International Journal of Safety and Security Engineering

Vol. 14, No. 4, August, 2024, pp. 1061-1072

Journal homepage: http://iieta.org/journals/ijsse

Shipbuilding Risk Assessment: Legal Frameworks and Practical Challenges in Indonesian

Shipyards
Winarno* , Antoni Arif Priadi , Retno Sawitri Wulandari

Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Pelayaran, Maritime Institute of Jakarta, North Jakarta 14150, Indonesia

Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

Copyright: ©2024 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsse.140405 ABSTRACT

Received: 22 June 2024 Ship accidents during the shipbuilding process, including construction, repair, and
Revised: 4 August 2024 operation, remain frequent and unresolved, often leading to legal issues for ship owners
Accepted: 12 August 2024 and shipbuilding companies. This research aims to analyse the obstacles encountered
Available online: 30 August 2024 during these stages and the associated accidents. We employed the Hazard and Operability
Study (HAZOP) method to analyse the data. We collected primary data from 13 shipping
companies located in six major cities in Indonesia. The findings indicate that problems
Keywords: such as rework at the erection and outfitting stage due to worker negligence, delays in
shipbuilding process, risk assessment, contract schedules, and accidents due to worker's negligence frequently happen in the
shipping company, shipyard process of shipbuilding. Then, rework at the sub-assembly stage due to engine damage
and repairs due to engine damage were the highest risks in ship repair, and collision
accidents were the highest risk in ship operations. Current efforts to reduce ship accidents
focus on continuous improvement strategies at both organizational and individual levels
through the development of best shipbuilding practices.

1. INTRODUCTION (hazard identification, risk assessment, and risk control) [10,

11], HIRARC combined with SWOT (Strength, Weakness,
Ship collisions continue to disrupt the global shipping Opportunity, Threat) analysis [12], JSA (Job Safety Analysis)
industry, encompassing incidents such as fires and explosions [13], JSA combined with Bowtie analysis [14, 15], Interval
during construction, collisions and sinking during trial runs, type-2 Fuzzy expert system integrated with the dynamic
and natural disasters like earthquakes. Contractual obligations Bayesian network and bow-tie model [16], Dynamic Multi-
require shipyards to safeguard their interests and those of their Attribute Decision-Making Method [17], and the rule-based
customers against these hazards. The shipbuilding sector, Bayesian network (RBN) and utility function [18]. RBN
characterized by unique attributes and a complex economic technique excels at handling ambiguous and uncertain risk
environment, is considered a high-risk industry requiring information.
meticulous management [1]. The growing maritime activity is amplifying the potential
Shipbuilders typically face challenges in competing with hazards associated with oceanic operations, particularly the
other shipyards due to the lengthy construction processes dangers faced by ships as the primary means of transportation.
required in national shipyards. We can divide the ship Hence, it is appropriate for the ship owner to obtain vessel
production process into three distinct phases: ship construction, insurance. Presidential Instruction No. 5/2005, which pertains
ship maintenance, and ship operation. During the new to the empowerment of the national shipping industry,
shipbuilding process, it is critical to prioritize the timely mandates that all ships owned and/or operated by national
completion of ship construction as specified in the contract [2]. shipping companies, as well as used ships or newly
Multiple factors have impacted recent shipbuilding endeavors, constructed vessels that will be acquired domestically or
resulting in delays. The late arrival of imported ship materials internationally, must be insured, with a minimum coverage of
is one significant issue causing delays. The shipyard industry Hull and Machinery [19]. Both parties must comprehend the
should take proactive measures to anticipate the timely arrival provisions of the Marine Hull and Machinery Insurance Policy,
of these supplies. To predict and mitigate delays in project which serves as a written record of the sea transportation
completion, it is necessary to apply risk analysis and risk agreement derived from the Marine Insurance Act of 1906 [20].
assessment [1]. This understanding will enable each party to anticipate any
Researchers used a variety of methodologies to detect potential legal hazards that may develop [21]. At present, the
potential dangers and conduct risk evaluations. In order to maritime sector receives satisfactory insurance service. The
obtain the necessary data, they employed Failure Mode and shipping customer satisfaction index at PT. Indonesian Service
Effects Analysis (FMEA) [3-6], HAZOP (Hazard and Insurance is 67.82%, indicating a satisfactory level of
Operability Study) [7], HIRADC (Hazzard Identification, Risk satisfaction [22].
Assessment And Determining Control) [8, 9], HIRARC Risk analysis studies related to shipping companies have

1061
employed various approaches and methodologies. For insurance. Additionally, the study evaluates the safety
instance, using Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), facilities at shipyards, standard operating procedures, and the
risk analysis on operational functions tries to keep companies types of insurance that the Directorate General of Sea
from losing money by finding possible failures and offering Transportation can use to reduce the risk of losses during the
ways to deal with the risks that come up [23]. The Warship construction of state ships. The benefits of the study are to
Division of PT. PAL Indonesia adopted the House of Risk provide input for decision-makers at the Directorate General
(HOR) model for their Risk Assessment and Risk Mitigation of Sea Transportation, especially the Directorate of Traffic and
Program [24]. Louhenpessy and Febriansyah utilised a Sea Transportation, and related parties in the construction of
technological model to determine the technology contribution ships for sea transportation. Furthermore, the study's output
coefficient value at the shipyard, quantifying the overall will contribute to producing guidelines and policies as
contribution of technical components such as technological minimum requirements for ship construction insurance and as
equipment, human resources, information systems, and best practices for shipbuilding.
organizational machinery [25]. This study examined the
availability, development needs, and mapping of ship
component product standards using descriptive and 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
quantitative methods, literature review data, questionnaires,
surveys, and interviews [26]. Significant work accident risks are associated with three key
Qualitative and quantitative risk analyses, in particular, ship construction operations: plate pounding, welding, and
involve systematic evaluations of the potential impact and lifting work [30]. The primary risks in shipbuilding projects
likelihood of identified risks. These methods prioritize risks include potential delays in material supply and the need for
based on their impact on project objectives. Asdi and Basuki improvements due to changes in recommendations following
define quantitative risk analysis as the process of numerically work completion [3, 31]. Despite these risks, the application
evaluating the likelihood and consequences of each risk for of risk analysis to various aspects of the shipbuilding
project objectives [27]. Qualitative analysis typically production process remains insufficient [32-34]. Additional
complements this by leveraging company resources, such as hazards that emerge include the occupational safety and health
expenses, time, and performance, to execute the project. This conditions of the workforce [7, 35]. Furthermore, the painting
work has the potential to significantly contribute to the process, as well as the sandblasting and welding procedures,
development of improved risk models. have inherent hazards [4]. The shipbuilding process is prone
When discussing risk assessment, the government must take to significant risks, such as challenges in delivering ship
responsibility for improving safety in navigation-related areas. materials and equipment, insufficient shipyard facilities,
Whether handled by individuals or businesses, governments alterations in ship design, and suboptimal labor productivity
must prioritize the safety aspects of shipping. In order to [5].
reduce the frequency of maritime accidents, it is crucial for the Ship repair is the next stage in ship construction, typically
government to effectively enforce laws and regulations. conducted at offshore wind farms. Despite the fact that
In Indonesia, the need for maritime transportation remains offshore wind facilities are often located far from commercial
significant due to the growing popularity of marine transport shipping routes, the rapidly growing demand for repair or
techniques. The legal ties that exist in maritime transport replacement services drives a significant concentration of ship
services are complex, involving both private and public law maintenance activities. Currently, there is insufficient
relations. The government must be present within the attention to evaluating the likelihood of collisions between
framework of public law relations to effectively carry out its maintenance ships and offshore wind turbines. The risk of
duty as a guardian of the populace. Shipping Law No. 17 of such collisions primarily arises during the maintenance of
2008 governs the organisation and execution of both certain wind turbine components that require corrective repair
commodity and individual transportation. or replacement [36]. Additional hazards or limitations
Law enforcement must conduct their operations with associated with repair work can also emerge due to changes in
proportionality and professionalism in order to guarantee safe ship owners' and classification societies' requirements [1].
and secure shipping and minimise incidents of violence at sea The lifting process of moving blocks or goods using a crane,
[28]. As a result, it is necessary to establish the state's the cutting process of lifting materials and placing them on the
accountability for preventing maritime vessel accidents in cutting machine, the grinding process of lifting materials and
accordance with international regulations and incorporate placing them on the grinding place, the fitting and working at
them into Indonesian legislation [29]. height process of installing plates, and the main engine
Previous studies assessed the risk of ship accidents overhaul process all involve high risk [8]. The repair
separately, namely at the shipbuilding stage, the repair stage, procedure is at high risk due to unfinished work equipment,
and the operational stage only. Furthermore, the research inefficient work planning, inadequate preparation for painting
focuses on the technical aspects without touching on the legal the ship's body, and incomplete production equipment [6].
aspects. This paper uses a legal study to develop a risk Other high-risk situations include welding in enclosed areas,
assessment for ship accidents in phases of inertia. The legal docking and undocking procedures, cutting metal plates, doing
aspect will provide clear guidance on what shipowners and maintenance and repairs in electrical rooms, and being
related agencies should do. Based on the above explanations, reckless when filling gas cylinders [10]. Additional high-risk
the paper will answer the following questions: a) What are the concerns include the extended duration of approval for goods
problems faced in the process of building, repairing, and requests, delays in client payment processes, changing design
operating ships?; b) What is the risk assessment in the process specifications, the owner's decision-making process, the
of building, repairing, and operating ships? lengthy delivery process, inadequate material inventory, and
The study aims to evaluate risks in shipbuilding, repair, and insufficient stock material availability [37]. During the plate
ship accidents while operating under the risks covered by cutting process, there are significant issues with sandblasting

