Scofield

358 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
358
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • - Word of thanks. Those attending conference, some may have experienced in Turkey. Main purpose of presentation to draw attention to some problems when dealing with casualties in Turkey. Presentation in two. General introduction and some case studies.
  • As can be seen Turkey has a vast coastline and many ports. Some more remote than others but the main principals being explained this morning apply throughout. The exception to this being monopoly zone CLICK where any casualties within this area are controlled by the TURKISH COASTAL SAFETY ORGANISATION. We shall not elaborate or talk to you this morning in this regard but happy to answer any questions you may have at the end of this presentation.
  • As I just said, the monopoly zone outside the scope of any private enterprise and BEAUFORT/SOLAR will only offer assistance if invited to do so by TURKISH COASTAL SAFETY ORGANISATION. Outside monopoly zone, only Turkish registered salvage companies are permitted to perform salvage services due to the cabotage rules. There are only TWO recognized professional salvage companies that are geared up to assist any casualty situation that they may be presented with. By this I mean grounding, collision, fire, pollution or even the most simple rescue tow. Both salvage companies are members of International Salvage Union. As some of you are probably aware, casualties that occur in the monopoly zone can normally be subject to contractual terms under the TURKISH OPEN FORM (TOF) For those of you who are unfamiliar with this, we can talk on this, during question time. However, unlike in situations where casualties occur inside the monopoly zone, the the contractual terms offered, subject to the circumstances surrounding the case, will be on the basis of either the standard BIMCO contracts or LOF 2000, both of which are standard and recognized international agreements which I’m sure you are all aware.
  • As in most countries, one of the main criteria is dealing with the local authorities. The requirements imposed by the Turkish authorities is no different to what you have experienced in other parts of the world. Therefore you will quickly find that the ship owners will be confronted with their requirements and it is therefore very important to address the issues imposed by them and all the more reason why prompt decisions are necessary in firstly recognizing the importance of contracting a Turkish salvage company to render assistance. Irrespective of the contractual terms, having a Turkish salvor contracted as soon as possible will ensure a much more smoother operation as will be highlighted during Murat’s presentation on some case studies.
  • Moving on from here and AFTER AWARDING A SALVAGE CONTRACT, DECISION PROCESS SHOULD BE to nominate ETC, who will be there to fully protect owner’s interest throughout the operation. Therefore if you do not already have in your standard procedures contacts covering all these points we can obviously introduce you to companies that provide these services. These are just a few words of advice that we can provide for this presentation but we can be available elaborate further in a separate discussion. This now leaves me to pass the presentation over to MURAT DALYAN who will talk to you about two cases where we have been contracted, one being a wreck removal in BANDIRMA, the other being a collision in AEGEAN SEA. Both of this case studies will also highlight the involvement of the local authorities and where we held a strong position in satisfying their requirements imposed throughout.
  • Good afternoon, I would also like to take this opportunity of thanking BDM for inviting us to make this presentation today and I hope the following case studies will be of some interest. First case and no, it’s not a whale in the Aegean sea but the hull section of the HAYAT-N.
  • The HAYAT N was a RORO vessel of XXXX tonnage, XXXX built, SOME MORE DETAILS SOME MORE DETAILS. SOME MORE DETAILS. CARGO, FUEL OILS, LOSS OF LIFES.
  • SOLAR SALVAGE were contracted by one of the P&I clubs in London for the removal of the HAYAT N which was on BIMCO Wreckhire conditions with our methodology of cutting the vessel in situ after having taken all fuel oils, contaminants etc. initially the whole operation was to take approximately 7 months but due to severe weather conditions, not normal for this area the operation in fact lasted 300 day.
  • As said project commenced with the removal of all fuel contaminants and with our team of in excess of 30 divers, this phase of the operation was completed very quickly. Thereafter the whole cutting and removal operation involved 11650 dives during daylight hours.
  • After locating all the fuel tanks, sealing some certain areas, installing pump configurations we discharged a total of 80 tons fuel oils into individuals barrels placed onto the deck of our work barge.
  • During F/O removal phase, full spread of salvage equipment was mobilized to location.
  • One of the biggest problems caused as a result of the planned methodology was weather conditions and in and out going traffic in the port of Bandirma. At this point I would add that due to the cabotage laws the lack of equipment available under Turkish flag meant the only way of removing this wreck was through conventional cutting. As a result of this, there was much time lost due to weather and tracffic control restrictions.
  • Here again our friendly whale and in the background you can see the type of vessels coming in and out of Bandirma Port.
