Maritime Safety Committee s 76 th Session. Maritime Security Conference

Transcription

1 News Update American Bureau of Shipping January 2003 Vol.12, No.1d Maritime Safety Committee s 76 th Session and Maritime Security Conference 2 to 13 December 2002 Refer also: / News and Events / Regulatory Information ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D)

2 ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 1/12

3 International Regulation News Update January 2003 Refer also: / News and Events / Regulatory Information Regulatory Development OPENING REMARKS (page 2) SOLAS AMENDMENTS SECURITY RELATED (pg 2) Security Alarm Ship Security Plans Certification SOLAS AMENDMENTS SAFETY RELATED (pages 3-4) Automated Identification Systems (AIS) IMO Ship Identification Number Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) Water Ingress Monitoring/Alarm Dewatering Systems Machinery Controls Radio Transponder SOLAS AMENDMENTS MEANS OF ACCESS (pages 5-6) General Provisions Ship Structures Access Manual Technical Provisions Bulk Carriers Technical Provisions Oil Tankers BULK CARRIER SAFETY INITIATIVES (pages 6-9) Double Side Skin Standards Coating Standards Focsle Requirements Breakwater Requirements Hatch Cover Securing Other Initiatives Recommended Risk Control Options LOAD LINE AMENDMENTS(pages 9-11) Hatch Cover Strength Minimum Bow Height Requirements Reserve Buoyancy Miscellaneous Amendments MISCELLANEOUS(pages 10-12) Standards for Ship Maneuverability Standards for Thickness Measurement Integrated Bridge Systems ISM Code Major Non-Conformities Arctic Ship Standards High Speed Craft Code ( + ships are all self propelled vessels) Ship + Application Cargo Ships Bulk Carriers Bulk Carriers Ro-Ro Oil Tankers and Bulkers Bulk Carriers Bulk Carriers Ships (except tankers) Oil Tankers Arctic Class Ships High Speed Craft ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 2/12

4 OPENING REMARKS MSC 76 th Session / Maritime Security Conference (2 13 December 2002) Secretary General William A. O Neil reviewed the significant tasks before the 76th session of the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and SOLAS Conference on Maritime Security, which met concurrently from 2 to 13 December 2002, at IMO Headquarters in London. Afterwards, he turned to the significant damage to the marine environment caused from the Prestige casualty and urged that investigation reports and any proposed remedial actions be submitted to IMO where action would be taken in an expeditious manner. The following summarizes the actions taken on the more significant issues arising from both MSC 76 and the Maritime Security Conference. SOLAS AMENDMENTS SECURITY RELATED At the completion of the SOLAS diplomatic conference, Governments adopted a set of new provisions addressing maritime security of ships and port facilities. These provisions are contained in SOLAS Chapter XI-2 and the new International Security for Ports and Ships (ISPS) Code. Briefly, internationally trading ships and ports receiving such ships are required to develop, implement and maintain a security plan. The plan is to be based on a security assessment, which must respectively include an onsight survey of the ship and port. The ship s security assessment may be carried out on behalf of the Administration by an authorized organization, whereas the port assessment can only be carried out by the Government. To provide independence and impartial views, the organization that carries out the ship security assessment cannot certify the ship s security plan. The following provides an overview of the principal requirements which are scheduled to enter into force on 1 July Security Alarm (sls XI-2/6) Every new cargo ship >500 gt, passenger ship, high speed craft and drilling unit constructed on/after 1 July 2004 will be required to be fitted with a ship security alarm. Existing passenger ships, tankers, bulk carriers and high speed craft will need to be retrofitted with such alarms by the first radio installation survey after 1 July All other cargo ships >500 gt and drilling units need to comply by the first radio installation survey after 1 July The alarm shall automatically alert shore authorities (designated by the Contracting Government) that the ship s security is under threat or is being compromised. The alert signal shall continue until it is deactivated by authorized personnel. The signal shall not alert other ships nor raise an alarm on board. The alarm shall be capable of being controlled from the bridge and at least one other location. The radio installation fitted to comply with SOLAS Chapter IV may be used to sound such an alert provided the above requirements are met. Ship Security Plans (sls XI-2/4) All ships as defined above must, after undergoing a risk-based analysis of securityrelated hazards or threats and at least one onboard survey, be provided with an approved ship security plan. Responsibility for development, implementation and restricting access to the assessment and the plan are shared between the designated company and ship security officers. The plan must be consistent with, and respond to, security levels set by the port State prior to entry. Depending on the security level set by the port State or, upon request by the ship, a Declaration of Security (DoS) may be required, particularly when the ship is operating at a level of security higher than that declared by the port State. The DoS documents the security measures agreed between the ship and the port facility in accordance with the approved security plans. The plan shall contain procedures and measures to prevent introduction of weapons; provide procedures for responding to security threats and evacuation; assign shipboard security duties including auditing, training and drill procedures; and prevent access to restricted areas commensurate with the level of security assigned by the ship or the port facility. The plan shall also specify the frequency of internal audits of the security plan implemented and records generated, including training, drills and exercises. ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 3/12

