Occurrence Probability Coefficients of Risk of Hazards in Shipwreck Removal Operations in Nigeria’s Waterways

Greener Journal of Business and Management Studies

Vol. 12(1), pp. 59-72, 2024

ISSN: 2276-7827

https://gjournals.org/GJMBS

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15580/gjbms.2024.1.102524150

$Description: Description: C:\Users\user\Pictures\Journal Logos\GJBMS Logo.jpg$

Click on Play button...

Occurrence Probability Coefficients of Risk of Hazards in Shipwreck Removal Operations in Nigeria’s Waterways

Ofurumazi, Righteousness Pereowei^1*; Famous, Denhinbofa Egelu²; Okonko, Ifiokobong Ibanga¹

1 Department of Maritime Transport and Business Studies, Global Maritime Academy, Delta Nigeria.

2 Department of Transport and Nautical Science, Nigerian Maritime University, Okerenkoko Nigeria.

ARTICLE INFO	ABSTRACT
*Article No.:* 102524150 *Type: Research* Full text: PDF, PHP, HTML, EPUB, MP3 *DOI:* 10.15580/gjbms.2024.1.102524150	The study evaluated the occurrence probability of risk of hazards in shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria waterways. The objective of the study was to estimate the occurrence probability of hazards of shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria and rank the hazards in decreasing order of occurrence probability. The study used ex-post facto research design, employing time series secondary data. The time series data on the frequency of risk and hazards types in shipwreck removal operations in Rivers State and Bayelsa State coastal regions of Nigeria, was obtained from the operations department of Humber Marine Werks Ltd, the salvage company used as case study. The statistical method of occurrence probability theory was used to analyze the data obtained. The result of the study indicates that, operational hazard types which include Sudden failure of equipment/downtime (SFE), Human error (HE), Fleet traffic within operating location FTOL), etc., have the highest occurrence probability of 27%. This is followed by technical risk/hazards types which include Hazards related to poor use, inadequacy/lack of requisite equipment and tools (HTE); Hazards related Lack of/poor technical know-how and experience (LTH), Risks related to equipment maintainability problems (REM), and Risks related to poor work procedure (RPWP) with occurrence probability of 23%. Risk of Environmental hazards is third in the ranking with occurrence probability of 21%, followed by natural and security risks types. The implications on policy development were discussed and recommendations were preferred on the basis of the research findings.
*Accepted:* 25/10/2024 *Published:* 29/11/2024
Corresponding Author Ofurumazi, R Pereowei* *E-mail:* righteousnessofurumazip@ gmail.com
*Keywords: occurrence, probability, hazards, shipwreck, removal-operations, waterways*

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The persistent inability of the Nigeria Ports Authority (NPA), the Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), and the Nigeria Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) to guarantee wreck-free navigable waters and channels in Nigeria by effectively removing shipwrecks left in the navigable waters is one of the numerous obstacles to the safety of navigation in Nigerian waterways. According to Sulaimon (2021), there are more than 3,000 shipwrecks scattered throughout Nigeria's coastline alone. This implies that it is risky to travel through areas of water where shipwrecks are common. This could result in a higher frequency of maritime accidents and the socioeconomic repercussions that follow. Consequently, the maritime transportation industry's sustainable growth will be able to significantly support the economic goals of the country is hampered. According to Sulaimon (2021), the failure of indigenous companies that were previously awarded wreck removal contracts in Nigeria to successfully execute such contracts is closely related to the issue of the preponderance of shipwrecks in Nigeria's waterways. This is because the contractors were exposed to marine perils and hazards associated with wreck removal in the marine environment, which they (the contractors) did not anticipate before the contract was awarded (Sulaimon, 2021; Chima, 2017; Olariwaju, 2014).

