Page 58 - CHIRP Annual Digest 2017

CHIRP Maritime

Article. 44 but following the inspection someone (allegedly) paid the
inspector in order to pass. Most of the time harbour pilots
MARPOL violations and safety complain about the steering system of the vessel. On one
management failings occasion, we entered a river and the steering system failed
- the vessel almost grounded in shallow water. The pilot
wanted to report the incident to Port Control, but after the
OUTLINE: A reporter has alleged serious violations of MAR- Master (allegedly) paid the pilot the vessel continued to the
POL and corrupt practices with serious safety manage- berth. They hide the truth - the ship has had problems with
ment failings which CHIRP has passed to the flag state the steering gear for a long time. The vessel suddenly turns
authority for investigation. whilst in auto pilot and hand steering reportedly does not
work properly. Once in a congested traffic area the vessel
What the Reporter told us: lost steering and nearly collided with other ships in the
Since I joined the vessel I have observed several non-compli- vicinity. Repairs were attempted but we noticed they were
ances with MARPOL regulations. just experimenting by transferring the spare parts from
• After discharging vegetable oils, the vessel carried out steering system number 1 to number 2 and vice versa - we
tank cleaning and a mixture of noxious liquid substances still have steering problems.
and seawater was directly discharged to the sea using
a cargo hose from the ship’s manifold. The last cargo Another concern was the mooring winches which have two
was MARPOL II Category Y (pollution hazard) and even drums. On one of the winches one drum cannot be disen-
though the cargo was vegetable oil, it can still pollute gaged – it is very dangerous during mooring and unmooring
the sea and the requirements of MARPOL Annex II were operations, but has not been repaired. The company just
being violated. (Regulation 13 2.1.2 - the discharge must said it is for dry-dock work, but the lives of the crew engaged
be made below the waterline through underwater outlets, in mooring operations are still in great danger. If an accident
whilst not exceeding the maximum rate for which the happens to the crew, they are just not concerned for our
underwater discharge outlet is designed). This method safety. We have also family waiting for us at home.
of cleaning is being carried out every time the vessel
conducts a tank cleaning operation. I believe that my vessel is not the only one that has prob-
• Just before arriving at an anchorage I saw an engineer lems and that there are many others out there. Most are
discharging oily waste from the engine room directly into afraid to report deficiencies or malpractice, which takes
the sea without passing through the oily water separator. courage. I still believe that the priority must be the lives of
• The vessel was at anchor and a newly promoted engineer persons working on board, because without seafarers there
and duty oiler discharged oily waste directly to sea as is no shipping industry”.
ordered by the Chief Engineer. They believed that they
had no choice but to follow instructions or else they What the Third Party told us
would be sent home. On that occasion, the company’s As the report states, a company superintendent was in
Marine Superintendent saw the incident and did nothing attendance in at least one instance, so the reporter asked
to stop it. He is the company representative but instead CHIRP not to contact the Company. The reporter did, how-
of following the rules he was tolerating wrongdoings. ever, wish the report to be followed up and thus CHIRP con-
• At a different anchorage, oily residues were once again tacted the vessel’s Flag State, which investigated the MAR-
discharged. I have some videos that will prove that POL allegations.
MARPOL regulations were violated.
CHIRP Comment
In addition, the reporter advised the following; The discussion of this report by the Maritime Advisory Board
• A vetting inspection was carried out (which typically was wide ranging. It was agreed that there was potential for
occurs every six months on tankers). I was with the Port, Coastal and Flag State legal intervention, so all posi-
vetting inspector and he noted many major and detainable tions and geographical references have been removed from
deficiencies, for example: the report. The relevant Flag State has been informed and
o High/Overfill tank alarms not working properly; they have agreed to make their own investigation.
o Fixed Gas Monitoring system not working;
o Oil Discharge Monitoring Equipment not working – There are other details in the report given to CHIRP which
the inspector searched the equipment for a testing are not specifically safety related, and CHIRP is aware of the
date but this was not available. In the Oil Record involvement of both the International Seafarers Welfare and
Book, it was recorded as being tested monthly, and Assistance Network, (ISWAN), and the International Trans-
o Personnel including engineers were not familiar port Workers Federation, (ITF).
with the operation of the monitoring equipment.
The Board congratulated the reporter for his or her extremely
It was alleged that after the closing meeting following the brave action in submitting this report to CHIRP. Whatever
inspection, the inspector’s remarks and findings were not the outcome of this harrowing case, it demonstrates that
acted upon. The reporter advised “They just said to us that alleged illegal activity and serious management failings in
the vessel passed the inspection”. safety and environmental issues will be acted upon by CHIRP
and passed to appropriate authorities with a request for
The ship has been in other ports where Port State Con- their further investigation.
trol carried out inspections and noted major deficiencies,

57