1062
hose leaks, which pose considerable hazards during the repair for shipbuilding, the shipyard must incur higher expenses and
stage [9, 11, 13]. a penalty for the delay, thereby hindering its ability to proceed
The next stage in the shipbuilding process involves the with other shipbuilding projects. A variety of factors, such as
ship's operation, where conducting risk assessments is of contract terms and conditions, the preparedness of the basic
utmost importance. A significant challenge in obtaining design and key plan drawing of the ship, the clarity of ship
precise and dependable risk estimations is the lack of data and information and specifications, the procurement of ship
uncertainty surrounding the likelihood of collisions caused by materials and equipment, the availability of manpower,
human and organizational factors [38]. During ship operations, facilities, and production processes, and the financing support
the risk of ship fires, in addition to ship-to-ship collisions, is a from the banking sector, can cause delays in the completion of
major concern. These fires can occur suddenly and escalate shipbuilding. We must identify the issues facing the national
quickly, with even minor mistakes leading to severe shipyard industry in building new vessels so we can determine
consequences. The swift responses of both crew and the necessary actions to reduce the risk of shipbuilding delays
passengers are primary factors in mitigating the severity of that could harm ship-owners and shipyards. Increased self-
ship fire incidents [39]. The International Maritime navigation activity undoubtedly heightens the potential risks
Organization (IMO) has introduced the Formal Safety associated with these activities at sea, particularly for ships
Assessment (FSA) to evaluate risks on board, but has not yet that serve as the primary means of transportation. Marine Hull
implemented a specific tool for analyzing the risks involved in and Machinery Insurance Product aims to provide
ship operations [40]. comprehensive insurance protection for ships, ship engines,
During the operation phase, there is a significant risk of and parts of ship engines, i.e., connecting rods, cylinder blocks,
machinery operational failures, including main motor failure, cylinder liners, and rocker arm inlet valves.
propulsion system failure, and power system failure, all of Builder Risk Marine Insurance is one of the marine
which can potentially lead to accidents [16]. Failures are the insurance products that guarantees all risk of loss or damage
primary factor contributing to the malfunction of the pod to the hull and machinery that may occur in connection with
propulsion system on cruise ships. Other notable risks include the ship's construction. This includes risk at the launching
inadequate management for the players involved in the stage, during the sea trial, and during the surrender of the ship
logistics chain, human errors, restricted storage capacities, to the principal at the destination port (delivery voyage). When
subpar warehouse conditions, and a lack of knowledge a ship is built, the shipbuilder and buyer enter into a
regarding proper handling techniques during loading and shipbuilding contract that outlines the terms and conditions of
unloading operations [18]. Environmental safety and health the agreement. The contract positions the builder as the party
are high-risk considerations at a shipyard [41-43]. This responsible for the purchased ship throughout its construction
includes addressing potential environmental dangers [41], and until it reaches the buyer's hands. When the damage occurs,
such as the inhalation of toxic air or gas by ship sailors during the costs are enormous and can result in financial losses.
the inspection of the cofferdam tank [15]. Additionally, cost Therefore, the builder is very much in need of builder risk
services related to delivery [35] and the safety of loading and marine insurance to cover such losses. In addition, marine
unloading activities [12] are also taken into account. During insurance, also known as protection and indemnity (P&I),
the operation stage, significant risks arise from containers provides comprehensive protection for ships against the risk
falling and ships colliding with container cranes [14]. of accidents they may cause.
Furthermore, people's mishandling of the process is the Marine Insurance Act 1906, Chapter 41, states that a marine
primary risk element that significantly impacts the safety of insurance contract is an agreement in which the insurer agrees
ship-to-ship LNG bunkering [44]. to compensate the insured for any losses related to marine
The Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 17/2008 on activities [20]. This contract's purpose is to protect the insured
Shipping, Chapter IX, Article 124, stipulates that all against potential losses in inland waters or land-related risks
procurement, construction, and assembly of ships, including that may arise from any sea voyage. The relevant provisions
their equipment, as well as the operation of vessels in of this Act will apply, to the extent that they are applicable, if
Indonesian waters, shall comply with the ship's safety marine insurance covers a marine adventure. Nevertheless,
requirements [45]. The safety requirements for ships this Act will not modify or impact any legal principle that is
encompass various aspects such as materials, construction, applicable to any insurance agreement, except for a specific
buildings, machinery and equipment, stability, equipment type of insurance known as maritime insurance as described
arrangement, including auxiliary and radio equipment, and by this Act., except as provided in this section of marine
ship electronics. Further, Article 125 specifies that before the insurance as defined by this Act.
ship's construction and assembly, including its equipment, the The legal requirements cover a variety of topics, including
owner or shipbuilder is obliged to make calculations and shipping safety, ship dimensions, and specific standards that
drawings of the construction plan as well as its completion crews must adhere to. In order to ensure the safety
data. All of these rules are mandatory, as long as we try to requirements of shipping, the corporation must comply with
comply with the ship's safety measures. According to Article the regulations pertaining to ship construction, ship
245, a ship accident is defined as any event that could maintenance, and ship operations. This stage is a crucial
jeopardize the ship's safety and/or human lives, including milestone in enhancing the security of navigation. The Safety
sinking, burning, colliding, and ship cladding. The owner or of Life at Sea (SOLAS) convention governs maritime safety,
operator of a vessel of a specific type and size must insure their specifically addressing requirements pertaining to navigation
liability to meet the requirements of maritime liability [46]. equipment, the integrity of the ship's watertight compartments,
In the implementation of new ship construction, there is communication systems, construction standards, and other
always the potential for delayed completion of the ship. This safety equipment. According to Article 1, Paragraph 34 of Act
is extremely detrimental to the ship-owner because of the No. 17 of 2008 on shipping, a certificate obtained through
vessel's inability to operate. Due to the ongoing use of the land inspection and testing serves as evidence of a ship's safety.