Therefore, there appears to be a problem with the contractors' and coastal authorities' lack of empirical data regarding the incidence, frequency, and/or likelihood of risk kinds and categories of hazards related to shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria. As a result, the majority of Nigeria's prior wreck removal contracts have gone to local businesses that lack the necessary expertise and a thorough awareness of the dangers and hazard kinds involved in shipwreck removal operations. The result is the termination of the wreck removal operation whose contract has already been awarded and paid for when these organizations actually face the dangers involved in wreck removal and are exposed to the related hazards in the marine environment.

The repercussions of abandoning the wreck removal operation include violations of maritime safety standards, an increase in accident frequency, and ensuing socioeconomic repercussions.

Local wreck removal companies must therefore have a real-time understanding of the risks and related hazards that are associated with and causing disruptions of wreck removal operations in order to carry out a shipwreck removal operation successfully. They must also build empirical information on each risk type associated with wreck removal operations in order to determine the probability of occurrence of each risk and hazard type in order to understand the level of exposure of workers to the hazard types and the impacts. In order to ensure a successful wreck removal operation and minimize the number of injuries linked to each risk and hazard type, this will guarantee that the risks and hazards related to wreck removal operations in Nigerian waters are proactively controlled.

A number of elements present risks and sources of hazards to shipwreck clearance operations, according to Buerbe (2006) and Palmgren (2001). According to Palmgren (2001), a high rate of occupational injury and death linked to a wreck removal operation could jeopardize the operation's success. These factors include a lack of technical know-how, inexperience, inadequate and inadequate equipment, malfunctioning equipment, maintenance problems, equipment failure, etc.

In addition to exposing operators to risks and hazards (such as injury, death, drowning, etc.), other factors include hydrographic conditions and issues related to surface and underwater conditions during wreck removal, geologic issues related to adopting an excavation approach and wreck removal techniques, and atmospheric weather conditions. These factors also influence the occurrence of hazards in wreck removal operations. Studies by Fowler, Jones, and Vine (1995) further demonstrated that wreck removal is linked to environmental pollution risks, specifically oil pollution risk, since most wrecks have the potential to leak oil into the marine environment during removal, putting the operators (spillers) at risk for compensation and third-party claims.

Based on the aforementioned, the study classified the risks and hazards associated with shipwreck clearance operations based on the main causes of those risks and hazards, as indicated in table 1 below:

Table 1: Primary Sources of Risks of Hazards (Risk Factors) Associated with Wreck Removal Operations

s/n	Risk/hazard type/grouping	Specific/Individual risk/causes associated with each risk type/group	Associated occupational hazards and effects
1	Technical risks (TR)	i. Hazards related to poor use, inadequacy/lack of requisite equipment and tools (HTE) ii. Hazards related Lack of/poor technical know-how and experience (LTH) iii. Risks related to equipment maintainability problems (REM) iv. Risks related to poor work procedure (RPWP)	(i) Occupational Injury to operators (ii) Death (iii) Environmental damage, etc
2	Natural risks (NR)	(i) Hydrological conditions related to underwater and surface water operations in removal of wrecks in the marine environment where wrecks exist (HUSO) (ii) Geological conditions and operations ( geological operations associated with the digging and excavation of sunken and underwater/submerged wrecks conditions (GESW) (iii) Atmospheric weather conditions prevailing in the marine environment to which the operators are exposed induces risk of occupational injury and death that hamper the wreck removal exercise (AWRW)	(iv) Occupational Injury to operators (v) Death (vi) Environmental damage, etc
3	Operational risks (OR)	i. Sudden failure of equipment/downtime (SFE) ii. Human error (HE) iii. Fleet traffic within operating location FTOL) Etc.	(i) Occupational Injury to operators (ii) Death (iii) Environmental damage, etc
4	Security risks (SR)	(i) Pirate attacks and kidnap for ransom (PAKR) (ii) Attack and Assault on operators (AAO) (iii) Deliberate Shooting at and killing of operators (DSKO)	(iv) Kidnap for ransom (v) Missing of crew (vi) Trauma and assault (vii) Occupational Injury to operators (viii) Death, etc.
5	Environmental pollution Risk (ER)	(i) oil pollution (OP) (ii) pollution by noxious chemical substances (PNCS) (iii) pollution by other dangerous materials types other than oil and noxious chemicals (PDMT)	(iv) environmental damage claims by third parties (v) damage to biodiversity (vi) Occupational Injury to operators (vii) Death, etc

Source: Prepared by the Author.