5 Certification (sls XI-2/9) MSC 76 th Session / Maritime Security Conference (2 13 December 2002) The security of the ship is subject to periodic verifications, along the lines and frequency of safety management verifications (initial, intermediate and renewal audits) by, or on behalf of, the flag Administration. ABS is currently training its ISM certified auditors in the relevant aspects of maritime security and is seeking from Governments authorization to approve ship security plans and conduct verification audits under SOLAS Chapter XI-2 and the mandatory ISPS Code. Security measures implemented by the ship are subject to port State inspections which should initially focus on the veracity of the certificate and certain records associated with certain nonconfidential aspects of the security plan for at least the last ten ports of call. SOLAS AMENDMENTS SAFETY RELATED Automated Identification System (sls V/19) The retroactive application schedule for installation of an Automated Identification System (AIS) has been accelerated for existing ships of 300 gt and above but less than 50k gt other than passenger ships and tankers. Precipitated by maritime security concerns, the current SOLAS schedule (between 2005 and 2007) affecting the above ships was revised to require type approved AIS to be fitted by the first safety equipment survey due after 1 July 2004, but not later than 31 December Passenger ships and tankers were not affected as they have respective compliance dates of 1 July 2003 and first safety equipment survey due after 1 July AIS consists of a shipboard broadcast transponder system that is capable of determining the ship's position, course, and speed from differential GPS data. It then broadcasts the data via a VHF maritime band that is capable of sending and receiving information such as the ship s identification, position, heading, speed, ship length, beam, type, draft and hazardous cargo information, to other ships and to shore. The cost of a shipboard AIS transponder is about US$10,000. Ship owners should note that there are certain equipment/sensors (such as position, heading, course- and speed-over-ground) that are required to provide input to the AIS. Such equipment/sensors that do not have the correct output connections (IEC serial output) require converter units to provide functionality. Also, in certain instances the installed onboard global positioning system (GPS) may not be compatible with an AIS and may need to be upgraded when the AIS is installed to meet SOLAS requirements. A type approved GPS (see V/19.1) is needed if it is installed to meet SOLAS V/ on the first safety equipment survey due on/after 1 July However, if GPS is installed before the first safety equipment survey due on/after 1 July 2002, then it need only be documented to comply with standards equivalent to the performance standards in the annex to Res. A.819(19) as amended by MSC.112(73) as per V/18.2. IMO Ship Identification Number (sls XI-1/3) The assigned IMO Number is to be marked on all cargo ships >300gt and passenger ships (carrying more than 12 passengers) >100gt. Ships constructed on/after 1 July 2004 are to be provided with such markings on delivery. Existing ships are to be marked not later than the first scheduled dry-docking after 1 July The IMO Number is to be permanently marked (raised lettering or center punching for steel): on the ship s stern; amidships, port and starboard; on the port and starboard sides, or on the front, of the superstructure; or in the case of passenger ships, on a horizontal surface. Additionally, the IMO Number is to be marked: on a machinery space transverse bulkhead; hatchway coaming; in the cargo pump room, for tankers; or on a ro-ro space transverse bulkhead. Continuous Synopsis Record (sls XI-1/5) All internationally trading cargo ships and ships carrying more than 12 passengers are to be provided with a Continuous Synopsis Record (CSR) which contains an abbreviated history of ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 4/12

