Is Free Asbestos declaration a good Practice ???

Asbestos materials were ban at first by SOLAS on 01 July 2002 and totally prohibited, new installation of materials which contain asbestos for all ships on January 1st 2011. 

Verification that “new installation of materials which contain asbestos” under SOLAS II- 1/3-5, requires the Recognized Organization to review asbestos-free declarations and supporting documentation, for the structure, machinery, electrical installations and equipment covered by the SOLAS Convention, which is to be provided to the Recognized Organization by shipyards, repair yards, and equipment manufacturers for:

• New construction (keel laid, or at a similar stage of construction, on or after 1 July 2012);
• Conversions (contract date for the conversion or, in the absence of a contract, the date on which the work identifiable with the specific conversion begins) on or after 1 July 201

What SOLAS II-1/3-5 did is to prohibit its use and does not state in a clear manner if this prohibition shall be applied retroactively to existing ships. 

Contrary the IMO has issued MSC/Circ. 1045 "Guide Lines for Maintenance and Monitoring of On-Board Materials Containing Asbestos (Adopted 28/05/02). 

Basically in this MSC circular state that a successful maintenance and monitoring program should include the Following:

1.     Notification:  All those affected are informed

2.     Surveillance: Regular inspections to access and document any changes (Manage the Risk)

3.     Controls: Control all Work that can disturb asbestos-containing materials (Risk Assessment)

4.     Work Practices: focuses on special set of practices (Risk Assessment)

5.     Record Keeping for third parties

6.     Training

Based in before said the free asbestos declaration it is a necessary and good practice especially if we take in to account that the known presence of Asbestos-containing material means:

• A breach in one of the objective of the ISM code which is to ensure safety at sea, prevent human injuries or loss of life and avoidance of damage to the marine environment and;
• MLC 2006 under Reg. 4.3 demands from every member to ensure that seafarers on ships that fly their flag are provided with occupational health protection and live, work and train on board ship in a safe and hygienic environment.

Declaring the presence of asbestos-containing materials to the flag administration no necessarily means that it have to be removed from the ship, although is true that this will be their decision based in the assessment done by the company and the risk involved. An exemption certificate based on MSC.1/Circ.1374, that the ship is exempted from the requirements of Regulation II-1/3-5 of SOLAS convention will be issued by the administration, this exemption may be for a limited period of time after which the asbestos material shall be removed or for unlimited time depending of the risk assessment made by the company, the control measurements implemented and the risk involved for the crew.

In any case confirming the existence of asbestos on board and being issue with an exemption certificate will allow application of  MSC Circ.1045 which will allow all parties to mitigate the risk and may release the Ship Owners/Managers and Master of any liability at the court of law if any injuries or loss of life are demonstrated as a consequences of the asbestos-containing material on board.

Fixed Inert Gas System Requirement for Oil & Chemical Tankers

On 1st January 2016 new requirement enter in to force for fixed Inert Gas System, which require oil & Chemical Tankers of 8,000 DWT and above to be provided with it.

The new requirements has been introduced by IMO Resolution MSC.365(93) & MSC.367(93), as a result of these two new resolution, Resolution 365(93), adopted on 22/05/14, highlight changes to SOLAS II-2, Regulation 4 (Probability of Ignition), Chapter 5 (Cargo Areas of Tankers), New Paragraph 5.5.1.2 requiring all tankers of 8000 DWT and above, constructed on or after 01/01/2016 to be provided with an Inert Gas System. This requirement only apply when loading and transporting cargoes described under SOLAS Chapter II-2, Part A, Reg 1, Paragraph 6.1 and 6.2 (Oil & petroleum products less than 60 ªC Flash Point, Products listed under IBCC (Table 17) and product listed in the GCC. However the requirement for Gas Carriers still can be waived when agreed with the administration, as per SOLAS II-2/4.5.5.2.

Resolution 367(93) introduce amendments to chapter 15 of the FSS code and include among others new definitions, the general requirements to be satisfied by the installation, system components as well as describe the different types of inert gas sources that can be used to satisfy new SOLAS amendments.

When considering Insert Gas System in oil & chemical tankers, the administration can consider other equivalent systems or arrangements, as stated under SOLAS Ii-2/4.5.5.4. Where an installation equivalent to a fixed IGS is installed:

1. be capable of preventing dangerous accumulations of explosive mixtures in intact cargo tank during normal service throughout the ballast voyage and necessary in-tank operations and
2. be so designed as to minimize the risk of ignition from the generation of static electricity by the system itself.

Now a joint sulphur campaign is launched from east to west

http://www.soefartsstyrelsen.dk/Nyheder/Documents/Sulphur%20Regulation%20Pamphlet.pdf

MSC.1 Circ. 1430 " Fixed Based FiFi Systems for Ro-Ro Spaces"

The MSC, at its 84 session approved Guidelines for the approval of fixed water-based FiFi systems for Ro-Ro.

Circular MSC.1/Circ. 1430 supersedes MSC.1/Circ. 1272.

This guidelines are intended for the design and approval  of fixed water-based Fire fighting systems for open and close Ro-Ro spaces and special category spaces as defined in SOLAS II-2/3.13; II-2/3.36; II-2/3.46 and II-2/3.49.

PRINCIPAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL SYSTEMS:

1. The system may be automatically activated, automatically activated with provisions for manual activation or manually activated.
2. All system should be divided into sections. Each section should be capable of being isolated by one section control valve. The valve should be located outside the protected space and its location clearly and permanently indicated. It should be possible to manually manipulate or via control system routed outside the protected space. Means shall be provided to prevent unauthorized operation. Location shall be adequately ventilated.
3. The piping system should be sized in accordance with a hydraulic calculation technique such as Hazen-Williams or Dacy-Weisbach.
4. The pressure source system equipment should be located outside the protected space as well as all power supply components and have a minimum rating of IP 54.
5. Activation of automatic system should give a visual and audible alarm at a continuously manned station, showing the specific area activated. Described alarms are in addition to the detection and fire alarm system required by SOLAS II-2/20.4
6. Wet pipe systems on board vessels where temperatures can be expected below 0 ºC, should be protected fro freezing, either by having temperature control of the space. heating coils on pipes, antifreeze agents or other equivalents measures.
7. The capacity of the water supply system should be sufficient for the total simultaneous coverage of the minimum coverage are of tables 4.1 to 4.3 and 5.1 (see MSC.1/Circ 1430) and the vertical applicable areas as defined  in paragraph 22.
8. The system should be provided with a redundant mean of pumping or otherwise supplying a water-based extinguishing medium to the system with a capacity sufficient to compensate for the loss of any single supply pump or alternative source.
9. The system should be provided with a permanent sea inlet and be capable of continuous operation during a fire using sea water.
10. The system and its components to withstand ambient Temperature, vibration, humidity, shock, impact, clogging and corrosion. Piping, pipes fittings and related components except gaskets inside protected spaces to withstand 925 ºC, Distribution pipe of galvanize steel, stainless steel or equivalent. Sprinklers and nozzles to comply with paragraph 11.
11. The system and its components should be designed and installed based on international Standards acceptable for the Organization. The nozzles should be manufactured and tested in accordance with MSC/Circ. 1165.
12. Means for testing the automatic operation of the system and assuring the pressure and flow should be provided.
13. If the system is pre-primed with water containing a fire suppression enhancing additive and/or antifreeze agent, periodic inspection and testing, as specified by the manufacture, should be undertaken. Additive should be approve for fire protection service.
14. Operating instruction should be displayed at each operating position.
15. Installation plans, operating manuals and instructions for testing and maintenance should be supplied to the ship and readily available on board. 
16. Spare Parts should be provided, in the case of automatic sprinkler system, the total number of spare sprinkler heads for each type sahl be six for the first 300, 12 for the first 1000.
17. Where automatic system are installed, a warning notice should be displayed outside each entry point stating the type of media use and the possibility of automatic release.
18. All installation, operation and maintenance instructions should be in the working language of the ship.
19. Any foam concentrates used should comply with the revised guidelines for the performance and testing criteria and surveys of foam concentrates for fixed fire-extinguishing systems (MSC.1/Circ. 1312)
20. Means for flushing the system with fresh water should be provided.
21. The presence of obstructions and the potential for shielding of the water spry should be evaluated to ensure system performance is not affected.
22. System should be designed for simultaneous coverage of vertically applicable area at the minimum  water discharge density as per tables 4.1 to 4.3 indicated in the MSC.1/ Circ 1430.
23. All release controls for deluge system, monitor for any CCTV, control panel for fire detection system, water pressure on the discharge side and the position indication of all section valve should be available in a continuously manned control station. 
24. The length of a deluge section should not be less than 20 m and the with no less than 14 m.

Fire-extinguishing arrangements in Cargo Spaces (SOLAS Chapter II-2; Reg. 10; Part 7).

SOLAS require under 7.1.3 that Cargo spaces on cargo ships of 2.000 GT and above shall be protected by a fixed CO2 system, Inert gas System or by a fire-extinguishing system which provides equivalent protection. The same convention state, under 7.2, that a ship engaged in the carriage of Dangerous Goods “DG” in any cargo space shall be also provided with a CO2 system, inert gas system or a equivalent fire protection system. 

Under SOLAS 7.1.4 is stated that The Administration may exempt from the above mentioned requirements, cargo spaces of any cargo ship if constructed, and solely intended for, the carriage of ore, coal, grain, unseasoned timber, non-combustible cargoes or cargoes which, in the opinion of the Administration, constitute a low fire risk. These exemptions may be only granted if the ship is fitted with steel hatch covers and effective means of closing ventilators and other openings. 

When such exemption is granted, the administration shall issued a Exemption Certificate, irrespective of the date of construction and shall ensure the list of cargoes the ship is permitted to carry is attach to such certificate. The Exemption Certificate shall be issued with validity similar to the Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate (CSSEC). When a short Term CSSEC shall be issued, the Exemption Certificate shall be also issued for the same period and when all conditions have been dealt with the exemption certificate shall be reinstated for the same period of the Full Term CSSEC.

In view of before, The Maritime Safety Committee agreed that there were a need to provide administrations with guide lines regarding the provisions of SOLAS II-2/10/7.1.4, concerning exemptions from the requirements for fire extinguishing systems. Therefore the Marine safety committee between 11 and 20 of May 2011, review the list of solid bulk cargoes, approved by MSC/Circ.671, to align certain names in the list with those in the recent version of the IMDG Code, and approve them, as set out in table 1 & 2 of the annex to MSC/Circ.1395

ISM; Case of Study (OPA 90)

Company:                                         Mayor Player in the Tanker Segment

DOC:                                               Identify Main and Subsidiaries offices

Trade:                                               World Wide

Vessel Last Call US Port:                  Sep 2011

Audit Type:                                       ISM Renewal

Area of Audit:                                   Emergency Preparedness/Training/Rules & Regulations

It was observed in the Intermediate Verification Audit Report that the Master has stated a yearly ship-shore exercise was conducted with another vessel within the fleet. However, copy of the exercise self evaluation was not available on board when requested.   The auditor raised an observation, which was found at the renewal audit, duly documented and reported to the company by the Master and following the reporting system required by the SMS. The report was send to the office and following day the observation closed by the responsible officer from HQSE department, stating that is not a requirement to submit self-evaluation reports of shipboard drills and ISM code does not mention this requirement under chapter 8.

