Eect056 Oil And Gas Management Assessment Answers

Answer:

Introduction:

Relevant information is significant in starting of the chemical Type II category of a ship. The fact that ships must have relevant certificates to comply with the legal requirements highlights why the ship owners are sensitive to the requirements of law. These legal requirements include the acquisition of relevant documentation such as the international certificates when transporting chemical goods (Salt et al.2014). According to the environmental conservation regulations, it is crucial for the ship owners to satisfy all the environmental requirements, by acquiring all documents of compliance with what is required in regards to the environment (Gritsenko, 2015).

The information on the International Oil pollution requirements provides necessary information such as date of the ship inspection; hence providing validity of the ship’s documentation, and also if it is up to date in the SIRE database. The indication of the dead weight is important for it states that the ship has multiple numbers of the load lines certificates and therefore the dead weight must be incorporated.  The other case relates to the specification of the type of products that the ship can be identified with. In our case, the ship deals with chemicals (Fagerland, 2013).

Consequences

Procedure of carrying out a vetting inspection

The first stage can be identified as the trigger. At this point, the operator who is a member of the OCIMF requests the control department to inspect his vessel. The intervals of the inspection are at the disposition of the player, but it is imperative for inspections to be done regularly at least once per year (Duru, Clott & Mileski, 2017). Another alternative could be engaging the CDI system where the operator interacts directly with the CDI, and he promptly appoints a special inspector to inspect the vessel. The date that is specified by the operator as the specific date for the inspection will be verified so that it can be identified if there will be an inspector available at the time (De La Rue & Anderson, 2015).  A plan will be carried out through the utilization of the details given by the operator. At this stage, a booking code is provided to the player. The planning should also be guided by the cargo operations of the operator so that there are no disruptions in the process.

The second step is the assessment of the documents that are presented to the operator. That is the qualifications of the officers, the validity of the certificates, maintenance of the safety gadgets and record regarding drills. The duration of the assessment at this stage will take approximately 2-3 hours which are determined by the age of the ship (Bowman, 2013).

The third stage is the verification of the charts that are utilized by the past voyage.  The aim of the assessment is identifying if the tables are updated as it is required. The other documents to be checked include the radio log books and the available calculations to evaluate their performance.

The fourth stage involves checking of the deck areas. The primary procedure in this step includes checking on the safety management of the vessel. The assessment includes looking at life-saving gadgets that are available for the operators. It can be coupled with performance assessment of various equipment on the deck, (Code et al. 2013). Management standards are also checked, and this can be achieved through the inspecting of the conditions of various parts of the deck such as pipes, and lastly, the cargo systems will be checked through monitoring of the pumps (Akyuz & Celik, 2015).

The next step should be looking into the engine room management. The inspector checks the availability of spare parts and their relevance within the engine room. The inspector will test the preparedness of the operators in the case of the unanticipated breakdowns which are imperative in unexpected maintenance. Also, the sensors, alarms and the switchboards will also be checked for their automation and their promptness to emergencies.

The fifth stage includes the inspection directed to the cargo control room. The duty officer does the reviewing of the functionality of the consignment monitoring systems and the inert systems. The machinery spaces should then be checked, and this is done through timely communication with the engineers within the Engine Control Room (Ask, 2015). Besides, the machinery space should be checked from the bottom, and the inspector should emphasize on having the right protective gadgets. All the parts of the machinery space must be accessed to give a score on the observable conditions correctly.

The seventh step is to adjourn the meeting. The negative observations are brought on board by the inspector. The views are brought forward, and the officers are given an opportunity to correct them. The master is given a chance to add any observations on the comments sheet.  At this point, the written sheet is printed out, the inspector and the master gets copies of the same (Järvenpää, 2016).

At the adjourning of the meeting, the inspector makes findings known to the inspecting company. The master also shares his conclusions with his superintendent where they will resolve the highlighted negative outcomes in the shortest time possible. The last step involves the inspector winding up the report via the VIQ software. Once done, he avails it on the SIRE database. He then notifies the inspecting company that the report is complete and uploaded to the SIRE database; which is used for submitting of inspection reports (Jessen,2015).

