We have developed a solid network of Marine Surveyors in the world to support our clients with the right resources, in the right location, to implement the Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) must be taking into account the IMO Resolution MEPC.269(68) - Limit date 31 Dec 2020 -. We are in Europe + Malaysia + Banbladesh + Lebanon + Egyp + Cyprus + Canada + United Arab Emirates + .. working in more ...

Introduction

The Hong Kong International Convention (hereinafter referred to as “HKC”) for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships is not yet in force. It will enter into force 24 months after ratification of 15 Member States, representing 40% of world merchant shipping by GT, combined maximum annual ship recycling volume not less than 3% of their combined tonnage. Currently 15 Flag Administrations have ratified the Convention, representing the 29,62%.

The European Union (EU) having in mind the HKC requirements and in order to boost its ratification from the Member States, has adopted the Regulation (EU) 1257/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 on ship recycling amending Regulation (EC) 1013/2006 and Directive 2009/16/EC (hereinafter referred to as “EU SRR”).  The EU SRR is closely following the HKC’s structure, concepts and definitions. However, the Regulation also sets out a number of additional requirements that go beyond those set in the HKC.

Applicability

The Regulation applies to ships on international voyages, of 500 GT and above flying the flag of a Member State or the flag of a third country under the conditions of Article 12 of the Regulation. The Regulation applies to all vessels of any type whatsoever operating or having operated in the marine environment including submersibles, floating craft, floating platforms, self-elevating platforms, FSUs and FPSOs, as well as ships stripped of equipment or being towed.

It does not apply to any warships, naval auxiliary or other ships owned or operated by a state and used, for the time being, only on government non-commercial service. ‘New’ and ‘existing’ ships, ‘ships going for recycling’ as well as ‘ships flying the flag of a third country’ shall have on board an IHM in accordance with the relevant provisions of Article 5 or Article 12 of the Regulation.

The application date of the EU’s Ship Recycling Regulation (EU SRR) was 31 December 2018. From this date, new EU ships must carry a certificate for the Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IC) while existing EU ships shall only carry an IC from 31 December 2020. Non-EU ships should only be requested to submit a Statement of Compliance (SoC), together with the inventory of hazardous materials, from 31 December 2020.

Implementation

An Inventory of Hazardous Materials (hereinafter referred to as “IHM”) must be taking into account the IMO Resolution MEPC.269(68).

In accordance with Article 5 of the Regulation, all ships flying the flag of an EU Member State shall have on board an IHM. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 12 of the Regulation, all ships flying the flag of a third country shall also have on board an IHM when calling at a port or anchorage of an EU Member State.

The IHM consists of:

  1. Part I: HM contained in ship structure or equipment and referred to in Annexes I and Annexes II of the SRR
  2. Part II: Operationally generated wastes; and
  3. Part III: Stores.

In general, a ‘new’ ship shall have on board an IHM which shall identify at least the HM referred to in Annex II of the Regulation while an ‘existing’ ship or a ‘ship going for recycling’ before the final application date of the SRR, shall have on board an IHM which shall identify, at least, the HM listed in Annex I of the Regulation. Annex I of the Regulation lists five types of hazardous materials and Annex II lists the items of Annex I as well as an additional ten types of hazardous materials.

In all cases the IHM shall be properly maintained and updated throughout the operational life of the ship, reflecting new installations containing any HM referred to in Annex II of the Regulation and relevant changes in the structure and equipment of the ship.

Survey and Certification

All ships flying the flag of a Member State shall be subject to a survey regime, as per Article 8 of the EU SRR and they shall carry on board a ship-specific ‘Inventory Certificate’ issued by the administration or a RO authorised by it and supplemented by Part I of the IHM.

When calling at a port or anchorage of a Member State, all ships flying the flag of a third country shall carry on board a ship-specific ‘Statement of Compliance’ issued by the relevant authorities of the third country whose flag the ship is flying or an organization authorised by them and supplemented by Part I of the IHM.

EMSA Guidance on the Inventory of Hazardous Materials & on Ship Recycling Port State Control inspections

The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has released a Best Practice Guidance on a harmonised approach to the development and maintenance of IHMs in accordance with Article 5 and Article 12 of the EU SRR.

EMSA released also the Guidance on inspections of ships by the port States in accordance with Regulation (EU) 1257/2013 on ship recycling, ‘Inspections from the EU port States to enforce provisions of the ship recycling Regulation.

The PSC Guide advises inspectors that the detention of a ship may be considered if the ship recycling non-compliances involve:

  1. failure to carry a ship recycling-related certificate as appropriate;
  2. failure to carry a valid ship recycling-related certificate, i.e. when the condition of the ship does not correspond substantially with the particulars of the certificate (except when Part I of the Inventory of Hazardous Materials has not been properly maintained and updated);
  3. the Inventory of Hazardous Materials required by the EU SRR is not specific to the ship;
  4. the Inventory of Hazardous Materials required by the EU SRR has not been verified by the Flag State or an appropriate organisation authorised by it;
  5. the ship recycling plan does not properly reflect the information contained in the Inventory of Hazardous Materials;
  6. an EU ship is heading to a ship recycling facility not included in the European list of ship recycling facilities;
  7. non-compliance with the control measures for Hazardous Materials listed in Annex I of the EU SRR.