In order to prioritize the implementation of risk mitigation measures, it is crucial to ascertain the occurrence probability coefficient of each risk and hazard type in order to limit exposure to the effects of the related hazards and the occurrence of the identified risk types associated with wreck removal.
In order to categorize, rank, and prioritize the elimination of the risks and hazards types and guarantee successful wreck removal operations, it is crucial to have a thorough understanding of the occurrence probability coefficients of the risks and hazard types to which wreck removal contractors and workers are exposed in the Nigerian maritime sector.

1.2 Aim and Objectives of the Study

The aim of the study is to assess Occurrence Probability Coefficient s of Risk of Hazards in Shipwreck Removal Operations in Nigeria’s Waterways. The specific objectives of the study are:

i. To estimate the occurrence probability of individual risk/hazard types associated with shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria

ii. To rank the risk factors associated with shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria in order of decreasing occurrence probability

1.3 Research Questions

i. What are the occurrence probabilities of individual risk/hazard types associated with shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria?

ii. How can the risk factors associated with shipwreck removal operations in Nigeria be ranked in order of decreasing occurrence probability?

2.0 BRIEF REVIEW OF LITERATURE

An investigation on "Shipwreck: A Crisis with Challenging Solutions" was conducted by Ventikos, Koimtzoglou, and Louzi (2014). Among other things, the study's goals were to evaluate shipwreck removal techniques and the risks involved in using each one in order to protect personnel from harm and other dangers related to shipwreck removal operations. To demonstrate the steps involved in shipwreck removal operations and the factors influencing the process's performance, the study used the survey method and case study approach. In order to show which of the most popular procedures is more appropriate for a given situation, Ventikos, Koimtzoglou, and Louzi (2014) present a number of scenarios of the approaches. They also propose ways to mitigate the risks of harm and dangers connected with each technique. They provide an organized framework for the planning phase of such a procedure and generally draw attention to the challenges that arise in shipwreck removal operations.

According to the findings, weather and environmental risks have a significant impact on both the success of a shipwreck removal operation and the strategy chosen. It went on to explain that the marine environment's wave action, wide force, water currents, water resistance, and buoyancy levels significantly impede shipwreck removal operations' progress and may create significant environmental risks and dangers (Ventikos et al., 2014). The study's findings also indicate that the mechanical lifting method of removing shipwrecks is linked to the highest risks of accidents because to its association with fall, vibration, noise, and other hazards.

A research titled "Wreck Removal and the Nairobi Convention a Movement toward a Unified Framework" was conducted by Kern (2016). The purpose of the study was to examine, from a legal standpoint, the obligations of the parties involved in a shipwreck removal operation in accordance with the 2007 Naira Convention on Shipwreck Removal. In order to investigate the legal obligations of owners and coastal authorities in a shipwreck removal operation as stipulated in the Nairobi Convention on shipwreck removal, the study employed exploratory survey methodologies. The study's conclusions demonstrate that although the 2007 Nairobi Convention on Wreck Removal established the much-needed framework for the removal of shipwrecks from navigable waters, it also grants the coastal state the power to enact regulations to guarantee the prompt and/or efficient removal of shipwrecks from waterways, while also highlighting the fact that the registered owner or owners of the ship are responsible for paying for shipwreck removal expenses. The report therefore states that the registered owners are responsible for removing the wreck or providing funding for the wreck removal operation, but the coastal state should be in charge of identifying the registered owner and the ship's flag state so that communication to remove wrecks will be available. However, because shipwreck removal operations are dangerous, registered owners have avoided conducting a comprehensive impact assessment and identifying the main risks and hazards related to wreck removal operations in an effort to keep costs down over the years. With little to no attention from the coastal state and registered owners, this has resulted in serious workplace injuries for wreck clearance workers and environmental harm to third parties (Kern, 2016).