The subscribers of the SIRE database can access the information to view the inspection reports of the vessels and assess their suitability. Also, they can consider the class surveys.  The users can utilize the platform for contacting the tankers after reviewing the available inspection reports.

Reviewing of the Inspector’s observations

The CAP certification view on stating what the next special survey should contain was significant. He recorded the view because the CAP certification is important for the OCIMF members who have vessels that are more than 15 years old. The vessel having operated more than 15 years ought to have undergone a CAP survey (Banda et al. 2016). Also, there is a need for the inspector to access the copies of the classification society survey reports that can be reviewed at the disposal of the structural engineers.

The observation on the third mate not having a flag certificate was alarming, and that is why the inspector had to comment.  The inspector said since the operators and the officers had different nationalities as opposed to the flag state that the ship belonged to; they had to have a banner state endorsement. Also, there are provisions that an officer who has applied for a certificate of the flag state approval can continue with his operations up to 3 months when his certificate is still being processed. Meanwhile, the officer will be handed a certificate of receipt of an application that is valid for 3months (Bateman, 2016).

The other comment from the inspector was regarding the batteries that had no power as it was also a requirement in regards to safety. The GMDSS calls for radio systems to be accompanied with backup power for emergency cases. If the operators rely on one battery, then the battery must be reliable to supply enough power as are required (Soto-Oñate & Caballero, 2017). The reliability can be improved by instigating clever designs of the batteries or arranging for charging systems. Therefore, the batteries going low on power was a clear case of negligence from the management.

Furthermore, the comment on the calibrations of oxygen at 7% was necessary and justifiable since calibrations should be correctly indicated in the measuring of oxygen. It is also advisable to have nitrogen incorporated in the oxygen analyzing equipment. The accuracy of the measurements of the oxygen levels should be ensured at all points. The management, in this case, was up to the required standards in that the oxygen percentage of cargo tanks did not surpass 8%.

To add on the comment of the hydraulic oil leaking to the decks, it was a factor of concern and worth to be highlighted by the inspector. The inspector justified this through the fact that oil leaking on the floor and dropping into the sea is a breach of the environment management clause that bars the operators from the pollution of the water bodies (Merikas, 2014).

The oil shortages were also a factor of concern as the amount available was below the required threshold. The oil shortages could hinder the smooth operations of the vessel. The life-saving code states that a ship should have sufficient oil that allows it to cover 6knots for not less than 4hours. The oil shortages, in this case, can be termed as a management lapse which threatens the smooth running of the operations. The tank levels should be at par with the stated regulations (Houvardas, 2017) `

Effect of the Observations

The tank’s worthiness was questionable. According to the regulations that were in place, it is relevant for the personnel to adhere to the safety procedures while on board. The personnel had to put on the protective gadgets at all the time.  It is hence a factor that highlights the inadequacies of the inspection conducted (Pristrom et al. 2015). The emergency procedures were performed according to the international emergency regulations. It asserts that the vessel is unfit for sailing.

The international regulations require that the inspection should show the dates when the observations were made. The remark, therefore, affects the elaboration of the level of seaworthiness of the vessel. Also, there are no dates on the CAP that indicates when the CAP was completed. The lack of dates ultimately fails to validate if the CAP is up to date, and compromises the worthiness of the ship (Solax, 2014).

The credibility of the ship is furthermore damaged by the fact that the ship does not have the required medical examinations for the crew. The medical tests for the team are crucial as the vessel deals with chemicals. A ship without the medical tests cannot meet the international standards. Moreover, the inaccuracy of the oxygen calibrations is a factor that is of great essence. Therefore the vessel was lagging behind in that aspect which underscores its ability to meet international sailing regulations.

