Bontang Future 3rd LNG-LPG - A Design Which Achieves Very High Levels of Flexibility, Safety and Reliability

BONTANG FUTURE 3RD LNG/LPG DOCK: A DESIGN WHICH ACHIEVES VERY HIGH LEVELS OF FLEXIBILITY, SAFETY AND RELIABILITY LA FUTURE 3ÈM E JETEE DE CHARGEMENT GNL/GPL DE BONTANG: UNE CONCEPTION QUI ASSURE DES NIVEAUX TRES ELEVES DE FLEXIBILITE, SECURITE ET FIABILITE Yosua Sitepu Train G and 3rd Dock/LPG Storage Project Manager Pertamina Projects PKP Gedung Patra Jasa, 13th Floor Jl. Gatot Subroto Kav. 32-34 - Jakarta 12950, Indonesia Bertrand Bertrand Lanqueti Lanquetin n Gas Shipping Department Technical Manager Total S.A., Tour Total 24 Cours Michelet 92069 Paris La Défense Cedex, France

ABSTRACT The Bontang LNG/LPG expansion project includes a 8th liquefaction train, a 6th LNG tank, a 5th LPG tank and a 3rd LNG/LPG loading dock, making this plant the biggest in the world with a forecast of 390 to 410 LNG cargoes and 30 to 40 LPG cargoes to be lifted every year by year 2000. Given the docking requirements, the design of the new loading dock has been an extremely challenging task for PERTAMINA and considerable emphasis has been put on flexibility, safety and reliability aspects : - flexibility : the new dock has been designed designed for for 65 LNG ships of of all types with with sizes 3 3 ranging from 18,000 m to 145,000 m and for 128 LPG ships with sizes ranging from 15,000 m3 to 100,000 m3, which is the biggest fleet ever used for a loading dock design. - safety : particular particular attention has been paid paid to all safety safety matters including : siting siting and orientation of the dock, fire fighting, emergency escape routes, prevention, alarms, emergency shut down and release systems, monitoring and control of loading operations.

2.R–1

- reliability : equipment overlap and appropriate methods of structures calculations allow a reduction in the risk of prolonged unavailability in case of damages to the dock. The present paper discusses the above in detail and various other aspects of the new dock design.

RESUME Le projet d'expansion en cours de l'usine GNL/GPL de Bontang inclut un 8ème train de liquéfaction, un 6ème bac de stockage GNL, un 5ème bac de stockage GPL et une 3ème jetée de chargement GNL/GPL, faisant de cette usine la plus grande du monde avec 390 à 410 cargaisons de GNL et 30 à 40 cargaisons de GPL prévues annuellement à l'horizon 2000. Dans ce contexte, la conception de la nouvelle jetée de chargement a constitué un énorme challenge pour PERTAMINA et une attention toute particulière a été portée sur les aspects de flexibilité, sécurité et fiabilité : - flexibilité : la jetée a été conçue pour 65 navires GNL de tous types types et de tailles tailles 3 3 comprises entre 18 000 m et 145 000 m et pour 128 navires GPL de tailles comprises entre 15 000 m 3 et 100 000 m 3, ce qui constitue la plus importante flotte jamais utilisée dans la conception d'un tel ouvrage. - sécurité : l'accent a été mis sur toutes les questions de sécurité, sécurité, incluant la recherche du du site optimum, l'orientation de la jetée, la lutte incendie, les routes d'évacuation d'urgence, la prévention, les alarmes, les dispositifs d'arrêt d'urgence des opérations et de déconnexion du navire, la surveillance et le contrôle des opérations. - fiabilité : la redondance redondance des équipements équipements ainsi ainsi que des calculs calculs de structure adaptés permettent de réduire le risque d'une indisponibilité prolongée en cas de dommages sur le jetée. Le présent papier détaille les sujets ci-dessus et aborde encore divers autres aspects de la conception de la jetée.