 

Source: Dromon Bureau of Shipping www.dromon.com


Clean Cargo report shows reduction in CO2 emissions for container shipping

According to a new report by Clean Cargo, carbon dioxide emissions from 17 of the world’s leading ocean container carriers, representing approximately 85 percent of global containerized shipping, continued to fall in 2019. Global industry averages for CO2 emissions per container per kilometer decreased by 5.6 percent and 2.5 percent for Dry and Reefer (refrigerated) indexes, respectively. The annual report indicates that container shipping continues to improve its fleet-wide environmental efficiency whilst ensuring the smooth functioning of global trade.

“Standardized, consolidated, industry-wide emissions data are essential to decarbonization efforts. Clean Cargo continues to provide industry-leading emissions factors and tools for buyers of freight to calculate their emissions and make procurement decisions that incorporate environmental impacts,” said Angie Farrag-Thibault, Collaborations and Transport Director at BSR and Program Director of Clean Cargo. “With over 60 global brands and forwarders working with the industry, we are making excellent collective progress. But we know that further action is needed: full value chain collaboration is critical to transform the system, and we encourage more brands to get involved.”

Several years ago, Clean Cargo developed a standardized methodology and reporting system that was adopted globally by the industry, with carriers submitting operational data from the entire fleet to BSR on an annual basis for trade lane emission factors aggregation. The results produce environmental performance scorecards for each carrier, which are used to meet corporate supply chain sustainability goals by a significant share of shipping customers participating in the group. This year, they reported information that includes W2W, CO2e and a 70 percent utilization adjustment factor. As such, reported data aligns with the GLEC Framework and reporting expectations.

Clean Cargo members also work to accelerate progress by sharing best practices, discussing trends and innovations across the full logistics value chain, and designing tools and pilot projects that support progress towards industry decarbonization.

 

Source: IIMS (www.iims.org)

Full report: https://www.iims.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/BSR-Clean-Cargo-Emissions-Report-2020.pdf

 

 


Autonomous drone inspections move step closer after successful test

A drone has successfully inspected a 19.4 meter high oil tank on board a Floating Production, Storage and Offloading vessel. The video shot by the drone was interpreted in real-time by an algorithm to detect cracks in the structure. It is the latest step in a technology qualification process that could lead to tank inspections becoming safer and more efficient. Scout Drone Inspection and DNV GL, the quality assurance and risk management company, have been working together to develop an autonomous drone system to overcome the common challenges of tank inspections. For the customer, costs can run into hundreds of thousands of dollars as the tank is taken out of service for days to ventilate and construct scaffolding. The tanks are also tough work environments, with surveyors often having to climb or raft into hard to reach corners. Using a drone in combination with an algorithm to gather and analyze video footage can significantly reduce survey times and staging costs, while at the same time improving surveyor safety.
“We’ve been working with drone surveys since 2015,” said Geir Fuglerud, Director of Offshore Classification at DNV GL – Maritime. “This latest test showcases the next step in automation, using AI to analyse live video. As class we are always working to take advantage of advances in technology to make our surveys more efficient and safer for surveyors, delivering the same quality while minimising our operational downtime for our customers.”
The drone, developed by Scout Drone Inspection, uses LiDAR to navigate inside the tank as GPS-reception is not available in the enclosed space. A LiDAR creates a 3-D map of the tank and all images and video is accurately geo-tagged with position data. During the test, the drone was controlled by a pilot using the drone’s flight assistance functions, but as the technology matures it will be able to navigate more and more autonomously. In its role as the world’s leading classification society, DNV GL has been developing artificial intelligence to interpret the video to spot any cracks and eventually the camera and algorithm will be able to detect anomalies below the surface such as corrosion and structural deformations.

“This is another important step towards autonomous drone inspections,” said Nicolai Husteli, CEO of Scout Drone Inspection. “Up until now the process has been completely analogue but technology can address the urgent need to make the process more efficient and safer.”
Altera Infrastructure hosted the test on Petrojarl Varg as part of its drive to improve safety and efficiency through innovative technology. The video was livestreamed via Scout Drone Inspection’s cloud-system back to Altera Infrastructure’s headquarters in Trondheim, where the footage was monitored by engineers. DNV GL can also simultaneously watch the footage, opening up the possibility for stakeholders to work together from different locations.
“At Altera Infrastructure we are committed to using technology to raise efficiency and safety and we want to be at the forefront.  We see great potential for drone inspection technology to meet the challenges of the inspection process going forward,” said Astrid Jørgenvåg, Senior Vice President Technical & Projects Department Altera Production, at Altera Infrastructure.

Source: IIMS (www.iims.org.uk)

 


HMM Algeciras, the world’s largest containership

The 24,000 TEU HMM Algeciras, the world’s largest containership, has headed out to sea on its maiden voyage.

The ship left Geoje, Korea following its naming ceremony on April 23 setting sail for China. It departed from the port of Qingdao on Sunday and is heading for the Port of Busan, according to the latest data from Marine Traffic.

The ship is deployed on the Far East Europe 4 (FE4) service, one of the Asia-North Europe trade lanes of THE Alliance.

HMM’s official membership in THE Alliance was launched in April, following the expiry of its commitment to the 2M Alliance.

However, the start of the cooperation comes at a very difficult time for the sector as liners continue to blank sailings amid massive drop in demand due to COVID-19 pandemic.

The blanking of sailings has been adopted as the best way of adapting to the new reality and trying to keep freight rates healthy.

The ship’s port rotation starts at Qingdao, moving on to Busan, Ningbo, Shanghai, Yantian, Suez Canal, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp, London Gateway, and then Singapore via Suez Canal.

With the capacity of 23,964 HMM Algeciras has claimed the title of the largest containership from MSC Gulsun which has a 23,756 TEU capacity.

