Sport Risk Proﬁle - LSV

Project Sport Risk Profile

Prepared for Life Saving Victoria and its interested stakeholders

Reviewed by Paul Chivers, Risk Advisor, Grad Cert RM, CPRM, GIA (Cert), JP, Riskfacilitator

Sport Risk ProfileAugust 2019 | Version 1.0

© 2011-2019 riskfacilitator Pty Ltd ATF Chivers Executive Trust ABN 83 295 505 186. All rights reserved.

This document has been developed by riskfacilitator Pty Ltd in response to a specific body of work that was requested by Life Saving Victoria (LSV). The background intellectual property expressed through the methodologies, models, copyright, patent and trade secrets used to produce the Sport Risk Profile (SRP) remains the property of riskfacilitator Pty Ltd.

While the author and publisher have taken reasonable precaution and have made reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy of material contained in this report, riskfacilitator Pty Ltd does not guarantee that this publication is without flaw of any kind. The authors and publisher makes no warranties, express or implied, with respect to any of the material contained herein and therefore disclaims all liability and responsibility for errors, loss, damage or other consequences which may arise from relying on information in this publication.

DISCLAIMER: This report contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it, and we request that you notify riskfacilitator immediately. © 2011-2019 riskfacilitator Pty Ltd ATF Chivers Executive Trust ABN 83 295 505 186. All rights reserved.

Office +61 2 8005 6127 Email [email protected] Website riskfacilitator PO Box 117, Waverley, NSW Australia 2024


225 0 R

223 0 R

Risk Definitions 1

Risk Context 5

Risk Profile 7

Risk Control Profile 8

Risk Matrix 9

Risk Register 10

Annex A - Risk Methodology and Documents within Context 17

Annex B - Stakeholder Register 18

Approval 21

Contents


Definitions

ISO GUIDE 73:2009 Risk management — Vocabulary

In the context of risk management terminology, it is intended that preference be given to the definitions provided. Risk management is application specific. In some circumstances, it can therefore be necessary to supplement the vocabulary. Where terms related to the management of risk are used in a standard, it is imperative that their intended meanings within the context of the standard are not misinterpreted, misrepresented or misused. For supporting notes pertaining to the definitions, please refer to the ISO guide.

Risk Effect of uncertainty on objectives.

Risk management Coordinated activities to direct and control an organisation with regard to risk.

Risk management framework Set of components that provide the foundations and organisational arrangements for designing, Implementing, monitoring, reviewing and continually improving risk management throughout the organisation.

Risk management policy Statement of the overall intentions and direction of an organisation related to risk management.

Risk management plan Scheme within the risk management framework specifying the approach, the management components and resources to be applied to the management of risk.

Risk management process Systematic application of management policies, procedures and practices to the activities of communicating, consulting, establishing the context, and identifying, analysing, evaluating, treating, monitoring and reviewing risk.

Communication and consultation Continual and iterative processes that an organisation conducts to provide, share or obtain information, and to engage in dialogue with stakeholders regarding the management of risk.

Stakeholder Person or organisation that can affect, be affected by, or perceive themselves to be affected by a decision or activity.

Risk perception Stakeholder's view on a risk

Context Defining the external and internal parameters to be taken into account when managing risk, and setting the scope and risk criteria for the risk management policy.

Risk criteria Terms of reference against which the significance of a risk is evaluated.

Risk assessment Overall process of risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation.

Risk identification Process of finding, recognising and describing risks.

Risk description Structured statement of risk usually containing four elements: sources, events, causes and consequences.

© 2011-2019 riskfacilitator Pty Ltd ATF Chivers Executive Trust ABN 83 295 505 186. All rights reserved. Page 1

Risk source Element which alone or in combination has the intrinsic potential to give rise to risk.

Event Occurrence or change of a particular set of circumstances.

Hazard Source of potential harm.

Risk owner Person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a risk.

Risk analysis Process to comprehend the nature of risk and to determine the level of risk.

Likelihood Chance of something happening.

Exposure Extent to which an organisation and/or stakeholder is subject to an event.

Consequence Outcome of an event affecting objectives.

Probability Measure of the chance of occurrence expressed as a number between 0 and 1, where 0 is impossibility and 1 is absolute certainty.

Frequency Number of events or outcomes per defined unit of time.

Vulnerability Intrinsic properties of something resulting in susceptibility to a risk source that can lead to an event with a consequence.

Risk matrix Tool for ranking and displaying risks by defining ranges for consequence and likelihood.

Level of risk Magnitude of a risk or combination of risks, expressed in terms of the combination of consequences and their likelihood.

Risk evaluation Process of comparing the results of risk analysis with risk criteria to determine whether the risk and/or its magnitude is acceptable or tolerable.

Risk attitude Organisation's approach to assess and eventually pursue, retain, take or turn away from risk.

Risk appetite Amount and type of risk that an organisation is willing to pursue or retain.

Risk tolerance Organisation's or stakeholder's readiness to bear the risk after risk treatment in order to achieve its objectives.

Risk aversion Attitude to turn away from risk.

Risk aggregation Combination of a number of risks into one risk to develop a more complete understanding of the overall risk.

Risk acceptance Informed decision to take a particular risk.

Risk treatment Process to modify risk.


Control Measure that is modifying risk.

Risk avoidance Informed decision not to be involved in, or to withdraw from, an activity in order not to be exposed to a particular risk.

Risk sharing Form of risk treatment involving the agreed distribution of risk with other parties.

Risk retention Acceptance of the potential benefit of gain, or burden of loss, from a particular risk.

Residual risk Risk remaining after risk treatment.

Resilience Adaptive capacity of an organisation in a complex and changing environment.

Monitoring Continual checking, supervising, critically observing or determining the status in order to identify change from the performance level required or expected.

Review Activity undertaken to determine the suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the subject matter to achieve established objectives.

Risk reporting Form of communication intended to inform particular internal or external stakeholders by providing information regarding the current state of risk and its management.

Risk register Record of information about identified risks.

Risk profile Description of any set of risks. The set of risks can contain those that relate to the whole organisation, part of the organisation, or as otherwise defined.

Risk management audit Systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively in order to determine the extent to which the risk management framework, or any selected part of it, is adequate and effective.


