L'affaire Erika suite : RINA

Publié le par Dc Evo

Suite de La petite et la grande histoire de l'ERIKA


Comme je l'avais explique la plus gros responsable est RINA, société de classification, tandis que Total n'a pour ainsi dire presque aucune responsabilité.


Je vous invite a consulter le site ci-dessous qui démontre les manquements de la certification : La structure n'a probablement jamais été vérifiée, si elle l'a été, c'est entache d'erreur grossières et de falsifications.

Ce genre de mesure devant être faite en cale sèche, on ne peut aucunement demander à Total d'avoir fait les vérifications, qui de plus sont longues et couteuses.



Attendons le résultat du procès, mais une condamnation de Total serait une profonde injustice, tandis que la seule méthode pour se protéger de tels accidents est d'exiger que chaque bateau soit assure pour plusieurs milliards de dollars sur les dommages causes, ce qui impliquera que les assurances regardent de près la certification (qui était ici fautive) afin de ne pas perdre d'argent.



·       1993 - July 1998, Bureau Veritas had overseen classification for the Erika. 

·       February 14, 1998 – Mr. Psichedda (RINA Surveyor) and Mr. Costigliola (Panaship Representative) conducted a preliminary survey with quite negative conclusions:

o        Note that the level of corrosion on deck manifolds reached 68%

o        Fractures exist in Port Ballast Tank.

o        RINA and Panaship refused to provide a copy of this initial report to authorities.

·       February-March 1998 –IACS (International Associations for Classification Societies) rules require the shipowner and classification society to create a survey plan (including thickness measurements) in writing to establish specifications for repairs.  RINA interviews reveal that this did not happen, however, Panaship communicated a call for bids to Bijela and other shipyards during this time.

o        Castigliola (Panaship) drew up the technical aspects for the call for bids during the early months of 1998 but before Erika’s transfer of class to RINA.  Based on the lack of physical evidence (i.e. written reports) he could have only based these specifications on thikness measurements taken in Ravenna in 1997 and RINA’s pre-transfer inspection in February 1998.  Neither sufficient to determine the extent of work necessary.

·       April 3, 1998 – Adriatic Shipyards (Bijela) responds through its agent in Genova (Canbiaso and Risso) to Panaship call for bids.

·       June 1998 – Representatives from Adriatic Shipyard meet with Panaship in Ravenna to discuss the scope and cost of work to be done.

·       June 12, 1998 – Panaship visit Adriatic Shipyard, place order for $590,000 for work to start on July 17 and last 35 days.  Of this sum $500,000 was allocated for structural work.

·       June 16, 1998 – Panaship officially requests that RINA agree to the transfer of class.

·       June 22, 1998 – Erika dry docked at Bijela using a floating dock

·       June 17-August 1998 – Maintenance work carried out at the Adriatic Shipyard in Bijela pursuant to Panaship’s rules and under RINA supervision on the basis of RINA rules

o        Castigliola (Panaship) and Patane (RINA surveyor) inspected the entire ship and marked the deck structures and web frames to be replaced.

o        During special surveys, extended thickness measurements of the structures are taken by specialists approved by classification societies.  In this case Vincenzo Paolillo for RINA and the Erika.  For practical reasons, thickness measurements must be taken when a ship is in dry dock because many of the places where readings are to be done are inaccessible due to liquid in tanks, etc.  The classification society (RINA) contracted Pailillo to undertake the readings as a specialist, however, RINA is wholly responsible for verifying a sample of these readings and for the close-up surveys.  RINA is also responsible for the instructions given to the Shipyard regarding the results of the thickness readings.

o        All measurements were completed on July 12 (according to Paolillo) or July 3 according to RINA’s documentation.

o        Paolillo’s final thickness report is dated June 19, 1998.  This is not possible because if it were completed at this time, it would have served as the basis for Panaship’s instructions to Adriatic Shipyard.  RINA did not receive Paolillo’s thickness report until September 9, 1998, a full month after the interim certificates were issued.

o        The deck structures were reportedly replaced on July 7, 1998

o        The web frames were reportedly cut out on July 24, 1998.

o        Statements and reports from Patane (RINA), Costigliola (Panaship) and Paolillo (hired by RINA) are inconsistent with regard to the extent of scaffolding used in repairs, the dates of repairs, and the dates each was in Bijela.

o        Their statements included the claim that most of the tanks were examined by using a raft and filling the tanks with water.  This is impossible when a ship is in dry dock.

o        Subsequent review of Paolillo’s Final Report on the thickness readings showed a large number of discrepancies indicating that it performed inadequately or not at all.  Anomalies include:

§         The total number of readings reported were 7,842, while a ship of the Erika’s size would require no more than 5000.

§         The report includes readings for structures that did not exist on the Erika, such as a section of the deck E7. These readings were fabricated.

§         There were no readings for structural elements that did exist-the plating and longitudinal bulkheads.

§         Certain readings were thicker than when the ship was constructed.

§         Certain readings showed such slight deterioration that is inconceivable for a ship of that age (in ranges of 2-6%).

§         Thickness levels of some standard sections varied by factors of 2 or three-this is technically unjustifiable.

§         The document is not dated (other than the cover page dated June 19).  It was in all likely prepared in July 1998 and approved by RINA (Patane) no later than September 9, 1998.

o        The undisputable type, scope and number of anomalies found in the Paolillo Report means that it in no way reflects actual measurements taken in Naples (the last port of call) or Bijela.

o        Paolillo refused to meet with the Dunkirk Commercial Court in 2005 and claims the computer used to make all measurements on the Erika was stolen in 1999.

·       July, 1998 – Panaship transfers Erika’s Class from Bureau Veritas to RINA’s Trieste office.

o        RINA agreed to class the ship after repairs were carried out at the time of comprehensive five-year special survey’ in July 1998.

·       August 15, 1998 - At the conclusion of the post-maintenance survey in the Erika received all interim certificates without reservations from RINA and the class was officially transferred to RINA.

·       August 21, 1998 – Adriatic Shipyard issues invoice for $715,000 of which only $157,000 was for structural work.  The call for bids had called for 124 tons of plating at a price of $257,228 but the shipyard only replaced 19 tons.

·       December 16, 1998 – RINA issues the Erika full-term certificates without reservations.

·       November 24, 1999 – RINA reported corrosion of the ship’s structure and recommended that thickness measurements be carried out by the end of January 2000.  Confirmed the class until that date.






·       December 12, 1999 – Erika breaks up off the Brittany Coast.

Commenter cet article

dissertation 03/12/2009 09:20

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!