The colossal ship is 399.9 meters long and has a beam of 61 meters. It is longer in length than the Eiffel Tower (300 meters) or the Empire State Building (381 meters) are in height, or in sports terminology, longer than three and a half football fields.

HMM Algeciras is fitted with a scrubber, has an optimized hull design and highly efficient engine boosting its environmental footprint and also its efficiency.

The ship is the first of twelve 24,000 TEU class containerships set to be delivered to HMM by September.

 

Source: https://www.offshore-energy.biz/worlds-largest-containership-embarks-on-maiden-voyage/

 


DromonClass has been recognized by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) according to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 46 – 2.45 to act as a Classification Society in the United States of America.

We are proud to announce that DromonClass has been recognized by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) according to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 46 – 2.45 to act as a Classification Society in the United States of America.

The Coast Guard Classification Society Recognition was obtained after the evaluation of our Organization and it allows any vessel classed by Dromon Bureau of Shipping to call a United States port, carry out surveys, audits, repairs and occasional attendances.

We foresee that this authorization will further enrich our Organization and we can assure our clients, colleagues and associates that further enhancements will follow in 2020.

 

Source: Dromon Bureau of Shipping

 


Japanese government considers integrating 15 yards to form shipbuilding super group

Japan is currently exploring the possibilities to integrate 15 major shipyards in the country under a so-called All Japan Shipbuilding merger plan, following similar steps by neighbouring shipbuilding rival countries China and South Korea, local financial newswire Nikkei is reporting.

The merger plan comes after Japan’s two largest shipbuilders – Imabari Shipbuilding and Japan Marine United (JMU) – declared in December they would form an alliance and enter into a capital tie-up.

To move forward with the tie-up, Imabari and JMU recently announced that they would form a joint venture by March 31, 2021, to integrate sales and design business for bulker and tankers. Imabari and JMU will hold 51% and 49% shares in the joint venture respectively.

The All Japan Shipbuilding merger plan is led by Japan’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), which has entered preliminary discussions with some domestic yards.

Besides the tie-up between Imabari and JMU, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries also announced a plan at the end of last year to sell one of its largest yards to compatriot Oshima Shipbuilding. Another two major Japanese shipbuilders Mitsui E&S and Tsuneishi Shipbuilding both have a shipbuilding presence in China and the two entered into a business partnership for commercial shipbuilding back in 2018.

Japan is currently the third largest shipbuilding nation in the world after South Korea and China. It had been the largest shipbuilding nation in the world through to the turn of the century at which point cheaper neighbouring rivals expanded at its expense.

Last year, the two largest shipbuilding groups in China – CSSC and CSIC – started a merger by creating China Shipbuilding Group, while two major South Korean yards – Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) and DSME – are also in the process of merging.

In February, the Japanese government filed a petition at the World Trade Organization (WTO), questioning the legitimacy of the merger between HHI and DSME.

In a statement responding to this story, Peter Broad, Managing Director of Broadreach Marine and IIMS Deputy Vice President, based in South Korea, said,
“These mergers have to happen for the national preservation of shipbuilding industries in each country (Korea and Japan).

So why are the rest of the world (international monopolies commission) sticking there noses in to something that has already happened in China?

No one has questioned or tried to stop the China National Shipbuilding Industry from merging shipyards to facilitate better commercial and technical structures for future contracts and survival.

Please let Korea and Japan get on with their shipbuilding business to keep international trade moving and stop global interference with these mergers. They are each in the nations interests for commercial and technical survival. It is not creating monopolies. The countries are competing against each other for shipbuilding contracts based on price and quality, so still an open market and buyers choice.

Don’t let China take all the advantages, because the monopolies commission have no strength to stand up to one country and this should not disadvantage other successful shipbuilding nations.”

 

Source IIMS www.iims.org


Shiprecycling in Pakistan and India in Limbo

The coronavirus pandemic has practically paralysed the ship demolition market in South Asia as lockdown measures continue to be introduced across the subcontinent.
Pakistan suspended all beaching and boarding of vessels at Gadani ship recycling yards last week for a minimum period of four weeks. All ship recyclers have been instructed to strictly comply with these latest orders.
India has also ordered a suspension of recycling for all ships arriving at Alang whose last port departure was after March 13.
Those that departed a port earlier than March 13, will be allowed to arrive at Alang, however, foreign crews will be subject to a quarantine of 14 days at the port of arrival at Alang.
Cash buyer of ships for recycling GMS said that several ships have been detained at Alang anchorage this week, with authorities refusing to provide anchoring permissions.
Even those with Indian crew on board are going through rigorous medical checks, questioning, and procedures, before being allowed entry.
“As Pakistan and India close their doors on all foreign ships arriving (with India also canceling all international flights), the reality is that subcontinent recycling locations will remain quiet as long as the coronavirus crisis persists,” GMS said in its weekly market review.
“Global government efforts and the ongoing focus remains on fighting this virulent pandemic, and whilst shipping markets continue to struggle – this is certainly the least of the international communities’ concerns at present.”
It is no surprise that there is a lack of activity given the current market situation, however, interest from some buyers to acquire tonnage remains, Clarksons Platou Shipbroking said in its report last week.
“Several capesize bulkers continue to be discussed in the arena, but confidence from the cash buyers may restrict numbers placed on the negotiating tables. The market is not flush of cash buyers, several are reportedly facing difficulties with cash flow positions, and there is certainly more strain on those cash buyers active in the current climate.”
Clarksons added that with many ports adopting new restrictions, more owners will seek the ‘as is’ deal to avoid the last voyage to the recycling destinations – therefore it will be on the shoulders of the cash buyer to carry the burden of how they would dispose of the unit at a later stage.
The only subcontinent location that remains open at present is Bangladesh with several deals concluded this week, according to GMS, as owners scramble to finalize deals before an almost total global lockdown is eventually enforced.
Finally, Turkey is also expected to follow suit with the suspension of activities as vessels start to be turned away from Aliaga and reports of deals failing start to emerge, GMS believes.
“As European markets grind to a halt and a non-essential travel bans come into effect at various EU countries, it’s only a matter of time until Turkey follows suit. As such, this unintended closure, should it come into effect, may just be what the doctor ordered, given this markets plummet this week,” the cash buyer said.