Additional language used in this report

Inherent risk Existing risks without treatment or control

As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) For a risk to be ALARP, it must be possible to demonstrate that the cost involved in reducing the risk further would be grossly disproportionate to the benefit gained

Expert intuition Valid intuitions develop when experts have learned to recognise familiar elements in a new situation and to act in a manner that is appropriate to it.

Due diligence The investigation or exercise of care that a reasonable business or person is expected to take before entering into an agreement or contract with another party, or an act with a certain standard of care.

Reasonably practicable is what can reasonably be done in the circumstances. It takes into account: • The likelihood of the hazard or risk occurring • The degree of harm or possible consequences • The state of knowledge about the risk • The availability and suitability of ways of eliminating or minimising it • Finally, only after consideration of the above points, the cost of eliminating hazards or risks


Risk management intent

The key risk management objective for Life Saving Victoria (LSV) is to deliver operational effectiveness, identifying and assessing opportunities and their associated risks; together with analysing control effectiveness and continually consulting, communicating, monitoring and reviewing with key stakeholders. This is to give us the greatest chance of success whilst demonstrating diligent and defensible risk management and oversight.

This Sports Risk Profile (SRP) is to be taken within the context of exisiting due diligence conducted by LSV. (Refer to Annex B - Risk methodology and documents within context.).

This SRP demonstrates LSV’s governance responsibility as the primary organiser of the events and activities, and is designed to highlight high level risks of immediate concern to LSV and its interested stakeholders.

It does not identify every risk, as it is expected that engaged contractors will delivery their service provisions within their contracted requirements which require a level of due diligence and duty of care within governing laws, standards and guidelines, of which will be monitored and reviewed by LSV and their stakeholders to the extent that is reasonably practicable.

Risk methodology adopted

This risk profile uses methodology adopted from the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) Standard ISO31000-2018 Risk Management - Guidelines. This methodology and risk management process was selected as it aligns with the organisation’s exisiting risk management philosophy and practices.

The risk analysis can be undertaken with varying degrees of detail and complexity, depending on the purpose of the analysis, the availability and reliability of information, and the resources available. The risk analysis method used for this SRP is IEC/ISO31010 B.29 Consequence / probability matrix or risk matrix as it is commonly referred to. (See page 9 for details).

To increase the validity of risk analysis, additional methods have been adopted with stakeholders including, but not limited to the following IEC/ISO31010 Risk assessment techniques

• B.1 Brainstorming • B.2 Semi-structured interviews • B.4 Checklists • B.9 “What-if” Technique (SWIFT) • B.10 Scenario analysis • B.12 Root cause analysis (RCA) • B.18 Layers of protection analysis (LOPA) • B.27 FN curves • B.30 Cost/benefit analysis (CBA)

Risk Context


This SRP looks at specific risks identified by the stakeholder group associated with the operational practice of events and activities for LSV surf sport. It is expected that stakeholder expert intuition, existing policy and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) will form the foundation for diligent decision making. This SRP provides additional assurance to stakeholders that risk is being reduced to as low as reasonably practicable and that controls will be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness to ensure successful outcomes.

Additional documents that should be taken into context when reviewing this SRP are referenced in Annex A - Risk Methodology and Documents within Context.

Depth of analysis

The depth of analysis provides stakeholders with insights into the level and type of consultation that has been conducted with stakeholders in the preparation of this SRP.

• 354 key stakeholders have been engaged in consultation (refer to Annex B - Stakeholder Register • 22 key documents have been taken into context in the preparation of this risk profile (refer to

Annex A – Risk methodology and documents within context.). • 48 key risks were identified for risk analysis.

Assumptions

• It’s expected that there will be minor variations of practice and subsequent control effectiveness variations during events and activities and this would be considered reasonable within the context of managing risk. Therefore expert intuition, exisiting policy and SOPs will form the foundation for diligent decision making.

• Both subjective and objective risk is important. • Any breaches in regulatory compliance, legal duty, stakeholder policy or SOPs pertaining to

events and activities will be addressed immediately by LSV and or its interested stakeholders. • The SRP is a dynamic document that is continuously changing and will be updated regularly as

organisational context, risks and their control effectiveness change. • The most current version of the SRP should always be validated and referred to. • All information collected and supplied by stakeholders is accurate and in accordance with specific

industry standards and best practice.

Limitations

• Due to the subjective nature of using a consequence/probability matrix, it is noted that the numerical value (risk level) for risk may be misinterpreted and misused. It is also recognised that In some situations, the rating is inherently unreliable and validation against real data is particularly important.


Risk Profile

Risk Category

CATEGORY RISKS

Governance 1

Operational 9

Safety & Security 23

Reputation 8

Resourcing & Projects 7

15%

17%

48%

19%

2%

Current Inherent Risk Level

CATEGORY RISKS

Extreme 4

High 20

Medium 24

Low 0

50%42%

8%

Expected Residual Risk Level*

CATEGORY RISKS

Extreme 0

High 9

Medium 38

Low 1

2%

79%

19%

The following is a profile of the risks in terms of category, current Inherent risk level and residual risk level.

* Actual residual risk will not be reduced until evidence of control effectiveness can be demonstrated.


Current Control Effectiveness

CATEGORY RISKS

Substantially Effective 48

Partially Effective 0

Ineffective 0

None (-) 0100%

Current WHS Hierarchy of Control

CATEGORY RISKS

Level 1 - Eliminate the Hazard

0

Level 2 - Substitute, Isolate or reduce

39

Level 3- Administration, PPE

48

None (-) 0

55%45%

Implementation Status

CATEGORY RISKS

Complete 46

Work in Progress 2

Incomplete 0

4%

96%

Risk Control Profile

The following is a profile of the current risk control effectiveness, and the depth of control measures in terms of Occupational Health and Safety together with implementation status.


Risk Matrix

Consequence descriptors Likelihood descriptors

Consequence Governance Operational Safety & Security Reputation Resourcing & Projects Rare Unlikely Possible LikelyAlmost Certain

Catastrophic

‣ Governance framework degraded to a point requiring executive intervention.

‣ Sustained negative media attention or reports.

‣ Subject of non routine investigation or review by funding bodies or regulatory authorities with adverse outcomes.

‣ Significant outrage or high profile complaints from stakeholders.

