NEWSLETTER FROM DNV TO THE BULK CARRIER INDUSTRY

NO. 2 – JUNE 2004

Bulk Carrier Update

DNV Customer Presentation:

Golden Union
■ IMO changes its mind
■ Timber deck cargoes
■ SOLAS revision
 IMO

Double skin – single skin The IMO changes

At the time of writing, the 78th session of the Marine Safety
Committee (MSC 78) has just come to an end. I dare say that
its mind on
the outcome of a MSC meeting has seldom been observed
with more interest by the world’s bulk carrier owners and
newbuilding yards.
Several Formal Safety Assessments regarding bulk carrier
double hull
safety have been carried out. No doubt these assessments
show the importance of ships’ sides and hatch covers and
how structural failure in these elements has often resulted in
bulk carriers
tragedies, especially involving ships designed and constructed
at the end of the 1980s and early 1990s. Stepwise improved
rules, greater attention to maintenance and enhanced survey
schemes have certainly contributed to the improved loss fig-
ures. Hopefully, the counter-measures taken will prove suc-
cessful.
The proposal regarding a mandatory requirement of dou-
ble side skin for bulk carriers of more than 150 m in length
At the 78th session of the IMO
was originally discussed at MSC 76 and further considered by
the Sub-Committee on Design and Equipment at its 47th ses- Maritime Safety Committee (MSC
sion (DE 47), held in February 2004. The DE 47 decided to 78), the proposed SOLAS CH XII
make no changes to the proposed requirements, thereby as drafted by the sub-committee
continuing on the suggested path towards mandatory double
side skin. It is important to keep in mind that there has never
on Design and Equipment (DE47)
been any discussion whatsoever regarding phasing out single in March of this year, which
skin bulk carriers in parallel on tankers. Single skin ships required future bulk carriers to
were supposed to serve until technically or economically be of double side skin (DSS) con-
worn out.
Several yards have started to design and construct double struction, was rejected and the
hull bulk carriers and it appears that the shipping world IMO ditched the plans to make
expected the double skin to be made mandatory. We see sev- double hulls mandatory as from
eral designs not only complying with existing rules but also
2006.
incorporating the expected ones.
However, the discussion at MSC 78 resulted in a turn-
around. The members voted, with a large majority, for double
side skin as a voluntary option. Although not made mandato-
ry, I believe the double side bulk carrier has come to stay.
New rules covering double side skin bulk carriers are
under development, and shipowners will of course retain the
option of ordering new ships with a single skin. These ships’
bulkheads must be reinforced to cope with cargo hold flood- The proposal was originally discussed at In its efforts to amend SOLAS Ch. lengths of 150 m and above the addi-
ing. For owners ordering new double side skin vessels, the MSC 76 and further considered by the Sub- XII, MSC 78 maintained its previous tional class notations ES (D, S18, S20)
flooding requirements will not apply until the amendments Committee on Design and Equipment (DE decision to keep the minimum dis- or ES (D, S17, S18, S20) on a volun-
to SOLAS Ch XII come into force in 2006. 47) at its 47th session when proposing con- tance between inner and outer skin tary basis. ES means enhanced
In the meantime, DNV will offer the additional class nota- sequential amendments to SOLAS Ch. XII. on future DSS bulk carriers at 1000 strength, D indicates Double hull, and
tion Enhanced Strength ES (D, S18, S20) or ES (D, S17, S18, The discussion at MSC 78 was very heat- mm. S17, S18 and S20 refer to IACS unified
S20) on a voluntary basis to double side skin bulk carriers ed, with some delegations wanting the DSS Although new rules covering DSS requirements: URS17, Longitudinal
and combination carriers that exceed 150 m in length and bulk carriers as an alternative to single side bulk carriers that are more than 150 strength of hull girder in hold flooded
are capable of withstanding cargo hold flooding. skin (SSS) ships of this type, while other del- m i n length and carry solid cargoes condition, URS18 Transverse bulk-
egations strongly argued for the DSS con- with a density of 1,000 kg per m3 will head strength considering hold flood-
cept. A new FSA study had been sponsored still be developed, shipowners will ing and URS20 Allowable hold load-
and this document was presented at the retain the option of sticking with ships ing considering flooding. This infor-
meeting. A substantial number of delega- of single-skin design. mation will be a part of the vessel’s
tions participated in the discussion, with an For shipowners that want to order class notation.
almost equal number of delegations for and DSS vessels, the flooding requirements
Ulf Freudendahl against mandating DSS bulk carriers. In the will not be mandatory until the Roald Vårheim/Arve Myklebust
DNV Business Director, end, the Chairman was forced to take a vote amended SOLAS CH XII comes into
Bulk Carriers to get a clear decision. The voting resulted force in 2006 at the earliest. In the
(Ulf.Freudendahl@dnv.com) in a clear majority for not mandating DSS meantime, DNV can offer DSS bulk
for bulk carriers in the future. carriers or combination carriers with