  • One of the next important phases is using our divers to cut a section in the side of the vessel, as the vessel is laying on her side in order to gain access to removal of the cargo. In total, we had 74 TRUCKS, 2 CARS, AND ABOUT 2000 TONS OF VARIOUS CARGO, mainly BORAX and scrap paper and unfortunately during this part of the operation, our divers recovered two bodies who were trapped inside their trucks at the time of the accident.
  • Another major part of the operation was cargo recovery from the lorries and the surrounding sea bed area and thereafter taking this into the port for ultimate disposal. This also included all the steel section that have been cut by the divers.
  • As the HAYAT N was a RORO vessel, it was impossible to refloat the vessel. The divers cut the vessel into large pieces until we reached the double bottom tanks where we were able to pressurize the lower section and take it as one section to the nearest scrap yard. Salvage services were then completed to the satisfaction of the club and local authorities.
  • The following case study is on a collision that happened in the Aegean Sea in June 2009 involving a container vessel and a bulk carrier loaded with 8000 tons of cement in bulk. The sequence of events surrounding case can be clearly seen from the pictures but I want to take this opportunity more on the problems we had with the authorities. The first problem was to find a port of refuge where we can discharge the cargo and bunkers to prevent a possible environmental threat. Unfortunately we do not have a SOSREP in Turkey like some other countries. So during such an accident you are totally left to the decision of a committee established by many people from different local authorities and some of them have totally no idea about salvage. Just to give an idea how many parties were involved for this problem I will give the list of members of the committee. Governor of the City Mayor of the city District manager of the environment and forests Coastguard Customs District manager of maritime administration Harbor master Coastal safety organization
  • In addition to this list you may easily add tens of Non Governmental Organizations’ representatives who are always ready to protest and everywhere. Following the signing of the LOF, the next day we have received a fax message from environmentalists containing 20 pages of signature of hundreds of people living in the island close to the casualty area. They were ready to stop us if we would try to tow the casualty to their area.
  • One has to deal with these authorities to satisfy all requirements where some of the requirements are meaningless and have no relation with the case.   We were so lucky that the weather and sea conditions were excellent whereas we have lost 2 days in dealing with the committee meetings.   After long discussions we got the permission to separate the vessels and take the heavily damaged one to a sheltered area down in South.
  • It was decided to cut the bulbous bow section in order to assist in the separation phase. We mobilized a salvage team, along with cutters.
  • The main problem of the authorities: They want us to discharge the oil They want us to separate the vessels They want us to take all the precautionary measurements They want us to keep the stability of the both vessels BUT The customs were not giving necessary permissions to discharge the bunkers The environmental authorities were not letting us the make the “sludge transfer” at the location The harbor master / environmental auths / coastguard were not letting us to damp part of the cargo at the location in order to keep the stability of the vessel.
  • ALL OF THEM WERE REFRAINING TO TAKE ANY DECISION AS THEY WERE ALL SEEING THIS OPERATION VERY RISKY. IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG THEY HAVE TO GIVE SOME EXPLANATIONS TO THE HIGHER RANKS.
  • There was about 250 tons of FO in the tanks of the bulker, which was in sound condition. Before taking any action we were instructed to remove the oil from the vessel. In order to transfer the FO to another vessel we were in need of obtaining permission from the harbour master, customs authorities and environmental authorities. On top of this you have to make this transfer under the supervision of customs. The oil has to be kept on a separate barge until such time that it can be transferred back to the vessel the alternative was to sell the FO for disposal.
  • In view of these options we declared the whole bunker as sludge and transferred it to a sludge barge. This was the quickest and cost effective way of getting rid of the authorities not the fuel.   After bunker transfer we looked for alternative ports for cargo discharge operation. First we had been accepted by the Dikili port that is located more south, and we towed the vessel to that area. The next day Dikili harbor master and port management presented a list of requirements, which was impossible to comply with. In fact upon having confirmation from Dikili port we have made necessary agreements and paid in advance all the relevant costs. We understood that some of the authorities together with some environmental Non Governmental Organizations at that area, applied pressure to the harbor master and Dikili port management. Another option was to apply to Izmir port management and Izmir authorities. In the first instance we have been permitted to berth the vessel for the intended discharge of the cargo. But before berthing the vessel there we were asked by the port management to present all relevant p&I policies, they also required confirmation messages from the clubs stating that the covers are still continuing without any problem etc. This was not enough for them; we have been asked, as a salvage company, to present them a letter clearly stating that we were accepting all kind of responsibilities if the things get worse. We have consulted with our underwriters and followed their instructions. However the discharge process could not even start as the local authorities were bound with the decisions taken by the first committee in Dardanelles. During the first committee meeting they took some decisions some of them were irrelevant at the second and further phases of the operation.   According to the first committee meeting we had to submit a report from the university stating that xxxx mtons of cargo should be discharged to keep the vessel in stable condition. The authorities never accepted our naval architects’ reports as it was already stated in first committee report that a “UNIVERSITY REPORT” was required, this caused a further delay of four days whilst this was being arranged.   We have submitted this report to the district management of maritime authorities who then sent this report to their surveyors. These surveyors visited the vessels once again and discussed with our naval architects. Although some of the surveyors were also naval architects they have never worked in a salvage operation and had no clue about what is going on what we were doing. After satisfying their requirements of the harbor authorities we were thinking that we might commence discharge operation. We were so naïve to believe that we can solve the problems so QUICKLY.   GUESS WHAT we were stopped by the customs. As the cargo was exported from Turkey and the discharge port was a foreign port, customs authorities stated that we do not have the right to discharge it in Turkey.   It took several more days to convince them that we are not discharging the sound cargo and it is only damaged cargo to keep the vessel’s stability. It was hard for them to give any decision as they were also do not like the idea of taking risk as we might damp the cargo and left it at the area.