‣ A level of legal action or prosecution is likely. Breaches in fiduciary duties.

‣ Executive leadership challenged by stakeholders.

‣ Significant disruption to delivery of activities or programs.

‣ Significant number of normal day-to-day activities or routine tasks cancelled.

‣ Activities not conducted in accordance with business planning.

‣ Immediate intervention required by Executive.

‣ Death or significant injury of more than one person requiring serious medical intervention and hospitalisation. (Excluding inherent aged / health related issues).

‣ Potential for death or permanent disablement.

‣ Emergency plan errors delay transfer of injured to hospital.

‣ Significant breach in personal or physical security warranting major investigation by external agency and a significant change in procedures.

‣ Significant interference from external agency impacting on organisations ability to protect its reputation.

‣ Major backlash from stakeholders.

‣ National negative media coverage of issues.

‣ Unwanted attention from regulatory authority.

‣ Significant disruption to contract or service delivery through poor resource allocation or management.

‣ Insufficient resources to manage situation within contingency.

‣ Intervention required from Board or Executive.

‣ Over budget by 30% of total project budget.

‣ Major financial loss or investment required to remedy.

Medium 15

High 9

High 5

Extreme 2

Extreme 1

Major

‣ Governance framework tested, potential to significantly question leadership.

‣ Noteworthy negative media attention or reports.

‣ Subject of a number of questions from regulatory authorities.

‣ Breach in fiduciary duty. Legal challenge mounted or significant compliance breach.

‣ Uncertainty of leadership reducing confidence of stakeholders.

‣ Daily delays in delivery of activities or program.

‣ Regular cancellation of daily routine, scheduled events or activities.

‣ Some activities are not conducted in accordance with plans or instructions.

‣ Customers routinely get different answers to the same question from different staff.

‣ Daily monitoring required by senior staff.

‣ Serous injury of one or more persons requiring medical intervention & hospitalisation. (Excluding inherent aged / health related issues).

‣ Emergency plan errors delay transfer of injured to hospital.

‣ Serious breach in personal or physical security warranting a serious internal investigation or definite change in procedures.

‣ Interference or notable pressure from external agency with potential to impact objectives or decision making.

‣ Negative national media coverage of issue.

‣ Regular complaints from or discussions with the stakeholders.

‣ A significant period of attention from regulatory authority.

‣ Notable disruption to service delivery caused through lack of funds to conduct both routine maintenance and capital works.

‣ Insufficient equipment & staff significantly degrade the quality of some of the facility operation functions.

‣ Project over budget by 10% of total budget.

‣ Late payment to contractors leading to degradation in service provided.

‣ Minor financial loss or investment to remedy.

Medium 18

Medium 13

High 8

High 4

Extreme 3

Moderate

‣ Governance framework requires amendment to address governance issues.

‣ Instances of negative local or regional media reports.

‣ Fiduciary duties questioned. Complaints from pockets of stakeholders.

‣ Some legal constraints imposed.‣ Struggle to meet compliance

requirements.‣ Dip in confidence of leadership by

stakeholders.

‣ Major delays in delivery of activities or program.

‣ Occasional cancellation of activities or programmed activities.

‣ Noticeable disruption to day-to-day activities or scheduled work.

‣ Resolved internally by staff.

‣ Notable injury of one or more persons requiring local level medical intervention. (Excluding inherent aged / health related issues).

‣ Emergency plan errors disrupt delivery of medical support.

‣ A breach in personal or physical security or scare warranting serious concern.

‣ Update in local level procedures or security situation.

‣ Some pressure from external agencies disrupting day-to-day operations or decision making.

‣ Local media coverage of issues.‣ Complaints from individuals in

community or regulator.‣ Disruption to day-to-day activities,

which re-direct resources to managing reputation damage.

‣ Inconvenient disruption to service provision leading from poor local level resource management. Minimum equipment & staff significantly degrade the quality of some of the facility operation functions.

‣ Notable financial loss or investment to remedy

Low 21

Medium 16

Medium 11

High 7

High 6

Minor

‣ Governance framework could be improved.

‣ Possible sporadic negative media reports.

‣ Complaints from stakeholders cause disruption to day-to-day management.

‣ Potential for local legal challenge or breach.

‣ Lack of confidence in leadership team, which is recoverable.

‣ Moderate delays in project schedule or activities or programs.

‣ Resolved internally by staff. Minimal disruption to clients or activities.

‣ Injuries requiring on site first aid with no follow up medical treatment required. (Excluding inherent aged / health related issues).

‣ Security incident registered and monitored.

‣ Isolated intervention or influence from external agencies.

‣ Some complaints from stakeholders regarding quality of delivery of services.

‣ Potential if the situation deteriorates to attract greater external attention.

‣ Some disruption to service provision leading from poor local level resource management.

‣ Cash flow difficulties experience by organisation resulting in late payments to staff and subcontractors and reduction in service delivery.

‣ Minor financial loss or investment to remedy.

Low 23

Low 19

Medium 17

Medium 12

Medium 10

Insignificant

‣ Governance framework is adequate.

‣ Minimal negative media reports.‣ Day-to-day management responds

effectively to complaints from stakeholders.

‣ Within compliance requirements. No challenge to leadership.

‣ Minor delays in project schedule or activities or programs.

‣ Standard operating procedures apply.

‣ No disruption to clients or activities.

‣ Occurrence requiring minor on site first aid. (Excluding inherent aged / health related issues).

‣ Security incident noted but not registered.

‣ Minor intervention or influence from external agencies.

‣ Minimal complaints from stakeholders regarding quality of delivery of services.

‣ Minor disruption to service provisions.‣ Minor cash flow difficulties experienced.‣ Insignificant financial loss or investment

to remedy. Low 25

Low 24

Low 22

Low 20

Medium 14

Level of Risk Action Required Risk Owner

Extreme ‣ Intolerable. Cease or address activity until controls are implemented to reduce risk. Immediate and urgent executive management attention required. ‣ CEO/COO/General Manager(s)

High ‣ Tolerable level of risk. Risk may remain at high if reduced to As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) and managed using WHS & risk management practices. ‣ CEO/COO/General Manager(s)

Medium ‣ Tolerable level of risk. Managed by following standard operating procedures, WHS codes of practice, intuitive risk management. ‣ General Manager(s)/Manager(s)

Low ‣ Tolerable level of risk. Managed by following standard operating procedures and WHS codes of practice. ‣ Manager(s)

Risk Methodology Reference: ISO31000:2018, Risk Definitions and supporting documents

Control Effectiveness Rating

OHS Hierarchy Level Risk Decision Implementation

Status

‣ The effectiveness ofexisting controls in placeshould be consideredwhen decidingresponse to the risk.