2 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 3

 Timber deck cargoes
Is there a problem with
timber deck cargoes?
Many masters/operators have discovered a conflict between the
damage stability requirements (SOLAS Ch II-1 Reg.25) and the
need to have a reasonable GoM value for the securing of the
cargo (avoiding excessive transverse accelerations). So the ques-
tion one has to ask is whether this is a problem related to contra-
dictory regulations, a design problem or not a problem at all!
To illustrate this, we will take a look at the limit-
ing GoM diagram, as found in the Trim and
Stability booklet, in Figure 1. (The main dimen-
sions of the example vessels are given in Table
1.)
The green curve is the minimum GoM curve
with respect to intact stability (IMO Res. A749).
The blue line represents the minimum GoM
curve with respect to damage stability. The dam-
age stability is computed based on the so-called
probabilistic method. This means that an
attained index “A”, reflecting the ship’s capabil-
ity of surviving collision damage, is computed
and found to be above the required index “R”
as stipulated by the regulations. The attained
index is calculated by carrying out systematic
damage stability calculations for two drafts, the
partial and full loads stipulated by the rules,
while the GoM values at these drafts may be
chosen during the design work based on the
intended loading conditions.
IMO resolution A.715(17) “Code of Safe
Practice for Ships Carrying Timber Deck Car-
goes” recommends, in relation to the carriage
of timber on deck, that the GoM value should
not exceed 3% of the vessel’s beam. This is
based on the fact that higher GM values will
give rise to high transverse accelerations and
may thus cause a shift or even loss of the deck
cargo. The red line in Figure 1 is positioned at
1m GoM, which represents 3% of a 31m beam.
Since the loading timber loading condition
needs to be on the right-hand side of the blue
“damage” curve and should preferably be to the
left of the red “acceleration” curve, this means
that the timber carrying “area” for this vessel is
“limited” to the yellow triangle in Figure 1. The
yellow dots represent typical timber conditions,
as shown in the Trim and Stability booklet pro-
vided onboard this vessel by the yard , which
shows much too high GoM values for a comfort-
able journey.
4 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004
Principal Dimensions Vessel 1 Vessel 2
LOA 189.9 185.7
Lpp 181 177
B 31 30.4
D
TDesign
TScantling
16.6
11.00
11.60
16.5
11.00
11.62
Table 1: Ship dimensions
Figure 1: Minimum GoM Curve, Vessel 1
In practice, this means that this vessel may
have problems with timber cargoes since it is
unlikely that she can take a full deadweight
cargo of timber and thus obtain this large draft.
The solution to this problem could be to carry
ballast water but, since most bulk carriers nowa-
days have connected double bottom and top-
wing tanks so that the GoM value would be
increased at the same time as the draft was
increased, this may be a problem. Hence, it is
important at the newbuilding stage to ensure
that the top wing tanks can be filled independ-
ently of the double bottom tanks in order to
control the GoM when timber carriage is
intended (thus increasing draft while reducing
GoM).
The curve above could be adjusted for tim-
ber carriage during the design of the vessel by
choosing more appropriate loading conditions
as a basis for the damage stability calculations.
Figure 2: Minimum GoM-Curve Vessel 2
This is illustrated in Figure 2 below, where the
blue line represents the minimum GoM curve
for a similar vessel.
The attained index A and hence the limiting
GM values are mainly a function of the water- used in relation to the carriage of timber and 1. Make sure that the shipyard includes timber
tight subdivision, the watertight integrity in gen- when loaded in accordance with the provisions deck loading conditions in the preliminary
eral and the position of openings such as air of the Timber Code. This increases the area in loading manual that fulfil the damage stabili-
pipes, ie, improvements in the design directly the diagram where timber cargoes can be car- ty criteria and the 3% rule of thumb.
influence the limiting GM values and thus pro- ried, as illustrated by the yellow triangle. Also, 2. Check that these conditions are realistic.
vide a larger operational area for timber car- for this vessel we have added a few typical tim- 3. Apply IACS Unified Interpretation SC161.
riage. ber conditions from the loading manual. When SC 161 is applied, the vessel may have
The pink line in Figure 2 represents the min- So what can be done to improve the timber two sets of GoM limiting curves onboard, e.g.
imum GoM curve where the IACS Unified carrying capability of existing vessels? In some one for when timber deck cargo is stowed as
Interpretation SC161 (IMO MSC/Circ.998) has cases it might be possible to obtain more suit- stipulated in SC 161 and the other for any
been applied. This Unified Interpretation is able limiting GoM curves by simple means, such other type of cargo.
based on the recognition that the timber load as by altering the positions of the air-pipes. 4. Top wing tanks should preferably be separat-
on deck will provide additional buoyancy even However, since it is quite costly to rebuild the ed from double bottom tanks for bulk carri-
under damaged conditions. In short, this means vessel, the best option may be to add another ers intended to carry timber deck cargo fre-
that under certain conditions the buoyancy of GoM curve for timber carriage where the IACS quently, so that the GoM can be lowered.
the timber deck cargo may be taken into UI SC161 has been taken into account.
account when doing the damage stability calcu- For newbuildings there are more possibili- Anders Gustafson Swerke & Christian Strobel
lations. Hence the pink GoM curve may only be ties, such as:
BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 5
 Customer presentation

Golden Union
The Golden Union Shipping Company will shortly be celebrating
28 years of operation in the dry bulk sector. Today, this company,
which has more than 25 bulk carriers of close to 2,500,000 tons
DWT - predominantly Panamax size but with five modern Capes -
is looking to the future with optimism.

Established in Piraeus in 1977 by Theodore ciency. He is currently championing the sup-

Veniamis, it took advantage of two niche mar- port for the adoption of goal-based standards
kets, the bulk/car carrier market, which at the and common rules and requirements by Class
time was in the process of changing over to societies in order to ensure the building of
PCCs, and the bulk cement market, which was more robust ships, fit for purpose. “…it is very
breaking into the Middle East. important for the classification societies to have
Golden Union is a modern company, geared an open line with the shipping industry (not
to meet any challenges and take advantage of only the shipbuilding industry) before they pro-
the opportunities that present themselves at any ceed unilaterally into rule or policy. The ship-
given time. However, it is also a company of tra- builder may be the one to build a ship, but the
dition and commitment, maintaining as it does owner/operator is the one who will have to live
the values and experience of generations past, with it, charter it, and maintain and repair it
and it remains committed to providing good throughout its lifetime.” “..we support the
performance and high quality services to the adoption of common rules by all IACS mem-
shipping industry. bers and shall be very actively involved in the
Success may be measured in power and accu- discussions in order to ensure the increase of
mulated wealth, but to become successful you scantlings and strength and improvement of
have to invest in people and leadership; to standards and procedures, for the sake of
interact and cooperate creatively and effectively improving safety and ensuring the protection of
and to motivate your people. This has been the environment.”
Golden Union’s dogma from the beginning and
has proven to be its strength time and time Nikolaos.Boussounis@dnv.com
again.
The company personnel, both in the offices
and on board ships, are trained on a continu-
ous basis, attending special seminars so as to
meet the company’s commitment to safety and
quality as well as the expectations of shippers
and the need to maintain a dominant position
in the market.
“DNV has for many years been a provider of
good and practical training and training semi-
nars,” says Mr Veniamis.
With its commitment to performance, Gold-
en Union both maintains its equipment and
ships and adds new generations of vessels to its
existing fleet.
“DNV was chosen to classify the majority of
our NB vessels not only because of our good
relationship but also, and mainly, because of its
commitment to and support in achieving a
more robust vessel.”
Mr Veniamis does not only pay lip service to
this issue. As Vice Chairman of the powerful
Greek Shipowners Union and Vice Chairman of
the DNV Greek Committee, he has been most
critical and outspoken about the watering down
of the Class rules in favour of shipbuilding effi-