1063
These vessels' safety regulations are relevant to ship Government Decree No. 51 of 2002 on Shipping, Article 121,
construction, building, and maintenance, as well as their and Presidential Instruction No. 5/2005. Other supporting data
operation in Indonesian seas. are shipyard facility and production process data; shipbuilding
The government implements regulations that focus on the construction data; ship machinery data used; certificate-ship
procedural process of establishing general and technical excellence and safety data; policy documents; and past studies.
policies. This includes setting norms, standards, guidelines, We used the Likert scale method, which uses a value on a
criteria, planning, and procedures, as well as ensuring safety Likert scale as an indicator to describe the variable under
in shipping and licensing requirements. Just like in measurement. This value serves as a starting point for creating
shipbuilding, the government oversees the procedural process instruments that employ the Likert scale, which ranges from
by issuing instructions, advice, training, licenses, certifications, extremely positive to extremely negative. If we assign a value
and providing technical support in the development and of 5 to an alternative answer, we then sum up its value into five
operation fields. The government monitors development, weighting categories on the Likert scale. We can calculate the
maintenance, and operation activities to ensure compliance answer and present it as a table for average calculation.
with legislative requirements. This includes applying Sugiyono uses the Likert scale to gauge an individual's or a
corrective actions and enforcing laws. group's attitudes, opinions, and perceptions about social
phenomena [48]. Each instrument item's answers on the Likert
scale have a gradation from very positive to very negative.
3. METHODOLOGY Therefore, the author formulated a question to gather data or
information from expert staff members across all 13
This study uses a quantitative methodology, including a companies. The author then weights the data processed from
criterion scale, to analyse interview data and risk observations the questionnaire collection for each alternative answer.
at each stage of shipbuilding. The work procedure begins with Then we use descriptive analysis to process the data. We use
researchers conducting face-to-face interviews with workers descriptive statistical analysis to scrutinise the collected data
and meticulously tracking the various stages of shipbuilding. and provide a detailed description. The statistics used in this
We conduct interviews to identify potential hazards at each study are the mean and standard deviation. The variables in
stage of ship construction. In addition, we employ the Hazard this research are the likelihood risk and the risk impact that
and Operability Study (HAZOP) method to analyse the data. occur in shipbuilding, ship repair, and ship operation.
HAZOP is a systematic and structured technique for Risk assessment is the evaluation of events that threaten
identifying and reviewing hazards in a process or operation agencies' objectives and targets [49]. We use this type of
inside a system [47]. Identification is required to uncover assessment to identify situations, processes, and other
potential issues that may disrupt the process and pose dangers hazardous activities. The risk assessment criteria include three
to individuals, facilities, or the current system in the things: the risk impact scale, the probability scale, and the risk
environment. scale. Five categories make up the risk impact scale:
The primary survey or field survey was conducted at 13 insignificant (score 1), minor (score 2), moderate (scale 3),
companies spread across six significant regions in Indonesia, major (score 4), and catastrophic (score 5). Table 1 displays
such as Medan, Jakarta, Surabaya, Makassar, Bitung, and the risk impact scale.
Sorong. In Medan, there were two companies: PT. Waruna
Shipyard Indonesia and PT. PELNI Branch Medan. At Table 1. The risk impact scale
Makasar, there were two companies: PT. Industri Kapal
Indonesia and PT. Pelni Branch Makasar. In Bitung, there Scale Score Description Percentage
were two companies: the PT. Industri Kapal Indonesia branch Insignificant 1 No cost overruns 0%
and the PT. PELNI branch. We conducted surveys on three Minor 2 Low cost overruns <5%
companies in Surabaya: PT Dumas Tanjung Perak Shipyard, Moderate 3 Medium cost overruns 5%-10%
Major 4 High cost overruns 11%-20%
PT Adiluhung Saransegara, and the Pelni Branch of Surabaya.
Catastrophic 5 Extreme cost overruns >20%
In Jakarta, we conducted surveys at PT. Proskuneo
Kadarusman, PT. Daya Radar Utama, and PT. Pelayaran
The second criterion is a likelihood-risk scale. We divide
Nasional Indonesia. There was only one company in Sorong:
this scale into five categories: rare (score 1), unlikely (score 2),
the PT. PELNI branch. We conducted a survey on the
possible (score 3), likely (score 4), and almost certain (scope
inventories of state ships, the challenges encountered during
5). Rare (scale 1) means that the risk is unlikely to occur in
their development, repair, and operation, and the insurance
extreme circumstances, whereas almost-certain (5 scores)
products utilized in this process.
means that this risk has occurred or is certain to occur more
The respondents are 40 males, with an average age of 44
than once in a year. Table 2 displays the likelihood-risk scale.
years old; the youngest was 35 years old, while the oldest was
50 years old. The forty respondents included eight HRD
Table 2. The likelihood risk scale
managers, seven branch managers, six engineering managers,
five commercial SPV directors, four masters, four production
Scale Score Description Percentage
general managers, four site managers, one marketing chief,
Rare 1 Seldom occur <20%
and one marketing manager. Unlikely 2 Rarely occur 20%-40%
Secondary data collection is required in the process of Possible 3 Sometimes occur 41%-60%
analysis and policy related to the requirements of state Likely 4 Frequently occur 61%-80%
shipbuilding insurance, including the Marine Insurance Act Almost
5 Certain to occur >80%
1906, Chapter 41; The Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. certain
17/2008 on Shipping, Chapter IX, Articles 124, 125, and 245;

1064
 Table 3. The risk scale

Likelihood Consequences
Probability/
What is the severity of financial impact if the risk actually occurs?
frequency
Minor Moderate (3) Major
Insignificant (1) No Catastrophic (5)
How likely is the event at (2) Low cost Medium cost (4) High cost
cost overruns Extreme cost overruns
sometimes in the past overruns overruns overruns
0% >20%
<5% 5%-10% 11%-20%
Almost certain (5) Certain
M5 H 10 H 15 E 20 E 25
to occur >80%
Likely (4) Frequently occur
M4 M8 H 12 H 16 E 20
61%-80%
Possible (3) Sometimes
L3 M6 M9 H 12 H 15
occur 41%-60%
Unlikely (2) Rarely occur
L2 M4 M6 M8 H 10
20%-40%
Rare (1) Seldom occur
L1 L2 L3 M4 M5
<20%

The last criterion is the risk scale. We use the formula reduce the work of welding. The next step is to attach frames
R=L×C to assess risk. R is risk, L is likelihood, and C is the to the stomach skin. The process of merging several wrangs,
value of consequences. In risk assessment, the risk matrix is as well as merging two blocks, involves combining part
5×5. The classification of consequences values includes low assemblies from the subassembly into a single block. We
(score 1), medium (score 2), high (score 3), and extreme (score weight the built-in blocks based on the crane's capabilities.
5). Low means that the impact is less than 5%; low means the Erection is the process of combining block structures to
impact caused is 5-10%. Medium is defined as 10-15%. High form the vessel's body. Erection is the last stage of the
indicates an effect of 15-20%, while extreme indicates a cause assembly process. This procedure entails merging blocks from
of more than 20%. The following table provides a clearer the assembly process into a vessel. The erection process
understanding of the level of danger by classifying the risk typically starts with the double bottom block, often in
value from the formula above. Table 3 displays the risk scale. conjunction with the keel-laying process, and then progresses
upwards to the superstructure part. Before the erection process
starts, we will perform a block reversal. The direction block
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION follows the block at the back, and the erection process takes
place on two double-bottom blocks, which also serve as the
4.1 Problems in the process of building, repairing, and vessel's keel-laying blocks. Outfitting is the process of
operating ships assembling ship components, including hull outfitting, piping,
accommodation, propulsion systems, and machinery outfitting.
Before discussing the problems faced in the process of A sea trial is a test carried out by ship owners and shipbuilders.
building, repairing, and operating ships, we need to know the Tests include speed, maneuver, anchor drop and withdrawal,
activities that occurred in each phase. Based on the results of fire extinguishers, and others that cover the entire function of
interviews with respondents, there are several stages of new the equipment at the time the ship goes to sea. The last step in
shipbuilding, including planning, fabrication, sub-assembly, shipbuilding is the delivery of a ship from the shipyard to the
erection and outfitting, sea trials, and delivery. ship owner.
Every stage of the shipbuilding process has the potential to
4.1.1 Problems in ship-building phase suffer significant obstacles. For example, in the planning
The first stage of shipbuilding is to develop the owner's process, there is a possibility that the completion of
requirements. Each customer utilizes their ship according to shipbuilding takes longer than the agreed-upon contract
their specific needs. Understanding the ship owner's wishes schedule. This completion delay may be due to a delayed
leads to the creation of a preliminary or concept design. This supply of spare parts, resulting in rework at the fabrication
stage is significant because approved designs will serve as the stage. Similarly, in the sub-assembly and outfitting phases,
foundation for shipbuilding based on these approved designs. rework can occur due to both human and machine errors. To
Fabrication is the next step. Fabrication is the initial stage in understand the specific issues that arose during the
the shipbuilding process that involves producing its shipbuilding process, refer to Table 4, which displays the
components. Fabrication consists of marking, cutting, and responses from respondents regarding the problems they
forming. The process of marking a plate begins with profiles encountered.
and frames. A code that includes the ship number, block In this study, we decide using the perceptions of the
number, and marking position matches the name. Cutting a respondents; thus, to do this, we use the weighted average
plate involves using a gas cutter or acetylene while considering value. To calculate the weighted average value, we simply sum
the target plate's cutting angle, speed, and thickness. While up the mean values for the items, then divide by the total
forming involves transforming a plate from its original shape number of items. If an item's mean score is higher than the
to the desired one, Rolling, bending, and pressing machines weighted score, the decision is highly probable to occur. On
assist with plate formation. The next step is sub-assembly, the other hand, if the item's mean is below the weighted score,
which involves combining components from the fabrication the decision has a low probability of occurring.
process into smaller blocks. By merging small blocks, we can