6 the ship from 1 July 2004 The Administration is to issue and, based on changes received from the ship owner, maintain the accuracy of the CSR. Changes to the CSR are required to be entered by the ship owner with notifications of such changes sent to the Administration. The CSR is to contain the history of the ship s name, registered owner and any bareboat charterer, Flag, class society and ISM (DOC and SMC) and ISPS certificate issuer. Water Ingress Monitoring/Alarm (Reg XII/12) Water level alarms giving audible and visual indication on the navigation bridge must, under resolution MSC.134(76), be provided on all bulk carriers >500 gt (single and double side skin including ore and combination carriers) built on/after 1 July 2004 when they are put in service and on existing bulk carriers by the first annual, intermediate or renewal survey carried out after 1 July The alarms must detect water: at 0.5m and 15% cargo hold depth (but not more than 2m) at the aft end of each cargo hold; at a level corresponding to 10% capacity of any ballast tank forward of the collision bulkhead; and at 0.1m above the deck of any dry or void space (other than a chain locker) which extends entirely or partially forward of the foremost cargo hold and exceeds 10% of the ship s maximum displaced volume. Arguments by industry against the U.K. proposal to include the annual survey were not supported, even though the fitting of these alarms, particularly in cargo holds, will require flame cutting, welding, staging, cabling, etc., which is more safely carried out when the ship is in dry dock (concurrent with the intermediate or renewal survey) as opposed to the use of riding crews or being carried out during the annual survey. IACS has withdrawn its Unified Requirement S24 which contained a different implementation schedule and system requirements which called for water detection at one level; 2 m above the cargo hold bottom. IMO is to develop performance standards for adoption at MSC 77 in June Systems will not be able to be approved with confidence until the IMO performance standard is adopted at MSC 77. This will undoubtedly place a strain on industry as over 4900 bulk carriers will need to be equipped with these systems in a very limited time frame. IACS and Industry representatives are currently developing a performance standard with the view to submitting it to the 46 th Session Design and Equipment Sub-Committee which meets in March The standard will address type approval testing requirements to ensure robustness and suitability of the detection/alarm system for the conditions expected to prevail within the cargo hold. In light of the above regulation, IMO concluded that the above system would provide sufficient warning so as to alleviate the need for the proposed risk control option to fit hatch covers with sensors that provide indication of the covers status (closed/open). Dewatering Systems (Reg XII/13) Under resolution MSC.134(76), a means of dewatering ballast tanks and dry spaces, any part of which extends forward of the collision bulkhead, must be fitted in all bulk carriers >500 gt (single and double side skin including ore and combination carriers) built on/after 1 July 2004 when they are put in service and on existing bulk carriers by the first intermediate or renewal survey carried out thereafter, but not later than 1 July It is noted that the time period for implementation on existing ships is longer than the schedule for water ingress monitoring/alarm as the annual survey is not included. The means of operation shall be readily accessible from an enclosed space that can be accessed from the navigation bridge or propulsion control position without having to traverse exposed decks. Machinery Controls (sls II-1/31) Automation systems which control the propulsion machinery in manned machinery spaces from the navigation bridge must, when fitted on board ships built on/after 1 July 2004, be equipped to provide the navigational watch officer sufficient time to manually intervene in case of imminent engine slowdown/shutdown. Under resolution MSC.134(76), such a provision is required except in cases, such as engine ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 5/12

7 over-speed, where the manual intervention would result in total failure of the engine. Radio Transponder (sls III/26) Resolution MSC.134(76) requires liferafts fitted on board new ro-ro passenger ships built on/after 1 July 2004 (when they are put in service) and existing ro-ro passenger ships (by the first survey carried out on/after 1 July 2004), to be provided with a radio transponder meeting the requirements of A.802(19). One transponder is required for every four liferafts. Mounted inside the liferaft, the transponder s antennae shall extend above sea level or, for canopied liferafts, be capable of being readily erected by survivors. SOLAS AMENDMENTS MEANS OF ACCESS General Provisions (sls II-1/3-6) A new SOLAS regulation II-1/3-6, applicable to oil tankers > 500 gt and bulk carriers > 20,000 gt, constructed on or after 1 January 2005 was adopted by resolution MSC.134(76). Each space within the cargo area is to be provided with a permanent means of access to enable overall and close-up inspections and thickness measurements of the ship s structures to be carried out by the Administration, the Company, and the ship s personnel. The means of access must be available throughout the life of a ship and comply with the requirements of a mandatory set of Technical Provisions which are contained in resolution MSC.133(76). In cases where a permanent means of access may be susceptible to damage during normal cargo loading and unloading operations or where it is impracticable, the Administration may allow, in lieu, the provision of portable means of access such as staging, moveable platforms and ladders to the extent it is so specified in the Technical Provisions. Means of attaching, rigging, suspending or supporting portable means of access must form a permanent part of the ship s structure. All portable equipment shall be capable of being readily erected or deployed by ship s personnel. The means of access shall be subject to survey prior to, or in conjunction with, its use in carrying out surveys in accordance with regulation XI/2. Safe access to cargo holds, cofferdams, ballast tanks, cargo tanks and other spaces in the cargo area shall be direct from the open deck. Access to double bottom spaces may be from a pump-room, deep cofferdam, pipe tunnel, cargo hold, double hull space or similar compartment not intended for the carriage of oil or hazardous cargoes. Tanks, and subdivisions of tanks, having a length of 35 m or more shall be fitted with at least two access hatchways and ladders, as far apart as practicable. Tanks less than 35 m in length shall be served by at least one access hatchway and ladder. When a tank is subdivided by one or more swash bulkheads or similar obstructions which do not allow ready means of access to the other parts of the tank, at least two hatchways and ladders shall be fitted. Each cargo hold is to be provided with at least two means of access as far apart as practicable. In general, these accesses should be arranged diagonally, e.g. one access near the forward bulkhead on the port side, the other one near the aft bulkhead on the starboard side. Horizontal openings, hatches or manholes shall be sized to allow a person wearing a selfcontained air-breathing apparatus and protective equipment to ascend or descend any ladder without obstruction and also provide a clear opening to facilitate the hoisting of an injured person from the bottom of an internal space. The minimum clear opening shall not be less than 600 mm x 600 mm. When access to a cargo hold is arranged through the cargo hatch, the top of the ladder shall be placed as close as possible to the hatch coaming. Access hatch coamings having a height greater than 900 mm shall also have steps on the outside. Vertical openings, or manholes, in swash bulkheads, floors, girders and web frames providing passage through the length and breadth of the space, shall have a minimum opening not less than 600 mm x 800 mm at a height of not more than 600 mm from the bottom shell plating unless gratings or other foot holds are provided. Ship Structure Access Manual A ship s means of access to carry out close-up inspections and thickness measurements must ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 6/12