6 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 7

 SOLAS revision
IMO backtracks on
SOLAS XII revision
At the 78th session of the IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC 78) the
proposed amendment to SOLAS chapter XII was reversed and IMO has now
ditched plans to make double hull mandatory from 2006. A draft proposal,
made by the sub-committee on Design and Equipment in March this year,
required that all future bulk carriers be of double side skin (DSS) construc-
tion.
The proposal was originally discussed
at MSC 76, and further considered by
the Sub-Committee on Design and
Equipment (DE 47) at its 47th ses-
sion when proposing consequential
amendment to SOLAS Ch. XII.
However, discussions at MSC 78
resulted in division between those
that called for the double side skin
bulk carriers as an alternative, while
others strongly argued for the double
side skin concept as a matter of
course. Despite a new FSA study
being presented at the meeting, and
a substantial number of delegates
participating in the discussion, with
an almost equal number of delegates
for and against mandating the dou-
ble side skin for bulk carriers, the
Chairman was in the end forced to
take a vote to get a clear decision.
The voting resulted on a clear majori-
ty for not mandating DSS for future
bulk carriers.
In its effort to amend SOLAS XII,
MSC 78 maintained its previous deci-
sion to keep the minimum distance
between inner and outer skin on DSS
bulk carriers when built in the future
at 1000mm.
Although new rules covering DSS
bulk carriers of more than 150m in
length carrying solid cargoes with a
density of 1000kg/m3 will still be
developed, shipowners will retain the
option of sticking with ships of single-
skin design.
For shipowners that want to order
DSS vessels, flooding requirements
will not be mandatory before amend-
ed SOLAS XII comes into force in
2006.
8 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004
In the meantime, DNV will offer
DSS bulk carriers or combination car-
riers with length of 150m and above
the additional class notations
Enhanced Strength (ES) (D, S18,
S20) or ES (D, S17, S18, S20) on a
voluntary basis.
Off diary
The most important thing to occur
during MSC 78 relating to the imple-
mentation of the International Ship
and Port Security Code (ISPS) to that
happened at MSC/78 was in fact
what did not occur!
Despite some quarters calling for
postponing implementation, this mat-
ter was not raised during the meet-
ing, so it seems the ISPS Code will be
fully implemented on 1 July 2004, as
initially planned.
Another ISPS-related issue that
seemed to be omitted from the agen-
da was discussion concerning the pos-
sibility of issuing Interim Certificates
prior to or on the 1 July ISPS Code
deadline. Some Administrations had
been vociferous in this regard and a
paper has been presented by Mar-
shall Islands to this effect. However,
that paper was dismissed and all
future Interim Certificates must thus
be issued as laid out in the ISPS Code
requirements (ISPS A/19.1.2).
However, the matter of Long
Range Information and Tracking
(LRIT) was discussed at length, and
the Committee decided that only the
minimum information detailing ships
identity, position, time and date will
be incorporated into the system.
Apart from this, the Committee
advised on a number of restrictions
concerning access to the LRIT infor-
mation. The item was then passed on
to COMSAR for further deliberation.
The Committee also discussed how
ships should behave when entering a
port which is not an ISPS-approved
port, or where the master has reason
to believe that relevant mandatory
security measures are not in place. A
separate MSC on such procedures
will be issued.
Another hot topic was the develop-
ment on Guidance for Security Port
State Control, known as ‘Control and
Compliance Measures to Enhance
Maritime Security’. The guide con-
tains a list of items which may be
used during ‘more detailed inspec-
tions’, and will probably develop into
a baseline document for establishing