1065
 Table 4. Responses on respondents’ perceptions of problems occurred during ship building

Problems Code Mean STD Decision

Rework at the erection and outfitting stage due to worker negligence SB1 4.33 1.23 High
Rework at the sub assembly stage due to engine damage SB2 4.28 1.40 High
Rework at the sub assembly stage due to worker negligence SB3 4.08 1.37 High
The ship's speed did not match the design SB4 3.43 1.46 High
Delay in delivery SB5 3.15 1.63 High
Engine failure during free trial SB6 2.83 1.56 High
The ship sank during the free trial SB7 2.73 1.66 High
Rework at the fabrication stage due to planning errors SB8 2.63 1.79 Low
Delay in contract schedule SB9 2.46 1.50 Low
Delay in supply of spare parts SB10 2.33 1.46 Low
Delay in supply of plate material SB11 2.30 1.56 Low
Rework at the erection and outfitting stages due to planning errors SB12 2.25 1.56 Low
Rework at the sub assembly stage due to planning errors SB13 2.20 1.49 Low
Engine failure in delivery SB14 2.15 1.71 Low
Ship fire in delivery SB15 2.15 1,46 Low
Rework at the fabrication stage due to worker negligence SB16 2.13 1.54 Low
The ship sank in delivery SB17 2.10 1.45 Low
Ship fire during free trial SB18 2.03 1.8 Low
Rework at the fabrication stage due to engine damage. SB19 2.00 1.45 Low
Rework at the erection and outfitting stages due to machine damage SB20 1.88 1.39 Low
Note: N=40, Rare=1, Unlikely=2, Possible=3, Likely=4, Almost certain=5. Weighted average=53.49: 20=2.67

The table above indicates that certain problems have a high was a delay in the supply of plate material and rework due to
probability of arising during the shipbuilding process. We engine damage. Worker negligence was also highly likely to
reworked the first three issues during the erection and occur in ship repair, with a score of 2.4.
outfitting stages, as well as the sub-assembly stage. During the
free trial stage, the following high possibilities emerged: The Table 5. Responses on respondents’ perceptions of problems
highest possibility was that rework occurred at the erection and occurred during ship repair
outfitting stages due to worker negligence, with a score of 4.33
out of 5. This means that there was a high frequency of human Problems Code Mean STD Decision
error in the process of erection and outfitting. The second- Delay in contract schedule SR1 2.6 1.72 High
highest possibility (the score of 4.28) was that rework occurred Delay in supply of plate
SR2 2.5 1.68 High
at the sub-assembly stage due to engine damage. This implies material
that, in addition to human error, engine error also played a role. Rework due to engine damage SR3 2.5 1.43 High
Rework due to worker
The next highest possibility was that rework occurred at the negligence
SR4 2.4 1.78 High
sub-assembly stage due to worker negligence, with a score of Delay in supply of spare-parts SR5 2.2 1.45 Low
4.08. These two possibilities suggest that human error played Rework during ship repair. SR6 2.0 1.37 Low
a significant role during the shipbuilding stage. The following Note: N=40, Rare=1, Unlikely=2, Possible=3, Likely=4, Almost certain=5.
high possibility occurred: the ship's speed did not match the Weighted average=14.19: 6=2.37.
design during the free trial, with a score of 3.43. Another issue
was a delivery delay, with a score of 3.15. Not only did the 4.1.3 Problems in ship-operation phase
engine failure occur during the sub-assembly stage, but it also Ship operation is the next stage. Before the ship can operate,
occurred during the free trial, earning a score of 2.83. it must complete several stages. Crews have to do pre-ship
Furthermore, the ship that sank during the free trial had a high preparations, such as licensing documents, navigation, and
probability of occurring, with a score of 2.73. route management. The unloading process begins once the
ship arrives at the destination port. During the journey to the
4.1.2 Problems in ship-repair phase destination port, ships may encounter emergency situations,
A ship undergoes an integrated repair in the dockyard, including collisions, fires, explosions, stones, leaks, sinking,
adhering to the Bureau of Classification's requirements, where people falling into the sea, pollution, reactions from hazardous
the ship undergoes withdrawal or docking prior to the repair. cargo, shifting cargo, engine damage, severe weather, war, or
Every year, the dockyard performs an annual docking, a piracy, among others. Human error is the cause of any
routine repair that encompasses the maintenance of machinery, interruption during sailing, but natural factors may also play a
armour, and other equipment. Special docking takes place role. Any disruption at the time the ship sails is an emergency
every four years, usually during class updates, so the ship's because it will delay the ship's arrival in time. An emergency
condition must be perfect. Emergency docking refers to is an out-of-normal condition that occurs on a ship and has a
necessary repairs beyond the repair schedule, such as when a level of inclination that may endanger human life, property,
ship sustains damage from a collision. Human error and engine and the environment in which the ship is located.
error can cause potential problems during the ship repair Ship operations are susceptible to human and engine errors,
process. Table 5 specifically illustrates the problems similar to shipbuilding and repair processes. Furthermore,
encountered during ship repair. adverse weather conditions can pose potential obstacles,
The table indicates that a delay in the contract schedule, leading to ship fires, accidents, sinking, vessel leaks, and other
with a score of 2.6 out of 5.0, is the most likely event during potential dangers. To find out what problems occurred during
ship repair. The next highest possibility, with a score of 2.5, the ship operation process, see Table 6 below.