In a different study titled "Design of a wreck removal method considering safety and economy," Lee (2020) evaluated the methods of choosing shipwreck lifting techniques that will ensure worker and marine environment safety while also providing cost and economic benefits to the registered owner, who bears the responsibility for removing shipwrecks. According to the study, one of the most crucial steps in organizing a salvage operation is deciding on an appropriate lifting technique for wreck removal. To prevent accidents and save time and money, both economy and safety should be taken into account. The study suggested that a key factor in selecting techniques for shipwreck removal operations should be the assessment and confirmation of economy and safety. To evaluate the lifting method's safety, a multi-body dynamics simulation was employed. Specifically, it created a model to compute the contact and friction of the wire when lifting the ship to mimic the wire-wrapping method using primary data and the experimental design methodology. In conclusion, it suggested a way to compare the outcomes of different lifting techniques in order to estimate the overall salvage cost and conduct an economic assessment.

Muhammad (2013) conducted a case study on the Sitakunda shipbreaking industrial region of Bangladesh to examine the health risks and hazards that shipbreaking workers face.
Notwithstanding the numerous detrimental effects on coastal environments in Bangladesh's Chittagong region, the study observes that shipbreaking activities face both opportunities and challenges for the holistic management of coastal zones due to the rise in their demand for raw materials for re-rolling mills and other household uses. The study's goal was to determine the socioeconomic status and health risks of workers in the Sitakunda shipbreaking industrial sector in Bangladesh's Chittagong region as a result of shipbreaking activities. Using a hybrid methodology, the study collected data from primary and secondary sources between September 2012 and August 2013. The socioeconomic status of shipbreaking workers revealed that the majority of them work in hazardous, poorly equipped shipyards where they are susceptible to illnesses and injuries. According to the poll, the majority of the workers were from areas of Bangladesh that were extremely deprived in terms of employment opportunities. According to the report, 40.40% of workers reside continuously in the Chittagong or study region, while 59.59% of workers are migrants from other districts. Five categories serious accident-related hazards, physical hazards, mechanical hazards, biological hazards, and ergonomic and psychological hazards on workers and residents closest to the breaking yards in the study area were found to contain the most common risks and hazards associated with shipbreaking activities (Muhammad, 2013).

A study on "Ship Breaking Industries and their Impacts on the Local People and Environment of Coastal Areas of Bangladesh" was conducted by Kutub, Nishat, Shahreen, and Yasin (2017). According to the study, Bangladesh's coastal regions are among the most environmentally productive and have a rich biodiversity, including a number of endemic species. It was noted that shipbreaking industries in coastal locations have received a lot of attention due to the danger they represent to these vibrant biological communities, their various environmental effects, and the hazardous working conditions for their employees. An exploratory survey design approach was used in the investigation. It was discovered that a number of shipbreaking-related activities, including the discharge of various toxic wastes into the sea, the expansion of shipbreaking yards, the alteration of land-use patterns, and the release of toxic substances into the soil, have seriously contaminated Sitakunda's coastal environment. Additionally, the very hazardous and poisonous working conditions that this industry's employees are subjected to put them at danger for bodily and mental illnesses, as well as unintentional injuries and fatalities. However, labor accept these dangers in exchange for pitiful pay, while the wealthy merchants keep the majority of the earnings. The growing need for raw materials for rerolling businesses and job prospects for residents of coastal areas have made this industry more significant despite a number of drawbacks (Kutub, Nishat, Shahreen, and Yasin, 2017).