 

Source: www.worldmaritimenews.com


Tips and advice for Marine Surveyors about Coronavirus (COVID-19)

The International Institute of Marine Surveying (IIMS) is concerned for the health and well-being of its members as well as any marine surveyor, inspector or examiner travelling locally and/or internationally for work whilst Coronavirus (COVID-19) continues to spread globally.
Already there is evidence that the outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19) is having a profound effect on some areas of the marine surveying profession. But the picture is fluid, changing hourly and by the day, so you are advised to check the current status before you travel for work.
How Coronavirus (COVID-19) spreads; When someone who has COVID-19 coughs or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid. Most of these droplets fall on nearby surfaces and objects, such as desks, tables or telephones. It is possible to catch Coronavirus (COVID-19) by touching contaminated surfaces or objects and then touching the eyes, nose and/or mouth. If you are standing within one metre of a person with Coronavirus (COVID-19) it is possible to catch it by breathing in droplets coughed out or exhaled by them. In other words, Coronavirus (COVID-19) spreads in a similar way to flu. Most people infected with Coronavirus (COVID-19) experience mild symptoms and recover in several days. However, some go on to experience more serious illness and may require hospital care. Risk of serious illness appears to rise with age – so far, people over 40 seem to be more vulnerable than those under 40. People with weakened immune systems and people with conditions such as diabetes, heart and lung disease are also more vulnerable to serious illness.
Give yourself the best chance of avoiding Coronavirus (COVID-19)
You are advised to wash your hands more often than usual and for a minimum of 20 seconds using soap and hot water, particularly after coughing, sneezing and blowing your nose, or after being in public areas where other people are doing so. Use alcohol based hand sanitiser if that’s all you have access to.
To reduce the spread of germs when you cough or sneeze, cover your mouth and nose with a tissue, or your sleeve if you don’t have a tissue (but not your hands) and throw the tissue away immediately. Then wash your hands or use only an alcohol based hand sanitising gel.
Clean and disinfect regularly touched objects and surfaces using regular cleaning products to reduce the risk of passing the infection on to other people.
Before travelling:
– Make sure you have the latest information on areas where Coronavirus COVID-19 is spreading (see links below).
– Based on the latest information, you should assess and weight up the risks related to your trip.
– If you are at higher risk of serious illness (e.g. older or with medical conditions such as diabetes, heart and lung disease) avoid travelling to areas where Coronavirus COVID-19 is spreading.
– Consider travelling with small bottles (under 100 cl) of alcohol-based hand sanitiser rub, which facilitates regular hand-washing.
While travelling:
– Wash your hands regularly and stay at least one metre away from people who are coughing or sneezing.
– Ensure you know what to do and who to contact if you start to feel unwell while travelling.
– Ensure you comply with instructions from local authorities in the area you are travelling to. If you are told not to go somewhere you should comply with this and comply with any local restrictions on travel, movement or large gatherings.
When you return from travelling:
– Once you are back from an area where Coronavirus (COVID-19) is active you should monitor yourself for symptoms for 14 days and take your temperature twice a day.
– If you develop even a mild cough or low grade fever (i.e. a temperature of 37.3 C or more) you should stay at home and self-isolate. This means avoiding close contact (one metre or nearer) with other people, including family members.
– You should also telephone your local healthcare provider or public health department, giving them details of your recent travel and symptoms.
Useful resources:
– World Health Organisation questions and answers page about Coronavirus (COVID-19)
– Myth-busters about Coronavirus (COVID-19)
– Worldometer update and latest virus statistics
– World Health Organisation Situation Reports (updated daily)
Travel and work safely, but remember it is a rapidly changing situation.

Thanks to IIMS


The Lloyd’s Standard Form of Salvage Agreement (LOF), time for update

The Lloyd’s Standard Form of Salvage Agreement (LOF) has existed in various iterations for over 100 years, with the earliest published form appearing in 1892. The form has been amended and simplified over the years to keep up with developments in the industry but the principles behind the contract have remained the same: to provide a simple and flexible legal framework for a Contractor to provide salvage services to property in danger.

The latest genesis of the contract has been produced following extensive discussions with various stakeholders in the industry including: the leading salvage companies, the International Salvage Union, insurers, arbitrators and the Admiralty Solicitors Group.

The changes in LOF 2020 do not appear to be significant in the first instance, however, the changes that have been agreed seek to address some specific concerns that have been raised by those who regularly use LOF.

In the rest of this article, we highlight the key changes that have been made to the contract and the implications that it will have for regular users of LOF. For ease of reference, a link to a marked up copy of the contract highlighting the amendments is provided at the end of this article, reproduced with the kind permission of the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Branch.