1066
Table 6. Responses on respondents’ perceptions of problems each construction or repair undertaken on the vessel. The
occurred during ship operation ship's construction plans must undergo a thorough
examination and secure permission from the Office of the Ship
Problems Code Mean STD Decision Safety Inspectorate, which functions under the Ministry of
Accident due to worker’s Transportations. According to the requirements stated in
SO1 3.0 1.69 High
negligence Article 4 of Government Regulation No. 51 of 2002, the
Accident due to collision SO2 3.0 1.88 High entrepreneur, owner, or builder must perform calculations and
Accident due to crashing produce drawings of the ship's design and completion data
SO3 2.7 1.63 High
the port
Leak in hull SO4 2.7 1.82 High
before starting construction or repair. Shipbuilding inspections
Accident due to bad are necessary to verify that ships meet safety regulations,
SO5 2.6 1.81 High comply with requirements, follow standardised practices,
weather
Piracy SO6 2.4 1.66 High facilitate ship operation and maintenance, and make use of
Accident due to collision technology. These examinations should not just depend on the
SO7 2.2 1.60 High
with heavy equipment data provided by the shipowner.
Ship fire SO8 2.1 1.46 Low
Engine explosion SO9 2.0 1.45 Low Table 7. Risk assessment in ship building
Problem with collision
SO10 2.0 1.49 Low
liability
Problems Likelihood Consequences Risk Decision Rank
The ship sank. SO11 1.8 1.28 Low
SB1 4.3 3.1 13.3 High Risk 3
Accident due to collision
SO12 1.8 1.27 Low SB2 4.3 3.9 16.8 High Risk 1
with crane
SB3 4.1 3.1 12.7 High Risk 4
Jettison SO13 1.7 1.19 Low
SB4 3.4 1.8 6.1 Medium risk 20
Problem with sue and labor SO14 1.7 1.34 Low
SB5 3.2 4.3 13.8 High Risk 2
Problem with pollution
SO15 1.7 1.02 Low SB6 2.8 3.6 10.1 High Risk 8
hazard.
SB7 2.7 4.4 11.9 High Risk 5
Accident due to pilot's
SO16 1.7 1.12 Low SB8 2.6 3.1 8.1 Medium Risk 15
negligence
SB9 2.5 4.1 10.3 High Risk 7
Problem with general
SO17 1.4 0.59 Low SB10 2.3 4.0 9.2 Medium Risk 13
average and salvage.
SB11 2.3 4.0 9.2 Medium Risk 12
Barratry SO18 1.3 0.57 Low
Note: N=40. Rare = 1, Unlikely=2, Possible=3, Likely=4, Almost certain=5.
SB12 2.3 3.2 7.4 Medium risk 17
Weighted average=37.75: 18=2.1. SB13 2.2 3.0 6.6 Medium Risk 19
SB14 2.2 3.5 7.7 Medium Risk 16
SB15 2.2 4.7 10.3 High Risk 6
The table above indicates that the most likely event during
SB16 2.1 3.2 6.7 Medium risk 18
ship sailing on the sea was an accident due to worker SB17 2.1 4.6 9.7 Medium Risk 9
negligence and collision, receiving a score of 3.00 out of 5. A SB18 2.0 4.8 9.6 Medium Risk 10
port crash or a hull leak accounted for the next highest SB19 2.0 4.6 9.2 Medium risk 11
possibility, each receiving a similar score of 2.7. Accidents SB20 2.0 4.5 9 Medium risk 14
caused by severe weather also had a high probability, with a Note: N=40. Risk=Likelihood × Consequences. Risk=1-3=Low. Risk=4-
score of 2.6. With a score of 2.4, piracy had the potential to 9=Medium. Risk=10-16=High. Risk=20-25=Extreme.
happen. A collision with heavy equipment caused an accident
with a high probability and a score of 2.2. Table 7 shows that there are eight high-risk issues during
shipbuilding development. The first issue required rework at
4.2 The risk assessment in the process of building, the sub-assembly stage due to engine damage, resulting in a
repairing, and operating ships risk score of 16.8 out of 25. Rahmat's study, which shows that
the sub-assembly process, including the plating and welding
The previous section explained that risk assessment procedures, is prone to high-risk situations [30], directly
evaluates events that pose a threat to agencies' purposes and relates to this problem. At this point, it is crucial to use further
targets [23]. We use this type of assessment to identify caution. Before initiating the ship's plate replating procedure,
situations, processes, and other hazardous activities. The risk we must inspect and thoroughly clean the tanks, paying special
assessment criteria include three things: the risk impact scale, attention to the fuel and chemical tanks to ensure they are gas-
the probability scale, and the risk scale. We use the formula free. Prior to cutting, it is imperative that the ship's condition
R=L×C for risk assessment. R is risk, L is likelihood, and C is is thoroughly devoid of gas, as the plate's pores typically retain
the value of consequences. In risk assessment, the risk matrix gas that is highly susceptible to expansion and combustion.
is 5×5. The classification of consequences values includes low The ship's body building section performs the replating
(score 1), medium (score 2), high (score 3), and extreme (score welding procedure to join previously severed construction
5). Low means that the impact is less than 5%; low means the parts and install other components, prioritising ship
impact caused is 5-10%. Medium is defined as 10-15%. High construction.
indicates an effect of 15-20%, while extreme indicates a cause The next high risk was a delay in ship delivery to the ship
of more than 20%. The following table provides a clear owner, with a risk score of 13.8. This finding correlates to
classification of the risk value obtained from the formula previous studies [32-34], which found that various aspects of
above, allowing us to better understand the level of danger. the shipbuilding production process are still inadequate. This
Table 7 displays the risk assessment for shipbuilding. causes delays in ship deliveries to their owners. The contract
stipulates the location for the ship's handover. The work
4.2.1 Risk assessment in ship-building phase schedule (time schedule) outlines a plan for the handover, with
The shipowner must produce an elaborate schematic for a maximum duration of 450 calendar days. The shipyard is
responsible for the ship's mobilization to the handover site.

1067
 Then, during the erection and outfitting stages, rework using a crane, during the cutting process of lifting materials
occurred due to worker negligence, with a risk score of 13.3. and placing them on the cutting machine, during the grinding
In addition to the erection and outfitting stages, rework also process of lifting components and placing them on the
occurred in the sub-assembly stage due to worker negligence, grinding machine, during the fitting and working at height
with a risk score of 12.7. The issue of worker negligence is of process of installing plates, and during the main engine
utmost importance. Prior studies have identified personnel overhaul process, all of which carry a high risk [8].
mishandling as the primary influencing element contributing
to risk [18, 39]. Several variables influence employee Table 8. Risk score in ship repair
performance. They possess distinct personalities and
capabilities. The task may necessitate exceptional aptitude. If Problems Likelihood Consequences Risk Decision Rank
this is the case, identify the right person or team to carry out SR1 2.6 3.9 10.1 High Risk 2
the task and decide on the best way to complete it. Specialized SR2 2.5 4.0 10 High Risk 3
training or guidance may be required. The assignment may SR3 2.5 4.6 11.5 High Risk 1
present a potential hazard to individuals with physical or SR4 2.4 3.2 7.7 Medium Risk 5
SR5 2.2 4.1 9.0 Medium Risk 4
cognitive impairments, as well as to inexperienced and SR6 2.0 3.4 6.8 Medium Risk 6
youthful employees. Note: N=40. Risk=Likelihood × Consequences. Risk=1-3=Low. Risk=4-
In the free trial, sinking, fire, and engine failure had a high 9=Medium. Risk=10-16=High. Risk=20-25=Extreme.
risk score of 11.9, 10.3, and 10.1. Machinery operational
failures, such as Main motor failure, propulsion system, and Other high-risk issues include a delay in the contract
power system failure can cause accidents [16, 18]. Failures are schedule, which had a high risk (a score of 10.1), and a delay
the primary reason pod propulsion systems malfunction on in supplying plate material, which also had a high risk (a score
ships. Engine failure refers to a situation in which the engine of 10). These findings supported the previous study that
functions in a condition that deviates from typical conditions. potential delays occurred due to unfinished work equipment,
An abnormal condition can arise due to a malfunction in the inefficient work planning, inadequate preparation for painting
full-authority digital engine control system, which can cause the ship's body, and incomplete production equipment [6].
an abnormal state. The engine has neither direct pilot control Delay also occurred due to the long approval for goods
nor a manual control mode. In the event of a malfunction in requests, delays in client payment processes, changing design
the control system, the engine will cease to function. specifications, the owner's decision-making process, the
A delay in the contract schedule was also high-risk, with a lengthy delivery process, inadequate material inventory, and
score of 10.3. This finding is consistent with previous studies insufficient stock material availability [37]. The next
showing that delays in material supply, ship materials delivery, significant risk is the possibility of reworking due to worker
and equipment delivery can cause delays in the contract negligence. The high risk of worker negligence correlates to
schedule. High-risk factors that caused delays in the contract the process, which includes welding in enclosed areas,
schedule include potential delays in material supply, the need docking and undocking procedures, cutting metal plates, doing
for improvements due to changes in recommendations maintenance and repairs in electrical rooms, and being
following work completion [3, 31], the delivery of ship reckless when filling gas cylinders [10].
materials and equipment, insufficient shipyard facilities,
alterations in ship design, and suboptimal labour productivity 4.2.3 Risk-assessment in ship-operation phase
[5]. High-risk in ship operation refers to a situation where there
is a significant likelihood of safety and life risks owing to
4.2.2 Risk-assessment in ship-repair phase factors such as war, military tension, conflicts, pirate activities,
This section will show the high risks that occur during the and other events that pose an immediate threat to visiting
ship repair process. The provisions of the set contract warships and their crews. The operational risks faced during
agreement must guide the implementation of ship repairs. maritime transportation include crashes, fires, terrorist
Problems that may arise in the implementation of ship repairs operations, adverse weather conditions, and cargo system
are delays in contract schedules, delays in supply of plate malfunctions. The primary objective of risk assessment is to
materials, rework due to engine damage, rework due to worker mitigate the occurrence of accidents by facilitating the
negligence, delays in supply of spare parts, and rework during exchange of information regarding potential hazards, such as
ship repair. blind spots and uncharted areas, among crew members and
A ship must function with absolute safety. Therefore, it is between the vessel and shore-based management entities, such
imperative to enforce safety protocols during the repair phase, as the shipowner and ship management company. This is
irrespective of the frequency or severity of incidents. To put it particularly important when undertaking high-risk operations.
otherwise, it would be inconceivable to disregard a risk that Therefore, it is crucial to include all individuals involved in
has an extremely low occurrence rate on the ship. The the operation in the briefing and to communicate the outcomes
personnel, in their role as technicians, were not aware that they to both the crew and shore management, rather than relying
would be required to accept the risk prioritization described solely on the Master/Chief Engineer or Chief Officer/First
earlier. Based on this awareness and concept, the ship Engineer at a desk.
management business receives the results of the vessel's risk Table 9 reveals that a collision accident, with a score of 14.7
assessment. out of 25, posed the highest risk in ship operations.
According to Table 8, there are three high-risk activities in This finding aligns with a previous study that identified the
the ship repair stage. Rework due to engine damage posed the lack of data and uncertainty surrounding the likelihood of
highest risk, scoring 11.5 out of 25. This finding aligns with a collisions caused by human and organizational factors as a
previous study, which discovered that engine damage led to significant challenge in obtaining precise and dependable risk
accidents during the lifting process of moving blocks or goods estimations [38]. During ship operations, the risk of ship fires,