According to Tsavliris (2020), in a different research titled "Wreck removal issues, the contractors’ perspective," collisions with sunken shipwrecks that have not been removed over time account for a major portion of the approximately 1000 serious shipping casualties that occur worldwide each year. Most of these wrecks are either pulled to safety or refloated, repaired, and put back into service as a result of successful intervention. About 200 of these cases will be legitimate salvage jobs under various salvage and towage contracts, according to Tsavliris (2020). In certain instances, the intricacy and expense of the repairs and salvage required to return the vessel to service make it unfeasible to do so, and the casualty is deemed a loss. Tsavliris (2020). In some situations, such as when the ship sinks in really deep water, it is completely lost. Although ship owners, insurers, and wreck removal contractors complain that the cost of such operations has skyrocketed in some significant cases, the study acknowledges that removing a vessel's wreckage from the coastline or deeper water has always been a significant and costly undertaking. According to the report, the cost of the impact assessment and the research necessary to determine the extent of the risk factors and dangers connected to the removal job are not even included in the amount being referred to. Tsavliris (2020) reports that the International Group (IG) of major P&I Clubs discovered that the combined cost of the top 20 most costly wreck removals over the previous ten years is currently over US$ 2.11 billion, and this amount is expected to increase as some cases are still pending. The paper claims that the location of a wreck, local conditions, and the kind of vessel are significant determinants of the cost of the removal process. A remote location could lengthen the operation's duration, requiring more time to charter costly equipment from a distance. Additionally, studies reveal that even small containerships can cause costly mishaps due to the labor-intensive and sluggish process of removing the containers, which is linked to a higher risk of accidents and occupational hazards than bulkers.

The primary goal of wreck removal operations is always to reduce operator exposure to the risks and hazards involved in wreck removal in order to promote safe operations (Tsavliris, 2020). For operators, reducing the effects of exposure to various hazards and hazard categories is equally crucial. According to studies by Bessis (2010) and Hollman (2010), modeling the occurrence probability of the associated risks and hazards and prioritizing the implementation of risk control measures based on the occurrence probability coefficient of each risk/hazard type is the first step towards limiting exposure and impacts of risks and hazards of shipwreck removal operations.

In order to assess and methodically identify, analyze, prioritize, and respond to risks and hazards in shipwreck removal operations, the risks analysis methodology makes use of occurrence probability measurements. Decisions to accept a known or evaluated risk and/or take steps to lessen its effects or likelihood of happening can be made through the risk appraisal process (Tsavliris, 2020). The steps involved are as follows:

a) Hazard Identification: To identify the causes, mechanisms, and incident scenarios, dangers, and hazardous occurrences.

b) Consequence Analysis: To ascertain the magnitude of the repercussions of recognized dangerous incidents.

c) Estimating Frequency: To ascertain how frequently indicated hazardous events occur and what effects they have.

d) Risk Summation: To ascertain the degree of risk.

e) Risk assessment: To determine if a risk is acceptable or unacceptable, to identify strategies for risk mitigation or reduction, and to score these strategies using methods like cost-benefit analysis and risk rating.

There are several different sources of risk and dangers related to wreck clearance operations. Therefore, the occurrence probability measure gives an indicator of the degree of exposure and incidence of each risk or hazard related to shipwreck removal activities in Nigerian waters. As shown in figure 1 below, the assessment's goal is often to move high occurrence probability risks and hazards to low occurrence probability areas that are acceptable and bearable, where exposure to and the effects of such risks and hazards are at their lowest.

