.

    21. Overview Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions

    22. Security measures should be embedded in the organisation via a Marine Facility Security Plan (MFSP).

    23. CRAM MFSA: examples of administrative measures Measures to ensure the security communication (ISPS, A, 14) Asset identification (ISPS, A, 15; B, 15.5-15.8) Information security measures (ISPS, A, 16) Logical access controls to information Monitoring / physical detection measures (ISPS, A, 14) Physical access controls to ships, ports and their restricted areas (ISPS, A, 1.3; 16)

    24. CRAM MFSA: examples of operational measures The development and implementation of marine facility security plans (XI-2, reg. 10, ISPS, A, 1.3) and assessments (ISPS, A, 15) Measures to prevent the introduction of weapons (explosives, etc.) to ships or port facilities (ISPS, A, 1.3; 16) Notification and upscaling measures (ISPS, A, 1.3; 16) ‘Control of controls’, ensuring the performance of the security duties and audits of the security plan (ISPS, A, 14; 16) Supervision of the handling of cargo and the ship’s cargo handling equipment and stores (ISPS, A, 14; 16) Contingency planning (ISPS, A, 16) A valid international ship security certificate (XI-2, reg. 9) Securing the proper conditions for port entry such as checking the information contained in the continuous synopsis record (cf. SOLAS, XI, reg. 5) and the information regarding the expected time of arrival in the port, the crew, the cargo, the passengers (ISPS, B, 4.39) valid international ship security certificate (XI-2, reg. 9)

    25. CRAM MFSA: examples of staff measures The institution of a port facility security officer (ISPS, A, 2) Security training (ISPS, A, 1.3) The specification of security related duties of port facility personnel (ISPS, A, 16)

    26. Overview Marine Facility Security Assessments Risk Management CRAM MFSA: a methodology for Marine Facility Security Assessments Marine Facility Security Plan Conclusions

    27. Conclusion: CRAM MFSA as a tool of management The ISPS Code and the related SOLAS December 2002 amendments will go into force on July 1, 2004. Objectives of the Code and SOLAS are to strengthen maritime security and prevent and suppress acts of terrorism against shipping. Marine facilities are required to perform marine facility security assessments and to implement marine facility security plans. CGEY developed a methodology for performing assessments: the CRAM MFSA. The methodology is supported by a dedicated assessment tool.

More Related