‣ Determine whetheradditional mitigationstrategies are requiredbased on the controlrating below andimplement actions thatare practical and costeffective while reducingrisk to as low asreasonably practicable(ALARP).

‣ OccupationalHealth and Safety(OHS) Hierarchyof control level isincluded todemonstrateeffectivenessagainstRegulationsrequired by dutyholders to workthrough thishierarchy whenmanaging risk.

‣ A decision is madeon action to betaken once aresidual risk level ismeasured.

‣ Considering theimpact on strategicimperatives, theappropriateness ofthe activity and theprojected cost ofimplementingsufficient controlsto further reducethe risk exposure.

‣ Theimplementationstatus of additionalcontrols /treatments shouldbe monitored andreviewed.

Substantially Effective Level 1 Accept Complete

‣ Existing controls addressrisks, are in operationand are appliedconsistently.

‣ Management isconfident that thecontrols are effective andreliable.

‣ Ongoing monitoring andreview is required.

1. Eliminate thehazards

‣ The most reliableand highest levelof health andsafety.

‣ Proposed activitiesare within the riskappetite of theorganisation andcurrent controleffectiveness needsto be maintained.

‣ All additionalcontrols have beenimplemented andare beingmonitored andreviewed.

Partially Effective Level 2 Reduce Work in Progress

‣ Controls are only partiallyeffective, and may need to be redesigned, improved or supplemented with additional controls.

2. Substitute thehazard withsomething safer.

3. Isolate the hazardfrom people.

4. Reduce the risksthroughengineeringcontrols.

‣ Additional controlmeasures need tobe implemented toreduceconsequence orlikelihood of event.

‣ All controls arecurrently beingimplemented andare yet to becompleted.

Ineffective Level 3 Avoid Incomplete

‣ Management cannot beconfident that anydegree or riskmodification is beingachieved.

‣ Controls need to beredesigned andadditional controlsimplemented.

5. Reduce exposureto the hazardusingadministrativeactions.

6. Use personalprotectiveequipment.

‣ The least reliableand lowest level ofhealth and safety.

‣ Avoid the risk bydeciding not tostart or continuewith the activity thatgives rise to therisk.

‣ Additional controlshave not beencompleted.


Risk Register

Serial Risk Description Category Consequence Likelihood Risk Level Existing Treatments / Controls

Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level


Expected Residual Risk level

Risk Decision

Key Risk Indicators Actions Due Risk Owner

or entity

Specific Risks to Surf Sport

1Athlete / official goes missing in the water during event

Safety & Security Catastrophic Possible 5

• Designated competition areas (equipment) • Power-craft Water safety • ARRO (Count in and out) • Safety & Emergency Management Co-ordinator

present at events • Search and Rescue Kit accessible to officials / water

safety • PA System • Athletes required to wear high-visibility vests in water • Athletes only compete in designated competition

areas • Water Safety present during competition • Athletes counted as they enter and leave the water

Substantially Effective

Level 2

Level 3

Complete 15 Accept• Historic data • Incident

reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov SEMC

2Collision between athlete in the water and surf craft


• Surf Risk Rating (determining surf conditions and altering as needed - substitution, modification, relocation, isolation)

• ARRO (adjusting of competitor numbers per race based on conditions)

• PPE - high-visibility vests / lifejackets / helmets • Athlete Coaching • Equipment restrictions based on ages/abilities (i.e.

board size / ski eligibility) • Designated areas for disciplines, i.e. boats separate to

craft and swim areas • Designated warm up areas • Athletes compete in designated areas • Athletes wear high visibility vests • Athlete numbers adjusted based on conditions /

advice • Equipment restrictions based upon abilities / age


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov SEMC

3Injury to member as a result of incorrect manual handling

Safety & Security Major Almost

Certain 3• SEMC present to manage risk and safety of event • First Aid available to athletes • Insurance


Level 2

Level 3Complete 8 Accept

• Historic data • Incident

reporting

Monitor & review

1 hr prior to event SEMC

4Collision between athletes and IRB / RWC


• Power-craft not to interfere with competition areas • Radio communication between officials and IRB /

RWC • Power-craft Coordinator / ARRO to manage IRB /

RWC • Power-craft crews have appropriate qualifications and

training • PPE (Lifejackets / high-visibility vests)


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review

1 hr prior to event

Power-craft Coordinator


5

Collision between a vehicle and a member / member of the public

Safety & Security Catastrophic Rare 15

• Only approved vehicles allowed in participation zones • Signage -"Vehicles Only" "Pedestrian Access" • Traffic management devices present at entrances to

beach / car parks • LSV SOPs restrict operating speed of vehicles • Traffic management plans and maps shared prior to

events


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


6

Incident / injury occurring during warm up phase when athletes are in water


• Allocated warm up areas to minimise dispersed athletes with no official personnel in play

• Power-craft water safety • High visibility vests worn by athletes • ARROs continually monitor conditions


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


7Incident / injury due to poorly or incorrectly installed infrastructure

Safety & Security Major Possible 8

• Trailers onsite for storage • Equipment required to be weighted down,

requirements pre-communicated • Permit requirements • Event staff / SEMC to monitor compliance


Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review


8

Insufficient or inexperienced water safety personnel for event


• Carnival Calendars used by staff to seek experienced personnel

• Administration Process - Clubs ratios required monitored by staff

• Carnival Committee teleconferences prior to carnivals, review of official roles

• LSV provide skill training to club members (Can Laying Course, RWC Course)


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review

48 hrs prior to event

Chief Referee

9

Large sea swell resulting in hazardous surf exceeding members capabilities

Safety & Security Catastrophic Likely 2

• Carnival Committee meeting prior to Carnival (BOM,Willy Weather, Surf Conditions monitored)

• Back Up Carnival locations • On day Surf Risk Rating/ Carnival Committee • Water safety personnel • Consultation between athletes / coaches and officials