The biggest change is probably the departure from the separation of the Lloyd’s Standard Salvage and Arbitration (LSSA) Clauses, Procedural Rules and Fixed Cost Arbitration Procedure. These have now been merged into a single document, the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Clauses 2020 (LSAC), which combines the old clauses and rules so that everything is in one place. This addresses a common complaint from salved property interests (usually individual cargo interests who are unfamiliar with the old LOF contracts and their constitution) that it was difficult to “navigate”.

Clause H

The language in Clause H of the LOF has been amended to make it clear when the services are deemed to have been performed. Further commentary and a recent example of the operation of Clause H (albeit that the services were provided under LOF 2011) can be found in the recent decision in the “SAM LION”. The award and appeal set out in some detail the law in relation to when a vessel can be considered as being “in a safe condition in the place of safety”. Subscribers to the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Branch website can download a copy of the award and reasons1.

Important Notice No. 4

The contract incorporates the ad hoc requirement that was implemented by the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Branch for the Contractors to notify and provide a copy of “… any agreement that amends or varies the provisions or terms of this Agreement…”. This formalises the position in relation to side letters and any other form of agreement that seeks to circumvent the usual mechanics for determining the salvage remuneration due to the Contractors under the contract, i.e. in accordance with Article 13 of the Salvage Convention. For example, concern had been expressed that in certain circumstances the effect of such side letters could potentially prejudice the P&I Club’s position in relation to any SCOPIC claim, or otherwise operate to the detriment of cargo interests. The intention is to improve the transparency of the LOF procedure and allow the LOF Panel of Arbitrators to review these agreements and consider their enforceability.

Clause 1 – Introduction

This has been amended to include reference to the ‘old’ Procedural Rules which are now set out in Clause 8 and the Fixed Cost Arbitration Procedure which is set out in Clause 15 of the LSAC.

Clause 2 – Overriding Objective

The overriding objectives (which in our view are often forgotten or overlooked) maintain their prominence and are now located in Clause 2 of the LSAC.

Clause 4 – Provisions as to Security, Maritime Lien and Right to Arrest

These key provisions which are regularly relied upon by the Contractors have kept their position in the LSAC at Clause 4. These have been largely unamended, recognising the way in which the provisions have worked successfully since their last revision. However, subtle changes have been made to Clause 4.5 which specifies the form and format of security that should be provided by a salved property interest. Clause 4.5 requires that security shall be provided to the Council of Lloyd’s (via the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Branch), that it is in a form approved by the Council of Lloyd’s and “… by person[s,] firms or corporations acceptable to the Council or acceptable to the Contractors”. There is no longer the requirement for the guarantor to be resident in the United Kingdom, which reflects the increasingly international nature of the marine insurance market. This does not however preclude the Contractors from stipulating their own requirements for guarantors in accordance with Clause 4.5(iii) which permits them to determine whether or not the identity of a particular guarantor is “… acceptable to
the Contractor…
”.

Clause 5 – Appointment of Arbitrators

This now provides an entitlement for the arbitrators and/or appeal arbitrators to seek security for their “… reasonable fees and expenses …” which mirrors the position of the Contractors to ensure that they are adequately secured.

Clause 6 – Arbitrators Powers

The arbitrators’ powers are conferred to them by virtue of the provisions in the Arbitration Act 1996 and any subsequent amendment to this legislation. Clause 6.2 sets out the additional powers that the arbitrators have at their disposal (bearing in mind the Clause 2 – Overriding Objectives) in addition to those contained in the Arbitration Act 1996. The Clause provides a non-exhaustive list and gives arbitrators wide discretion to “… conduct the arbitration in such a manner in all respects as he may think fit subject to the LSAC 2020 Clauses…”.

Any decision by the arbitrators in relation to the costs and expenses incurred by a Contractor in seeking and obtaining security, enforcing or protecting a salvage lien and securing the payment of fees and expenses of the Lloyd’s Salvage Arbitration Branch and the arbitrators, remains part of the arbitrators’ absolute discretion under Clause 6.3 of the LSAC.

The powers of the appeal arbitrators have been moved from the ‘old’ LSSA Clause 10 to the end of LSAC Clause 6 so that all the relevant provisions are in one place.

Clause 7 – Representation of Parties

This Clause has remained largely unamended save that under Clause 7.4, an owner of salved cargo is deemed to have received notice of the hearing and any relevant correspondence if the Contractor provides such notice or correspondence to the guarantor. This provision reflects the increasing costs faced by a Contractor when dealing with large container vessels with many hundreds or even thousands of cargo interests.

Clause 8 – Arbitration Procedure

This is where the ‘old’ Procedural Rules are now located within the LSAC. The amendments to these provisions are minimal.

Clause 14 – Special Cargo Provisions

This Clause has had a substantial overhaul and the ‘old’ LSSA Clauses 13, 14 and 15 have now been merged into one new clause. The old clauses set out a pragmatic framework for dealing with unrepresented container cargo, whereby an agreement between the Contractors and a large majority of represented cargo interests would be considered binding on all remaining cargo interests (subject to the arbitrator’s approval).

LSAC Clause 14 now applies to all salved cargo, and is no longer limited to container cargo. However, it provides that the arbitrator will have increased discretion over the process, allowing them to give such agreements as much weight as they may consider appropriate in assessing the salvage award against owners of unrepresented cargo.

The broadening of the provisions and the arbitrators’ discretion to evaluate any commercial settlements that may have been reached with other represented interests is a welcome development. This will hopefully allow matters to be concluded in a more cost effective manner and reduce the expense that is often incurred by the Contractors in dealing with the minority of unrepresented interests who fail to engage in the arbitral process.

