627
1 INTRODUCTION
This study contains an assessment of the impact of
exempting ships from compulsory pilotage and the
benefitsandcostsofpilotageservicesontheSzczecin
‐Świnoujściewaterway.
Safemaritimetransportinlimitedportchannelsand
waterways is themain objective of the pilot scheme
and safe
waterways contribute significantly to the
efficiency and effectiveness of maritime transport.
Ship accidents have a significant environmental
impactandareassociatedwithhighaccidentrelated
costs (compensation, pollution control costs, costs of
temporaryportclosures,etc.)Onlypartofthesecosts
can be quantified in financial terms, but even these
easily
identifiablecostsareveryhigh.
Thispaperfocuses ontheanalysisofdataonthe
impactofpilot presence onthe safety of navigation.
Theresearchwascarriedoutonthebasisofavailable
world literature. Available sources concerning the
influence of maritime pilotage on the safety of
navigationhave
beenanalysed.Themainproblemin
collectingdata onthis problemis that there are few
waters in the world where parallel navigation with
and without pilots is allowed. Such data have been
collected and made available only for the Danish
Straits, the Great Barrier Reef Area of Australia, the
Bosporus
StraitsandtheTokyoBay.
2 METHODUSEDINTHESTUDY
The following multistage method was used in the
analysis:
1 Determination,onthebasisofavailableliterature,
of the impact of pilotage on the safety of
navigation, and in particular on the reduction of
the risk of accidents such
as collision, grounding
andimpactonfixedobjects.
2 Determination of traffic on the waterway
Świnoujście‐Szczecin.
3 Determining the accident rate on the waterway
Świnoujście‐Szczecin.
4 Determinationoftheproportionsofshipsplanned
tobeexemptedfromthepilotageobligation.
Analysis of the Impact of Exemption from Pilotage for
75m and 90m Long Vessels on the Fairway Świnoujście-
Szczecin
L.Gucma&K.Łazuga
M
aritimeUniversityofSzczecin,Szczecin,Poland
ABSTRACT:Theaimofthestudyistoanalyzetheimpactofexemptionfrompilotagefor75mand90mlong
vessels entering Szczecin on navigation safety on the waterwayŚwinoujścieSzczecin. Available sources
concerningtheinfluenceofmaritimepilotageonthesafetyofnavigation
havebeenanalysed.Suchdatahave
beencollected and made availableonly for theDanish Straits, the Great Barrier Reef Area of Australia, the
BosporusStraitsandtheTokyoBay.Thestudyalsoincludedananalysisofeconomiceffectivenessofpilotage
exemptioninthisarea.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 13
Number 3
September 2019
DOI:10.12716/1001.13.03.20
628
5 Determination of the reduction in the level of
navigation safety as a result of the proposed
changes in the form of exemption from the
obligatorypilotage.
6 Analysis of the economic effectiveness of the
proposedsolutions.
3 IMPACTOFPILOTAGEONNAVIGATION
SAFETY
3.1 Definitionofaccident riskreduction
In the most of studies on the subject under
consideration, the socalled factor of reducing the
numberofaccidentsduetothe presenceofthepilot
onboardisused.Thesemaybepercentagevalues(as
usedinthisstudy)orfractionalvaluesintheformof
riskreduction
(Rp),e.g.Rp=1/3,whichmeansthatthe
presenceof apilot reduces around 67% of accidents
[LentzandKroon,2010].
n
bp=np/(1Rp)
where:
n
bpnumberofaccidentswithoutpilotonboard;
|n
pnumberofaccidentswithpilotonboard;
R
ppercentageriskreductionduetopilotage.
Available sources concerning the impact of
maritime pilotage on the safety of navigation were
analysed.Themainproblemincollectingdataonthis
problem is the fact that there are few areas in the
world where sailing with and without pilots is
allowed.The
literaturereviewindicatesthefollowing
areas where such data has been collected and
analysed:
1 the Danish Straits, including the Great (between
20042012),theLittleBeltandtheSound(between
19821994).
2 TheGreatBarrierReefarea inAustralia,including
theStraitofTorres(between19852003).
3
BosporusStrait(between19822003).
4 TokyoBay,1970sresearch.
Navigation accidents are divided into types. The
study covers only three most important of them‐
occurringmainlyinpilotedareas,thatis:
1 grounding,
2 collision,
3 impactonthefixedobjects.
Available literature sources determine risk
reduction asa result
ofmaritime pilotage
provocation.Ingeneral,thesourcesareconsistentand
statethat:
1 the pilot on board contributes more to reducing
theriskofstrandingthantheriskofcollision;
2 thereductionofshoalentryisintherangeof50%
to80%,
3 collision reduction averages between
25% and
60%.
