this program. Calculations involving the data on Figures 2 and 4 are presented in Table 1 where vessel examinations and deficiencies for each country are compared as a percentage of the total number of examinations and deficiencies. Among the vessels of the six most frequently examined countries, Greece shows the largest negative spread (a higher percentage of total deficiencies than percent of total examinations) with Liberia exhibiting a slight negative spread and the other four countries either being equal or showing a lesser deficiency to examination percentage. A vessel's age grouping was contrasted with the overall number of deficiencies for that vessel to develop a deficiency distribution by age. Table 2 compares the age profile developed earlier with this deficiency distribution and reveals that the 50.4 percent of vessels in excess of ten years of age account for 75.5 percent of the deficiencies discovered in the administration of this program. The deficiencies shown in Figure 5 reveal the relative frequency of major deficiency types with cargo ventilation system deficiencies discovered at a rate twice that of the next nearest deficiency type. Similar to the age grouping in the overall distribution of deficiencies, the individual deficiency types exhibit a similar percentage distribution again using vessel's age as a basis. For example, between twenty to thirty percent of the deficiencies discovered in the ventilation system, cargo piping system, pump room, electrical system, and fire protection systems were found aboard vessels of less than ten years of age with the remaining seventy to eighty percent found on vessels older than ten years of age. The only one of the six major deficiency categories that did not exhibit as high a percentage favoring older tank vessels was in the area of cargo handling gear deficiencies. The distribution for this category was thirty six percent for vessels one to ten years old with the remaining sixty-four percent attributable to tankers over ten years of age. This is logical considering the vital role that the cargo handling system plays in the daily operation of a tank vessel. It is the attention given to this system, vice the others, that accounts for the closer percentage distribution between age groupings. An evaluation and enumeration of the deficiency types is as follows: Cargo venting system (2206 deficiencies) This singular area accounts for the largest number of deficiencies. The most common of these are (1) defective or missing flame screens, (2) defective or missing pressure/vacuum valves, (3) wasted and holed vent piping, and (4) wasted and holed vent masts and vent headers. The above four items have been reported with almost equal frequency. Cargo piping systems (1052 deficiencies) This includes both bunker fuel as well as cargo fuel piping systems with the main deficiency throughout the vessel being wasted, holed and leaking piping, flange, and spool piece connections. Cargo handling equipment (706 deficiencies) There are five discrepancies reported with equal frequency and a number of others of lesser frequency. The former include (1) inoperative cargo pumps or cargo pumps leaking excessively, (2) wasted and leaking steam piping to cargo pumps, (3) leaking, wasted or inoperative cargo valves, (4) inoperative stripping pumps and (5) cement boxes in way of wasted sea suction connections to ballast piping, while the latter group includes (1) inoperative cargo pump remote shutdowns, (2) inoperative gauges and cargo monitoring equipment and (3) leaking or inoperative cargo heating coils. Fire protection systems (476 deficiencies) There has been a variety of discrepancies in this area with items numbered one through five below being reported most frequently. The deficiencies are (1) wasted, missing and holed steam smothering system piping, (2) inoperative valves in steam smothering system, (3) inoperative fire dampers in pump room ventilation systems, (4) wasted and holed firemain system piping, (5) inoperative fire pumps and firemain valves, (6) missing firehose, (7) portable fire extinguishers missing or requiring service, (8) semi-portable CO2 systems requiring service, and (9) inoperative sprinkler systems or foam monitors. Pump room (612 deficiencies) The most frequently found pump room deficiencies consist of (1) the presence of excessive product in the bilges, (2) wasted and missing ventilation supply and exhaust ducting, and (3) missing or holed ventilation supply and exhaust duct flame screens. Other deficiencies found within the pump room areas include (1) inoperative bilge pumps and disconnected reach rods, (2) flammable materials and loose tools adrift, (3) defective pump room weather deck watertight doors, and (4) missiong or broken ladder rungs. Electrical systems (401 deficiencies) The electrical examination is concentrated mainly in the pump room areas and on the weather deck with the primary deficiencies being (1) defective explosion proof lights and junction boxes and (2) jury rigged wiring and installations. Other electrical deficiencies include (1) dead ended wiring, and (2) inadequate or non-approved lighting, such as, drop cords and fixtures with exposed light bulbs. Structural deficiency (136 deficiencies) The most frequently reported structural deficiencies are (1) cracks in the pump room bulkheads between the cargo tanks and the pump room, causing cargo leakage into the pump room, and (2) cracks and holes between the pump room and the engine room. Other structural deficiencies include (1) defective main deck watertight doors leading into deck houses, (2) cement boxes on hull and sea stuction valves, and (3) cracks in the main deck and superstructure bulkheads. Personnel protective equipment (74 deficiencies) The three common deficiencies are (1) missing fireman's outfits, (2) missing or defective explosive meters, and (3) missing fresh air breathing apparatus. Vital machinery (22 deficiencies) The noteworthy deficiencies include (1) defective emergency generator, (2) defective steering gear system, and (3) inoperative auxiliary generator. Life saving equipment (18 deficiencies) The deficiencies have centered about (1) missing liferings, (2) missing or inoperative lifering lights, and (3) defective lifeboats. Ship's ventilation system (11 deficiencies) The primary discrepancy has been wasted and holed ventilation ducting thereby permitting the egress of explosive vapors into the living spaces of the vessel. Navigation safety regulations (243 deficiencies) The major deficiency reported has been the lack of posted vessel maneuvering information and to a much lesser extent the lack of U.S. navigation publications and updated charts of the areas to be transited. The impact of this newly created program has caused considerable strain on existing U.S. Coast Guard personnel resources. Accordingly, the Coast Guard has requested and will receive during fiscal year 1978 approximately one-hundred additional inspectors for assignment to field offices for the foreign tanker examination program. The priorities for assignment of these personnel resources will primarily be determined by the level of activity of a particular Marine Safety Office or Marine Inspection Office. Table 3 indicates the frequencies of foreign tank vessel examinations at various ports throughout the United States. The list is not all inclusive and only shows the more active ports. The major question to be answered is "Has this new program during its brief infancy increased the overall safety level aboard foreign flag tank vessels"? Every two weeks the U.S. Coast Guard transmits a message to field units containing the names of those foreign flag tank vessels having outstanding deficiencies. Figure 6 shows the trend of that deficiency listing as compared with the total number of different vessels examined during the same period. It is quite evident that the resurgence, around 1 July 1977, in the number of vessels with deficiencies is due to the influence of the navigation safety regulations. Also, the diverging nature of the slopes of both curves indicates that more foreign flag tankers are coming out of the examinations deficiency free and those with deficiencies tend to be repeaters. The differences between the percent of vessels with deficiences from the beginning of the period to the present show an improving level of vessel safety. This argument is given further support by an evaluation of those vessels that have undergone multiple examinations since the program began in January. Table 4 shows the trend of the decreasing numbers of deficiencies, mainly for those vessels that have been examined on three or more occasions. |