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review

1 hr prior to event

Carnival Referee

10

Inadequate contingencies for extreme weather conditions


• Extreme Weather Guidelines provide decision making process and options

• Carnival Committee teleconferences meeting prior to carnival

• Back Up Carnival Locations


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


Carnival Referee

11Ingestion of contaminate as result of poor ocean quality

Safety & Security Major Likely 4

• EPA information reviewed prior to competition • Back Up Locations • Surf Risk Rating (determining surf conditions and

altering as needed - substitution, modification, relocation, isolation)


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


Carnival Referee


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


12

Injury due to competing on hard sand, potholes, and undulating surfaces

Safety & Security Major Likely 4 • Beach Hazard Checklist

• Officials inspect field of play prior to eventsSubstantially

Effective

Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review

1 hr before event

SEMC

13

Injury / incident due to delays in conducting events or length of time for an event

Safety & Security Moderate Possible 11

• Chief Referee to monitor event progress • Area referees to be briefed on preventing delays by

Chief Referee • Water Safety • First Aid


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


Carnival Referee

14Injury / incident caused by fatigue to members


• Chief Referee to monitor event progress • Area referees to be briefed on preventing delays by

Chief Referee • Water Safety • First Aid


Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review


Carnival Referee

15Members of public interfering with event zones

Safety & Security Minor Likely 12

• Signage identifying event zones • Permits issued by Transport Safety Victoria • Communications to members of public in lead up to

event

Substantially Effective Level 3 Complete 17 Accept


reporting

Monitor & review

Start of event

Carnival Referee

16

Number of athletes at event greater than that which can be safely managed


• Official Quotas for competition entry - monitored by staff

• Carnival Committee meetings prior to carnival • ARROs monitor conditions and athlete numbers


Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review


Carnival Referee

17Athletes over estimating their ability to manage conditions


• Athlete Training - Coaches / Team Managers • High Performance / Winter Development Squads • Carnival Referee Briefing prior to competition • Surf Risk Rating • ARRO (monitoring those being consistently pulled

out) • Power-craft Coordinator • High-visibility vest


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov Carnival

Referee

18Failure of radio communications equipment

Safety & Security Catastrophic Unlikely 9

• Access to public safety grade radio communications • Supply chain manage packing of equipment,

checked prior to use


Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review


Kirsty Clark - AS Manager

19Persons displaying anti-social behaviour during or post event


• Code of Conduct and LSV Member Protection Policies

• SLSA Sports Manual and Local Rules • LSV notify local police of events


Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review

14 days prior to event

Carnival Referee

20

Members not understanding their role in activating emergency procedures due to insufficient training

Safety & Security Catastrophic Unlikely 9

• ** Minimal controls currently in place • Chief Referee briefings • 1-2 member briefings

Substantially Effective Level 3

Work in

Progress9 Reduce


reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov Chief

Referee


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


21Emergency response processes not tested prior to event

Safety & Security Catastrophic Rare 15 • Annual exercise to take place for officials / athletes Substantially

Effective

Level 2



reporting


Referee

22Failure of systems put in place to manage safety of events

Safety & Security Catastrophic Unlikely 9 • Members trained in Emergency Action Plans

• External risk consultant to review LSV processesSubstantially

Effective

Level 2

Level 3

Work in

Progress9 Reduce


reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov

Kate Simpson - GM Sport

23 Harm coming to a child involved in LSV Sport


• LSV Member Protection Policy • Member Protection Officers in each club • Education and awareness sessions at state centre,

clubs and at LSV events, conferences


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


Kate Simpson - GM Sport

24

Decision processes not followed when considering event outcomes or management

Governance Major Possible 8

• Carnival Committee provided with documentation of emergency processes

• Athletes able to have input into change through Aquatic Sports Council



reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov Kirsty Clark -

AS Manager

25Limited options in selecting variety of venues for competition

Operational Moderate Unlikely 13

• Venue Matrix - outlining venue descriptions by permit details, beach, venue, club, event and safety features

• Streamlined process for clubs to EOI hosting events • Staff and leaders approach clubs with appropriate

infrastructure / beach type • Ongoing LSV advocacy for facility funding to improve

infrastructure



reporting


Rachael Rylance - AS Director

26Lack of logisitical support to members for delivery of event

Operational Major Possible 8

• Club hosting contracts outline club obligations • Supply Chain Management - Check in/ out system • Supply Chain Staff - monitoring equipment failures at

carnivals / delivering trailers / co-ordination on pack up and set up


Level 2



reporting


AS Manager

27Failure of equipment or required equipment not brought to event

Operational Major Possible 8

• Supply Chain Management- monitoring equipment failures at carnivals

• Catalogue of equipment • Carnival Checklists • Officials Feedback forms


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review


Darryl Taylor - Supply Chain Management

28Poor communication between LSV and stakeholders

Operational Moderate Possible 11

• Aquatic Sport Delegates participate in quarterly meetings

• Team Managers meetings occur during competition • Team App provides live communication feed • Social Media • Carnival committee includes athlete representatives • Quarterly Aquatics Sports Council Meetings


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


AS Manager


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


29Inconsistent application of risk management processes

Operational Moderate Possible 11

• Carnival committee provided with documentation of emergency processes

• Officials in senior roles provided with training in risk management


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


Referee

30 Difficult / convoluted event entry processes Operational Moderate Possible 11

• Staffing resources dedicated to improving entry processes

• IT development underway to provide solution to difficult entry process


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


AS Manager

31Lack of staff support to volunteers managing event

Operational Moderate Possible 11• Additional staffing resources allocated to event day • Feedback forms to allow feedback on staffing

resources


Level 2



reporting


AS Manager

32 Poor / ineffecient programming of events Operational Moderate Possible 11

• Quarterly Aquatic Sport Council Meetings to receive club feedback

• Annual forums to provide feedback opportunity • Working groups and key stakeholders utilised in

reviews of programs


Level 2



reporting


Referee

33Venue not large enough to manage numbers of athletes

Operational Moderate Unlikely 13• Venue Matrix utilised to assist in identifying

appropriate venue • Staff to approach appropriate venues to encourage

them to host events



reporting



34Athletes making decision to leave LSV Sport

Reputation Moderate Possible 11 • Work plan with identified priorities around retention • Pathways offered within LSV Sport to provide options



reporting



35Erosion of athlete skills due to not being challenged

Reputation Moderate Possible 11

• Venue Matrix utilised to assist in identifying appropriate venue

• Coaching programs to develop athletes and coaches • Additional staffing implemented (Development Officer) • High Performance Squad / Winter development • State Teams • Calendar programmed to allow access to interstate

competition • SLSA National Pathway Teams - Super Surf Team

League


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


Brian Happ - ASDevelopment Coordinator

36

External stakeholders not understanding risk management processes

Reputation Minor Possible 17 • Communications with parents and membership outlining established risk management processes



reporting


AS Manager


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


37LSV athletes not achieving at national and international level

Reputation Major Possible 8

• High Performance program • Investment in development of coaching • Investment in LSV state teams • Subsidy for athletes travelling to Australian