8 be presented in a Ship Structure Access Manual approved by the Administration. The Manual shall include the following for each space in the cargo area: plans showing the means of access within each space, with appropriate technical specifications and dimensions, to enable close-up inspections to be carried out; instructions for inspecting and maintaining the structural strength of all means of access and their attachments, taking into account any corrosive atmosphere that may be within the space; instructions for rigging and use of portable equipment; and an inventory of all portable means of access onboard with safety instructions for the rigging. Technical Provisions Bulk Carriers The Technical Provisions contained in MSC.133(76) require the following: Cargo Holds (Vertical Structure) - Permanent vertical access to allow for inspection of a minimum of 25% of the total number of hold frames port and starboard equally distributed throughout the hold including at each end in way of transverse bulkheads. In no case should this arrangement be less than three permanent means of vertical access. A means of portable access may be used to gain access over the sloping plating of lower hopper ballast tanks to the lower brackets. Cargo Holds (Overhead Structure) - Three permanent means of access (port, starboard and in the vicinity of the centerline) shall be fitted to the cross deck structure. Each access is to be accessible from the cargo hold or directly from the main deck and is to be installed between 1.8 m to 2.5 m below the deck. Alternatively, if the height of the overhead structure of the cross deck is 17 m or less, above the tank top, a movable means of access (e.g., hydraulic arms with a stable base or wire lift platforms) may be accepted. Top Side and Lower Hopper Tanks Tanks 6m in height are to be provided with one longitudinal, continuous permanent means of access for the full length of each tank. Access to the longitudinal permanent access is to be provided by three (3) with vertical ladders (or, alternatively, longitudinal members) within a top side tank and by one (1) vertical ladder within the vicinity of the access leading into the lower hopper tank. The longitudinal access is to be located adjacent to side shell at 1.8 m to 2.5 m below the top of the tank. Access holes are to be arranged at each transverse ring web within 600 mm of the tank base. Where the bottom web frame rings have a web height greater than 1m, step rungs/grab rails are to be provided to allow safe access over each transverse web frame ring and bottom web frame rings. Portable ladders may be used for a tank height < 6 m. Technical Provisions Oil Tankers Relative to the earlier draft provisions approved at MSC 75 in May 2002, the provisions for oil tankers adopted by Resolution MSC.133(76) contain a significant change. Specially, rafting is not allowed as an alternative to permanent access to the overhead structure - although rafting can still be used to survey the tank. In all cases, portable ladders may be used where distance between horizontal stringers or tank height < 6 m. Cargo & Ballast Tanks Except as provided below for Wing Ballast Tanks < 5 m width: Overhead Structure - is to be provided with one continuous athwartship permanent access arranged at the transverse bulkhead and at every deck transverse on the clean (unobstructed) side of the web plating from 1.8 m to 2.5 m below the deck. The athwartship access is to be accessible from a continuous longitudinal permanent access located 1.8 m to 2.5 m below the deck at the longitudinal bulkhead. Where a longitudinal bulkhead contains attached framing, the access shall be provided on that side. Lightening holes (300 mm φ) shall be cut in the web plating at each side of and adjacent to each tripping bracket at a minimum of 3 locations. Vertical Structure - is to be provided with permanent access at each transverse web unless the tank height is less than 6 m in which case portable ladders may be an acceptable alternative. Wing Ballast Tanks < 5m width ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 7/12

