Search This Blog

Showing posts with label bulker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bulker. Show all posts

Monday, 5 November 2012

Pratibha Cauvery - the real story part ! & 2



http://www.moneylife.in/article/pratibha-cauverys-sorry-plight-who-is-to-blame/29481.html

Pratibha Cauvery, 31 years old, already in bad shape, with unpaid crew, no provisions, no diesel, no stores, no drinking water, is outside Chennai harbour. What are the options with the captain? Very little, given the current way maritime laws are implemented

http://moneylife.in/article/the-mt-pratibha-cauvery-tragedy-at-chennai-some-hard-truths-and-unsavoury-facts/29495.html

The truth behind what happened on the Pratibha Cauvery off Chennai lies more in the communications to and from the ship for the past few months than in what happened onboard in the last few hours before grounding. Meanwhile, as the ship breaks free and heads north, the bigger question arising is—was this an attempt to scuttle the ship for insurance?

+++

Tuesday, 9 August 2011

Why are Indian ports the destination for every over-age rustbucket in the world?


As published at MoneyLife:-

http://moneylife.in/article/why-are-overage-ships-with-improper-documents-being-chartered-for-indian-ports/18732.html

Why are overage ships with improper documents being chartered for Indian ports?
August 08, 2011 06:25 PM
Veeresh Malik

New questions are cropping up everyday over the Rak Carrier and Pavit, but nobody is giving any answers; and all this is happening in the region of India’s biggest naval base

As the issue of oil from the tanks of the MV Rak Carrier and the MT Pavit start reaching the coastline and bays, as well as estuaries around Mumbai, the issues of the documentation around the two ships starts getting even murkier, as does what appears to be a combined effort to cover-up. The fact remains, however, that unlike in the case of the similarily overage MSC Chitra, where a specific collision caused very specific damage to the ship before it went down more or less intact by way of oil tanks and other spaces, in the case of the Rak Carrier a progressive breakup is going to create havoc, and in the case of the Pavit the complete mystery of how a ship that was allegedly sinking landed up off Mumbai with oil drums lashed and intact on deck is going to need more forensic capabilities than shown so far.

As seafarers all over the world know, the first thing that goes adrift and overboard, breaking loose from any restraint whatsover, are the lubricating and hydraulic oil drums stored on deck, simply because they are the most exposed items on deck. In the case of the Pavit, despite everything reported, the sight of oil drums merrily standing neatly made fast on deck is in itself as miraculous as, for example, the fact that the ship itself did not sink after being abandoned.

However, it is what appears to be a multiple cover-up in the case of the Rak Carrier that nurtures astonishment of a degree which is doing more than lifting eyebrows all over. This is over and above what appears to be a fairly well planned evacuation from the ship, to use a polite word, leaving it to sink at a location where it will cause yet some more hazards to marine life as well as other passing traffic. All this in the biggest naval base in India.

Consider this:

# The chief officer of the Rak Carrier, in an interview on TimesNow television, claimed that the ship had arrived in Mumbai as early as 12th July, and then took stores as well as fuel while anchored off Mumbai. How she managed this in the monsoons in the first case and without customs or immigration formalities in the other, is something that needs to be responded to. So far, there's been deep silence. Immigration comes under the Intelligence Bureau, so it is not possible to get this information under the Right to Information Act and as for customs it is absolutely likely that the ship simply did not inform the Indian Customs.

# There is still no response from anybody—neither the owners, nor charterers, or cargo interests, or the Directorate General of Shipping, or whoever-on what class this ship carries and who was responsible for declaring in the statement from the Press Information Breau that she was under Lloyd's Register, when Lloyd's themselves have published that they withdrew class in November 2010. How a ship was chartered in with cargo for India when she was not only very overage, but also without class is not being explained. Again, deep silence.

# The Maharashtra police have, as per reports, filed for "negligence" under the Indian Penal Code. This is about as easy as it gets, though prima facie, this epsiode smacks of criminal conspiracy, fraud and attempt to destroy evidence. There is no information on whether the ship's staff brought the hard discs of the various logs and data recorders on board, though they seem to have had time to get their packed bags, computers, personal documents and more.

# From the environmental point of view, it is amply clear that this is much more than just a state government issue. The impact of this specific pollution is going to be what it is, but it will embolden others to come and do what they want within India's economic zone, whether it is fishing or dumping oil and other pollutants. In addition, there is a national security angle, which again goes beyond the singular purview of the state. When are the central investigative agencies going to step in?

