MARINE FIRE SAFETY

Objectives:
1. The International framework for standards on fire protection. Commonwealth Legislation State Legislation how it relates to Commonwealth and between States Developing appropriate standards for coastal vessels the NSCV Typical fire safety systems

2. 3.
4. 5.

International Maritime Organisation

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is a UN body dealing with marine safety. The IMO develops a range of codes / standards: The IMO has:
General assembly (all countries) Council (executive management) Committees

In relation to fire safety, the Committee concerned is the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) The MSC has a fire protection sub- committee

 There is a hierarchy of standards produced by IMO:

Conventions ( SOLAS relates to fire)
These are adopted under particular criteria eg SOLAS -entry into force requires acceptance by 25 States whose merchant fleets comprise not less than 50 per cent of the world's gross tonnage

IMO Instruments

Circulars (specific advice / interpretation that is more detailed or refines a convention) Circulars relating to fire safety are produced by the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC)
Eg MSC/Circ 776 Guidelines for the approval of equivalent fixed gas fire extinguishing systems for machinery spaces and cargo pump rooms

Codes eg the Fire Safety System Code detailed specifications (eg fire extinguishers) Codes Fire Test Procedure Code details of testing procedures for fire products

Commonwealth Legislation
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) provide input for Australia on technical standards developed by IMO Once an IMO Convention comes into force, the Commonwealth makes legislation to enforce the convention. Generally, Fire Safety comes under the Navigation Act 1912 and Marine Orders made under the Nav Act.

Marine Orders.
Marine Orders Part 15 simply says SOLAS is the standard to adopt. It then flows on that all lesser documents under SOLAS (Circulars, Codes) become law under Marine Orders Part 15 SOLAS is primarily relevant to ships not boats MO Part 15 says that the USL Code applies to vessels that are not SOLAS vessels. This relates to vessels up to 35 metres / 500GRT operating on intra and inter state voyages.

USL Code
There is a need for a different standard for smaller commercial vessels rather than SOLAS this is the Uniform Shipping Law Code (USL Code) The USL Code was made by the Australian Transport Council in the 1970s. It is a watered down version of IMO and Classification Society rules that made practical rules for small coastal vessels. All States were involved in formulating the USL Code, and once finalised, all States made legislation enforcing the USL Code.

Problems with the USL Code

1. 2. 3. The formation of the USL Code did not include a review and update process so it became out of date. The Code was inflexible because it was highly prescriptive. The Code couldnt deal with new designs, novel craft etc The Code is ambitious because it tries to deal with a large range of vessels under one set of rules. The Code is applied differently in States due to different interpretation of requirements. The Code is applied differently in States due to political, legislative and local requirements. This led to a Inter-Governmental Agreement in 1997 that agreed to review the USL Code using a new body called the National Marine Safety Committee.

4.
5.

6.
7.

The NMSC / NSCV

The NMSC is gradually overhauling the USL Code and developing a new document called the National Standard for Commercial Vessels (NSCV). The NSCV is designed to be more flexible and not outdate immediately. The NSCV covers not only vessel design but operator competency and safety management.

General philosophy of the NSCV

1. Get to the heart of what is trying to be achieved in the standard. 2. Set requirements for safety based on risk assessment principles and cost benefit analysis. 3. Provide a performance statements (safety outcomes) that are the non-negotiable safety outcomes. 4. Provide prescriptive solutions to meet the safety outcome but also accept equivalent solutions where an alternative means to the prescriptive measure can still meet the safety outcome.

The Fire Safety Section Development

NMSC appoint a project leader and reference group. A discussion paper is distributed defining problems with existing standard and examining fire casualties and identifying causes. A draft standard is produced based on discussion paper and responses and is finalised by reference group. A Regulatory Impact Statement is developed which describes the impacts, benefits costs that the proposed new standard will cause. The RIS and draft standard are distributed for general consultation. The reference group will consider the comment and propose a final draft of the standard. The standard must then be endorsed by the NMSC and the ATC The standard then still means nothing until States adopt it into legislation!

Benefits of this approach:

New technologies / materials can easily be accepted without changing the law. Novel craft and design features can be used without changing the law. Stakeholders understand what the standard is trying to achieve. The standard stays workable and flexible for longer periods without review. The Standard makes realistic requirements based on evidence received during risk assessments.

Benefits of this approach

It provides a prescriptive solution that provides good guidance in most cases. This gives comfort to designers, builders and regulators. (Cheapest option also) It allows for innovation providing a product, design or system can be rigorously proven to meet the safety outcome. This is the more expensive option and will only really be taken up where prescriptive solutions cannot be used or where large cost savings are derived from the alternative approach.

SAFETY OUTCOMES OF FIRE SAFETY STANDARD: 1. Prevention of explosive combustion 2. Control risks of spillage of flammable liquids 3. Control risks of ignition by sources of heat or sparks 4. Prevention of exposure to the smoke and heat of fire 5. Prevent or delay the spread of fire 6. Protection of essential systems 7. Reliability of fire systems

Safety Outcome eg Prevent or delay the spread of fire

Option 1 Deemed to satisfy solution (prescriptive) Eg You shall have either a Halon or CO2 fire extinguishing system Problem with USL Code Halon was banned and only left CO2 systems. These were inappropriate for some vessels. Regulators ended up making ad-hoc / inconsistent decisions.

Option 2 You dont like the deemed to satisfy solution , so you are free to devise and rigorously prove an alternative approach that achieves the safety outcome. For example Pyrogen style fire systems are being properly tested and will meet the requirements of the standard in a structured way

HOW IS RISK ACCOUNTED FOR?

Studies found fire risk (both probability and consequence) related to: 1. The nature of the space on the vessel engine rooms and galleys have highest incidence of fire. Larger engine rooms are a greater risk/ 2. The nature of the vessel operation tankers and passenger carrying vessels have far higher consequence if fire occurs. 3. Distance from Coast determines the level of external support that can be relied upon. Vessels operating further from the coast need to have better fire safety.

Vessel Risk Categories

Four fire risk categories are defined as follows Fire Risk Category I (lower risk) Fire Risk Category II (moderate risk) Fire Risk Category III (higher risk) Fire Risk Category IV (highest risk)

Class of vessel

Class A Unlimited domestic operations

Class B Offshore operations

Class C Restricted offshore operations

Class D Partially smooth waters

Class E Smooth waters

Class 1 length of vessel Class 1: 13 to 36 day pax Class 1: 37 to 450 day pax Class 1: 451 & more day pax Class 1: 13 to 36 berthed pax Class 1: 37 & more berthed pax Class 2Length of vessel Class 2 Fire risk category Class 3Length of vessel Class 3 Fire risk category

< 35 m III III IV III IV < 35 m II All lengths II

<35 m II III IV III IV All lengths II All lengths II

All lengths II II III II III All lengths I All lengths I

All lengths I II III II III All lengths I All lengths I

All lengths I II II II III All lengths I All lengths I

Risk categories of spaces on vessels

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. High Risk Moderate Risk Accommodation Spaces Minor Risk Control Stations Escape and Evacuation routes

Where doubt exists or compartment is multi use higher risk level applies

Space category Description 1. High Fire Risk Spaces Spaces where, without appropriate controls, the likelihood and consequence of fire are high. Typically within such spaces, there is: potential for the spillage or escape of potentially dangerous quantities of inflammable liquid or explosive vapour, and the presence of one or more sources of heat or other sources of ignition.
Examples- Machinery spaces with IC engines, boiler spaces, carriage dangerous goods, flammable goods. Limits are set on magnitude.

2.

Moderate Fire Risk Spaces

Spaces that contain potentially dangerous quantities of inflammable liquids but where the sources of ignition have relatively low frequency, or contain heat sources or other sources of ignition but where the quantity or nature of material within the space to fuel a fire is such that the risk is significantly reduced, or

Examples Low power machinery spaces, electrical switchboard rooms, galleys, fuel pumping equipment etc

3. Accommodation Spaces that are likely to contain persons who: Spaces are unfamiliar with the vessel, may be asleep or disoriented at the time of an emergency, or may inadvertently or deliberately initiate a fire
Examples sleeping rooms, mess rooms, pantries, toilets, public rooms

Table 27 Fire-fighters outfits for sea-going vessels Fire risk Class A, B and C2 vessels category Minimum Minimum number of number of spare outfits charges I II III IV N/A N/A 31 31 N/A N/A 31 31

KEY: 1.Two sets are for the use of a rescue party. The third is available for backup person should the rescue party get into difficulties. 2.It is assumed that vessels operating in sheltered waters will have ready access to shore-based fire fighting personnel, see Part A of this standard for guidance on safety obligations and Part E for emergency preparedness.

Table 7 Structural Fire Protection for Fire Risk Category I

Category of space High fire risk spaces Moderate Accomfire risk modation spaces spaces Minor fire risk spaces Control Stations Escape and evacuati on routes. 6

30 High fire risk spaces

ST STNF 30 1 301 30 1,3

ST 301

ST 301

ST

30 1, 2

Nil Moderate fire risk spaces 2 STNF STNF Nil Nil

Nil Nil

Nil Nil

Nil

Examples of fire safety systems / measures