9 Overhead Structure located more than 6 m above the upper horizontal stringer is to be provided with one continuous longitudinal permanent access for the full length of the tank from 1.8 m to 2.5 m below the deck with means to pass through swash bulkheads. Vertical access ladders are to be provided at each end of the tank and at its mid-span. The above provisions also apply to the bilge hopper sections where the upper knuckle point is 6 m or more above the baseline. Vertical Structure - is to be provided with permanent access to each transverse web between horizontal stringers from the upper knuckle point of the bilge hopper section to the main deck, unless the distance is < 6 m in which case portable ladders are acceptable. BULK CARRIER SAFETY INITIATIVES Mixed opinions were expressed as to the thoroughness and extent of transparency of the UK/International Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) Collaboration carried out. On several occasions, the MSC s attention was drawn to the inconsistent application of FSA principles in determining which risk reduction factors would comprise mandatory regulation. In some instances, the interactive effects and dependence of one RCO on another would be used to dismiss the RCO as not cost effective whereas in other instances such effects were completely disregarded and RCOs were independently assessed. Because of the noted inconsistencies, IMO will consider revising its FSA Guidelines to require that interactive effects of RCOs on one another be considered in the decision making process. Despite the above, the majority supported a proposal to proceed with the development of a number of safety standards based on the risk control options (RCOs) identified below. Double Side Skin Standards IMO agreed in principle that new bulk carriers > 150 m in length should be constructed with a double side skin and is scheduled to develop uniform requirements for the double side structure by the end of IACS is developing standards for submission to IMO. The MSC agreed to retain the principle of onecompartment flooding and is to extend the IACS single side shell strength requirements for bulkheads, double bottoms and longitudinal strength to double side skin bulk carriers. The details regarding the extent of flooding will be further considered during the March 2003 Design and Equipment Sub-Committee meeting. Significant issues to be resolved include: minimum width requirements; consideration of tank use (ballast vs void); the basis for determining the scantlings of double side skin spaces; and appropriate loads for the structure, particularly with regard to the accelerations and the interaction between local pressure loads and hull girder loads IACS will contribute to all issues, but will focus on load determination and scantling standards. Based on the schedule of IMO meetings for 2003/4 and considering the regulatory protocol for approval and entry into force of regulation, it is estimated the earliest date from which these new requirements may be applied would be to ships constructed (keel laid) from 1 July 2006 onward. The actual date has not, however, been determined. Coating Standards Currently, SOLAS requires that the ballast tanks in bulk carriers and tankers be provided with an efficient corrosion prevention system such as hard coatings. However, only the scheme for selecting, applying and maintaining the coatings needs to be approved by the Administration; the actual processes and coating performance are not approved MSC 76 decided that the above provision should be extended to apply to tanks/spaces located within the double side skin of new bulk carriers and that international performance standards for coatings should be developed. Application of such requirements to the cargo hold was not supported due to lack of the compatibility between certain cargoes and coatings and the difficulty to regulate such. Forecastle Requirements IMO noted that IACS is developing standards for requiring a forecastle on new bulk carriers. However, IMO did not go so far as to require the fitting of a forecastle in light of significant increases in hatch cover strength to withstand sea loads contained in revised regulation 16-1 (Hatch covers) and the increase in the ship s ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 8/12

10 forward reserve buoyancy contained in the revised regulation 39 (Minimum bow height and reserve buoyancy) as per the amendments to the Load Line Convention adopted at MSC 76. Refer to LOAD LINE AMENDMENTS, below, for details of regulation 16-1 and 39. Breakwater Requirements IMO concluded that the fitting of a breakwater on existing bulk carriers was not a cost effective risk control option. IACS withdrew its Unified Requirement to fit a breakwater on existing bulk carriers which aimed to reduce the horizontal wave loads on the forward area of the deck and therefore was considered an alternative to strengthening the forward transverse hatch coaming. IACS concluded that the formal safety assessment did not show this retroactive action to be cost justified. Hatch Cover Securing IACS has adopted Unified Requirement S30 which provides, for existing ships, strength standards for securing devices (quick acting cleats) to prevent cover uplift and for stoppers which restrict lateral movement of the hatch cover due to horizontal loads. A phased-in implementation schedule is laid out based on vessel age and surveys due after 1 July Other Initiatives Performance Standards for water ingress monitoring and alarm (visual and audible) systems for cargo hold and dry spaces extending forward of the collision bulkhead and the foremost cargo hold s forward bulkhead will be developed during Immersion Suits amendments to SOLAS will be developed to require immersion suits onboard new and existing bulk carriers. Free-fall Lifeboats noting the advantages for speed of evacuation and floatability, amendments to SOLAS will be developed to require free-fall lifeboats for new bulk carriers Loading Information guidelines will be developed to provide comprehensive, userfriendly information covering stability (particularly for smaller ships) and longitudinal stresses (particularly for larger ships) during loading and unloading. BC Code IMO will consider the feasibility of mandating compliance with the Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes after current proposed revisions to the Code have been finalized. These revisions are scheduled to be completed in 2004 and address, for certain cargoes, ventilation, liquefaction, CO 2 fire extinguishing, cargo trimming procedures and management of deviations from loading sequences. Loading Prohibition IMO will consider the development of regulation which would ban existing bulk carriers after reaching a certain age (possibly 15 years) from loading high density cargoes (> 1.78 m/t 3 ). This was the second highest RCO determined from the UK/International Formal Safety Assessment Collaboration. Discussion also focused on the application of a structural condition assessment survey and the large number of bulk carriers that will be subject to such a ban. The impact of increased acceleration forces on the structure will also need careful consideration (due to increased metacentric height, GM) if the banned bulk carriers elect to carry high density cargoes homogeneously. Recommended Risk Control Options Steel Repairs A circular is to be developed that will recognize and recommend application of the various shipbuilding and repair standards (e.g., IACS Recommendation 47 available at IMO will consider the recommendation to require ship owners to maintain, on board and ashore, as-built construction drawings and other plans showing subsequent structural alterations. The IACS proposal that all plans be indicated with the ship s IMO Number will also be considered. Ballast System Capacity IMO recalled the need for ballast system capacities to be compatible with today s modern loading terminals and the induced stresses that can arise if not adequately controlled through effective ship/shore communication. No action was however taken by IMO for new or existing ships, but of the proposed IACS Unified Requirement (UR) S25 was noted. UR S25, when finalized and adopted by IACS, will provide strength requirements for three new class notations for new single and double side skin bulk carriers. Based on discussions with ship owners and yards, the requirements will provide for increased robustness and loading ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 9/12