# A gazette notification was published on 29 December 2005 instructing all parties that ships bringing cargoes into India are to adhere to certain simple logical compliances as far as insurance and other related issues like pollution and wreck removal are concerned. This gazette notification was kept in abeyance soon thereafter, without any explanation why, on 2 August 2006. Here is the notice.

The text of the Gazette of India notification no. 403 dated 20 September 2005 is reproduced hereunder.

" G.S.R. 600(E) - In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908 (15 of 1908), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules to regulate the entry of vessels into Ports, namely:
1. (1) These rules may be called the Entry of Vessels into Ports Rules, 2005.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.


2.   Insurance cover:
Owner of a vessel entering a Port shall have to produce an insurance cover for compensation in relation to:
(i) Wreck removal expenses;
(ii) Pollution damage caused by spillage of oil or any hazardous and noxious substances; from a Protection and Indemnity Club which is a member of an International Group of Protection and Indemnity Club or a Club duly approved by the Central Government.

3. The vessel which fails to produce the insurance cover referred to in rule 2 shall not be allowed to enter the Port:
Provided that the provisions of these rules shall not be applicable to a non Safety of Life At Sea (SOLAS) Convention vessel if the owner of the vessel furnishes an undertaking for compensation to the port in connection with expenses which port may incur on removal of wreck and pollution damages caused.

4.  Explanation: 
Non Safety of Life At Sea (SOLAS) ships means a cargo ship with less than 500 gross tonnage (GT) and includes a ship engaged on domestic voyage, a domestic passenger ship and other small ship being used as fishing vessel and tug."

However, on 2 August 2006, the same ministry deemed it fit to issue another gazette notification: -

"The entry of vessels into Port Rules 2005 published in the extraordinary gazette dated September 20, 2005, vide No. G.S.R. 600(E) under Section 6 of the Indian Ports Act 1908 (15 of 1908) is kept in abeyance with immediate effect until further order of the Central Government of India".

That gives all of us an idea of the real direction that the central government is taking in context with the issue of insurance, or lack of insurance thereof, for ships visiting Indian ports.

Another circular/notification from the Directorate General of Shipping on the subject of overage ships, especially during the monsoons, is reproduced in its entirety, and nothing more need be said about the subject. It is another fact and truth that overage ships of all sorts regularly visit Indian ports, for what is known as "commercial considerations", of all sorts.
 
Shipping Development Circular No.1 of 2008


NO: SD-9/CHRT(82)/97-IV          Dated  25.04.2008                                                                               
Subject :  Revised guidelines for chartering of vessels under Sections 406 and 407 of Merchant Shipping Act ,1958.

Concerned by the rising trend of marine accidents in and around Indian waters especially during rough weather, the Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport & Highways set up a Committee in July, 2007 to suggest urgent measures to reduce marine casualties.  Since analysis of the accidents over the last 3 years showed a significant correlation between age of vessels and the break-downs which caused these casualties, the Committee recommended, inter-alia, the revision of guidelines to restrict the age of vessels plying in Indian waters and a tighter regime of surveys and inspections.

2. Accordingly, in the interest of maritime safety, it has been decided to modify existing guidelines for chartering of vessels under Sections 406 and 407 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (M S Act).  Existing  DGS Circulars Nos. 7 of 2003 dated 11.06.03 and 8 of 2003 dated 14.08.2003 (read with clarifications vide Memorandum dated 21.11.2003 and 31.12.2003), restrict only the charters of tankers to those which are less than 25 years (30 years in the case of gas carriers) and are CAS and CAP-2 rated and classed with IACS.

3. It is now further decided, after taking into consideration the views and objections of a wide range of stakeholders, that, with effect from 15th May 2008, applications for permissions for chartering in / grant of licence to vessels under Sections 406 and 407 of the MS Act either for single or specific voyages or time charters that enable vessels to visit an Indian port or to ply in Indian territorial waters or the Indian EEZ will be entertained only as follows:

3.1 During the period of foul weather, being 1st June till 31st August in the Arabian Sea along the West Coast and 1st May till 30th November in the Bay of Bengal along the East Coast of the Indian Peninsula:

3.1.1 From all cargo vessels - other than gas carriers, oil or product tanker and   dredgers - only if they are less than 25 years of age. 

3.1.2 From gas carriers, only if they are less than 30 years of age.

3.1.3 From oil or product tankers, only if they are double hull or if single hull, less than 20 yrs and fulfilling the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) requirements as assessed by the Indian Register of Shipping (IRS) or Classification Societies that are notified as Recognized Organizations by the Government.   Consequently, SD Circulars 7 and 8 of 2003 giving guidelines for chartering of oil and product tankers will stand modified accordingly for the period of foul weather.