Clause 15 – Fixed Cost Arbitration Procedure (FCAP)

The Fixed Cost Arbitration Procedure (FCAP) is now fully incorporated into LSAC, and is set out in Clause 15. FCAP has a wide application with the aim to cut costs of arbitral proceedings for smaller claims, and the LSAC provide for slightly amended thresholds. The procedure may now be ordered by an arbitrator where a security demand is less than US$2 million, or where the factual issues are likely to be straightforward.

The FCAP includes a variety of measures to simplify arbitrations and to reduce costs, such as (i) joint bundles not exceeding 100 pages; (ii) submissions capped at 4,000 words; (iii) fixed charges for arbitrators’ fees; and (iv) less detailed reasons for an award.

Clause 19 – Contractors’ Special Right to Terminate

Finally, Clause 19 of the LSAC introduces a special right to terminate salvage services for the Contractors in narrow and limited circumstances. The clause is intended to cover circumstances where the Owners of a vessel have decided to terminate their obligations to pay SCOPIC (in accordance with Clause 9(i) of the SCOPIC Clause) but the Contractors are then unable to exercise their own right to terminate SCOPIC due to the Owners’ failure to provide increased security under Clause 4(ii) of SCOPIC.

In these circumstances, the Contractors could find themselves on site and prevented from demobilising and without any ability to seek additional security for their SCOPIC claim, which would be inherently unjust.

In such circumstances, the Contractors may seek an Order from the arbitrators that they are no longer bound by the terms of the LOF and that the LOF shall be deemed terminated. This is without prejudice to their rights to recover any sums due under their SCOPIC claim and the Contractors’ (reasonable) costs of demobilisation and any sums due by way of an Article 13 award from the salved property interests.

Summary

The amendments to the contract and revisions set out in LOF 2020 are a welcome development. Hopefully, the changes will simplify the arbitration procedure and will go some way to restore the confidence in the contract. Whether the changes precipitate an increase in the number of LOFs that are agreed will have to be seen.

 

Source - www.maritimecyprus.com

 


Changes to SOLAS and MARPOL shipping and maritime regulations from January 2020

The new and far reaching IMO Sulphur Cap regulations have captured media attention in recent months for obvious reasons, but as well as this significant change, January 2020 beckons in with it a raft of new regulations and amendments too – in total more than 30. Additionally, other new regulations are set to come into force later in the year. But for now, here is what you need to know about the new regulations and amendment effective 1 January 2020.