11 flexibility that is less dependent on operational interventions for a variety of loading patterns (homogeneous, block and alternate hold loading). Side Shell Renewal After having been advised by IACS that the requirements contained in new UR S31 supplement the enhanced survey requirements contained in A.744(18), IMO decided to develop a circular to recommend compliance with S31 for ships not classed with an IACS Member. UR S31 requires that the side shell frame be renewed when the actual thickness is less than the greater of: 75% of the as-built thickness; or 75% of the thickness as per UR S12 minus a 2 mm to 4 mm safety margin which varies based on ship length and structural member. Bending and shear checks are also required when the measured thickness is less than 75% of the thickness as per UR S12. Where the actual thickness is greater than the renewal thickness as defined above and 75% of the thickness as per UR S12, the frame is to be: Sand blasted and recoated; Fitted with tripping brackets; and Maintained with the coating in a good condition. Foredeck Fittings The MSC noted that this risk control option had been adopted in two new IACS URs (S26 and S27) and therefore decided to include reference to these two URs in a circular which will recommend application to ship s not classed with an IACS Member. Both UR s address fittings located within the forward 25% length of new and existing ships where the main deck is located less than 10%L (or 22m, whichever is less) above the summer load waterline. Compliance will be required for new ships (> 80m) built on/after 1 July 2004 and for existing ships (> 100m) based on the vessel s age and renewal survey. Closures and their primary and secondary securing devices for access hatches, airpipes and ventilators are addressed as is the securing of winches to the deck. An example of the primary securing for an access hatch is provided in Figure 1, below. Figure 1 Primary Securing Device 1 butterfly nut 6 hatch cover 2 bolt 7 gasket 3 pin 8 hatch coaming 4 center of pin 9 Metal bearing pad 5 fork clamp plate 10 stiffener 11 inner edge stiffener Strength criteria for the anchor windlass securing arrangement to the deck is also included in this UR. LOAD LINE AMENDMENTS The following amendments to Annex B of the 1988 Load Line Convention Protocol were approved at MSC 76. Subject to adoption at MSC 77 in May 2003, the amendments are scheduled to enter into force on 1 January Recognizing that the States signatory to the 1988 Load Line Protocol represent only 60% of the world s fleet of ships, an Assembly resolution will be issued encouraging the nonsignatory States to ratify the 1988 Protocol so as to achieve the widest possible application of these amendments. Hatch Cover Strength (icll 16) The loads applied to determine the strength of hatch covers located within the forward quarter of ships > 100m in length were significantly increased due to the ship considered in the damaged condition, as shown in Figure 2. ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 10/12