compliance with Code regulations for
Port State Security Controls in the
future.
The US delegation made it clear
that ships that do not carry a valid
International Ship Security Certifi-
cate (ISSC) or Interim ISSC after 1
July 2004 will simply not be allowed
into any US port. It is expected that
other international key ports will fol-
low suit.
Means of Access
During its 78th Session, the Maritime
Safety Committee (MSC) also
approved the amendments to the
Technical Provisions for Means of
Access for Inspection.
The new amendments, first pro-
posed by the Greek delegation, con-
cerned that the original amendments
approved by MSC 76 was too com-
plex, too costly, and had too little
flexibility, are much simpler and can
be arranged as a part of the internal
structure of the ship, and therefore
become a safer system to be used for
inspection by the ships crew and for
the over all surveys by classification
surveyors.
As these amendments were agreed
prior to the first amendments enter-
ing into force, (January 2005) and
the fact that it is having less compre-
hensive requirements than the last
one, the MSC noted the inconven-
ience this will have to the ships being
constructed between January 2005
and January 2006 when the last
amendment is expected to come into
force.
The latest amendments as
approved by MSC 78 can be provided
by Arve.Myklebust@dnv.com
Goal-Based Standards
The Administrations of The
Bahamas, Greece, as well as the Inter-
national Association of Classification
Societies (IACS) submitted a paper
on the general principles for goal-
based standards for future adoption
by IMO. The document which was
introduced by The Bahamas on
behalf of the co-sponsors was well
received by the Committee. The dis-
cussion concluded that delegations
were urged to submit further com-
ment on the proposal to next MSC
79, at which time a working group
will be established to develop the
standards.
IACS Common Rules posed by IACS, based on the EU proj-
To inform IMO of the most impor- ect on Advanced Technology to Opti-
tant task in its history, the Interna- mize Maritime Operational Safety
tional Association of Classification (ATOMOS).
Societies (IACS) presented its two The working group felt that there
common rules projects at MSC 78. was no need to develop an alternative
The two projects the Joint Bulk Carri- instrument to demonstrate compli-
er Project (JBP) and the Joint Tanker ance with SOLAS V/15 and gave its
Project (JTP) were very well received full support to the IACS initiative.
by the delegation. The group concluded that the
Common IACS Rules have long BDEAP would be a useful instrument
been requested by the Administra- to be applied for the purpose of sur-
tions and the industry, alike, and vey and certification until the time of
according to schedule the Rules will delivery of the ship.
be sent for hearing by the industry MSC 78 concluded the issue by
from the end of June, and the Rules instructing the Subcommittee on
will be adopted by IACS Council by Safety of Navigation to consider the
the end of 2004. BDEAP as an instrument for verifying
compliance with SOLAS Regulation
IACS UI SC 181 V/15, at its 50th session (NAV 50)
The IACS unified interpretation for which will take place in July.
Bridge Design, Equipment, Arrange-
ment and Procedures (BDEAP) was
presented by IACS at the meeting in
May. The BDEAP sets forth a set of
requirements for compliance with
principles and aims of SOLAS Regu-
lation V/15 relating to bridge design,
design and arrangement of naviga-
tional systems and equipment and
bridge procedures.
Several delegations attending MSC
78 expressed their appreciation to
IACS for its efforts in addressing Reg-
ulation V/15 through the UI.
The BDEAP was also considered
by the Joint Working Group on the
Roles of the Human Element (HE)
which was re-established at MSC 78.
One Administration had proposed
that MSC should request HE to devel-
op an alternative method to that pro-
BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 9
 Katerina V

