As s e s s me nt o f Ic e bre ake rs
2017.06.16
This proposal is business sensitive to DNV GL and is being transmitted to Estonian Maritime
Administration as confidential. No part of the proposal may be duplicated or used, or
disclosed for any other purpose than to evaluate this proposal.
DNV GL © 2014 Safer, smarter, greener
DNV GL © 2014
Proposal title DNV GL AS
P.O. Box 300
Assessment of Icebreakers 1322 Høvik, Norway
Tel: +47 67 57 99 00
http://www.dnvgl.com
Org. No: NO 945 748 931 MVA
Customer Estonian Maritime Administration
Customer Address
Customer Reference
Contact Person Rene Arikas, Director of the Estonian Maritime Administration (EMA).
DNV GL Legal Entity DNV GL AS
DNV GL Reference
Date of Issue: 16 June 2017
Validity of Proposal 4 weeks from date of issue
Terms and Conditions DNV GL standard terms & conditions for technical due diligence services
Prepared by / Contact Person Position Signature
Richard Tao Discipline Leader, DNV GL Maritime
Approved by Position Signature
Ellen Olsvik BDL, DNV GL Maritime
DNV GL © 2014
Background and Purpose
§
Estonian Maritime Administration (EMA) is in charge of the government
owned vessels which include two icebreakers.
– “Tarmo” was built in 1963
– “Eva316” was built in 1980
§
All countries in the Baltics have icebreaker capacity to ensure open
waterways during cold winters, and the EU are supporting the smallest
countries with special funding if proven necessary to maintain or further
develop their local services.
§
The two icebreakers managed by EMA are getting older, the oldest close to
65 years. It is a challenge to get spares and qualified support for old systems.
The vessels are not classed, and inspection , maintenance and operation are
handled by EMA internally.
§
Ice breaker “Botnica” which was built in 1998 to DNVGL class and currently
still in Class has been excluded in this proposal.
§
EMA is looking to bring more competence into its organization and finding a
better balance between “in house vs hired” capabilities. It is the intention of
EMA to work on a specific program to change this in the future.
§
The remainder of this presentation outlines how Maritime Advisory in DNV GL
(the consultant, DNV GL) plan to undertake such a project and detail the
scope of such a project.
DNV GL © 2014
Click icon to add picture
DNVGL Support
Click icon to add table
DNV GL © 2014
Working method – frame work
A: B: C: D:
Technical condition Vessel management Fleet replacement Docking support
assessment audit and decision support
What benchmarking
Step 1: Step 2: Step 3: Step 4: Step 5:
Preparations and Document review Condition Life extension, Docking and
planning assessment and fleet replacement upgrade support
audit
How
Perform
Agree on Review vessel and Life extension Verification of
boundaries of relevant company analysis, repair in
study documents audits assessment docking yard
Plan
Prepare Perform Docking
upcoming Recommenda
checklist and technical Project
workshops / tions
audit program inspections Management
site visits
Fleet
replacement
decision
support
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 1 Preparations and planning
–
Establish relationship between Client and Consultant organisation/teams.
–
Meeting with key stakeholders to clarify expectations
–
Introduction of DNV GL Life Extension Program principal and methodology, collecting key documents for the
project
– Clarifications on Project Details, Method, Approach
– Discuss Schedule and Deliverables
–
Set up system for virtual database for exchange of documents, drawings etc.
–
Identify relevant documentation
–
Establish timelines for various activities
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 2 Document review
§
Document Review
–
Review of vessel drawings
– Hull and machinery drawings
– Layout and safety drawings
–
Reports
– Docking reports
– UTM reports
– Inspection reports
–
Records/Data
– Vessel trading history and performance data
– Marine machinery system performance data
– Vessel damage and repair
– Maintenance history, Other reports as deemed necessary
–
This phase focuses on establishing the existing condition of the vessel by
review the relevant documentation. DNV GL © 2014
Typical resource requirement
§
A classification of required systems evaluation as below:
Hull Integrity
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 3 Condition assessment
§
Technical condition assessment
–
A condition assessment survey indicates actual condition of the vessel and its suitability
for operations. The inspection may also reveal areas of attention and minor
improvements required to operate the ship further. The templates developed during the
preparation stage shall be used to document the condition on board.