Table 2: Primary Sources of Risks of Hazards (Risk Factors) Associated with Wreck Removal Operations

s/n	Risk type/grouping	Specific/Individual risk/causes associated with each risk type/group	Associated occupational hazards and effects
1	Technical risks (TR)	i. Hazards related to poor use, inadequacy/lack of requisite equipment and tools (HTE) ii. Hazards related Lack of/poor technical know-how and experience (LTH) iii. Risks related to equipment maintainability problems (REM) iv. Risks related to poor work procedure (RPWP)	i. Occupational Injury to operators ii. Death iii. Environmental damage, etc
2	Natural risks (NR)	i. Hydrological conditions related to underwater and surface water operations in removal of wrecks in the marine environment where wrecks exist (HUSO) ii. Geological conditions and operations ( geological operations associated with the digging and excavation of sunken and underwater/submerged wrecks conditions (GESW) iii. Atmospheric weather conditions prevailing in the marine environment to which the operators are exposed induces risk of occupational injury and death that hamper the wreck removal exercise (AWRW)	i. Occupational Injury to operators ii. Death iii. Environmental damage, etc
3	Operational risks (OR)	i. Sudden failure of equipment/downtime (SFE) ii. Human error (HE) iii. Fleet traffic within operating location FTOL) Etc.	i. Occupational Injury to operators ii. Death iii. Environmental damage, etc
4	Security risks (SR)	i. Pirate attacks and kidnap for ransom (PAKR) ii. Attack and Assault on operators (AAO) iii. Deliberate Shooting at and killing of operators (DSKO)	i. Kidnap for ransom ii. Missing of crew iii. Trauma and assault iv. Occupational Injury to operators v. Death, etc.
5	Environmental pollution risk (ER)	i. oil pollution (OP) ii. pollution by noxious chemical substances (PNCS) iii. pollution by other dangerous materials types other than oil and noxious chemicals (PDMT)	i. environmental damage claims by third parties ii. damage to biodiversity iii. Occupational Injury to operators iv. Death, etc

Source: prepared by the author.

The company's occupational safety and health records, which document the history of occurrence of each risk of hazard related to shipwreck removal operations throughout time, provided the secondary data on the frequency of occurrence of each risk of hazard kinds. The company's Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE) section also provided records of occupational injuries and fatalities that occurred as a result of operators being exposed to risky conditions during shipwreck clearance operations.

3.3 Data Analysis Technique: Occurrence Probability Theory

Chance or stochastic processes are the subject of probability theory. Based on past data, occurrence probability calculates the chance that an event will occur. Based on past and/or historical data, the occurrence probability coefficient is a numerical value or scores that indicate the possibility that specific events will occur. The likelihood of hazards related to shipwreck clearance operations occurring is a random occurrence. Therefore, the occurrence probability coefficients of each individual risk of hazards in the various groups of risk factors associated with wreck removal operations in Nigerian waters can be estimated using frequency data on individual hazards/risk types in each category of the risk factors in wreck removal operations.

The occurrence probability P_e of an event E is given as:

------------------------------- (1)

Where: F = frequency/number of successful occurrences in the past

N = Aggregate frequencies representing number of possible outcomes.

P_e=occurrence probability coefficient showing the likelihood of occurrence of event ‘e’.

The categories of risk factors associated with wreck removal operation as aforementioned include TR, NR, OR, SR, and ER.

Technical risk factors (TR) have individual risk/hazard components which include:

i. Hazards related to poor use, inadequacy/lack of requisite equipment and tools (HTE)

ii. Hazards related Lack of/poor technical know-how and experience (LTH)

iii. Risks related to equipment maintainability problems (REM)

iv. Risks related to poor work procedure (RPWP)

The occurrence probability P_e of each of the individual technical risk/hazard types for example is given as:

Where: HTE = frequency of occurrence of risk of hazards associated poor use and inadequacy of equipment and tools over the years.

TR = aggregate total occurrence of technical risks recorded over the period.

The occurrence probability coefficients of the remaining individual technical risk types are shown respectively below.

For the risks/hazards related to poor technical know-how and inexperience, the occurrence probability

For risks of hazards related to equipment maintainability issues (REM), we have:

For risk of hazards related to poor work procedure, we have

It is important to state that by the rules of probability theory:

Similarly, the occurrence probability coefficients of the individual components of the risk of hazards in each of the Operational risk factor (OR), natural Risk factors (NR), Security Risk factors (SR) and Environmental Risk factor (ER) will determined using the occurrence probability analytical tool discussed earlier. Using the methods discussed above, the study analyzed the data obtained in order to provide answers to the research questions.