3.2 Cond itionsoftheŚwinoujście‐Szczecinwaterway in
termsofpilotage
TheŚwinoujście‐Szczecin waterway has special
navigational conditions, which differ from those
mentioned in Chapter 3 of the area where pilot
studieswereconductedontheimpactofpilotageon
navigationsafety.Theseinclude,among
others:
1 very small width of the waterway, the ratio of
which to the width of ships is 3 to 5 times the
width of the ship, which requires considerable
skills in maneuvering in limited areas, including
passingtechniques,
2 high complexity of the track and navigational
signage, which requires
a high level of
navigationalknowledge,
3 lackofthenavigationassistanceserviceprovided
by VTS resulting mainly from the design of the
route(thisserviceisnotpossiblewiththecurrent
stateofthetechnology),
4 highinteractionwithothervesseltrafficregarding
passingandovertakingrestrictions,
5 complexityof
portregulationscoveringabout100
pages,
6 the complexity of the port structure and
infrastructureintheformofturningplace,basins,
etc., which makes it difficult to determine
manoeuvring tactics or interactions with other
participantsandberths.
As a followup step, the average values of the
coefficient of
reduction in the number of accidents
(basedonOzsoysalR.&OzsoysalA.O.(2006),Lentz
A.& Kroon I. B. (2010),White M. (2000))caused by
pilotage were determined for pa rticular types of
accidentsandarepresentedinTable1.
Table1.Averagepercentagevaluesoftheimpactofpilotage
onthesafetyofnavigation,asadoptedinthestudy
_______________________________________________
Typeof Averagereductionof Relativeaccident
accident accidentriskasaresultreductionexpressed
ofpilotageRp%[%]asRp
_______________________________________________
Grounding 600.60
Collision 550.55
Impact820.82
Average650.65
_______________________________________________
4 TRAFFICONTHEŚWINOUJŚCIE‐SZCZECIN
WATERWAY
Vessel traffic is the most important accident factor.
Vesseltrafficin20032016wasanalysedonthebasis
of data from the Central Statistical Office [Statistical
Yearbooks of Maritime Economy 20102017] and the
Maritime Office in Szczecin. It shows a slight
variation of several percent without a clear upward
trend(Tab.2.).
Thewaterwayisdominatedbysmallunitswithan
overalllengthofupto90m.Figure1 onthebasisof
MaritimeOffice data for 2017(3162 entries ofships)
showsthepercentageshareofvesselsinsizegroups
in intervals of 5m. It can be noted that the vessels
currentlyexcludedfrompilotage,i.e.withalengthof
lessthan60m,areabout250vessels(8%ofthetraffic).
Unitsfrom60mto75mare300units,whichis10%of
thetotaltraffic,andunitsfrom75mto
90mareabout
250 units (8% of the traffic). 1580 units per year is
approx.50%ofallshipstrafficinSzczecin.
629
Figure1. The histogram of the length of units entering
Szczecinin2017.
5 RISKRESULTINGFROMTHEEXEMPTION
FROMPILOTAGETOSZCZECIN
Asafurtherstep,theannualaverageaccidentfigures
fortheperiod20042014weredetermined.Inorderto
estimatetheprobabilityperoccurrenceforeachtype
ofaccident,thenumberofoperations(events)inthe
formwasfirstcalculated:
1
for grounding‐one operation is a single track
crossing,
2 in the case of a collision, one operation is one
passing by with another ship (stoppages and
passingbansarenotincluded),
3 for hitting an object, one operation is one shipʹs
entryorexit.
Theaboveoperations(events)
areusedinthenext
step as a divisor to estimate the probability of
accidents (Tab. 3). Comparison with world results
showsa highshareofcollisionsinaccidents.This is
due to the specific navigation characteristics of the
fairwayanditssignificantreduction.
5.1 Exemptionfrompilotageofunitsup
to90minlength
The values of navigational risk reduction from
pilotage (chapter 3), vessel traffic (chapter 4) and
accidents (chapter 5) and the assumed number of
vesselsexemptedfrompilotage(60%ofvessels)were
usedinthenextsteptoestimatetheexpectednumber
ofaccidentsinthegroup
ofvesselsfrom60mto90m
and the expected increase in accidents in this group
due to not being manned with a pilot. It was
calculated
The values are presented inTable 4. Itcan be seen
thattheexpectedincreaseofaccidentsinthegroupof
collisions with solid
objects is 25.3 accidents/year
(540%),inthegroupofcollisionsis3.2accidents/year
(220%) and in the group of grounding‐3.9
accidents/year (248%). Assuming that the latter two
are the most important for safety, it can be noticed
that on the basis of the adopted assumptions, the
accident rate on the
waterway and in Szczecin will
increaseby7.1accidentperyear,i.e.byabout230%.