–
In cooperation with the client clearly define what should be inspected and generate an
inspection plan
–
Carry out the inspection, document the inspection including evaluation of findings and
rating of various items on board
–
Survey of special systems
§
Reporting –
A rating system for evaluation of different items and for future use shall be separately
–
Following all the different phases as developed.
outlined above, a draft report to be presented to the
client. The draft report shall underline all the relevant findings and recommendations.
–
The draft report shall indicate corrective actions that needs to be attended to
immediately and actions that need attention in due course and general
recommendations over the extended life time of the vessel.
–
Once the key recommendations from the final reports are addressed or if actions for
carrying out the key recommendations are outlined, DNV GL MA may issue a final report
with closing of findings and handling of recommendations or actions in place to handle
the recommendations.
–
A reporting system for future use shall be separately developed.
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 3 – Management/Vessel Audit
§
Management audit
–
A safety management manual shall be developed if not in existence.
–
Manual shall identify the procedures and systematics to be followed during the
vessel inspections, on board operations and maintenance from ashore as well as
onboard.
–
An audit plan shall be developed
–
Interview with onboard and shore personnel shall be carried out.
–
A system shall be developed separately for logging in the various activities, records,
procedures and actions followed for maintenance of the vessel on shore as well as
on board.
§
Reporting
–
Following the audit, a report shall be presented to the Client.
–
The report shall highlight key areas for improvement and immediate actions to
be taken.
–
A reporting system for future use shall be separately developed.
DNV GL © 2014
Vessel management audit (1)
Vessel management audit scope:
Review (documents & interviews) based on the DNV GL Fleet Management Benchmark Tool with focus on the following
functions:
§
Maintenance management
§
Docking management
§
Project management
§
QHSE (including Safety Management System and Risk Management)
DNV GL © 2014
Vessel management audit (2)
Each function will be reviewed with regards to the following subfunctions:
2 Maintenance management & asset integrity 5 QHSE
2.1 Goals & requirements 5.1 Safe operations (Safety Management System)
2.2 Maintenance plan 5.2 Emergency preparedness
2.3 Planning & execution 5.3 Continuous improvement
2.4 Inventory management 5.4 Risk management
2.5 Reporting & analysis 5.5 Environmental Protection
3 Docking Management 9 Project management
3.1 Management & organisation 9.1 Project coordination
3.2 Pre-planning phase 9.2 Project planning
3.3 Detailed planning & preparation phase 9.3 Project execution
3.4 Drydocking execution phase 9.4 Project control
3.5 Closing phase 9.5 Project close out
3.6 Drydocking performance 9.6 Project management performance
9.7 New building projects
Reporting:
A report will be supplied with observations and recommendations with regards to the selected management functions.
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 4 – Life extension assessment
§
Analysis & benchmarking
–
Regulatory framework applicable for similar ship types.
–
Findings analysis to identify survey findings (damages)of similar type of the
vessel in DNVGL fleet and give an input to critical areas in the study.
–
Benchmarking of various systems and components on board with risk levels.
–
A typical example is given on the next slide. The final parameters shall be
agreed together with the client.
–
The key focus areas could be availability, maintainability and efficiency.
–
Based on the results from benchmarking and the corresponding risk levels, a
maintenance plan shall be developed for future as well as identify immediate
actions.
–
This step would also reveal the need for replacement, modification or continued
maintenance for various systems
§ and components
Decision supporton board.
–
The results from Step 1 –Step 4 should give an indication on the feasibility to run the
vessels as is and approximate costs required to continue running the vessels.
–
If not feasible to maintain, the possibility to procure used vessels shall be considered
with possible candidates for conversion into ice breakers.
–
Possibility for new builds shall also be considered following steps 14.
DNV GL © 2014
Proposed Methodology
Analysis and Benchmarking
A high level example of such a framework, reflecting the key parameters would look like :
Functions
Availability Efficiency Maintainability Rating Comment
Type Code Name
Function group xxx Main electric power
Function group xxy Main electric power generation
xxy.1 Generator driver Definition for the parameters:
xxy.2 Coupling
Availability – Is the system “available” as required?