2.R–2

BONTANG FUTURE 3RD LNG/LPG DOCK: A DESIGN WHICH ACHIEVES VERY HIGH LEVELS OF FLEXIBILITY, SAFETY AND RELIABILITY

rd

th

BONTANG EXPANSION PROJECT — 3 DOCK / 5 LPG TANK

INTRODUCTION Due to the increasing capacity of the Bontang liquefaction plant operated by PT. Badak with a 7th liquefaction train operational in year 1997 and a 8th train to be operational in year 2000, PERTAMINA and its Production Sharing Contractors : TOTAL Indonesie, VICO and UNOCAL, decided, based on the results of port simulation studies commissioned by TOTAL Indonesie, to build a 3rd loading dock for LNG and LPG ships together with one additional LNG Storage Tank and one additional LPG Storage Tank in order to cope with the increasing traffic of ships. After the completion of the 8th liquefaction train it is estimated that 21.6 million tons per year of LNG will be lifted by 390 to 410 LNG cargoes under various sales contracts

2.R–3

mainly to Japan, Korea and Taiwan as well as around 1.35 million tons per year of LPG lifted by 30 to 40 LPG cargoes. The dock no. 3 siting study and the preparation of the Statement of Requirements (SOR) covering as a milestone project the dock no. 3, the additional LPG tank and the associated process (pipe racks, tie-ins, flares) were completed in 1995. A fairly detailed and comprehensive Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) was performed by PT.INCONED Indonesia in 1995 and completed at the beginning of 1996. Finally, the Detailed Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contract (EPC) was awarded in January 1997 to a joint operation between IKPT (PT. Inti Karya Persada Tehnik Engineering and Construction) of Indonesia and CHIYODA CORPORATION of  Japan for a mechanical completion scheduled for January 1999 and an operational acceptance three months later. The LNG dock no. 1 was commissioned on 9 August, 1977 and the LNG/LPG dock  no.2 was commissioned on 19 December, 1988, i.e. already twenty-one and ten years ago and with a much smaller fleet of ships. Consequently the design of dock no. 3 could not re-use previous studies : it had not only to accommodate the latest state of the art for dock  designs and the latest technologies, but also the biggest fleet of LNG and LPG ships ever used for a dock design.

1. BASIS OF THE DESIGN 1.1

Process

The LNG/LPG dock no. 3 has two independent LNG transfer lines from the LNG storage tanks farm. It means that when enough storage inventory is available, up to three LNG ships can load simultaneously in Bontang (one on each dock). A new LNG marine flare has been added, which can handle the simultaneous maximum vapor return rates from both dock no. 2 and dock no. 3. However during normal operation the vapor return from dock no. 3 will use a new vapor return line connected to the vapor recovery system and used for both dock no. 2 and dock no. 3. It was deemed necessary to have LPG loading facilities on two docks for flexibility and back-up but simultaneous loading of LPG ships on two docks has not been considered as a probable scenario with regard to LPG current and future production levels. Consequently the LPG transfer lines of dock no. 3 (one line for C3 and one line for C4) are tied-in to the existing LPG transfer lines of dock no. 2 as well as the vapor return lines (one for C3 and one C4), which are tied-in to the existing BOG reliquefaction facilities at the LPG storage tank farm. The excess vapor is flared on the existing LPG flare. The LNG loading system for dock no. 3 is designed for loading at a minimum rate of  10,000 m3 /hr using three 16" liquid arms and one 20" vapor arm with a minimum battery limit pressure at ship’s rail of 3.50 kg/cm 2 abs (in order to take into account a mesh 60 loading strainer). However, ships can be loaded at 12,500 m 3 /hr using the four liquid arms in place (fast loading scenario).

2.R–4

The LPG loading system for dock no. 3 is designed for loading at a minimum rate of  5,000 m3 /hr (single product C3 or C4) using the two 12" liquid arms and the two 8" vapor arms with a minimum battery limit pressure at ship’s rail of 2.10 kg/cm 2 abs. However, most of the ships will load simultaneously C3 and C4 at 2,500 m 3  /hr each. Small ships with smaller freeboard and smaller size of manifold can also load a single product (or two products sequentially) using the two 8" LPG arms, which are slightly longer than the 12" arms to achieve a greater outreach. 1.2