12 The formula used to determine the minimum bow For comparison purposes the current 1966 ICLL applied load (1.75t/m2 with a 4.25 safety factor on ultimate strength) was approximated to be equivalent to 3.5 t/m2 with a 1.25 safety factor on yield strength. Based on 3.5 t/m2, it can be seen that at the forward perpendicular (FP) the loads increase from 42% (for L= 100m) to 290% (for L= 340m at a Type B-Reduced freeboard). Linear interpolation is to be used to obtain loads for lengths between 100m and 340m for either Type B or Type B-Reduced freeboards. The load remains constant for ships above 340m in length. The loads contained in the current IACS UR S21rev.1 generally fall between the 1966 loads for B-Red and B freeboards at the FP as they do not yet include the loads for the ship in the damage condition. Although the values of loads applied to hatch covers located in other positions than noted above were revised, because the applied factors of safety and the extent of material strength to be credited were also revised there is very negligible effect for hatch covers located in such positions. Minimum Bow Height (icll 39) The empirical formula contained in regulation 39 of the 1966 Load Line Convention was amended at MSC 76 to reduce the amount of water shipped over the bow ( deck wetness ) and therefore the magnitude of pressures experienced based on an acceptable long-term probability level. height was significantly revised to more comprehensively account for the global and local hull form parameters affecting deck wetness based on many years of research and model testing. Because the current formula is relatively simple and based solely on ship length and block coefficient, the new formula affects the magnitude of the minimum required bow height: for ships of more than 100m in length the minimum required height will increase on the order of 0.5m. for new large ships assigned a type B freeboard, the minimum height will be of the same magnitude or slightly greater. For ships subject to the new minimum reserve buoyancy requirements, as discussed below, it is anticipated that compliance with the new reserve buoyancy requirements will govern over the new minimum bow height standard. Reserve Buoyancy (icll 39) To reduce the frequency of seas boarding the forward portion of certain types of ships, the MSC further amended regulation 39 based on analytic studies and model tests carried out over the last several years. Submitted analyses evaluated by IMO s technical committees showed that the buoyant volumes of structure located above the summer water line, determined under the current 1966 Load Line Convention, did not ensure equivalent distributions of reserve buoyancy for different sheer profiles. Particular concern focused on panamax and capsize bulk carriers which normally do not have ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 11/12

13 forward sheer and operate at reduced freeboards. The capsize exhibited the largest deficiencies about 30% less reserve buoyancy in the forward 15% length than a ship with standard bow sheer. To rectify this shortcoming, MSC approved a new standard that requires a minimum amount and distribution of reserve buoyancy for ships other than oil, chemical and gas carriers assigned a type B freeboard or B-Reduced freeboard The volume of reserve buoyancy (represented by the projected areas A1, A2 and A3 shown in Figure 3, below) must not be less than the minimum required by regulation 39 which is calculated based on tabular freeboard, block coefficient, length and depth. Table 1, below, illustrates changes in bridge height in order to comply with SOLAS bridge visibility requirements for three (3) Cases of a capsize bulk carrier complying with the minimum amount of reserve buoyancy. The distance that sheer and a focsle can extend aft of the FP depends on the hatchway arrangement and minimum airdraft restrictions of loading terminal arrangements. Table 1 Bow Height Consequences Case Height at FP (mm) Sheer Focsle Change in Bridge Height (m above wl) Existing * * * 15%L aft FP is not realistic for Capesize bulker Case 1: Sheer extends 15% L aft FP Case 2: Original sheer with focsle (5% L) Case 3: Sheer (15% L) and focsle (5% L) Miscellaneous Amendments Determination of Depth has been clarified for ships where the depth varies along the length (e.g., tugs with rake of keel). Block Coefficient for multi-hulled ships is to be based on the full breadth of the ship and not the breadth of the individual hull. Freeboard Depth for ships with discontinuous upper decks has been clarified with respect to the treatment of recesses in the upper deck. Position 2 definition for applying the relaxed closure and strength requirements (relative to Position 1) to hatchways, doorways, ventilators and airpipes has been revised to include locations within the forward quarter of the ship provided they are at least two standard superstructure heights (4.6m for ships > 125m in length) above the freeboard deck. Coaming Heights and Closures for openings in the freeboard and superstructure decks (including those leading to the machinery space) have been revised and clarified taking into account IACS Unified Interpretations. Scuppers, Inlets and Discharges location and arrangement requirements have been revised and clarified, again based on IACS Unified Interpretations. Included in the amendments are requirements for garbage chutes and provisions for watertightness and closures for spurling pipes leading from the upper deck to the cable/chain locker. Free Port Area arrangements and formula for calculating minimum area as a function of athwart ship free flow area were revised. Protection of Crew incorporates the IACS Unified Requirement LL 50 which has been implemented by IACS Members since MISCELLANEOUS Standards for Ship Maneuverability Resolution MSC.137(76) together with MSC/Circ.153 provides recommended standards for determining the maneuverability characteristics of new ships. This resolution supersedes the interim standards contained in resolution A.751(18) and contains revisions in the following areas: deviation of rudder angles for nonconventional ships is now permitted in determining the turning ability; yaw and course keeping abilities determined from the 10 o /10 o zig-zag test have been revised such that the second overshoot angle now varies as a function of the ratio of ship length/velocity; Further evaluation of the explanatory notes concerning the mathematical model of the behavior of a ship during a stopping maneuver is needed in order to account for the shorter track ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 12/12