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.0 Data Presentation

Table-4.1: Occurrence frequency of individual hazards risks associated with wreck removal operations in Rivers Coastal zones of Nigeria between 2012 and 2016.

s/n	Type/Category of Risk/Hazard	Occurrence Frequency of individual risk/hazard types					Total
1	Technical Risks	Risks/hazards:	HTE	LTH	REM	RPWP
1	Technical Risks	Frequency:	7	9	2	6	24
2	Natural risks	Risks/hazards:	HUSO	GESW	AWRW	-
2	Natural risks	Frequency:	6	8	3	-	17
3	Operational risks	Risks/hazards:	SFE	HE	FTOL	-
3	Operational risks	Frequency:	8	16	3	-	27
4	Security risks	Risks/hazards:	PAKR	AAO	DSKO	-
4	Security risks	Frequency:	11	2	1		13
5	Environmental pollution risks	Risks/hazards:	OP	PNCS	PDMT	-
5	Environmental pollution risks	Frequency:	12	5	4	-	21

Source: Secondary Data Sourced from the HSE Records of the Company.

Table-4.2: Occurrence probability coefficients of individual risks of hazards affecting shipwreck removal operation in Nigeria

s/n	Type/Category of Risk/Hazard	Occurrence probability coefficient(s) of individual risk/hazard types					aggregate
1	Technical Risks	Risks/hazards:	HTE	LTH	REM	RPWP
1	Technical Risks	Probability coefficient:	0.29	0.38	0.08	0.25	1.0
2	Natural risks	Risks/hazards:	HUSO	GESW	AWRW	-
2	Natural risks	Probability coefficient:	0.35	0.45	0.17	-	1.0
3	Operational risks	Risks/hazards:	SFE	HE	FTOL	-
3	Operational risks	Probability coefficient:	0.30	0.59	0.11	-	1.0
4	Security risks	Risks/hazards:	PAKR	AAO	DSKO	-
4	Security risks	Probability coefficient:	0.85	0.15	0.07	-	1.0
5	Environmental pollution risks	Risks/hazards:	OP	PNCS	PDMT	-
5	Environmental pollution risks	Probability coefficient:	0.57	0.23	0.19	-	1.0

Source: author’s calculation

The ranking indicates that operational hazard types which include Sudden failure of equipment/downtime (SFE), Human error (HE), Fleet traffic within operating location FTOL), etc have the highest occurrence probability of 27% followed by technical risk/hazards types which include Hazards related to poor use, inadequacy/lack of requisite equipment and tools (HTE), Hazards related lack of/poor technical know-how and experience (LTH), Risks related to equipment maintainability problems (REM), and Risks related to poor work procedure (RPWP) with occurrence probability of 23%. Risk of Environmental hazards is third in the ranking with occurrence probability of 21%, followed by natural and security risks types.

5.0 CONCLUSION

According to the study's findings, burn injuries are the most common kind of injuries sustained by wreck removal workers as a result of welding and cutting risks. Following this, roughly three workers were impacted over time by cuts, bruises, and arc eye injuries. During the study period, only two wreck workers experienced musculoskeletal injuries, fractures, laceration injuries, and strains and sprains.

Similarly, the second-highest number of illnesses and injuries among accident workers during that time period were brought on by exposure to dust and chemical fumes from sandblasting and painting procedures. Rhino rhea and eye irritation are the two main ailments brought on by this hazard category, affecting three and two wreck workers, respectively, over time.

Two dockworkers experienced tinnitus as a result of exposure to noise dangers in the shipyard, while two wreck workers experienced headaches as a result of exposure to vibration hazards. The study's findings make it clear that over half of the health risks experienced by wreck workers in Nigerian wreck removal operations were related to welding and cutting hazards.

REFERENCES

Ahamad, A.F.; Schneider, P.; Khanum, R.; Mozumder, M.M.H.; Mitu, S.J.; Shamsuzzaman, M.M. (2021) Livelihood Assessment and Occupational Health Hazard of the Ship-Breaking Industry Workers at Chattogram, Bangladesh. Journal of Marine. Science & Engineering, 9 (718) 2-22. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/jmse9070718.

Chima J.(2017) Arbitration as a conflict resolution approach to oil spill compensation payment in oil producing Communities of rivers state, Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Legal Studies and Governance, 2(1)17 – 32

Cherniack,M.,Brammer,A.J.,Lundstrom,R.,Meyer,J.,Morse,T.F.,Nealy,G.,&Fu,R.W.(2004).Segmental nerve conduction velocity in vibration-exposed shipyard workers. International archives of occupational and environmental health,77(3),159-176

International Maritime Organization (IMO, 2007) Nairobi Convention on Wreck Removal 2007. Available at: http//www.imo.rog. Retrieved on 13/10/2021

Iqbal, K.S., Zakaria, N.G.,& Hossain, K.A.(2011) Identifying and Analysing Underlying Problems of shipbuilding Industries in Bangladesh. Journal of Mechanical Engineering,41(2),147-158.

Kern J.M (2016) Wreck Removal and the Nairobi Convention—a Movement Toward a Unified Framework? Frontiers in Marine Science 3(11) Pp:1-10. Doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00011

Kutub, M., Pinto, C., Magpili, L., & Jaradat, R (2015) Operational Risk Management: Momentum press, USA.

Lee J .P (2020) Design of a wreck removal method considering safety and economy. Journal of Transport safety and security 4(3)1037-1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2019.

Muhammad M. (2013) Health hazards and risks vulnerability of ship breaking workers: A case study on Sitakunda ship breaking industrial area of Bangladesh. Global Advanced Research Journal of Geography and Regional Planning (ISSN: 2315-5018) Vol. 2(8) pp. 172-184. Available online http://garj.org/garjgrp/index.htm

Malherbe, L. & Mandin, C.(2007) VOC emissions during outdoor ship painting and health-risk assessment. Atmospheric environment, 41(30), 6322-6330.

Nwokedi T. C., Kalu D. I., Ibe C.C., Igboanusi C.C., Gbasibo L.A., Odumodu C.U. (2019) Constraint Theory Approach Analysis of the Nigerian Shipbuilding Industry. LOGI – Scientific Journal on Transport and Logistics Vol. 10 No.( 1) 50-61. DOI: 10.2478/logi-2019-0006,

OSHA (2013) Occupational Safety and Health Standards in Shipyard Industry. US Department of Labor. No.: OSHA 2268-11R.

Puntoni, R., Merlo,F., Borsa,L., Reggiado, G., Garrone, E., & Ceppi, M.(2001) A historical cohort mortality study among shipyard workers in Genoa Italy. American journal of industrial medicine,40(4),363-370.

Suleman Salau (2021) Government to spend N10 billion on shipwreck removal. https://guardian.ng/business-services/maritime/government-to-spend-n10-billion-on-shipwreck-removal/

Tsavliris A., (2020) Wreck removal issues–the contractors’ perspective. International Salvage Union. A working document.

Ventikos N.P., Koimtzoglou A., & Louzis K. (2014) Shipwreck: A Crisis with Challenging Solutions. Journal of Risk Analysis and Crisis Response, Vol. 4, No. 3 (September 2014), 160-174

Risk factor/hazard type(s)	Occurrence likelihood probability%	Rank (s)
Operational risks/hazards (OR)	27%	1
Technical risks/hazards (TR)	23%	2
Environmental risks/hazards (EN)	21%	3
Natural risk (NR)	16%	4
Security risks (SE)	13%	5

Risk factor	TR	NR	OR	SR	EN	aggregate
Occurrence probability coefficient(s)	0.23	0.16	0.27	0.13	0.21	1.0