3.1.4 For all time charters of vessels other than passenger vessels, to be entered into with effect from 15th May, 2008, which include in the period of charter any period of foul weather, only if the age of the vessel proposed is less than 25 years at the time of termination of the charter period.

3.2 Regardless of the period of the year - from Offshore Service Vessels (OSVs) of all description (e.g. anchor handling tug, accommodation barge, tug, supply vessels, support vessels, barges, pontoons, etc.) or any other type of vessels which are chartered-in / engaged for the purposes of  plying in and around offshore oil exploration areas and / or where security/safety sensitivities are high, only from those that are less than 25 years old, are classed with the Indian Register of Shipping (IRS); and    have undergone inspection and rectification of deficiencies of hull, machinery, safety appliances and operational requirements (e.g. manning, etc.) before entry into Indian territorial waters.

4. All shipping companies, exporters, importers and agents may kindly take note of the change in eligibility of vessels for consideration of grant of chartering permissions and amend their own chartering terms, practices and instructions accordingly.

5. This issues with the approval of the Director General of Shipping and Ex-Officio Additional Secretary to the Govt. of India.

Sd/-
(Samuel Darse)
Deputy Director General of Shipping


MEMORANDUM

NO: SD-9/CHRT(82)/97-IV    Dated 13.05.2008

Subject : S.D. Circular No.01 of 2008 - Clarifications regarding

This Directorate has been receiving numerous correspondences seeking clarifications on Shipping Development Circular No. 01 of 2008 dated 25.04.2008 issued by this Directorate regarding revised guidelines for chartering in  of vessels under Section 406 and 407 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958. The matter has been examined further and it is clarified as follows:-

1. The said Circular does not apply to Indian Flag Vessels, as they are registered and already licensed to ply in Indian waters.

2. The said Circular applies to all vessels chartered in under Section 406 and 407 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 except vessels already carrying the Indian Flag.

3. The said Circular is applicable from 15th May 2008. It therefore does not affect vessels licensed under section 406 and 407 before 15th May 2008, even, if the existing license overlaps the rough weather period. 

4. Clause 3.1.4 of the said Circular stands amended to read as follows:
 "3.1.4. For time charters of vessels other than passenger vessels, to be entered into with effect from 15th May 2008, which include in the period of charter any period of foul weather, only if the age of the vessel proposed, is less than that specified in Clause 3.1.1, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 for the respective category of vessel, at the time of termination of the charter period".

5. This issues with the approval of the Director General of Shipping and Ex-Officio Additional Secretary to the Government of India.

Sd/-
(Samuel Darse)
Deputy Director General of Shipping


Moneylife shall file the required RTI applications in these cases.

Saturday, 6 August 2011

the mystery of the RAK Carrier - where was she for 40 days?




The mystery of the RAK Carrier: Where was she for the past 40 days?
August 04, 2011 03:49 PM
Veeresh Malik

At 8-9 knots, sailing time from Singapore to Mumbai would not exceed 10 days. The RAK Carrier, now sinking off Mumbai, took 40. Where was she in between?

Time was not too long ago, a ship would go adrift or get stranded in and around Mumbai Port about once every two years, and would then become the focus of all discussion at the Seaman's Club. Now it appears to be a weekly affair, like the "specials" on sale in the Irani Hotel next door, and everybody knows that the special is simply what was not moving so had to be flogged.

The RAK Carrier, an Indonesian flag bulk carrier, is one more example.

About 26 years old, with a history as long as that of any history-sheeter, she sailed out of Singapore on or around the 2nd of May 2011, ostensibly towards Indonesia to load coal for Dahej in Gujarat. She then reappeared off Singapore on the 20th of June 2011, ostensibly loaded, and then sat patiently outside Singapore till the 24th of June. She then sailed out towards India through the Malacca Straits, making good about 8-9 knots, giving an ETA (expected time of arrival) Dahej of 7th of July 2011.

So far so good, but then suddenly on the midnight of 24/25 June 2011, all position reporting seems to have stopped from her AIS (Automatic Identification Signal), including most surprisingly no reports when passing Colombo or making landfall off India, until she arrived off the Port of Mumbai almost a month behind schedule. Down by head, and certainly looking like she was about to go under, conveniently near the only port in India where rescue would not be too much of a problem.

For all we know, the Master decided to go on a short tour of the Indian Ocean through most of the month of July 2011, while the cargo receivers in Dahej waited patiently for their coal. Or something happened to the cargo en route, and after that, it became a very brilliant insurance claim. But why does a ship take almost 40 days to come from Singapore to Mumbai, is the question which people should be asking, and also doing a quick check on what's really in those cargo-holds.

