know-how about MODU code

1. The MODU code
overview

2. What is a MODU ?
 Mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) or unit is a vessel capable of
engaging in drilling operations for the exploration for or exploitation
of resources beneath the seabed such as liquid or gaseous
hydrocarbons, sulphur or salt.

3. Reasons for a specific code
Mobile units for the offshore industry are very special ships which
could not be constructed as normal ships under SOLAS requirements
Shape, operations, fire protection and or operations of specific
machineries
Specific operations like stationary or moving
Working with very flammable or dangerous goods must require
different conditions of contruction and management of operations

4. Why a different code of construction and management ?
Main reason: the offshore industry is a complex technology and is
rapidly evolving
So the code should be able to evolve also by re evaluation and
revew easily and rapidly as necessary
The grand’s father clause applies either

5. Purpose of such a code
The purpose of the Code for the Construction and Equipment of
Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODU code), 2009, is to
recommend design criteria, construction standards and other safety
measures for mobile offshore drilling units (any shape of hull) so
as to minimize the risk to such units, to the personnel on board and
to the environment.

6. The aim of the code is to provide an international standard for
MODU which will facilitate the international movement and
operations of these units and ensure a level of safety and pollution
prevention for such units and personnel on board equivalent to that
required by the SOLAS and MARPOL conventions.

7. Why only MODU ?
Mobile drilling units are not the only units working in the offshore
industry
 They are other mobile offshore units (MOUs) which may be involved in
any single offshore activity or combination of offshore activities such as
construction; maintenance (including the maintenance of wells); lifting
operations; pipe-laying and related operations; emergency/contingency
preparedness, including firefighting; production
systems; accommodations; storage systems; and diving.
Which follows similar requirements initiated by flag and classification
societies

8. MOUs do not include
.1 supply vessels;
.2 standby vessels;
.3 anchor-handling vessels;
.4 seismic vessels;
.5 ship-shape mono hull diving support vessels; and
.6 special purpose ships.
Which follows their own SOLAS requirements

9. Historical of MODU code
First MODU code was issued in 1979
Second one was adopted in 89 for application on MODU built after
May 91
Amended in 91
Then again consolidated in 2001
To day the MODU code 2009 applies and amendements are in
preparation for this year 2016

10. Compare to former 2001 edition:
new chapters in the 2009 edition
• Towing arrangements
• Anti-fouling systems
• Drainage and sediment
control
• Alternative design and
arrangements
• Elevating systems for self-
elevating units
Emergency escape breathing
devices
• Fire control plans
• Operational readiness and
maitenance
• Visual aids
• Motion sensing system
• exemptions

11. MODU code 2009
With futur amendements still in discussion after
the Deepwater Horizon disaster

12. contents
1. General/surveys and controls
2. Construction
3. Stabibility
4. Machinery installations
5. Electrical installations
6. Installations in hazardous
areas
7. machinery for self propelled
units
RUSSIAN

13. 8. Periodically unattended
machinery spaces
9. Fire safety
10. Live saving appliances
11.Radiocommunications
12. Lifting devices
13. Helicopter facilities
14. Operating requirements
• RUSSIAN

14. Chapter 1:Surveys and certification/no change
Any MODU is subjected to surveys for issuance, maintenance and
renewal of the MODU certificate (valid 5 years max)
In addition, two dry-dock surveys are mandatory during the 5 years
period of the certificate
Specific conditions of renewal of certificates apply

15. Chapter 2: Construction
The relevant construction, strength and materials are already
specified in the code but after the DWH disaster some amendements
are studied for re-enforcing the protection againts blast and specific
fire of hydrocarbons
A new class of fire bulkheads or decks has been prepared

16. New class of bulkheads is proposed
 "H 60" class divisions are those divisions which meet the same
requirements as "A 60" class divisions, as defined in SOLAS
regulation II-2/3, except that, when tested according to the Fire Test
Procedures Code, the furnace control temperature curve is replaced
with the furnace control temperature curve [for hydrocarbon fires]
defined in national or international standards*.
Therre is a possibility of »J » class bulkhead (jet fire) bulkhead also

17. Other propositions

18. Portable or other electrical
equipment
Better maintenance of portable electrical
equipment or other fixed electrical
equipmentwhich could have been part of the
causes of the blast: not really very new;
remember the blast on the chimical tanker
« Bow Mariner » due to bad operation of
portable torch lamp (change of battery):
meaning maintenance by qualfied personnel in
accordance with international standards
(international electrotechnical Commission)

19. To comment
As we will see later: the ISM code applies to self
propelled MODU and in its Chapter 10 criticity
of equipment must be evaluated and suitable
cautions must be taken: in our case due to the
proximity of possible flammable gas from the
well, specific automatic closure of air inlet should
have been working properly
(maintenance/frequent tests)

20. Protection of esacape routes: amendements of
appropriate heat radiation
Fire extinguishing arrangements for the drill floor
still in discussion
Equipment in hazardous areas should be treated
under the permit-to-work procedure

21. Malicious solution for PIC
The dual commande organizational structure for
MODU latched should be abandonned
When the DP system is used as a sole means of
position- keeping, the Master must be considered
as the PIC at all times

22. This is quite logic
The stupid organization having finally two master
on board has some problems and was a main cause
of delays in decision making in the DWH disaster

23. Proposed amendement for Resol 1079
Person in charge means the person on each MOU to whom all personnel
are responsible in an emergency. This person should be designated in
writing (with title) by the owner or operator (in the SMS). NB The pic can
be the OIM or the Master. But on unit that use dynamic positionning
systems as a sole means of psition-keeping, the master should be
designated as the person in charge at all times

24. Action of Fire and gas detection system
In case of units using DP systems as a sole means of psition keeping,
disconnection or shutdoawn of machinery and equipment associated with
maitaining the operability of the PD system should be based on a shitqdown logic
system designed to preserve the inegrity of the well and station keeping capability
Shutdown of grneratros and related power supply equipment neede for the
operation of the DP system should be divided into independent groups to allow
response to gas detection alarms while maintaining position keeping

25. Size of a crew member for the design of liferafts
LSA standard does not correspond to the Size of
typical offshore workers
LSA code uses 82,5Kg for crew member and a seat of
430mmm
Increase of wheight and dimensions for crew member
is proposed : 95 Kgs and 530mm

26. consequence
This is not a joke, size of liferafts should be
modified or
More lifeboats for the same crew!

27. Training liferaft
Instead of using a normal liferaft for training
purpose
It is envisaged to install a clearly marked
specific training liferaft for only training; it is
in complement of the normal ones.

28. remember
When conditions of training and drills with liferaft
are not possible
An alternative solution can be used (see
MSC.1/circ 1486)

29. consequences
These propositions bring important structural modifications and will
nomally apply to new constructions (a revised MODU code will be
issued – could be MODU code 2017 ? )
NB amendements to life-saving appliances could be required also to
existing MODU

30. Other Chapters
No modifications expected in the intact stability criteria and
freeboard
No modifications for radiocommunications, lifting devices or
helicopter operations as well as operations

31. Thank You