  • Finally we got all the permissions and commenced the discharge operation of the damaged cargo. The next day we were visited by the environmental authorities we were claiming that we were damaging the environment by discharging the cargo. It was great fun, we have asked them if they would prefer to damp same into the sea, or alternatively if we could wait long enough they would have a nice wreck at Izmir port. THEY LEFT. The next day we have been visited by the customs authorities, they were accusing us discharging sound cargo. They were so lazy that they had not checked which vessel was discharging what kind of cargo. There were two other vessels at the same berth discharging bulk cement. Together with them we visited the other vessels and CONVINCED theme that we were only discharging damaged cargo.
  • During the temporary repairs we have faced with similar kind of problems raised by the customs and environmental authorities. In order to effect temporary repairs at the same berth you have to get permission from environmental authorities, customs authorities, harbor master, district manager etc etc.
  • As a last word; we are aware that part of the above problems can be seen in all countries. The main problem is dealing with the committees. You have to convince all the participants. Dealing with a SOSREP would be much more easy, but this is what we have. And we are very well aware how to deal with the authorities and committees.
  • The convoy departed Izmir for Gemlik for the discharge of the undamaged cargo, thereafter onward towage to Tuzla for repair. I hope these case studies were of interest to you and highlight the potential problems you and we as salvors will encounter in the future. I would welcome any questions from the floor during question time.
  • Scofield

    1. 2. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com <ul><li>SALVAGE AND WRECK REMOVAL OPERATIONS IN TURKEY </li></ul><ul><li>INTRODUCTION by ALAN SCOFIELD </li></ul><ul><li>CASE STUDIES by MURAT DALYAN </li></ul>
    2. 3. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com MONOPOLY ZONE
    3. 4. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com <ul><li>MONOPOLY </li></ul><ul><li>OUTSIDE MONOPOLY </li></ul><ul><li>CABOTAGE RULES </li></ul><ul><li>CONTRACT ONLY WITH TURKISH REGISTERED COMPANIES </li></ul><ul><li>ONLY TWO RECOGNISED PRIVATE SALVAGE COMPANIES </li></ul><ul><li>CONTRACTUAL TERMS </li></ul>
    4. 5. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com <ul><li>TURKISH AUTHORITIES </li></ul><ul><li>HARBOUR AUTHORITIES </li></ul><ul><li>ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORITIES </li></ul><ul><li>OTHER AUTHORITIES (COASTGUARD, CUSTOMS) </li></ul>
    5. 6. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com DECISION PROCESS <ul><li>LOCAL CORRESPONDENTS </li></ul><ul><li>LAWYERS </li></ul><ul><li>SURVEYORS </li></ul>
    6. 7. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    7. 8. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    8. 9. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    9. 10. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    10. 11. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    11. 12. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com 80 tons of F/O recovered and disposed
    12. 13. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com Full diving support vessels Crane barge Tugs Pollution booms
    13. 14. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com 24 Hour watch keeping due to proximity of the operation Continued disruption of operation due to weather and port operations
    14. 15. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    15. 16. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com <ul><li>74 TRUCKS </li></ul><ul><li>2 CARS </li></ul><ul><li>APPRX 2000 TONS OF VARIOUS CARGO </li></ul>
    16. 17. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    17. 18. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com CARGO RECOVERY SEA BED CLEANING CUT STEEL SECTIONS ULTIMATE DISPOSAL
    18. 19. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    19. 20. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    20. 21. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    21. 22. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    22. 23. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    23. 24. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    24. 25. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    25. 26. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    26. 27. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    27. 28. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com 1550 tons of wet/ solidified cement discharged
    28. 29. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    29. 30. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com
    30. 31. www.solarsalvage.com www.beaufortsalvage.com

    ×