14 reach due to the ship veering off the assumed straight line of course Standards for Thickness Measurement Guidance for taking thickness measurements used to calculate longitudinal strength and to effect repairs was approved and issued as MSC/Circ For tankers >130m in length and over 10 years of age, the thickness of longitudinal members required to be gauged should, at a minimum, to be measured as follows: all longitudinal members comprising two girth belts for tankers between 10 and 15 years of age and three girth belts for tankers 15 years of age and older; two readings for each deck plate and bottom shell plate; one reading for the web and face plate of every longitudinal and girder located within 10%D (depth) of the main deck and bottom shell plate; and one reading for the web and face plate of the remaining longitudinals and girders. Additionally, the guidelines recommend that the minimum continuous length of a renewed or reinforced structural member should be at least twice the spacing of the primary members in way thereof. Thickness diminution at the butt joints of joining member forward and aft of the replaced member should not be within the substantial corrosion range (75% of the allowable diminution). A transition taper is to be provided in way of the butt joint where differences in thickness exceed 15% of the lower thickness. Integrated Bridge Systems MSC/Circ.1061 provides guidance covering the safe operational use of an integrated bridge system (IBS). The guidelines promote the use of procedures and training (knowledge and skillbased) to ensure adequate knowledge of the various operational modes and the comprehension of navigational and technical information provided for both normal and emergency/abnormal situations. The guidelines also recommend the development of a Vessel Operating Manual which consolidates the equipment manufacturer s technical manuals into a single comprehensive document without technical detailed information. The aim is to provide a ready reference on corrective actions to be taken in response to displays/alarms. ISM Code Major Non-Conformities Additional ISM guidelines for certifying compliance with the ISM Code were adopted by MSC/Circ This circular embraces the IACS practice of allowing a major non-conformity to be downgraded, provided a corrective action plan is presented to the auditor prior to completion of the audit. Such a practice is carried out in lieu of withdrawing the ISM certificate which, in the case of a withdrawn DOC, automatically invalidates the associated SMC s. Somewhat different than the current guidelines (which require an audit equivalent in scope to that of an initial audit in order to revalidate the withdrawn certificate), a downgraded major nonconformity can be accepted provided an additional audit is satisfactorily completed within a time period not to exceed 3 months. During this period, a short term certificate is issued to allow for the accumulation of objective evidence demonstrating the effective functioning of the SMS with respect to the corrective action implemented relative to the major nonconformity. Also, where an SMC has been withdrawn, as a result of its associated DOC being withdrawn due to a major non-conformity, an initial verification should be carried out onboard a representative sample of ships prior to reinstating the SMC(s). Arctic Ship Standards MSC approved MSC/Circ.1056 which contains Guidelines that address the unique risks for ships operating in the Arctic environment. Besides the application of severe design temperatures (-30 o C), which impact machinery and emergency equipment operation and impose additional loads on the hull, propulsion system and appendages, these risks include poor weather conditions, lack of good navigational charts, communication systems and other navigational aids, and the remoteness of operation, including rescue and clean-up. The Guidelines take into account that Arctic conditions may include sea and glacial ice -- the single most significant factor representing a ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 13/12

15 serious structural hazard to all ships operating in Arctic conditions. Note - Items in [brackets] refer to the agenda items. For further information concerning the above information, please contact ABS Regulatory Affairs Department at: tel: ; fax: -5314; gshark@eagle.org Several IACS Unified Requirements (URs) for Arctic Operation are near completion and will be footnoted in the Guide. These UR s include structural and propulsion machinery requirements for the Polar Classes contained in the Guidelines and presented in Table 2, below: Polar Class Table 2 Polar Class Descriptions General Description Year-round operation in all Arctic icecovered waters Year-round operation in moderate multiyear ice conditions Year-round operation in 2nd-year ice including multi-year old ice inclusions Year-round operation in thick 1st-year ice including old ice inclusions Year-round operation in medium firstyear ice including old ice inclusions Summer/autumn operation in medium 1st-year ice including old ice inclusions Summer/autumn operation in thin 1styear ice including old ice inclusions High Speed Craft Code MSC/Circ.1057 was approved and provides a list of discrepancies that have arisen between the 1994 High-Speed Craft Code(MSC.36(63) as amended by resolution MSC.119(74)) and the Dynamically Supported Craft Code (resolution A.373(X) as amended by MSC.37(63)) when compared with the corresponding provisions of SOLAS and the 2000 HSC Code. These discrepancies, which primarily concern navigational equipment and life saving appliances are scheduled to be resolved during the review of the above mentioned Codes by ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 14/12

16 ABS REGULATORY AFFAIRS: INTERNATIONAL REGULATION NEWS UPDATE, JANUARY 2003 (VOL 12, NO.1D) page 15/12