Since the nitrogen was not used in the analysis of the oxygen levels as required by the regulators, then the vessel was deemed not suitable for the services (U?urlu et al. 2017). The calibrations of the measuring equipment should be calibrated not more than 24 hours before the implementation of the inert gas systems.

If there is oil spillage, then the situation ought to be stated in the Oil Record Book Part II. The information must include the causes of the oil spills. In the case of the spillage in the deck area, it should be recorded in the deck log book. The worthiness of the vessel is verified by the transparency of the crew. The observations call for prompt action by the operators so that they can comply fully with the international regulations. For the vessel to be termed as worthy, it has to meet all the standards (Ivshina ET al.2016).

The Single Effect Menace

The single effect is crucial in the determination of the supply of the gasoline to the customers.  If the effect is identified as off-line then at this juncture, the vessel will be stopped due to the restrained ability to operate as needed. An offline situation will automatically lead to delays that will inconvenience the customers. With this effect, shortages will be experienced, and the clients will not be supplied with gasoline on time. The other effect of this situation is that the owners will incur more expenses and the increased costs would lead to a subsequent increase in oil prices (Wang et al. 2015), and the high prices will impact negatively to the customers. These combined effects may negatively influence the operations of the company leading to closure. The reduced confidence and trust from the gasoline consumers towards their providers is a bad sign which may result in loss of corporate image.

In the case of the inspection being repeated, delays in supplies are inevitable. The volume of stocks will be affected, pending approval from the inspectors after a second inspection. It is a disadvantageous situation that may lead to massive losses from a business point of view.  

The action/inactions of the Owners

The clauses that are applicable in the case include clause 1. Clause1 calls for the classification of the vessel according to society by the proprietor. Classifying should be applicable where the vessel is a member of an International Association of Classification Societies. The clause also calls for the acquisition of a flag. Therefore, it is imperative for the owners to own one in due time. The flag should not be changed at any instance.

The masters must ensure that they have all the certificates that are stipulated by law to avoid unnecessary delays. It is also paramount for the bosses to have a document containing all the strategies they are applying appertaining to environmental management (Walter et al. 2016). The owners being affiliated by Shell should make sure that it reports its proceedings in regards to the environment management that corresponds with the Shell safety and Environmental monthly Reporting Template.

Clause 3(a) is applicable in this case where the owner is supposed to receive a notification in writing now that their vessel has failed the inspection that was carried out. Clause 39 calls for the owners of the vessels to submit information such as their details and the employees’ bio so that the charters can give the required assistance if there are any oil spills like it was in the case of the vessel recognized as a type II. The information should be relayed via telephone, telex numbers or by fax.   The owners will be liable for any losses that are incurred if the owners did not comply with clause 45(a) (L’Esperance, 2016).

Lastly, according to Clause 3, the master must cease the operations of the vessel until it complies with the requirements of the charterers. He has a duty of availing the ship for inspection (Walter et al.2013). It is the responsibility of the owners to avail the ship for inspection as required during the time frame of the charter. Moreover, the owners have to make sure that they highlight a detailed description of the performance of their vessel. They are supposed to give details on the average speed in knots, the maximum diesel consumption in tonnes in a day and auxiliaries fuel oil in tonnes.

Appertaining to dry-docking, it is the duty of the owners to carry out dry docking at consistent intervals. The schedules for the dry docking should be relayed to the charterers. It shall be at the expense of the owners when they engage in a dry-docking. It is imperative for the owners to answer the questions with a ‘Yes,' ‘No’ or ‘Not applicable’ in the next inspection.  Also, they must state the specific date that they will be able to comply with the area that inefficiencies were reported (Kim et al. 2015).

References:

Akyuz, E., & Celik, E. (2015). A fuzzy DEMATEL method to evaluate critical operational hazards during gas freeing process in crude oil tankers. Journal of Loss Prevention in the  Process Industries, 38, 243-253.

Ask, M. (2015). Aging of ships, LPG tankers (Master's thesis, University of Stavanger, Norway).