The analysis of the detected deviation, done by the HQSE officer was superficial and although was evident from the company SMS that there are procedures in place for shipboard drills (Oil Spill Response & Emergency Notification Drills), these exercises include documents like Current CFR for foreign vessels operating in water of US and vessel specific Response Plans which contain guidelines/instructions that have to be taken in to account as part of the exercise.

CFR 155.1015, state that every vessel design or adapted to carry oil in bulk and operate in US navigable waters requires an approved VRP. The VRP requires that all personnel with responsibilities under plan receive training in their assignments, refresh and participate in the exercises as necessary. 

CFR 155.1055, state that vessel owner shall maintain records to demonstrate training and make them available for inspection. The training records may be on board, with the Q.I. or at U.S. location and this shall be indicated in the VRP.

CFR 155.1060 identifies the following training requirements:

Internal:

a.-  Qualified individual notification exercises, which must be conducted quarterly.

b.-  Emergency procedures exercises, which must be conducted quarterly.

c.-  Shore-based spill management team tabletop exercises, which must be conducted annually. In a triennial period, at least one of these exercises must include a worst case discharge scenario.

d.- Oil spill removal organization equipment deployment exercises, which must be conducted annually.

e.- An exercise of the entire response plan, which must be conducted every 3 years.

Yearly, at least one of b or d should be unannounced. Self evaluation report shall be recorded.

External:

a.- area exercises

b.- Government initiated-unannounced exercises.

National Preparedness for response exercise program (PREP) guidelines, state under section 2 “Guiding Principles”, that the VRP holder must identify a Shore based Spill Management Team in the plan. The SMT shall conduct an annual Tabletop Exercise (TTX). The VRP must be utilized in the exercise to ensure SMT is familiar with the plan and is able to use it effectively to conduct a spill response. If VRP cite the same SMT for all fleet the SMT TTX shall be conducted once per year and all vessels should take credit for the annual exercise.

Additionally to above mentioned, the approved vessel response plan available on board requires within the program of exercises a yearly exercise involving the master a SMT. 

Therefore it is conclude that Currents CFR cite in the shipboard drills and office response to emergency situations procedures, require the self drill evaluation as internal training and to  take credit of the yearly ship-shore exercise (SMT TTX), the vessel must be provided with it. The results will be brought to the crew attention at the next safety meeting on board for example. Although the VRP does not mention where this records shall be and in view this may be required by USCG, a front the doubt think the Wright place is on board.

Base in before said and taking in to account that the red warning flag was raised when the observation was raised at the intermediate verification, which was not properly considered, a NcN was raised to strongly bring it to the attention of the ship operator.

The NcN against emergency preparedness was discard in view that the investigation carried out revealed that the company SMS included procedures for shipboard drills, which were done regularly as required by the company and the CFR.

Therefore two possibilities left; the first one is to raise the NcN under Resources & Personnel (6.4), because the HQSE officer showed a lack of knowledge in view of his justification for closing out the observation. The second will be to consider the Objective of ISM code (1.2.3.1/1.2.3.2) in view that compliance with mandatory regulations or applicable codes or standards recommended by administration were not taken in to account.

The Flag Administration/R.O. issuing the DOC, proved to have failed by not identifying this deviation from the stated regulations at the office audit and if does, no other chance to issue the NcN under 1.2.3.2 “ISM Objective”. However, because this problem was detected as a consequence of a no properly closed observation report when doing an onboard audit, I will raise the NcN under 6.4 of the ISM code.

Area under Review:

Chapter 6; paragraph 6.4: The Company should ensure that all personnel involved in the company’s safety management system have an adequate understanding of relevant rules, regulations, codes and guide lines.

Objective Evidence:

The shipboard drill & office response to emergency situations procedures included in the Company SMS mention as supporting documentation the VRP and Code of Federal regulations, which certainly requires vessel to participate in a yearly Spill Management Team Tabletop Exercise. Vessel can credit participation by receiving and discussing exercise self evaluation report when the exercise have been done with other ship within the fleet.  In consequence the raised observation was wrongly closed when was stated that there is not a requirement neither in the ISM code chapter 8 nor in the company SMS to distribute the self evaluation report among the fleet.