Table2.VesseltrafficinSzczecin
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Traffic/Year2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
EntrancestoSzczecin3288 2943 3106 2971 2895 2718 2775 3185 3084 2822 2872 2619 2823 2939
Operations(2*entrances)6576 5886 6212 5942 5790 5436 5550 6370 6168 5644 5744 5238 5646 5878
Hourlyintensity1direction
ofmovement[vessels/h]0.38 0.34 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.31 0.32 0.36 0.35 0.32
0.33 0.30 0.32 0.34
AveragetimeoftransitiontotheBaltic 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25
Sea[h]
Averagenumberofencountersituation 1.60 1.43 1.51 1.44 1.40 1.32 1.35 1.55 1.50 1.37 1.39 1.27 1.37 1.43
duringpassage
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table3.ProbabilitiesandaveragenumberofaccidentsontheŚwinoujście‐Szczecinfairway
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Type / Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Average
Year
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Impacts 11 12 13 7 10 3 15 19 7 3 5 9.55
Probability of impact
per operation. 1.87E-03 1.93E-03 2.19E-03 1.21E-03 1.84E-03 6.16E-04 2.72E-03 3.58E-03 1.36E-03 5.22E-04 9.55E-04 1.71E-03
Collisions 1 2 7 11 6 3 7 3 4 2 3 4.45
Probability of collision
per 1 passage 2.43E-04 4.85E-04 1.70E-03 2.67E-03 1.46E-03 7.28E-04 1.70E-03 7.28E-04 9.70E-04 4.85E-04 7.28E-04 1.08E-03
Grounding entrances 8 4 3 3 8 8 3 7 2 1 1 4.36
Probability of grounding
for operation 1.36E-03 6.44E-04 5.05E-04 5.18E-04 1.47E-03 1.64E-03 5.43E-04 1.32E-03 3.89E-04 1.74E-04 1.91E-04 7.96E-04
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table4.Expectedincreaseinaccidentratein thegroupof ships60m90mas aresult of exemptionfrompilotage onthe
Świnoujście‐Szczecinwaterway
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Type Average number Percentage Number of Pilotage Number of Additional number Increase in
of ship accidents of vessels accidents for accident accidents in of accidents in the accident rate
per year 60m - 90m [%] ships between reduction the group 60-90m group of 60-90m due (ww%=
60m and 90m (Rp) after pilotage to pilotage exemption nbp/np*100%)
(np) exemption per year per year (delta) [%]
(nbp)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Impacts 9.55 60.1 5.7 0.82 31.0 25.3 541
Collisions 4.45 60.1 2.7 0.55 5.9 3.2 220
Groundings 4.36 60.1 2.6 0.60 6.5 3.9 248
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
630
6 ANALYSISOFECONOMICEFFICIENCY
Following the example of other countries with a
developedmaritimesafetyculture (e.g.Canada, UK,
DenmarkorAustralia),itis proposed to carryout a
standard Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), which is also
partoftheFSA[IMOFSA2011]methodology,which
isrequiredby
theIMOtoadoptanytypeofbinding
legalsolutions,beforeintroducingchangesrelevantto
maritimesafety.
In the case of pilotage, the CBA procedure takes
the form of minimising the total costs of expected
accidents and pilotage in a given area. The
dependence on the determination of costs is
as
follows:
T
C=PAR+PC‐>min
where:
T
C‐TotalCosts
P
AR‐Profitfromaccidentreductionthroughpilotage
P
C‐Pilotagecosts
Thecostofaccidentsistakentomeanthetotalcost
of maritime accidents, including the cost of port
downtime,thecostofexpectedhumancasualtiesand
thecostofenvironmentalpollution.
The cost of pilotage is understood as the cost of
conductingpilotageactivitiesandthecost
ofexposing
thepilottohealthanddeathasaresultofconducting
suchactivities.
The standard CBA procedure for pilotage was
performed for Canadian pilots [MPC 2017]. In this
analysis, the economic profit resultingfrom pilotage
activitywasevenestimatedat300:1.
6.1 Costsofnavigationalaccidents
The average cost
of a cargo ship accident is in the
orderofUSD2.5million[MPC2017]fortheUSCoast
Guard[1997],notincludingenvironmentallosses.The
averagecostofaninsuranceclaimdeterminedbythe
Swedish Club over 10 years (20002010) is USD 1.4
million for collision and USD
0.9 million for shoal
entry[CollisionsandGroundinds,2011].TheSwedish
Club insures and reinsures more than 5,000 ships
every year and operates in the marine insurance
marketfrom1872.
OnthebasisofCefordatafrom2017[HullClaims
2017]associating 26% ofthe world fleet above 1,000
GRT and
46% above 10,000 GRT for hull insurance
claims alone (collisions, strikes and strikes), the
average cost of such a fall was determined as 1.27
millionEuro(Fig.2.).
Figure2. Costs of collision, shoal and strikes insurance
claimsbetween1996and2017[Cefor2017].
Fig.3presentstheaveragecostofaccidentsonthe
ŚwinoujścieSzczecin fairway, divided into size
groups,asadoptedinthestudy.
It should be noted that they cover the insurance
claimitselfwithouttakingintoaccountthetruecosts
ofpollutionandlossofhumanlife.
Figure3. Average accident costs as a function of ship size
basedonSwedishClubdatafortheperiod20012011.
7 CONCLUSIONS
Theanalysis