1068
in addition to ship-to-ship collisions, is a major concern. These of frequent issues in ship construction and repair processes,
fires can occur suddenly and escalate quickly, with even minor such as worker negligence leading to rework and contract
mistakes leading to severe consequences. The rapid responses schedule delays. Additionally, accidents caused by worker
of both crew and passengers are the primary factor in negligence are common. The study also reveals that machine
mitigating the severity of ship fire incidents [39]. The next damage is the most significant risk during the construction and
high risk factor involved accidents caused by severe weather, repair phases, whereas collision accidents are the main risk
with a score of 11.2. During the operation phase, there is a during ship operation. These findings underscore the need for
significant risk of severe weather, which can lead to machinery improved shipbuilding practices to reduce accident risks.
operational failures and potentially cause accidents [16]. Limitations of this research include: the data collection,
Failures are the primary factor contributing to the malfunction which was conducted at only 13 shipping companies in six
of the pod propulsion system on ships. Worker negligence major cities in Indonesia, potentially not fully representing
(score of 10.2), which includes inadequate management for the national conditions. Additionally, the research focuses more
logistics chain players, human errors, and a lack of knowledge on technical and operational aspects without deeply examining
regarding proper handling techniques during loading and management and safety culture in shipyards.
unloading operations [18], constitutes high-risk issues in ship Future research could focus on developing a more
operations. Port crashes are the next highest risk (a score of comprehensive risk model by considering management and
10). During the operation stage, significant risks arise from safety culture aspects in shipyards. Moreover, further studies
containers falling and ships colliding with container cranes are needed to explore the impact of government regulations
[14]. A leakage hull, with a score of 10.5, was another high and policies on risk management in the shipyard industry.
risk. Environmental safety and health are high-risk Longitudinal research involving more companies and regions
considerations at a shipyard [41-43]. This includes addressing can provide a more representative and in-depth picture of risk
potential environmental dangers [41], such as the inhalation of dynamics in ship construction, repair, and operation in
toxic air or gas by ship sailors during the inspection of the Indonesia. Consequently, the results of this research can
cofferdam tank [15]. During the plate cutting process, there are contribute to improving safety and efficiency in the national
significant issues with sandblasting hose leaks, which pose shipyard industry.
considerable hazards during the repair stage [9, 11, 13].

Table 9. The risk score in ship operation ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Problems Likelihood Consequences Risk Decision Rank Authors gratefully accept the funding granted by the
SO1 3.0 3.4 10.2 High Risk 5 Directorate of Traffic and Sea Transportation for supporting
SO2 3.0 4.9 14.7 High Risk 1 this study. Authors are grateful to assessors for their
SO3 2.7 3.7 10.0 High Risk 6 constructive comments which assisted to enhance this
SO4 2.7 3.9 10.5 High Risk 4
manuscript.
SO5 2.6 4.3 11.2 High Risk 3
SO6 2.4 4.8 11.5 High Risk 2
SO7 2.2 3.2 7.0 Medium Risk 9
SO8 2.1 3.9 8.2 Medium Risk 8 REFERENCES
SO9 2.0 3.1 6.2 Medium Risk 13
SO10 2.0 3.5 7.0 Medium Risk 10 [1] Giovanni, A., Fathimahhayati, L.D., Pawitra, T.A.
SO11 1.8 5.0 9.0 Medium Risk 7 (2023). Risk analysis of occupational health and safety
SO12 1.8 3.4 6.1 Medium Risk 14 using hazard identification, risk assessment and risk
SO13 1.7 3.7 6.3 Medium Risk 12 control (HIRARC) method (Case study in PT Barokah
SO14 1.7 1.1 1.9 Low Risk 18
Galangan Perkasa). Indonesian Journal of Industrial
SO15 1.7 3.9 6.6 Medium Risk 11
SO16 1.7 3.2 5.4 Medium Risk 15
Engineering & Management, 4(2): 198-211.
SO17 1.3 2.1 2.7 Low Risk 17 https://doi.org/10.22441/ijiem.v4i2.20398
SO18 1.3 3.5 4.6 Medium Risk 16 [2] Cahyani, Z.D., Pribadi, S.R.W., Baihaqi, I. (2016).
Note: N=40. Risk=Likelihood × Consequences. Risk=1-3=Low. Risk=4- Implementation study of the House of Risk (HOR) model
9=Medium. Risk=10-16=High. Risk=20-25=Extreme. to mitigate the risk of delays in imported materials and
components in the construction of new ships (Studi
implementasi model House of Risk (HOR) untuk
5. CONCLUSIONS mitigasi risiko keterlambatan material dan komponen
impor pada pembangunan kapal baru). Jurnal Teknik ITS,
This research provides a comprehensive analysis of 5(2): G52-G59.
accident risks associated with the processes of ship [3] Ariany, Z., Pitana, T., Vanany, I. (2023). Risk
construction, repair, and operation in Indonesian shipyards. assessment of new ferry ship construction in Indonesia
The findings indicate that the construction phase faces the using the failure mode effect and analysis (FMEA)
highest risk during sub-assembly due to machine damage, method. Journal of Applied Engineering Science, 21(3):
while the repair phase is most at risk due to rework caused by 872-883. https://doi.org/10.5937/jaes0-43711
machinery damage. During the operational phase, collision [4] Ramadan, R.M., Basuki, M. (2023). Operational risk
accidents pose the highest risk. This study highlights the assessment of occupational safety and health at PT.
importance of implementing continuous improvement Dewa Ruci agung using FMEA method and risk matrix
strategies at both organizational and individual levels to (Penilaian risiko operasional keselamatan dan kesehatan
mitigate ship accident risks. kerja pada PT. Dewa ruci agung menggunakan metode
The key findings of this research include the identification FMEA dan matrik risiko). In Prosiding SENASTITAN:

1069
 Seminar Nasional Teknologi Industri Berkelanjutan (Vol. https://doi.org/10.31949/infotech.v9i1.5064
3), pp. 1-8. [13] Rivai, H., Sitepu, A.H., Purba, T.B. (2023). Risk analysis
[5] Putri, H.D.Z., Mulyatno, I.P., Manik, P. (2023). Risk with Job Safety Analysis (JSA) on ship repair work at PT.
management study with FTA and FMEA methods due to Afta Tehnik Mandiri Shipyard Makassar (Analisa Resiko
delays in the construction project of pioneer ship KM. dengan Job Safety Analysis (JSA) pada pekerjaan
Sabuk Nusantara 72 (Studi Manajamen Risiko dengan reparasi kapal di PT. Afta Tehnik Mandiri Shipyard
Metode FTA dan FMEA akibat Keterlambatan Proyek Makassar). Jurnal Riset & Teknologi Terapan
Pembangunan Kapal Perintis KM. Sabuk Nusantara 72). Kemaritiman, 2(1): 1-7.
Jurnal Teknik Perkapalan, 11(2): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1234/jrt2k.v2i1.27693
[6] Brites, M., Basuki, M. (2023). Operational risk [14] Iskandar, I.N., Basuki, M. (2023). K3 risk assessment in
assessment causes of delays in the KM cargo ship repair container crane operations at Nilam terminal Surabaya
project at the PT Dewa Ruci Agung Surabaya shipyard using job safety analysis and bow tie analysis methods
(Penilaian Risiko Operasional Penyebab Keterlambatan (Penilaian risiko K3 pada operasional container crane di
Proyek Reparasi Kapal KM Cargo pada Galangan Kapal terminal Nilam Surabaya menggunakan metode job
PT Dewa Ruci Agung Surabaya). In Prosiding Seminar safety analysis dan bow tie analysis). In Prosiding
Nasional Teknologi Industri Berkelanjutan III (Vol. 3), SENASTITAN: Seminar Nasional Teknologi Industri
pp. 1-12. Berkelanjutan (Vol. 3), pp. 1-7.
[7] Sari, I.P., Ilasabilirrosyad, A., Tanjov, Y.E., Rahayu, S. [15] Lestari, J.N., Basuki, M. (2023). Occupational health and
M. (2023). Occupational health and safety risks in the safety risk assessment of enclosed space entry work on
shipbuilding industry, Case study at PT Blambangan the Km. Sabuk Nusantara 40 ship using the Job Safety
Bahari Shipyard. Buletin Jalanidhitah Sarva Jivitam, 5(1): Analysis and bow tie risk assessment methods (Penilaian
45-53. http://doi.org/10.15578/bjsj.v5i1.12226 risiko K3 pekerjaan enclosed space entry pada kapal Km.
[8] Basuki, M. (2023). Occupational health and safety (K3) Sabuk Nusantara 40 menggunakan metode Job Safety
risk assessment of ship repair work at PT Dewa Ruci Analysis dan bow tie risk assesment). Ocean Engineering:
Agung using the hazard identification and risk Jurnal Ilmu Teknik Dan Teknologi Maritim, 2(1): 60-75.
assessment and determining control (HIRADC) Method https://doi.org/10.58192/ocean.v2i1.1166
(Penilaian risiko keselamatan dan kesehatan kerja (K3) [16] Ahmed, S., Li, T., Huang, S., Cao, J. (2023). Dynamic
pekerjaan reparasi kapal pada PT Dewa Ruci Agung and quantitative risk assessment of Cruise ship pod
dengan menggunakan metode hazard identification and propulsion system failure: An integrated Type-2 Fuzzy-
risk assesment and determining control (HIRADC)). Bayesian approach. Ocean Engineering, 279: 114601.
Ocean Engineering: Jurnal Ilmu Teknik dan Teknologi https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114601
Maritim, 2(2): 45-56. [17] Li, X., Zhang, X., Yuan, Y. (2024). Dynamic multi-
https://doi.org/10.58192/ocean.v2i2.1132 attribute decision-making method for risk-based ship
[9] Suwito, M., Yuliawati, E. (2023). Identification of design. Applied Sciences, 14(13): 5387.
occupational safety and health risks in the repair process https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135387
of the Geomarin III research vessel using the HIRADC [18] Cui, Z., Wang, H., Xu, J. (2023). Risk assessment of
method (Identifikasi risiko keselamatan dan kesehatan concentralized distribution logistics in cruise-building
kerja pada proses perbaikan kapal riset Geomarin III imported materials. Processes, 11(3): 859.
dengan metode HIRADC). JATI UNIK: Jurnal Ilmiah https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11030859
Teknik dan Manajemen Industri, 7(1): 33-41. [19] Indonesian Government. Presidential Instruction
https://doi.org/10.30737/jatiunik.v7i1.5142 Number 5 Years 2005 about Empowerment Shipping
[10] Fairussihan, J.D., Setiono, D. (2023). Risk analysis of Industry National. Ministry of State Secretariat of the
worker safety and health (K3) in the ship rep air process Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta.
at PT. Dock and shipping Surabaya using the hierarch https://bphn.go.id/data/documents/05ip005.pdf.
method (Hazard identification, risk assessment, and risk [20] Marine Insurance Act of 1906. (1906).
control). Jurnal Inovasi Sains dan Teknologi Kelautan, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw7/6/41/data.p
41(1): 23-29. https://doi.org/10.62012/zl.v4i1.18977 df.
[11] Susanto, E., Thalitha, R.F., Putri, S.C.T.A., Wicaksana, [21] Njatrijani, R. (2018). Marine hull and machinery claims
F.Y., Aulia, A.A. (2023). Hazard identification using the in liability practice (Klaim marine hull and machinery
hazard identification, risk assessment, protect, dalam praktek pertanggungan). Diponegoro Private Law
anticipation and risk control (HIRARC) method in an Review, 3(1): 326-344.
effort to reduce the risk of work accidents at PT Pal [22] Listiningrum, S., Daryanto, A., Pranowo, K. (2016).
Indonesia (Identifikasi bahaya dengan metode hazard Analysis of customer satisfaction of marine hull
identification, risk assessment, protect, antisipasiiand insurance in PT. Insurance Indonesia Jasa Jakarta
risk control (HIRARC) dalam upaya memperkecil Risiko (Analisis kepuasan nasabah asuransi marine hull di PT.
kecelakan kerja pada PT Pal Indonesia). Madani: Jurnal Asuransi Jasa Indonesia Jakarta). Warta Penelitian
Ilmiah Multidisiplin, 1(4): 379-391. Perhubungan, 28(1): 27-42.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7964764 [23] Wulandari, L.M.C., Nainggolan, B.A. (2021).
[12] Liperda, R.I., Ruswandi, N. (2023). K3 risk analysis in Operational risk analysis using Fmea method at Cv.
port services using the Hirarc method: Studi Kasus: Pt Gamarends marine supply Surabaya (Analisis risiko
Pelabuhan Indonesia (Persero) regional 4 makassar operasional menggunakan metode Fmea Di Cv.
Analisis Risiko K3 Pada Jasa Kepelabuhan Dengan gamarends marine supply Surabaya). In Prosiding
Metode Hirarc (Hazard identification risk assesment and Seminar Nasional Riset dan Teknologi Terapan
risk control). INFOTECH Journal, 9(1): 104-114. (Ritektra), pp. A15-A15.