Championships


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


Brian Happ - ASDevelopment Coordinator

38Experienced athletes not challenged in terms of surf conditions


• Venue Matrix • Coaching • High Performance Squad / Winter development • State Teams • Calendar Program (initiate interstate comp) • SLSA National Pathway Teams - Super Surf Team

League


Level 2

Level 3


reporting



39

Members believing that LSV is not capable of taking mature approach to risk management

Reputation Minor Possible 17• Annual LSV Sport Forum • Aquatic Sport Work-plan published on LSV website • External consultant utilised to conduct LSV Sport Risk

Review



reporting

Monitor & review

1st September

Kirsty Clark - AS Manager

40

Athletes not making transition from junior to senior competition, reducing athlete numbers


• Transition of U14 to Youth/Senior Program • Implementation of Youth Ambassador program • Investment in development of coaching • Promotion of athletes within LSV and wider

community


Level 2



reporting



41 Use of illegal drugs by athletes / officials Reputation Catastrophic Possible 5 • LSV Anti-Doping Policy

• LSV JudiciarySubstantially

Effective Level 3 Complete 15 Accept• Historic data • Incident

reporting



42Lack of suitably trained and experienced officials

Resourcing & Projects Moderate Possible 11

• Staff role created to address development of LSV Sport

• Database established to ,track and monitor officials • Officiating course roll out-online/practical assessment

to streamline processes • Increased number of Senior Officials / mentors to

assess new candidates. • Official PD Sessions


Level 2

Level 3


reporting

Monitor & review 1st Nov Sharon Rich-

DSO

43 LSV not able to retain experienced officials


• Staff role created to address development of LSV Sport

• Enhancing conditions/equipment at carnivals • Enhanced staff support at carnivals • Communication • Officials PD Sessions - introduction of officials subsidy


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


DSO

44Lack of coaches with sufficient skills and experience

Resourcing & Projects Moderate Possible 11 • Investment into coaching development programs

• Establishment of coaching accreditation processSubstantially

Effective

Level 2



reporting


DSO


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


45

Lack of members with appropriate experience to undertake safety roles

Resourcing & Projects Moderate Possible 11 • Sport Forum to engage people in safety processes

• PD available to train officials into the safety rolesSubstantially

Effective

Level 2



reporting

Monitor & review

1st September

Sharon Rich- DSO

46

LSV operational capacity diminished due to members having limited exposure to challenging conditions

Resourcing & Projects Major Possible 8

• Carnival Committee empowered with tools to allow members to compete in challenging conditions

• External risk consultant reviews appetite and approach to risk in LSV Sport


Level 2

Level 3


reporting



47Time it takes to train members around safety due diligence

Resourcing & Projects Major Possible 8

• Officials Accreditation online • Training supported at Carnivals to reduce time

commitment • Support to be drawn from LSV Operations

Department


Level 2

Level 3


reporting


AS Manager

48

Requirements of LSV to participate in operational patrols creates a barrier to persons entering competition


• Amendments to Policy 5.04 (Come & Try ability) • Exemption requests (Team Managers & Official

handbook) • Patrol Policy - Patrol & Club Service included (8:8

hours)


Level 2

Level 3


reporting



This risk register is dynamic in nature, and demonstrates continual improvement process designed to reduce risk levels to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). Due to the subjective nature of using a consequence/probability matrix, it is noted that the numerical value (risk level) for risk may be misinterpreted and misused. It is also recognised that In some situations, the rating is inherently unreliable and validation against real data is particularly important. Risk Methodology Reference: IEC/ISO 31010 Risk management – Risk assessment techniques.


Treatment / Control

Effectiveness

OHS Hierarchy

Level



Risk Decision


or entity


Ref Documents within context

1 SOP 10.05 – Water Safety Requirements

2 SOP 8.03 – Water Safety Procedures

3 SOP 6.01 – Sharps and Contaminated Material

4 SOP 5.07 – Missing Persons

5 SOP 5.03 – Rescue Procedures

6 SOP 5.02 – Body Retrieval

7 SOP 4.04 – Reporting Incidents & First Aid Cases

8 SOP 3.03 – All Terrain Vehicles (ATV)

9 SOP 1.11 – Shark Sightings

10 SOP 1.10 – Hot Weather and Heat Waves

11 SOP 1.09 – Lightening Procedures

12 SOP 1.08 – Inclement Weather

13 SOP 1.07 – Beach Closure

14 Race Data Sheet

15 LSV Risk Register

16 Hazard Checklist - Beach Carnivals

17 Risk Assessment & Emergency Action Plan

18 ISO 31000-2018 Risk management - Guidelines

19 ISO Guide 73:2009 Risk Management Vocabulary

20 ISO IEC 31010 – Risk Assessment Techniques

21 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 Act No. 107/2004

22 Occupational Health and Safety Regulations 2017

Last updated 19/8/19

Annex A

Risk Methodology and Documents within Context.


