Taking Over a Newbuilding Aframax Tanker

Taking Over a Newbuilding Aframax Tanker
Universal Shipyard-Japan

Sunday, 15 April 2012

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

Sunday, 8 April 2012

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.






















Sunday, 11 March 2012

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. 

Sunday, 12 February 2012

SOLAS II-2/10.2.1.4.1; Emergency FiFi pump piping running through E/R.

Reg. 10.2.1.4.1:

Isolating valves to separate the section of the fire main within the machinery space containing the main fire pump or pumps from the rest of the fire main shall be fitted in an easily accessible and tenable position outside the machinery spaces. The fire main shall be so arranged that when the isolating valves are shut all the hydrants on the ship, except those in the machinery space referred to above, can be supplied with water by another fire pump or an emergency fire pump. The emergency fire pump, its seawater inlet, and suction and delivery pipes and isolating valves shall be located outside the machinery space. If this arrangement cannot be made, the sea-chest may be fitted in the machinery space if the valve (sea inlet valve) is remotely controlled from a position in the same compartment as the emergency fire pump and the suction pipe is as short as practicable. Short lengths of suction or discharge piping may penetrate the machinery space, provided they are enclosed in a substantial steel casing, or are insulated to "A-60" class standards. The pipes shall have substantial wall thickness, but in no case less than 11 mm, and shall be welded except for the flanged connection to the sea inlet valve.

A.- When suction and Discharge piping penetrate E/R spaces, the pipe shall be protected by steel casing or shall be insulated to A-60 class, there fore the basic fire-resisting ability of the pipe shall remain intact during a period of 60 minutes. It is not necessary to insulate distance pieces, sea inlet valve and sea-chest. The discharge piping it is conclude to be the pipe running from the emergency fire pump discharge to the isolating valve. 


B.- The most common method to insulate a pipe to A-60 standard can be by covering and/or protecting the pipe with a steel faced mineral wool, which is approved as part of A-60 class division in accordance with the Fire Test Procedure Code.


C.- When sea inlet valve is inside E/R, this valve should not be fail close type in case the medium that move the valve actuator fail, instead fail open valve shall be use when remotely controlled. In my opinion this can be voided if the valve is opened/closed by a mecanical mean like a cardan joint intead control piping, actuacting devices and/or electric cables.

D.- In cases where main fire pumps are provided in compartments out side machinery spaces and where emergency fire pumps suction or discharge piping penetrate such spaces, above will be applied to the piping.