1070
[24] Amelia, P., Vanany, I. (2017). Operational risk analysis menggunakan metode matrik risiko dan fmea). Ocean
on the warships division of PT. PAL Indonesia with the Engineering: Jurnal Ilmu Teknik dan Teknologi Maritim,
house of risk method (Analisis risiko operasional pada 2(2): 87-96. https://doi.org/10.58192/ocean.v2i2.1147
divisi kapal perang PT. PAL Indonesia dengan metode [35] Ramirez-Peña, M., Otero-Mateo, M., Pastor-Fernandez,
house of risk). Jurnal Sistem Informasi Indonesia, 2(1): A., Batista, M., Cerezo-Narvaez, A. (2023). Impact of
1-11. key enabling technologies on safety risks in shipbuilding.
[25] Louhenapessy, B.B., Febriansyah, H. (2018). Application to painting activities on large vessels.
Standardisasi Industri Nasional Kapal di Indonesia Advances in Science and Technology, 132: 413-422.
[Standardization of the National Ship Industry in https://doi.org/10.4028/p-Rg62M6
Indonesia]. Jurnal Standardisasi, 19(1): 11-24. [36] Presencia, C.E., Shafiee, M. (2018). Risk analysis of
[26] Purnamasari, D. (2015). Shipbuilding technology Audit: maintenance ship collisions with offshore wind turbines.
Case study at PT. IKI (Audit teknologi galangan kapal: International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 37(6): 576-
studi kasus di PT. IKI). Wave: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknologi 596. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2017.1327437
Maritim, 9(1): 39-48. [37] Huda, A.M., Basuki, M. (2023). Risk assessment of
https://doi.org/10.29122/jurnalwave.v9i1.2664 delays in repair work of ship Bg. APC XVIII at PT.
[27] Asdi, R., Basuki, M. (2021). Risk management in Gapura shipyard (Penilaian risiko keterlambatan
shipbuilding using Bayesian network with noisy-or. IOP pekerjaan reparasi kapal Bg. APC XVIII di PT. Gapura
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, shipyard). Ocean Engineering: Jurnal Ilmu Teknik dan
1010: 012038. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757- Teknologi Maritim, 2(3): 207-219.
899X/1010/1/012038 https://doi.org/10.58192/ocean.v2i3.1213
[28] Utomo, H., Laut, T.N.I.A. (2017). Who is legally [38] Chen, P., Huang, Y., Mou, J., Van Gelder, P.H.A.J.M.
responsible in a ship accident (Siapa yang bertanggung (2019). Probabilistic risk analysis for ship-ship collision:
jawab menurut hukum dalam kecelakaan kapal)? Jurnal State-of-the-art. Safety Science, 117: 108-122.
Legislasi Indonesia, 14(1): 59-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.014
https://download.garuda.kemdikbud.go.id/article.php?ar [39] Wang, L., Wang, J., Shi, M., Fu, S., Zhu, M. (2021).
ticle=949679&val=14663&title=SIAPA%20YANG%2 Critical risk factors in ship fire accidents. Maritime
0BERTANGGUNG%20JAWAB%20MENURUT%20 Policy & Management, 48(6): 895-913.
HUKUM%20DALAM%20KECELAKAAN%20KAPA https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1821110
L. [40] Arici, S.S., Akyuz, E., Arslan, O. (2020). Application of
[29] Erwin, R. (2022). The state's responsibility to prevent fuzzy bow-tie risk analysis to maritime transportation:
maritime transport ship accidents according to The case of ship collision during the STS operation.
international law and national law (Tanggung jawab Ocean Engineering, 217: 107960.
negara untuk mencegah terjadinya kecelakaan kapal https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107960
transportasi laut menurut hukum internasional dan [41] Hati, A.K., Setiono, B.A., Purwiyanto, D. (2023).
hukum nasional). SUPREMASI: Jurnal Hukum, 4(2): Analysis of annual service implementation procedures
177-199. https://doi.org/10.36441/supremasi.v4i2.716 for safety equipment and fire extinguishers on ships
[30] Rahmat, N.A.N., Wahyuddin, W., Palippui, H. (2021). according to SOLAS standards (Analisis prosedur
Risk analysis of shipbuilding using consequence- pelaksanaan annual servis alat-alat keselamatan dan alat
probability matrix techniques (Analisis risiko pemadam kebakaran di atas kapal sesuai standar
pembangunan kapal menggunakan teknik matriks SOLAS). Jurnal Aplikasi Pelayaran Dan Kepelabuhanan,
konsekuensi-probabilitas). Zona Laut: Journal of Ocean 14(1): 81-93. https://doi.org/10.30649/japk.v14i1.105
Science and Technology Innovation, 86-91. [42] Sezer, S.I., Camlıyurt, G., Aydin, M., Akyuz, E.,
https://doi.org/10.20956/zl.v2i3.18678 Boustras, G., Park, S. (2024). A holistic risk assessment
[31] Rizcola, R., Budiarto, U., Yudo, H. (2020). Risk under the D–S evidential theory and FMECA approach
management on pioneer ship type 1200 GT in PT. JMI of ship recycling process hazards in the maritime
(Studi kasus keterlambatan proyek kapal bangunan baru environment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment:
Kapal Perintis type 1200 GT berbasis manajemen risiko An International Journal, 30(1-2): 201-216.
di PT). Jurnal Teknik Perkapalan, 8(1): 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2024.2312969
[32] Basuki, M., Mahendra, O.H. (2021). Operational risk [43] Zaman, M.B., Pitana, T., Prastowo, H., Priyanta, D.,
assessment ship construction causes material import Siswantoro, N., Maulana, F.S., Busse, W. (2023).
using House of Risk (HOR) and critical chain project Occupational health and safety risk assessment of
management: Case study in Gresik shipyard industry. shipyard using HIRARC method. AIP Conference
Journal of Marine-Earth Science and Technology, 2(1): Proceedings, 2482: 130005.
18-22. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0117107
[33] Hasugian, S., Rahmawati, M., Wahyuni, A.I.S., [44] Wang, B., Xie, H., Lyu, B., Chen, Z., Yu, D., Cao, Y.
Suwondo, I., Sutrisno, I. (2021). Analysis the risk of the (2024). A novel integrated method for the risk
ship accident in Indonesia with Bayesian network model assessment of ship-to-ship LNG bunkering operations.
approach. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in
Biology, 25(2): 3341-3356. Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering, 10(1):
[34] Nugraha, C.I., Basuki, M. (2023). Operational risk 04023052. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.RUENG-
assessment in fiberglass boat manufacturing at CV era 1153
fiberboat shipyard using risk matrix and FMEA methods [45] Indonesian Government. Law Number 17 of 2008 about
(Penilaian risiko operasional pada pembuatan perahu Shipping. Ministry of State Secretariat of the Republic of
fiberglass di galangan kapal CV era fiberboat Indonesia. Jakarta.

1071
 https://jdih.esdm.go.id/storage/document/UU%20No.% [48] Sugiyono. (2013). Educational Research Methods
2017%20Tahun%202008%20Pelayaran.pdf. Quantitative Approach, Qualitative, and R&D. Bandung:
[46] Indonesian Government. Government Decree Number Alfabeta.
51 of 2002 about Shipping. Ministry of State Secretariat https://elibrary.stikesghsby.ac.id/index.php?p=show_det
of the Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta. ail&id=1879&keywords=.
[47] Ningsih, S.O.D., Hati, S.W. (2019). Risk analysis using [49] Indonesian Government. Regulation of the Director
the hazard and operability study (Hazop) method in the General of Sea Transportation NO.HK. 103/2/20/DJPL-
manual hydrotest section at PT. Cladtek Bi metal 14 about Procedures for Imposing Sanctions for Failure
manufacturing (Analisis resiko keselamatan dan to Provide Ship Operational Services. Ministry of State
kesehatan kerja (K3) dengan menggunakan metode Secretariat of the Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta.
hazard and operability study (Hazop) pada bagian https://jdih.dephub.go.id/peraturan/detail?data=FW7Qk
hydrotest manual Di Pt. Cladtek Bi Metal Manufacturing Q7Wv8eKX7WEvQIfum8bP3eES7xnd4jpbcYIrKdt4jt
(Occupational Safety and Health (K3)). Journal of TOt25g3v8Rh1bvxvB6v4ZE7Uke6sOf8cMaNb7PdeX4
Applied Business Administration, 3(1): 29-39. TnfGl4NnQi4ErmrMsEUDcEUpexIG3hLhG2gxJVvDT
https://doi.org/10.30871/jaba.v3i1.1288 ocH9xF9SFCm66GkSjYUpvjuP.

1072