SOLAS amendments

Protection against noise (Amendments to SOLAS II-1/3-12)
Because of a discrepancy in the application of the Code on Noise Levels on-board ships there has been an amendment through a minor modification, in paragraph 2.1 of Chapter II-1/ Regulation 3-12. According to MSC.409(97), the existing paragraph 2.1 is amended to read as follows:
“.1 contracted for construction before 1 July 2014 and the keels of which are laid or which are at a similar stage of construction on or after 1 January 2009; or”
Damage control drills for passenger ships (Amendments to SOLAS II-1/19, III/30 and III/37)
Amendments to SOLAS chapter II-1 regulation 19 and chapter III regulations 30 and 37 to mandate damage control drills were adopted. The requirements are operational in nature with drills required at regular intervals for all passenger ships. According to MSC.421(98), the drills will have to involve crew members who have damage control responsibilities. Additionally, drills will have to be recorded and should cover different damage scenarios.
Fire integrity of windows on passenger ships (Amendments to SOLAS regulation II-2/20)
According to MSC.421(98), Amendments to SOLAS regulation II-2/20 were drafted to clarify the requirements in chapter II-2 for the fire integrity of windows on passenger ships carrying not more than 36 passengers and special purpose ships with more than 60 (but no more than 240) persons on board. The amendments explicitly require that for ships carrying not more than 36 passengers, windows facing survival craft and escape slides, embarkation areas and windows situated below such areas shall have a fire integrity at least equal to “A-0” class.
Fire protection of domestic boilers (Amendments to SOLAS Chapter II-2/10.5)
The text of regulation II-2/10.5.1.2.2 has been amended. Prior to the amendment domestic boilers of less than 175kW were not required to carry an approved 135l foam-type fire extinguisher. The 135l foam extinguishers are now not required for boilers that are protected by a fixed local water-based firefighting system. According to MSC.409(97), in paragraph 5.1.2.2, the last sentence is replaced with the following:
“In the case of domestic boilers of less than 175 kW, or boilers protected by fixed water-based local application fire-extinguishing systems as required by paragraph 5.6, an approved foam-type extinguisher of at least 135 l capacity is not required.”
Evacuation analysis is now mandatory (Amendments to SOLAS II-2/13)
Existing paragraph II-2/13.7.4 is deleted. New paragraphs II-2/13.2.7.1 and II-2/13.2.7.2 have been introduced which require escape routes to be evaluated to demonstrate that the ship can be evacuated in the required time. According to MSC.404(96), the evacuation simulation will be used to identify and eliminate congestion which may develop during abandonment and demonstrate that escape arrangements are sufficiently flexible to provide for the possibility that certain routes/areas may not be available as a result of a casualty.
Helicopter facility foam firefighting appliances (Amendments to SOLAS Regulation II-2/18 and the FSS Code Chapter 17)
MSC.404(96) states that amendments to SOLAS II-2/18 have a new paragraph 2.3 to require a foam application system that complies with the new chapter 17 of the FSS Code. The new Chapter 17 of the FSS Code details the specifications for foam firefighting appliances for the protection of helidecks and helicopter landing areas as required by chapter II-2 of SOLAS. As per MSC.403(96), for helicopter landing areas, at least two portable foam applicators or two hose reel foam stations shall be provided, each capable of discharging a minimum foam solution discharge rate.
Fire safety requirements for cargo spaces containing vehicles with fuel in their tanks for their own propulsion (Amendments to SOLAS II-2/20)
Cargo spaces on all ships used for the transport of motor vehicles
(a) with fuel in their tanks for their own propulsion, that are loaded/unloaded into cargo spaces which do not meet the requirements of SOLAS II-2/20, “Protection of vehicle, special category and ro-ro spaces”; and
(b) that do not use their own propulsion within the cargo space
are not required to comply with SOLAS II-2/20 provided the vehicles are carried in compliance with the appropriate requirements of regulation 19 and the IMDG Code, as defined in SOLAS VII/1.1, in accordance with MSC.421(98).
Requirements for lifeboats and rescue boats, launching appliances and release gear (Amendments to SOLAS Regulations III/3 and III/20)
The SOLAS amendments and associated MSC Resolution (MSC.402(96)) include explicit mandatory text clarifying the requirements for the qualification, authorization and certification of service suppliers, procedures for maintenance and testing, and what should be carried out at each stage of testing (weekly, monthly, annually, and 5-yearly).
Mobile Satellite Service (Amendments to Chapter IV)
Various regulations of Chapter IV and the Record of Equipment model form were amended to remove references to “Inmarsat” and replaced with references to ‘a recognized mobile satellite service’. MSC.436(99) clarifies that as a recognized mobile satellite service is defined any service which operates through a satellite system and is recognized by the Organization, for use in the global maritime distress and safety system (GMDSS)
Harmonization of survey periods of cargo ships not subject to the ESP Code (SOLAS XI-1/2)
New regulation of SOLAS Chapter XI-1 has revised the SOLAS Safety Construction Renewal Survey window for cargo ships which are not subject to the Enhanced Survey Program Code, so as to be harmonized with the Renewal Survey window under the ESP Code. MSC.409(97) states “For cargo ships not subject to enhanced surveys under regulation XI-1/2, notwithstanding any other provisions, the intermediate and renewal surveys included in regulation I/10 may be carried out and completed over the corresponding periods as specified in the 2011 ESP Code, as may beamended, and the guidelines developed by the Organization, as appropriate”
Damage Stability Explanatory Notes (SOLAS II-1)
Explanatory notes correspond to the extensive revisions of SOLAS chapter II-1, adopted by resolution MSC.421(98).
Amendments and revisions of codes
FSS Code, Chapter 8 – Automatic Sprinkler, Fire Detection and Fire Alarm Systems
MSC.1/Circ.1516 includes a new provision for water quality testing for automatic sprinkler systems and new flow charts for the testing and replacement of sprinkler heads and water mist nozzles. The related amendment to Chapter 8 of the FSS Code adds a new requirement for special attention to be paid to the specification of water quality provided by the system manufacturer, to prevent internal corrosion and clogging of sprinklers.
IGC Code – Applicable fire integrity of wheelhouse windows
The IGC code has been revised to align with the requirements given in the SOLAS regulation II-2/4.5.2.3. The amendments remove the requirement for A-0 fire-rated wheelhouse windows. MSC.411(97) states:
“3.2.5 Windows and sidescuttles facing the cargo area and on the sides of the superstructures and deckhouses within the limits specified in 3.2.4, except wheelhouse windows, shall be constructed to “A-60″ class. Sidescuttles in the shell below the uppermost continuous deck and in the first tier of the superstructure or deckhouse shall be of fixed (non-opening) type.”
IGF Code – Regulations for fire protection
The amendments remove the requirement for A-0 fire-rated wheelhouse windows, as per MSC.422(98).
LSA Code – Amendments on winches and winch brakes
Corrections to the provisions relating to winch and winch brake test loads as prescribed in the LSA Code. MSC.425(98), clarifying that “Structural members and all blocks, falls, padeyes, links, fastenings and all other fittings used in connection with launching equipment shall be designed with a factor of safety on the basis of the maximum working load assigned and the ultimate strengths of the materials used for construction. A minimum factor of safety of 4.5 shall be applied to all structural members including winch structural components and a minimum factor of safety of 6 shall be applied to falls, suspension chains, links and blocks”