Focuses on functionality and operability of systems and components with a
focus on utilisation
xxy.3 Gear
Maintainability – Can the system be maintained easily?
xxy.4 Shafting The ease with which a system component can be maintained, including
supply of spare parts and supportability. Related to downtime in
xxy.5 Generator maintenance as well.
xxy.6 Supporting structure Efficiency – Is this fit for purpose & performing as expected?
The effectiveness with which a system performs, with respect to the
designed performance, or with respect to the performance needed for the
purpose.
…
Function group xxx Safety, other
Function group xxy Helicopter safety arrangements
§ xxy.1 Helicopter pickshall
The parameters for benchmarking up area
be concluded together with client.
§
The weighting of parameters shall follow client inputs i.e. Safety, Maintenance etc.
xxy.2 Obstaclefree sector
§
DNVGL would ideally like client to follow the project during its entire duration and be available for clarifications
xxy.3 Rescue equipment
xxy.4 Wind direction indicator
DNV GL © 2014
xxy.5 Marking
Work scope – step 4 Fleet replacement decision support
§
Newbuilding specification defining support
§
Operational assessment
§
Workshop for defining ships operational profile
§
Defining operational conditions for the basis of
design and specification
§
Support for selecting class notation
§
Ice class selection support
§
Winterization requirements defining and
winterization options planning
§
Polar Code assessment for newbuilding (eventually
other vessels as well)
§
Specification of the relevant national and
international regulations that might have effect on
vessel’s design
§
Mapping of other relevant functions for the vessel
e.g.
DNV GL © 2014
Work scope – step 5 Docking and upgrade support
Docking project management support B.) During drydocking phase:
A.) Preparation and tender phase:
§
Project management and supervision during DD
§
Cost and progress follow up
§
Follow up of subsuppliers
§
Review current docking management process and §
Field reporting during DD
performance and establish GAP with industry best §
Inspection of work performed by yard and sub
practice suppliers
§
Safety audits during DD
§
Provide recommendations for DD performance §
Testing and seatrials prior to departure from yard
improvement activities §
Settling of final yard bill
§
Assist with creation of:
DD procedures including DD process description C.) DD Closure and evaluation phase:
with timeline (including yard safety)
Project risk assessment and management §
Drydocking report:
Planning of long lead spares and services technical (scope performed)
DD specification financial
DD budget service & test reports
DD tender invitation certificates
Pre DD Yard QHSE Audit §
DD performance evaluation
Tender evaluation review and yard selection (process/cost/time/quality/safety)
Repair agreement with selected yard §
Yard performance evaluation
DD Field report template (progress, cost, time, §
Archiving of DD documentation
QHSE, etc.)
Variation order template (for additional work during
yard stay)
DNV GL © 2014
Value delivered
Support on
technical
competence on all
disciplines
Independent
Recommendation for
assessment of
future areas of
effectiveness of
improvement
technical integrity
Benchmarking of
results against
industry best
practice
DNV GL © 2014
Safeguarding life, property
and the environment
www.dnvgl.com
Safer, smarter, greener
DNV GL © 2014
Dsse
From: Flagstad-Andersen, Tuva Kristine [mailto:
[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:30 PM
To: Rene Arikas <
[email protected]>
Cc: Eknes, Arnstein <
[email protected]>; Tao, Xiao Gang Richard <
[email protected]>;
Peetsalu, Jaanus <
[email protected]>
Subject: Assessment of Icebreakers
Dear Rene,
It was nice seeing you in Oslo in connection with Nor-Shipping!
With reference to your discussion with Arnstein, our advisory unit has put together a proposal for scope
related to the assessment of icebreakers. Please have a look and give us your comments/ feedback if this
is in line with your thoughts, and we can tune accordingly (add/ remove/ change scope).
Have a nice day, and talk to you later!
-tuva-
Best regards
for DNV GL Oy Ab
Tuva K. Flagstad-Andersen
Area Manager
Area Finland, Russia & Baltics
E-mail
[email protected]
Mobile +358 504120191 | +47 911 09 669
www.dnvgl.com | LinkedIn
**************************************************************************************
This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property
rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further
full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited.
**************************************************************************************