Root Cause:

1. Lack of familiarization with the Code of Federal Regulation applicable to foreign vessel when sailing in US water. 
2.  Lack of Familiarization with the Vessel Response Plan and the National Preparedness for response exercise program (PREP) guidelines.

Life Boat on-load release system.

"SOLAS III/1.5".

New SOLAS regulation is applicable to all cargo ship more or equal to 500 GT (New or Existing) and to all passenger ships. The requirements of the new regulation apply to davit launched life boats with On-Load Release Mechanisms (OLRM) not complying with the new paragraph 4.4.7.6.4 to 4.4.7.6.6 of the LSA code.

OLRM shall be replaced or modified not later than the first dry-dock after 01 July 2014 but not later than 01 July 2019 and for New Buildings, MSC. 1Circ. 1393 state ships constructed on or after 01/07/14 shall comply with revised LSA code..

The new modifications introduced to LSA code is:

4.4.7.6.4: The release mechanisms shall be so designed and installed that crew members from inside the life boat can clearly determine when the system is ready for lifting
by:
4.1: by observing the movable parts of the  mechanism and there fore being capable to sate is completely reset.
or
4.2: Observing a non adjustable indicator showing the the mechanism is reset
or
4.3: easily operating a mechanical indicator that confirms that the mechanism is reset.

4.4.7.6.5: Clear operating instructions shall be provided with a suitable worded warning notice using colour, pictogram, and / or symbols as necessary for clarity.

4.4.7.6.6: The release control shall be clearly marked in a colour that contrasts with its surroundings.

Replacement or Modification of On Load Release Mechanism:

To confirm compliance with LSA code, existing OLRM shall be reviewed as follow:

1.- Self Assessment, design verification and Factory test:
Manufacturers are to carry out and evaluation of their current OLRM in the market, the results to such evaluation and the support documentation are going to be submitted to the flag for a design review against new LSA code requirements. On satisfactory completion of the review, the manufacturer is to carry out a performance test in accordance with MSC.1/Circ 1392 and the test shall be witnessed by the flag administration. Prior any test is achieved, it should be established that a satisfactory manufacturer self assessment and design review has been carried out for the specific OLRM to be tested. On satisfactory completion of the test a test certificate shall be issued.

2.- Notifications:
On completion of the test the flag administration is obliged to report to the IMO the results of the test as Non- compliant, Compliant and/or compliant after modification

3.- Examination of existing OLRM:
When the OLRM has been reported as in compliant, users shall arrange for an examination of any such OLRM installed in their life boats. This examination shall be done by the manufacturer in accordance with MSC.1/Circ.1206, this after 14 July 2014 but before 01 July 2019. Prior to witnessing any examination on board should be established that the type of OLRM has been reported to IMO as in compliant by contacting the flag administration. The manufacturer maintenance report then will be reviewed by the flag inspector and a factual statement, issued by the manufacturer should be sighted on board. Operational test then shall be carried out and witnessed. 

If the OLRM is reported as non-compliant this mechanism shall be replaced and after replacement tested as required by MSC.1/Circ.1392, it should be first stated whether or not the replacement has been reported to IMO as a compliant type or by simply verifying type approval certificate in accordance with revised LSA Code.


Mean while, Fall Preventer Devices (FPDs) for life boat OLRM shall be provided unless otherwise instructed by the vessel's flag until modification/replacement is carried out.

As per MSC 1/Circ. 1327 "Guide lines for the fitting and use of FPD", FDPs can be Locking pins, Strops and sling (Wire and chains should not be use) issued with appropriate certificate documenting tensile strength, crew shall be made aware of the operation with FPD and the shipowner or manufacture of the OLRM shall contact administration for approval before any modification is done in the OLRM to fix the FPD.