1 / 8

Tripartite Tokyo September 2007 Safety & SOLAS

Tripartite Tokyo September 2007 Safety & SOLAS. 3.1 IMO Goal-based Standards. Eirik Andreassen Det Norske Veritas DNV Council Member Chairman of IACS EG/GBS. Content. CG on GBS for Bulk Carriers and Tanker for Oil CG on Safety Level Approach Pilot Project IACS Position & contribution

marilu
Télécharger la présentation

Tripartite Tokyo September 2007 Safety & SOLAS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tripartite Tokyo September 2007 Safety & SOLAS 3.1 IMO Goal-based Standards Eirik Andreassen Det Norske Veritas DNV Council Member Chairman of IACS EG/GBS

  2. Content • CG on GBS for Bulk Carriers and Tanker for Oil • CG on Safety Level Approach • Pilot Project • IACS Position & contribution • Comments to report from PP Coordinator

  3. CG on GBS for Bulk Carriers and Tanker for Oil • Dissemination from PP • Proposal for new Reg II (SOLAS) • SOALS Amendment (Tier I) • MSC Resolution (Tier II) • MSC Circular (SCF)

  4. CG on Safety Level Approach • Safety levels • Submission by Germany • Proposal by Denmark on Human Factors • Ship types • Many submissions and proposals • LRFP • No definite agreement • Concetual issues to be dealt with by WG/GBS, while detailed issues could be dealt with by WG/FSA

  5. Pilot Project • IACS Position & contribution • Contributed by preparing CSR as an example for review by the Pilot Panel (see MSC83/INF.5) • Participated in meetings by answering questions and clarifying technical content

  6. Pilot Project • Report from PP Coordinator • Guidelines for Verification of Compliance with GBS • Verification by GoE vs • Self assessment by Class • Information and Documentation requirements • Level of detail • Verification requirements • In-Service Structural Performance Monitoring Requirements (separate slide) • Net Scantlings (separate slide)

  7. In service structural monitoring • Continuous self assessment of effectiveness of own rules • In principle a good proposal, however… • Spans • construction, survey, operation, maintenance and repair • Depends on • operations, routing, loading/discharge, maintenance, individual designs, workmanship/seamanship, … • In service experience is not controlled by NB requirements • Is already routinely monitored by individual class societies • Similarities with EWS • May compromise IPR of ship designs • … practicalities will have to be well though out • IACS ask for industry understanding/support on our views

  8. Net scanlings • IACS support the majority view of the PP: • Strength assessment should be based on the foreseeable development of the ship structure throughout the life of the vessel. • Assessment based on the “pure” net scantling definition is too simplistic • Have provided an alternative text: • The net scantlings should provide the structural strength required to sustain the design loads, • assuming the structure is in intact condition and • accounting for the steel diminution that could be reasonably expected to occur during the life of the vessel due to corrosion and wastage. • Long experience with implementation of the proposed definition • Implementation of the strict net scantlings approach should therefore be justified. • IACS ask for industry support on our views and proposal

More Related