Vessel
had bunkered a few thousand tons of VLSFO at its last port. A few days after
departure, analysis results were sent to the vessel by the testing laboratory
and the fuel seemed to be on spec for all ISO 8217 parameters except for Total
Sediment Potential (TSP). The result for TSP was 0.15% whereas the maximum
limit in table 2 was 0.10%.
The
vessel operator’s technical department advised the vessel to consume this batch
of bunkers and report any operational difficulties faced. Some technical
guidelines on operational adjustments to be made were also given to the crew.
Within
hours of starting to consume the new batch of bunkers, the vessel experienced
excessive purifier sludging.
Charterers
were informed and they agreed to test the ‘vessel’ sample whose seal number was
mentioned in the Bunker Delivery Note (BDN). Owners did not see any reason to
object as they thought the samples were taken at the receiving ship’s manifold.
The vessel was instructed to land the sample at the next port. The Master acknowledged
the message and asked the office in return if the vessel should also land its
own samples at the same time since the samples mentioned in the BDN were taken
at the bunker barge’s manifold and not their own ship. Owners informed
charterers of this as they were now concerned that the samples from bunker
barge may not be representative of the fuel bunkered.
Charterers
expressed their dissatisfaction as the information provided on the BDN did not
reflect what the crew or the owners were saying. Charterers independently went
ahead with the testing of the ‘vessel’ sample mentioned in the BDN. The result
for TSP was 0.10% and therefore on spec. Under the charter party, this test
result was binding on owners. To avoid a repeat of this incident, owners investigated
the practice of signing BDNs across their fleet. The main findings from their
investigation were:
Ø During
the pre-bunker meeting with the bunker barge representatives, the sampling
protocols were not discussed.
Ø It
was common practice for Masters and Chief Engineers to sign BDNs without
verifying the information entered therein.
Ø No
fleet vessel had ever issued a protest to the bunker barge for such practices,
or refused to sign the BDN, or informed the owners or charterers.
Ø The
majority of crew assigned bunkering related duties were not aware that they had
to oversee and continuously monitor the sampling procedures adopted by the
barge in order to ensure the sample is truly representative.
Ø The
crew did not fully understand the repercussions of signing such BDNs as no
formal training had been provided by the shore management.
Ø The
company’s SMS did not clearly highlight how the vessel should act where the
bunker barge refuses to enter the seal numbers of the samples taken at the
receiving ship’s manifold on the BDN.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου