Download - Royal Australian Navy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

12 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN AUGUST 2002 an opportunity for survey work by the relevant classification society. In addition, these societies are being provided with detailed design packages for design approvals, consulted on repair proposals and contacted for general technical advice. However, with classification being a fairly new process, the involvement of these societies may not be fully understood and may appear to some to be additional cost and overhead without adding value. In broad terms, a classification society’s main role is to issue Certificates of Class. These certificates indicate compliance with a rule set relevant to the ship type. These rules provide for the structural strength and watertight integrity of the hull, the operation and functioning of machinery and associated systems on board as well as the effectiveness of other defined features and systems built into the ship to establish and maintain basic conditions on board. Ships can either be built to class, that being they are constructed in accordance with the classification society rule set, or existing ships can be brought into class while in service. The owner is then to decide whether the ship will be maintained in class, and if so, assign a survey program to do so. Other than the basic Certificate of Class, classification societies also have the authority to issue statutory certificates on behalf of the Flag state. Statutory certificates indicate compliance with International Maritime Organisation (IMO) regulations, which include Safety Of Life At Sea (SOLAS) and Marine Pollution (MARPOL) regulations. Since the RAN is its own flag state, classification societies issue certificates of compliance on behalf of the RAN. In addition certain classification societies, such as Lloyds have developed specific rule sets for “Naval classification” which allows Navies to be freed from the limitations of statutory requirements, and are far less constrained and so able to address the requirements of navies and naval ships in a flexible yet authoritative way. Indeed, experience to date has certainly demonstrated a good level of flexibility by all class societies in order to accommodate for the unique nature and function of naval vessels. Classification vs. Certification The driver for implementing a classification process stems from RAN policy as set out in ABR 5454 RAN Regulatory Framework and Certification Manual and DI (N) LOG 47-3 Technical Regulation of <strong>Navy</strong> Materiel. These documents refer to ‘Certification’ as meeting a ‘Certification Basis’ which is the suite of certificates identified as being necessary to deem a ship is safe, environmentally compliant and fit for purpose. This suite of certificates includes the certificate of class and any statutory certificates which when issued by a third party can be used as objective evidence that the vessels meet the requirements. Therefore the classification process is the initial step in attaining overall Certification. DI(N) LOG 47-3 is based on 6 key points, one of which states “the RAN is to benchmark performance against world best practice, adopting, as far as practicable, the standards and processes used in comparable civilian circumstances and developing, adapting or adopting the best of international civilian and military practice”, this is where classification societies come into play bringing with them merchant shipping expertise. This is particularly important for the AASFEG vessels due to the lack of a defined functional baseline, and therefore the ability to ensure ‘design integrity’ as required by the DI (N). Also as external agencies, the RAN ensures the integrity of an independent third party verifier. Progress of Classification within AASPO AASSPO is currently utilising classification societies to bring existing ships into class, some of which have had no classification society type rules applied in either their construction or on going maintenance. As a result, there will be significant noncompliances with classification rules of which some have already been identified. In this case, the class society has been tasked with assessing the risk to be posed by the non compliance and the decision is then passed on to the RAN to accept the risk or take measures to rectify the non-compliance. In this way the RAN moves to align with more commercial standards and is able to benchmark against world’s best practice while still maintaining overall authority in the process. The current status of the classification process within the SPO is as follows: • WESTRALIA: built and maintained to class with Lloyds Register • TOBRUK: Recently issued with Certificate of Class by Lloyds Register. • SUCCESS: Currently under survey with Bureau Veritas anticipated Certificate of Class to be issued in July 2002 • LPAs: Currently under survey by Det Norske Veritas anticipated Certificates of Class to be issued by end 2002 • LCHs: 4 are in class with Lloyds Register, the remaining two to be in class by end of 2002. • Young Endeavour: Currently under survey by Lloyds Register anticipated Certificate of Class by October 2002. About the Author An Engineer who joined DMO in 1999 under the Graduate Acquisition Trainee Engineer program. Currently working for the Amphibious and Afloat Support Systems Program Office within the Major Surface Ships branch, and is the Certification Manager for the vessels within the SPO. She has previously worked as Project Engineer with the RAAF Hornet Upgrade and F- 111 Simulator projects.
NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN AUGUST 2002 13 Legal Liability Of Commonwealth Employees Exercising Engineering Authority BY CDRE TIM BARTER CHIEF NAVAL ENGINEER A number of inquiries have been received regarding the legal liability of naval engineers and the requirement for professional indemnity insurance. The following advice is provide and is based on information provided in RAAF technical regulatory manuals and is equally applicable to Naval engineers. This advice will be included in <strong>Navy</strong> Technical Regulatory manuals being developed under project HELP. Naval technical personnel may be delegated specific authority to make engineering decisions. Currently there are short comings in the instructions that detail the process of assigning engineering authority in the RAN and associated requirements such as requirements to record engineering decisions. However, any person making an engineering decision should recognise that they are accountable for their decisions or the decisions of staff who make decisions on their behalf. This, raises the question of the legal liability of these employees. Force Discipline Act for ‘negligent performance of duty’, or • the liability (civil or criminal) of staff employed by contractors . Legal Liability of Commonwealth Employees Negligence Negligence is the failure to exercise the degree of care that is required by law in the particular circumstances. The purpose of the law of negligence is to enable a person who has suffered damage (personal injury, property the claim (the plaintiff) must show that ‘it is more likely than not’ that the defendant’s act or omission was a cause of their injuries. In summary, a person will only be liable for negligence if the following conditions are met: • the law requires a degree of care to be exercised in the particular circumstance; and • the person fails to exercise this degree of care; and • their failure to exercise the degree of care results in damage (loss) to another person. This article provides an overview of the law relating to negligence and civil liability as it applies to Commonwealth employees who exercise engineering authority (EA) by way of making engineering decisions. This includes both members of the ADF and civilian employees of the Department of Defence. Specifically, it does not address: • actions that may be taken under the relevant Crimes Act for ‘criminal negligence’, • charges that may be preferred under section 35 of the Defence Negligence can occur by either an act or an omission. damage or economic loss) through another person’s negligence to receive compensation to recoup that loss. Negligence can occur by either an act or an omission. Whether particular conduct amounts to negligence depends on the facts of each particular case. To prove negligence the person bringing Vicarious Liability In general, a person is legally responsible for damage that results from their acts or omissions. However, it is an established principle of law that where an employee, acting in the normal course of their duties, is negligent and causes damage giving rise to an action, it is the employer, not the employee, that the courts will hold
Page 1: NAVY ENGINEERING ISSUE 3 AUGUST 200
Page 4 and 5: 2 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN AUGUST
Page 64 and 65:
62 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN AUGUST
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
show all

Download - Royal Australian Navy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?