Banda, O. A. V., Hänninen, M., Lappalainen, J., Kujala, P., & Goerlandt, F. (2016). A method for extracting key performance indicators from maritime safety management norms. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 15(2), 237-265.

Bateman, S. (2016). Ship vulnerability, port state control, flag state responsibilities and maritime security.

Bowman, A. (2013). Environmental risks related to the proposed increase in oil tanker traffic in the waters near Kitimat, British Columbia.

Code, I., SpA, C. A. R. B. O. F. I. N., & BOGLIOLO, M. (2013). CHAPTER. De La Rue, C., & Anderson, C. B. (2015). Shipping and the Environment. CRC Press. Duru, O., Clott, C., & Mileski, J. P. (2017). US tanker transport: Current structure and economic analysis. Research in Transportation Business & Management.

Fagerland, S. O. (2013). A computerized system for loading and discharging oil tankers (Doctoral dissertation, Auckland University of Technology).

Gritsenko, D. (2015). Quality governance in maritime oil transportation: the case of the Baltic

Sea. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 26(5), 701-720.

Houvardas, D. (2017). Charterers and Vetting: Balancing Between Freedom and

Nightmare?. Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, 48(2), 183. Ivshina, I. B., Kuyukina, M. S., Krivoruchko, A. V., Elkin, A. A., Makarov, S. O., Cunningham, J., ... & Philp, J. C. (2015). Oil spill problems and sustainable response strategies through new technologies. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, 17(7), 1201- 1219. Järvenpää, E. (2016). Development of a dynamic performance-based distribution scheme for bulk shipping pools.

Jessen, H. (2016, March). XIII. Commentary on Regulation 530/2012/EU of Double-Hull or Equivalent Design Requirements for Single-Hull Oil Tankers. In EU Maritime Transport Law (pp. 1052-1077). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft MBA & Co. KG.

KIM, J. K., JUNG, W. R., & KIM, S. W. (2015). A Study on Introduction of Oil Major Vetting System for Enhancement of Safety Management of Coastal Tanker in Korea. Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education, 27(3), 706-717.

L’Esperance, P. (2016). In the Wake of the Erika: Flag State Responsibility for the International Obligations under the Law of the Sea. Ocean Yearbook Online, 30(1), 0-0. Merikas, A. G., Merikas, A. A., Polemis, D., & Triantafyllou, A. (2014). The economics of concentration in shipping: Consequences for the VLCC tanker sector. Maritime

Economics & Logistics, 16(1), 92-110. Pristrom, S., Yang, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, D., & Yan, X. (2015, June). Key issues associated with maritime security and piracy study. In Transportation Information and Safety

(ICTIS), 2015 International Conference on (pp. 588-594). IEEE. Salt, D., Cox, R., Cramer, M., & Davidson, D. (2014, May). Oil Spill Preparedness Response

Capability and Capacity: Do we know what we want and how do we get what we need?.

In International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, pp. 1869-1880).

American Petroleum Institute. Soto-Oñate, D., & Caballero, G. (2017). Oil spills, governance, and institutional performance:

The 1992 regime of liability and compensation for oil pollution damage. Journal of

Cleaner Production. Solax, K. (2014). Tanker Familiarization: Course material for Aboa Mare.

U?urlu, Ö., Kum, S., & Aydo?du, Y. V. (2017). Analysis of occupational accidents encountered

by deck cadets in maritime transportation. Maritime Policy & Management, 44(3), 304-

322. Walters, D., James, P., Sampson, H., Bhattacharya, S., Xue, C., & Wadsworth, E. (2016). Supply chain leverage and regulating health and safety management in shipping. Relations  Industriales/Industrial Relations, 71(1), 33-56.

Walters, D., & Bailey, N. (2013). Regulatory Features of the Maritime Industry. In Lives in  Peril (pp. 98-128). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Wang, G., Serratella, C., & Kalghatgi, S. (2014). Current practices in condition assessment of aged ships and floating offshore structures. Condition Assessment of Aged