Question 1

Following an incident, it emerges that the operation proceeded without a control measure specified in the risk assessment. In any subsequent legal proceedings under the 1997 Regulations, who has to prove whether omitting that measure was, or was not, reasonably practicable?

Accepted Answer

The burden of showing that failure to comply with a duty under the Regulations was not reasonably practicable falls on the defendant (the Master or Company), not on the prosecution to prove the opposite This reversed burden of proof is a deliberate and significant feature of the Regulations — once a contravention is established, it falls to the defendant to demonstrate that compliance was not reasonably practicable, rather than the prosecution having to prove it was. This materially raises the stakes of a documented decision to depart from an assessed control measure.

Question 2

A cadet is told that risk assessment on board isn't just one document but happens at four different levels, including something as informal as a quick personal check before starting a task. What are these four levels, broadly?

Accepted Answer

Generic risk assessments (company-level), task-based risk assessments (onboard, specific to the job), toolbox talks (discussing the assessment with those doing the work), and personal/dynamic assessment (an individual's ongoing informal check while working) COSWP describes a four-level structure: generic risk assessments set by the company, task-based risk assessments (TBRA) carried out onboard for specific jobs, toolbox talks that walk the team through the TBRA before work starts, and personal/dynamic risk assessment carried out informally by the individual as work proceeds.

Question 3

An OOW is about to lead a small team in a non-routine, high-risk job — entry into a void space that hasn't been entered in months. A generic company risk assessment exists for enclosed space entry in general. What additional level(s) of assessment does the OOW need before this specific job can proceed?

Accepted Answer

A task-based risk assessment specific to this entry and these personnel, followed by a toolbox talk walking the team through its findings before work begins Generic risk assessments don't capture ship- and task-specific factors at the time of the job — a non-routine, high-risk task like this needs its own task-based risk assessment, with a toolbox talk to brief the team on its findings before starting.