Incidentally, the value of the cargo would have been many times the value of the ship, especially in these depressed days. And the coal would find ready buyers anywhere in the world. But that's unfair to the seafarers who probably fought bad monsoon seas before making it to off Mumbai, too.

However, it is not unknown for ships to go elsewhere, offload cargo, fill holds with ballast water, and then go under. Shipping records are full of such cases.

For example, in the days when trade with a particular African country was "banned", ships would often load oil for, say, West Europe. Along the way, the cargo would be quietly unloaded at a port in that African country, and then the ship and ship-owners would go through all sorts of manipulations to close the voyage. In one glorious case, when a particular ship—on her last legs anyway—was going to be scuttled, the ship sent out a sinking signal and asked for help, and the rescuers found everybody dressed in formals with their suitcases neatly packed.

We are not saying that the RAK Carrier is an elaborate insurance scam. Far from it.

We have said it before, and we say it again—it requires a very simple notice to mariners issued by the DG Shipping in Mumbai addressed to all ships globally when they come anywhere near Indian waters—especially those calling Indian ports. All ships coming into Indian territorial waters must establish identity and purposes. All overage ships (those over 15 years old as per marine conventions) must in addition also provide full details of any and every possible issue including cargo, insurance cover, class and adherence to every possible aspect that makes her seaworthy.

Why would the DG Shipping not do it? This is unknown, but in their 'PAVITra WISDOM', maybe they will do it now?

Information Sources:

1) Information on RAK CARRIER movements sourced from:
 http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/datasheet.aspx?datasource=ITINERARIES&MMSI=351810000

2) Information on possible insurance issues—sourced from the grapevine.

(PS: In addition, I just saw some TV clips of the sailors from this ship. They seem to be interestingly very calm and collected. In addition, it appears as though they had the time to save and get along stuff like their laptops and stereos as well as all their documents. This is something strange, the Indian authorities need to hold these seafarers and question them to find out what happened).

___

Originally published at MoneyLife

Friday, 22 July 2011

what's quality of life like in your experience, onboard?


Recent developments in mercantile maritime matters worldwide, certainly when in the so-called developed countries and possibly also elsewhere, wherever IMO's writ allegedly runs, tend to also bring out two aspects, neglected or simply getting worse without contest, for far too long:-
1) The quality of life onboard, including accomodation, food, recreational facilities, communication/internet and safe manning. Add to that the kind of care given by the owners for small things like cabin linen/towels, and you get the idea.
2) The real truth behind the ownership and operation of the ship including beneficiary ownerships as well as other details often kept hidden from complement and port state authorities. This is having impacts on seafarers way beyond simple criminalisation.
In other words, it is even more important now than ever before, to be aware of as much as possible before signing up to go onboard a ship. Even if you have been with the company for a long time. Things are changing very rapidly in the real world, and working for the shipping fleets, especially those registered in offshore tax havens, is not as simple as it used to be - matter of fact it is, to give an example, as dangerous as taking a lift on a dark night in an unregistered can going through certain parts of India.
This writer has come across more than a few cases lately, where seafarers suffered because they didn't take basic precautions in advance, and here are some which stand out:-
# Reach on board and discover that cabin accomodation on what was obviously a very shoddily built ship meant that even the top-4 officers shared a toilet. Which may not sound like a terribly bad deal, but what makes it worse is if the single toilet itself keeps packing up all the time, and simply can not get fixed.
# The messing onboard was on some 500/- rupees or equivalent per day pattern, which worked fine as long as the supplies were taken from the more reasonable parts of the world. However, stranded alongside in a port where there was a civil war ashore meant the sum of money did not really manage to do the needful, and for some time the Master went out of pocket till he signed off.
# The actual hidden beneficiary ownership of a particular ship was traced back to a person whose nationality and pending issues were not acceptable in a port the ship called. After some time the ship was released and sailed on, but the Master was held back, in jail, for about 7 months before he was able to buy his own wy out by himself.
# There are, ofcourse, increasingly more frequent cases of owners abandoning vessel and complement on board, not just due to piracy but also for a variety of other reasons. This happens through registered and unregistered agents, and you can not expect too much help from the authorities in such cases.
It is, therefore, increasingly apparent that you as Indian seafarers will have to look after your own interests. Make your own checklist before you sign on the dotted line, or stick with the well reputed companies, which have adherences and policies way better than what the authorities require of them. They may not pay as much, or may be more stringent on documentation and qualifications, but in the forthcoming turbulence in the shipping world and world overall - certainly worth it.