Ship’s name: Katerina V

Shipyard/Hull No.: Hyundai Heavy Ind. Co. Ltd.
Hull No. 1482
Type of Ship: Bulk Carrier
Manager: Golden Union Shipping Co.,
S.A.
Owner: Aquarius Marine S.A.
Flag: Greece
Port of Registry: Piraeus
Gross Tonnage: 88129
Net Tonnage: 57100
DWT: 171061
Lengt Overall: 288.86 m
LxBxD
(on tonnage
certificate): 280.37 x 45.00 x 24.10
Class Notation: ✠1A1 Bulk Carrier ESP ES(S)
HC-E GRAIN-U E0 LCS(IS) IB(+)
HOLDS(2,4,6,8)EMPTY
NAUTICUS(Newbuilding)
Delivery: January 2004

10 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004 11

Dry bulk market softening further
The dry bulk boom experi-
enced since last autumn
has had a big impact on all dry
bulk commodity markets.
In certain trades for commodities of rel-
atively low value, the seaborne trans-
portation costs actually doubled or even
tripled the value of the cargo itself when
the freight market peaked earlier this
year. Although freight rates for all sizes
of vessels have seen substantial down-
ward corrections lately, present rates are
still more than healthy seen from the
shipowners’ point of view, at least when
considering the capital servicing of a
new vessel.
The dry bulk market fell back further
through April and May. Since the peak
level in early February, the Baltic Dry
Index for bulkcarriers had fallen by 42%
by the end of May, whereas the setbacks
for the various size groups differed
somewhat from their individual peaks
experienced in mid-January for Cape-
size, in early February for Panamax, and
in mid-March for Handymax size. At the
end of May, Capesize was down 49%,
Panamax was down 45%, and Handymax
was down 34%.
The steel industry now accounts for
about 50% of the total demand for dry
bulk tonnage when adding iron ore, cok-
ing coal, coke, iron and steel scrap, man-
ganese, ferroalloys, etc. China’s rapidly
growing steel industry has played a key
role in pushing rates upwards. During
the first four months this year, world
crude steel output was up 8.4% com-
pared with same period last year. China’s
output rose by 24.5% to 81.8 million
tonnes, whereas the rest of the world
saw an increase of 4.4% to 249.6 mt. Pig
iron production, which requires iron ore
and coking coal, is more interesting
from a shipping point of view, since
about one third of the world steel output
comes from recirculated scrap. Global
pig iron production rose by 8.9% during
Jan/April, with China up 23.2% to 75.9
mt and the rest of the world up
2.9% to 148.4 mt. During 1Q04,
China’s 50.7 mt iron ore imports
were 48% higher than in 1Q03,
whereas Japan’s iron ore imports
over 4 months were up 4.7% to
45.6 mt. Coal trade volumes have
shown a fairly strong develop-
ment in the first part of 2004,
whereas the grain trade has been
rather slow.
In late April, the Chinese
authorities announced that there
was a need to take “very forceful
measures” to curb the economy.
New guidelines were issued
requiring companies to cut back
on the use of debt to fund proj-
ects in the areas of steel, alu-
minium, cement and property.
The effects remain to be seen
after this orchestrated move to
reduce congestion, demurrage,
freight rates and raw material
prices. Stockpiles are reported
to have shrunk considerably and
more balanced growth could
provide a better momentum for
further economic growth in China, be expected, been minimal during this
albeit at lower rates than seen recently. boom in the dry bulk freight market. In
In the newbuilding market, new the whole of 2003, 89 vessels over 10,000
orders for bulk carriers over 10,000 dwt dwt totalling 3.3 million dwt were sold
in 2003 totalled 391 vessels of 29.4 mil- for scrap, of which the 4Q accounted
lion dwt, of which 66 vessels of 5.6 mil- for 18 vessels of 0.6 mdwt. In 1Q04, bulk
lion dwt were ordered in the 4Q. In carrier scrap sales amounted to only 9
1Q04, new bulk carrier orders totalled vessels of 0.3 mdwt, followed by 3 vessels
49 vessels of 4.1 million dwt and prelimi- of less than 0.1 mdwt in April/May.
nary figures for April/May show 36 ves- At the end of May, the world fleet of
sels of 3.0 million dwt. Looking at coun- bulk carriers stood at 5,701 vessels of
try of build, it appears that out of the 309.4 million dwt, up 3.5% from one
391 new orders in 2003, as many as 258 year before measured in dwt. The order
went to Japan and 106 to China, leaving book amounted to 606 vessels of 46.7
only 27 for other countries (including mdwt, corresponding to 15.1% of the
Taiwan 12, the Phillippines 7, and S. existing fleet. After deliveries of 7.3
Korea only 5 vessels - which is remark- mdwt during the first five months of this
ably low for the world’s largest shipbuild- year, scheduled deliveries for the remain-
Print: GAN Grafisk
ing country). New orders during the first der of 2004 stood at 12.5 mdwt, followed
five months of 2004 were distributed as by 17.4 mdwt in 2005 and, so far, 12.4
follows: Japan 56, China 18, India 6, S. mdwt in 2006 and 4.4 mdwt in 2007.
Korea 4 and the Philippines 1.
Bulk-carrier scrap sales have, as could
Design: DNVE Graphic Communications 0405-047

Jarle Hammer

DNV (Det Norske Veritas)
is an independent, autonomous
Foundation working to safe-
guard life, property and the
environment.
DNV comprises 300 offices in
100 countries, with 5,800
Bulk Carrier Update
is a newsletter published by
Det Norske Veritas,
DNV Maritime.
It is distributed to
DNV customers and stations
Please direct any enquiries to
your nearest DNV station, or
Bulk Carrier Update e-mail:
bulkcarrier@dnv.com
Editorial committee:
Ulf Freudendahl
Magne A. Røe
Det Norske Veritas
NO-1322 Høvik, Norway
Tel: +47 67 57 99 00
Fax: +47 67 57 99 11
Updated list of all regional
offices at DNV’s web site:
5,000/ 6-2004

employees. worldwide. Lisbeth Aamodt www.dnv.com

12 BULK CARRIER UPDATE 2 2004