2008 Intact Stability (IS) Code – anchor handling, towing or lifting operations
The Introduction and Part A of the 2008 IS Code have been amended to include fresh definitions and clarification about the new criteria. The criteria now requires an assessment of the ship’s intact stability when undertaking anchor handling, towing or lifting duties. The new criteria in Part B also require an assessment of the ship’s intact stability when undertaking towing and lifting operations.
Additional constructional matters are included in the amendments to part B of the 2008 IS Code covering the provision of a loading instrument, access to the machinery space, location of freeing ports, winch systems and on deck markings.
The footnote to title of chapter 2, General Criteria, of Part A of IS Code is deleted, to remove any misunderstanding that the referenced regulations of Part B become mandatory via a footnote.
1994 and 2000 HSC Codes
New text has been added to chapter 8 – Life Saving Appliances and Arrangements. High-speed craft of less than 30m (2000 HSC Code) and 20m (1994 HSC Code) in length may be exempted from carrying a rescue boat, provided that the requirements in the sub-paragraphs of 8.10.1.6 are fulfilled, and provided a person can be rescued from the water in a horizontal or near-horizontal body position (MSC.1/Circ.1185/Rev.1).
2009 MODU Code – Installations in hazardous areas, Fire Safety, LSA and Operational procedures
Chapters 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 14 of the 2009 MODU Code have been amended. As per MSC.435(98), revisions to the text include defining the ‘H’ class fire protection standard, changes to the required drills, provision of a dedicated rescue boat and allowing multiple fixed monitors to be used as an alternative to the drill floor fixed pressure water-spraying system.
IGC Code – Stability PC
An approved stability instrument capable of verifying compliance with the applicable intact and damage stability requirements is to be fitted on board. The approval generally applies to the software using MSC.1/Circ.1229, but it may include hardware. This resolution revises the model form of the Certificate of Fitness for Carriage of Liquefied Gases in Bulk to reflect confirmation of this instrument or an accepted alternative during surveys.
BCH & IBC Code – Stability PC
An approved stability instrument capable of verifying compliance with the applicable intact and damage stability requirements is to be fitted onboard. The approval generally applies to the software using MSC.1/Circ.1229, but it may include hardware. This resolution revises the model form of the Certificate of Fitness for Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk to reflect confirmation of this instrument or an accepted alternative during surveys.
FTP Code Revision – Fire protection provisions
The Code for Application of Fire Test Procedures, 2010, was revised by resolution MSC.437(99) to be consistent with SOLAS Chapter II which applies the same fire protection provisions for exposed floor coverings on passenger ships carrying not more than 36 passengers with those carrying more than 36 passengers.
FSS Code Chapter 13 – Arrangement of Means of Escape
A revision has been made to 2.1.2.2.2 distribution of persons, case 2 for passenger ship evacuation analysis, for the purpose of clarifying the distribution of crew in public places. In particular, MSC.410(97) mentions that “Passengers in public spaces occupied to 3/4 of maximum capacity, 1/3 of the crew distributed in public spaces; service spaces occupied by 1/3 of the crew; and crew accommodation occupied by 1/3 of the crew”
International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code – Amendment 39-18
The IMDG Code amends the following classification categories:
Class 1: Explosives – hazard divisions for packages containing pyrotechnic substances are revised.
Class 3: Flammable liquids – the marking, labelling and testing of packages containing viscous liquids are revised.
Class 4: Flammable solids – revision of the classification of self-reactive substances.
Class 5: Oxidizing substances and organic peroxides – packing instructions and methods are revised. Class 8: Corrosive substances – a completely new Chapter 2.8 is adopted.
Class 9: Miscellaneous dangerous substances and articles, and environmentally hazardous substances – the marking and packaging of lithium batteries are consolidated. MSC.1/Circ.1588 recommends voluntary application of the amendments as of January 1, 2019.
BCH Code – Model Form of Certificate of Fitness
Revised text has been added to the model form to correlate with recent amendments to paragraph 2.2.6 of the Code, which requires provision of an approved stability instrument on board, or other approved methods for ensuring safe loading of cargoes.
IBC Code – Model Form of Certificate of Fitness
Revised text has been added to the model form to correlate with recent amendments to paragraph 2.2.6 of the Code, which requires provision of an approved stability instrument onboard, or other approved methods for ensuring safe loading of cargoes.
SPS Code Revisions
The form of the Record of Equipment for Compliance with the SPS Code (Form SPS) has been revised in the ‘Radio Facilities’ section to refer to the use of a “Recognized mobile satellite service ship earth station”, rather than referring to a “Inmarsat ship earth station”.
MARPOL Amendments
Sulphur Content in Fuel Oil (MARPOL VI Regulation 14)
Sulphur content of any fuel oil used on board ships outside of Sox Emission Control Areas (Global Cap) shall not exceed 0.5% m/m on or after 1 January 2020.
Ozone-depleting substances, Hydro chlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) Refrigerants (MARPOL Annex VI)
According to MEPC.176(58), regulation 12 of MARPOL Annex VI states that installations which contain hydro chlorofluorocarbons shall be prohibited:
On ships constructed on or after 1st January 2020 or
– In the case of ships constructed before 1st January 2020 which have a contractual date of the equipment to the ship on or after 1st January 2020, or in the absence of a contractual delivery date, the actual delivery of the equipment to the ship on or after 1st January 2020. However, this does not apply to permanently sealed equipment where there are no refrigerant charging connections or potentially removable components containing ozone depleting substances.
Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) (New Chapter 4 of MARPOL Annex VI)
The CO2 reduction level includes three phases; Phase 2 starts on 01/01/2020.
The new chapter 4 Regulations on energy efficiency for ships to MARPOL Annex VI, makes mandatory the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), for new ships, and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) for all ships. Other amendments to Annex VI add new definitions and the requirements for survey and certification, including the format for the International Energy Efficiency Certificate.
EEDI reflects the amount of CO2 generated per tonne-mile (cargo carrying capacity). It constitutes a uniform approach to calculating a ship’s energy efficiency during design and building of new ships and will be used to control CO2 levels emitted for future ships by encouraging improvements in ship design.
Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database Guidelines (MARPOL VI)
These 2017 Guidelines provide guidance to assist:
– Administrations in developing their program to verify ship’s fuel oil consumption data;
– The IMO Secretariat on the development and management of the IMO Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database, and describe methods that will be used to anonymize ship data to ensure the completeness of the database.

 

Source: IIMS and Safety4Sea