Saturday, 13 November 2010

Memories of Suez Canal, '70s

So, the Israelis and Egyptians had just about made up, the canal was re-opened on the 5th of June 1975, and there we were, cream of the Nation, fresh out of the TS Rajendra a few days later on the 7th of June 1975, ready to sail. Scattered like so many dried leaves in the summer winds, 120+ of us went forth to sail under the red ensign. Many of us wanted to sail across Suez, because beyond lay the dreams and delights of Socialist countries, with their welcoming feminine arms and charms.

A dollar and pound went a long way there, so did the rupee, actually. Another story for another day.

Yours truly was lucky enough to be on one of the earliest merchant ships to cross the canal, the date is lost in the diary I kept, which got stolen years later with all the other diaries. There were reports of minor floating mines popping up every now and then, brought to the surface by the wake and churn, and similar explosions, still making the news every now and then, and extra lookouts were posted, without a clue on what we were supposed to do if we did spot sommething looking like an undefined mine floating in front of the ship. Throw a stone at it, no stones, ok, shackle, bolt, piece of dunnage wood?

On the desert side of the Canal (polite word for Israeli side) still lay the remnants of much of the Egyptian Armies hardware, growing older gracefully under the desert sun, a pity digital cameras were not around then.

Here's more of what I remember of the Suez Canal transit . . . I wonder if things have changed?

# Four pilots, each one ate at least 2 or 3 meals and drank half a dozen or more colas, while nibbling constantly at the cookies and biscuits on the bridge. and took back huge bags full of cigarettes, condiments, and whatever else. One even visited the dry provisions room to take a look, and picked up spices as well as "daal" and "basmati rice".

# A "Suez Canal Light" was rescued from the bottom of the rope locker, where it had lain forgotten since the ship was built. The Electrical officer and his assistant workedon it for days, and then we struggled to get it ready, after which, once we were in the canal, it didn't matter if it was used or not. It was heavy.

# The anchorage slots in Port Suez were really tight, and required amazing ship-handling, especially on unwieldy bulk carriers with wide beams. The slot we got would always be somewhere in the middle. Yes, you could buy fresh fish from the boats that swarmed around you, in exchange for old ropes, paint cans, and other scrap.

# Pilots and everybody else would only board and disembark by the gangway. This would include all variety of shopkeepers, who both bought and sold, and at that juncture, did not know the difference between a West German Deutsche Mark and an East German Deutsche Mark. For some reason, they always sold a lot of candies and gum - borrowed from other ships.

# These shopkeepers were also the emergency boat crews, who were supposed to keep their boats ready, but were actually running a great trade in Egyptian souveniers and artefacts. If you wanted something they didn't have (they had these photo albums) then they would deliver at the other end. In a day and age before mobile phones.

# We were like awake and on duty most of the while during transit, which could take a day or so, and the whole issue of fatigue and IMO inspired rest was not a parameter then. Also, keeping the ship in the middle while steering, especially if the ship was on even keel, was very difficult. You needed the best quartermasters on duty then.

# Fine sand got into everything. Even and especially into your nostrils. And for some reason, we would often pick up a pigeon or two hitching a ride towards the Med, once one stayed with us till Poland. Mostly, they would fly away near Gib, fatter for their experience.

# Crossing the South bound convoy, since North bound would be non-stop, was always great fun. Thanks to free rights of innocent passage to everyone, you saw all sorts of ships and flags, merrily next to each other - even if they were at war elsewhere.

I loved the Suez transits, and look forward to doing them again, as well as sailing past Gib. Some day soon, Insha-Allah.

Thursday, 11 November 2010

Bob Couttie's Marine Accident Casebook online

So how often has your company called you for a seminar, conference or meeting, to discuss accidents at sea and how to prevent them? And how often do they turn into finger pointing sessions, with the main real issues never being resolved? And then, the findings on accidents at sea, after all those investigations, never see the light of day.

Compare this with aviation, where every accident report is not just publicly available, but increasingly available in print and other formats - in mess rooms, briefing rooms, magazines, everywhere.

Bob Couttie's resource on the internet, found here:-
http://maritimeaccident.org/
tries to do exactly that.

Find time to go through it. Register for better access, free, and subscribe to his newsletter.

There was a day and age when Walport would not pick up Poseidon for viewing on ships. Matter of fact, in this day and age, it may be very relevant to show marine accidents and rescue films onboard.

And he has a very apt lifeboat survey up and running now, here:-

http://maritimeaccident.org/survey/index.php?sid=41249&lang=en

This one is for seafarers, and you are requested to take part, don't say you don't have a voice.

Thank you, Bob Couttie.