Ref First Name Last Name Ref First Name Last Name Ref First Name Last Name

1 Arnold Altman 56 Sally Dale 111 Donna Greeves2 Eliot Amalos 57 Trevor Dando 112 Benjamin Griffin3 Katrina Antony 58 Dominique Davidson 113 Julia Gruar4 Michael Artz 59 Samone Davidson 114 Danielle Hamstead5 Jason Balfoort 60 Sophie Davis 115 Wendy Handley6 Sally Bambrook 61 Angela Davutovic 116 Harry Hannas7 Allan Banks 62 Elizabeth De Nittis 117 Bernadene Hansen8 Michael Barrand 63 Trisha Dermody 118 Brian Happ9 Samantha Barrow 64 Matthew Dever 119 Lisa Happ10 Samantha Barrow 65 Kimberly Di Scala 120 Chloe Hardman11 Justine Birchall 66 Iain Dickson 121 Kirsty Hardt12 Fiona Blackmore 67 Rochelle Djokic 122 Pauline Harris13 Ian Blanchonette 68 Kristy Dodds 123 Gavan Hart14 Stephen Blewett 69 Paul Doherty 124 David Hay15 Nicholas Bohan 70 Grace Donnelly 125 Daphne Henderson16 Allan Border 71 Joshua Doolan 126 Sherren Hepburn17 Dinah Boswell 72 Mithran Doraisamy 127 Peter Hetherington18 Aaron Boyd 73 Gary Doyle 128 Simon Hirth19 Lindsay Brain 74 Terry Duggan 129 Jason Hocking20 Tamara-Leigh Brawn 75 Robert Dunlop 130 Chris Hoffmann21 Cameron Browne 76 David Eades 131 Rodney Holdsworth22 Paul Buchanan 77 Leanne Edwards 132 Allan Holmes23 Winston Burger 78 George El-Hage 133 Mandy Holt24 Toni Burton 79 Colin Ellicott 134 Bernardus Homburg25 Alexandra Cain 80 Timothy Elphick 135 Natalie Hood26 Sarah Cameron 81 Ben Evans 136 Andrew Hooper27 Dwayne Cananzi 82 Emma Evans 137 Peter Hosken28 Christine Cardwell 83 Sheree Evans 138 Michelle Howard29 James Carew 84 Roslyn Facey 139 Tamara Hudson30 Leonard Carlton 85 Zoe Fagan 140 Sameana Hume31 Hugh Cattermole 86 Susan Fawaz 141 Aaron Hunt32 Caterina Cester 87 David Ferguson 142 Sharon Hunt33 Nathan Cester 88 Fiona Fitzgerald 143 Malcolm Hyde34 Roberta Cester 89 John Fitzgerald 144 Michael Hyde35 Matthew Chalmers 90 Caroline Flanagan 145 Jacqueline Jackson36 Kylie Clarke 91 Sue Flockart 146 Sue-Ellen Jackson37 Nicholas Clarke 92 Elizabeth Flower 147 Christopher Jacobson38 Warren Clarke 93 Madeleine Fogarty 148 Craig James39 John Clinch 94 Adam Foord 149 Gwenda James40 Sara Cole 95 Paul Francis 150 Murray James41 Brett Coleman 96 Mark Frisby 151 Peter James42 Maxwell Collins 97 Joanna Gannon 152 Rory Johnson43 Kaya Cook 98 Jodie Gervasoni 153 William Johnson44 Megan Cooney 99 Andrew Gibson 154 Tim Johnston45 Ann Cornish 100 Rachael Gilbert 155 Peter Johnstone46 James Cornwell 101 Cristelle Gilmour 156 Ron Johnstone47 Rodney Costa 102 Jayne Good 157 Natalie Jones-Pinkett48 Renee Cottrill 103 Camille Gordon 158 Scott Jordan49 Peter Creswell 104 Deanne Gormon (Johnstone) 159 Clint Joseph50 George Crilley 105 Lorraine Gorvett 160 Thalia Karamalis51 Lisa Curran 106 John Gough 161 Bernadette Kean52 Timothy Cutrona 107 Michelle Gough 162 Darren Kerr53 Danielle Dalby 108 Danielle Graham (Knowles) 163 Sameana Kerr54 Jason Dalby 109 Lisa Grant 164 Scot Kerr55 Karen Dale 110 Aaron Green 165 Gina Khalil

