Nickel Ore Can Test

1.	A bulk carrier was due to load nickel ore in Indonesia. The Master was presented with a certificate of moisture content stating it was below the transportable moisture limit. The chief officer went ashore to conduct a can test of the cargo. Cargo samples were taken from four stockpiles. The chief mate and master accepted the results of each can test as no moisture was observed on the surface.
2.	The loading process began and some 19,100 tonnes of nickel ore was loaded. The officer of the watch later noticed moisture on the surface of the cargo. The loading operation was suspended and the Master requested P&I club assistance. An independent surveyor arrived and took samples from each of the cargo holds for testing in an independent laboratory. It was found that the moisture content of each sample of cargo was in excess of its transportable moisture limit.
3.	The ship began pumping water from the holds and discharging the wet nickel ore onto the quayside. The discharge process took over nine days to complete. Masters must be cautious when presented with moisture content and transportable moisture limit certificates. It is clear that in this case, certificates were false and did not represent the true state of the cargo. The Master relied on results from the can test as an assurance that the cargo was not in excess of its flow moisture point.
Do not fully rely on the can test. The can test does not take into account the ten percent safety margin of the transportable moisture limit. An independent surveyor should be asked to assist the Master in taking samples of the cargo and testing the moisture content and transportable moisture limit.

26 Read the case again and write down the numbers meaning.

ê19,100 _____________________________________________________________________

ê10% _______________________________________________________________________

ê 4 _________________________________________________________________________

ê 9 _________________________________________________________________________

27 a) Complete the table.

person	actions	fault (if any)
ship’s Master
Chief Officer
OOW
surveyor

b) In pairs, ask and answer to check your ideas.

28 Discuss.

1. Could the incident been avoided? How?

2. Who was in charge of the incident?

3. Why did they need over nine days todischarge the wet nickel ore?

29 Role-play the situation.

Cadet A	Cadet B
You are the OOW of the vessel from the case. The shipper representative arrived to look into the problem with the liquefied ore. You have some photos to prove the innocence of the crew.	You are the shipper representative. You arrived to look into the problem with the liquefied ore. Your task to get as much details as possible to inform the shipper about guilty party.

30 Read the case and find who or what is to blame.

1 Cargo officer

1 weather

1 Agent

1 stevedore

1 Master

1 small loading chute

Loading Cement: Make Sure You Clean Up After Loading

A bulk carrier loaded a full cargo of cement in the Far East during the northern winter, using an enclosed loading system. This meant that the hatch covers were closed and a loading chute was fed through a manhole in the closed hatch top, with the cargo pumped under pressure into the hold.

En route to the loading port, after the holds had been cleaned, the hatches were watertight-tested using ship’s fire hoses and found to have no leaks.

The master noted that the length of the loading chute only just fitted into the hold by 60 cms. This meant that the cement cargo was being fed in from the top of the hold, producing a considerable amount of cement dust onto the top frames, hatch trackways and hatch coaming drain holes.

The hatch cover drain holes were not taped over before the start of loading. It should be the practice – weather permitting – to clean the trackways and hatch cover coamings after loading, using compressed air if port regulations allow. This clears the drain holes and water channels of dirt and cement dust.

During the Pacific voyage, this ship was weather routed, heavy weather (over Beaufort 9) was encountered and seawater entered the hatch trackways. The water mixed with the cement and all the drainage channels to the forward two hatch coamings were blocked with hardened cement. As a result, water entered the holds and damaged the cargo. Sealing tape was ineffective in such heavy seas. Sealing tape should not be considered as a primary barrier to water access. The claim submitted, including the cargo damage, disposal of the cargo and associated costs, was over $650,000.

31 Answer the questions.

1. What was at risk from the very beginning?

2. What was the Master’s mistake?

3. What had to be done after the loading was finished?

4. Was it only one person’s mistake?

32 a) Choose some advice fitting the case.a. Before loading cement or other dusty cargoes, the coaming drain holes should be taped over to prevent the entry of dust. Tape should be removed before blowing down

b. A proper system of inspections and checks must be carried out to assess the integrity of ballast tanks after hold cleaning and during the ballast voyage

c. Cargo watch on deck should monitor stevedore grab handling and damage.

d. Masters should confirm that weather routing advice takes account of the water-sensitive nature of the cargo carried.

e. Masters must take a robust stand (приймати чітку позицію) when asked to carry out hold cleaning operations that are unrealistic.

f. Stevedores and charterers should be approached when incorrect loading equipment is used.

b) Discuss the correct advice.

33 Debate!

It’s only the Master who is responsible for the correct cargo handling.

Дата добавления: 2015-10-29