Annex B

Key Stakeholder Register


Ref First Name Last Name Ref First Name Last Name Ref First Name Last Name

166 Anthony King 226 Emma Moore 286 Bridgitte Roberts167 Glen King 227 Neil Morarty 287 Lorraine Robinson168 Joanne Klemke 228 Joanne Morel 288 Helen Rofe169 Tonia Krasnoff 229 Paul Morel 271 Sally Rolfe170 Afonso Lai 230 Barbara Morgan 272 Les Rudas171 Lisa Lang 231 James Morgan 273 Yvette Rutherford172 Andrew Lawrence 232 Aidan Moriarty 274 Jane Ryan173 Carol Lawrence 233 Michael Morris 275 David Rylance174 David Laws 234 Daryl Moss 276 Gerry Schalkwijk175 Rachel Lawson 235 Samuel Murphy 277 Paul Scherf176 Barry Leek 236 Bernard Murray 278 Fiona Scoullar177 Peter Leonard 237 Stephen Nelson 279 Cameron Shallard178 Sally Leung 238 Dale Nepean 280 Nicholas Shaw179 Elliott Lewis 239 Leonie Newey 281 Peter Sheehan180 Andrew Lewis 240 Rebel Noter 282 Judith Silom181 Donna Lionnet 241 Robert O'Brien 283 Paul Simpson182 Travis Lister 242 Robert O'Brien 284 Kim Sims183 Stuart Littler 243 Shaun O'Brien 285 Jodie Sizer184 Thomas Lloyd 244 Robert O'Neill 286 Luke Skehan185 Meagan Logan 245 Kerry Osler 287 Owen Smith186 Adrian Lynch 246 Jodie Over 288 Christopher Smith187 Stuart Mackinnon 247 David Owen 289 Tim Smith188 Sandra Madeley 248 Xeni (Maria) Pages 290 Wendy Smith189 Alexandra Madeley 249 Carolyn Palliardi 291 Joanne Stapleton-Pfister190 Shannon Magasdi 250 Andrew Palmer 292 Natasha Stevenson191 Kate Magnanini 251 Janine Paranavitna 293 Robert Stewart192 Melissa Marcus 252 Kelly Parrish 294 Paul Stone193 Julie Marshall 253 David Partridge 295 Chris Stoupas194 Robyn Marshall 254 Carly Pasco 296 Dianne Summers195 Michael Martin 255 Blane Paton 297 Matthew Symington196 Shane Maslin 256 Rebecca Patrick 298 Rebecca Talbot197 Trent Mason 257 Michelle Patterson 299 Scott Tannahill198 Susie Massey 258 David Pavia 300 Matthew Taylor199 Geoffrey Matthews 259 Anna Pawsey 301 Kate Tedstone200 Philip Mawkes 260 Catharine Payton 302 Steven Thirlwall201 Katherine McCardel 261 Omid Pazokian 303 Chris Thomas202 Caitlin McCombe 262 John Penney 304 David Thompson203 Elise McCorriston 263 Ruby Petersen 305 Steven Thomson204 Martin McCorriston 264 Adel Peterson 306 Craig Treloar205 Maurice McCutcheon 265 Gary Pettigrove 307 Charles Tuchtan206 Philip McGibbon 266 Megan Phelan 308 Michael Vafiades207 Katrina McKenna 267 Melanie Pollock 309 Stephen Vajda208 Andrew McKerron 268 Katrina Poolman 310 Bridgitte Roberts209 Sandra Mckie 269 David Pownall 311 Lorraine Robinson210 Andrew Mckinnon 270 Robert Pratt 312 Helen Rofe211 Jon McLeod 271 Mark Pratt 313 Sally Rolfe212 Jodie McNamara 272 April Pretorius 314 Les Rudas213 Peter McPhan 273 Mark Pring 315 Yvette Rutherford214 Tristan McSwain 274 Vanessa Prosser 316 Jane Ryan215 Ciurlino Melinda 275 Paul Puhar 317 David Rylance216 Sally Menzies 276 Carolyn Quan 318 Gerry Schalkwijk217 Jane Merrington 277 Tiffany Quinlan 319 Paul Scherf218 Emily Michael 278 Helen Quinn 320 Fiona Scoullar219 Brian Millman 279 Brenda Ramsdale 321 Cameron Shallard220 Ben Mitchell 280 Toni Read 322 Nicholas Shaw221 Richard Mitchell 281 Leanne Redfern 323 Peter Sheehan222 Stuart Molloy 282 Belinda Renison 324 Judith Silom223 Violetta Molloy 283 Graham Rice 325 Paul Simpson224 Robert Montebello 284 Sharon Rich 326 Kim Sims225 Amanda Moore 285 Jacinta Roache 327 Jodie Sizer


Ref First Name Last Name Ref First Name Last Name

328 Peter Van Deuren 343 Joanne Wicks329 Kevin Van Deuren 344 Vanessa Wight330 Mary Veal 345 Andrew Williams331 Frank Veltman 346 Fiona Williams332 Susan Wall 347 Jane Wilson333 Catherine Walsh 348 Kirilee Wilson334 Katrina Walsh 349 Simon Wilson335 Dawn Walterfang 350 Ashley Wolff336 Brett Waters 351 Robert Wood337 Georgia Watt 352 Nicole Woolrich338 Sarah Webster 353 Barry Wyatt339 Katie Wells 354 Sian Young340 Lucas Welsh341 Michael Whitfort342 Jenny Whiting

Last updated 19/8/19


Approval

The following SRP has been reviewed and accepted based on the context provided and risk analysis conducted. All stakeholders confirm that effective controls are in place to the best of their knowledge in order to reduce identified risks to as low as reasonable practicable.

Title Name Risk Decision Sign Date

LSV Manager - Aquatic Sports Kirsty Clark Accept | Not Accept

Sport Risk Profile Risk Advisor

Independent Risk Advisor, Riskfacilitator Kane Treloar Accept | Not Accept

Risk Management Qualifications & Experience

• Diploma in Public Safety, Victoria Police• Advanced Diploma in Police Investigation, Victoria Police• Experienced Investigator – Criminal Negligence & Coronial Matters• Subject Matter Expert – Coroner’s Court of Victoria - Aquatic Related Injury and Death• Member – Risk Management Institute of Australasia

Sport Risk Profile Author

Independent Risk Advisor, Riskfacilitator Paul Chivers Accept | Not Accept

Risk Management Qualifications & Experience

• Graduate Certificate in Risk Management, Griffith University• Certificate Practicing Risk Manager (CPRM), Risk Management Institute Australasia (RMIA)• Subject Matter Expert – Coroners Court of Queensland• Subject Matter Expert Panelist - The University of Sydney Business School• Cert IV Work & Health Safety Lecturer (TAR)• CPRM Assessor, Risk Management Institute Australasia (RMIA)• Lecturer & Author – Risk Management Institute Australasia (RMIA)• Lecturer & Author – CPA Australia (CPA)• Certificate Governance & Risk Management, Governance Institute of Australia (GIA)• Course Director, Lecturer & Author – Governance Institute of Australia (GIA)• RMIA Education & Professional Development Council Committee• Cert IV Trainer & Assessor TAE40110, Tabor• Just Culture – Certificate Event Investigation for Managers• Just Culture – Certificate Coaching & Mentoring• Justice of the Peace (JP)

For additional qualifications and information http://www.linkedin.com/in/riskfacilitator


19/8/19

Kane Treloar (Aug 19, 2019)Aug 19, 2019

221 0 R

https://na1.documents.adobe.com/verifier?tx=CBJCHBCAABAAiWvajowwt0UqNPFnvI6DZmgptzDgYRpZ

SRP v1Final Audit Report 2019-08-19

Created: 2019-08-19

By: Paul Chivers ([email protected])

Status: Signed

Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAiWvajowwt0UqNPFnvI6DZmgptzDgYRpZ

"SRP v1" HistoryDocument created by Paul Chivers ([email protected])2019-08-19 - 6:52:01 AM GMT- IP address: 58.164.66.67

Document emailed to Kane Treloar ([email protected]) for signature2019-08-19 - 6:53:49 AM GMT

Email viewed by Kane Treloar ([email protected])2019-08-19 - 7:15:08 AM GMT- IP address: 210.91.22.253

Document e-signed by Kane Treloar ([email protected])Signature Date: 2019-08-19 - 7:18:33 AM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 210.91.22.253- Signature captured from device withphone number XXXXXXX8402

Signed document emailed to Kane Treloar ([email protected]) and Paul Chivers([email protected])2019-08-19 - 7:18:33 AM GMT