Ships Used for The Dock No. 3 Design

Usually LNG ships calling at Bontang are dedicated to specific LNG sales contracts and LNG trades while LPG ships are nominated. For dock no. 3 being an extension of  existing facilities, it was not possible to be satisfied with a design using a limited number of “generic” ships as is often done for grassroot projects. Accordingly, an exhaustive list of ship type and size has been established for dock no. 3 design and 65 LNG ships have been selected, with sizes ranging from 18,000 m 3 (SURYA AKI for Medium City Gas Companies in Japan) to the future 145,000 m 3 ships still on the design boards. These 65 ships represent more than half of the worldwide LNG fleet, existing or under construction. These ships have been selected according to following principles: - ships calling at Bontang. - ships usually calling at Blang Lacang ( Indonesia’s second LNG/LPG Plant in Sumatra Island), because they also come from time to time to Bontang. - ships in lay-up condition worldwide because past experience has shown that short term charters of this category of ships was not to be excluded. - new ships under construction, deemed to be representative of the LNG carriers of the latest generation, even if they were not built for Indonesian trades. - future 145,000 m3 LNG ships: there is a very high probability that these ships will be built in the near future, therefore these ships had to be incorporated in the design. Ships bigger than 145,000 m 3 would require special consideration with regard to the coralline hard bottom in Bontang, the dredged depth limited to 14 m and the operational limits in use. This selection also allowed, as a matrix approach, to cover all categories of ships: membrane, prismatic or spheres with 3,4,5 or 6 tanks, resulting in almost all possible flat bodies, decks arrangements, manifolds configurations, etc. 128 existing LPG ships (refrigerated) have been selected, ranging from 15,000 m 3 to 100,000 m3 , representing all the LPG fleet worldwide within these size limits. In addition to data already held by PERTAMINA, inquiries have been sent to about 55 companies worldwide for ships data collection in order to have enough information to perform the design. PERTAMINA would like to take this opportunity to thank warmly all ships’ Owners/Managers, who contributed generously to the dock no. 3 design in providing data on ships. Their contribution to all of the efforts made to design a safe port has been invaluable and is a good example of how the LNG/LPG family stands close together in sharing the goal of safety.

2.R–5

1.3

Others

The dock no. 3 design allows round-the-clock operations. For safety reasons it has been decided that the dock no. 3 control room will not be on the dock (unlike docks no. 1 and 2) and that the gangway platform will be separated from the loading platform in order to provide a remote emergency escape. This is further developed in Chapters 6 and 7. The International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers & Terminals better known as ISGOTT (ICS, OCIMF, IAPH) and the Safety Guide for Terminals Handling Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (OCIMF) have been used extensively for the design as well as all relevant SIGTTO publications. On the particular subject of regulations, the interested reader could refer to the information paper no. 14 “Site Selection and Design for LNG Ports and Jetties” and to the information paper no. 15 “A Listing of Design Standards for Liquefied Gas Terminals (referencing Ports and Jetties)”, both produced by SIGTTO. They contain a fairly good background for dock siting and design aspects. (The explanation of various acronyms for the societies and international bodies mentioned is given at the end of the paper). A Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) was conducted in May of 1997 and its results incorporated in the design of dock no. 3.

2. DOCK NO. 3 SITING AND ORIENTATION 2.1

Siting Study

A siting study was performed in order to select the best possible location of dock no. 3 using a weighted multi-criteria analysis technique. Ten possible locations have been considered with evaluation criteria covering overall nautical, operational, safety, structural/construction and cost viewpoints. In particular, safe distances and hazard zones have been evaluated using various LNG/LPG spills scenarios and vapor cloud computations with the “DEGADIS” model developed by the US Coast Guards. The recommended location for dock no. 3 was further subject to confirmation by a nautical risk assessment study using a real time navigation simulation model. 2.2

Nautical Risk Assessment Study

This study was commissioned to DELFT HYDRAULICS using the Maritime Simulation Center in the Netherlands (MSCN) simulator located at Wagenignen. Bontang pilots attended and performed the simulations using their Bontang port knowledge, thus bringing more credibility to the design of this new installation. The aim of this study was to confirm the location of the dock no. 3 from a nautical point of view and to optimize the dock orientation through berthing/unberthing simulation

2.R–6

maneuvers in routine and emergency conditions for different weather patterns and with the assistance or not of tugs. An example of berthing maneuver is given on Figure 1. Of the two lay outs 110 o and 115o, derived from previous screening studies (also by DELFT HYDRAULICS but using the fast-time ship simulator SHIPMA-5), the 115 o orientation has been selected and a mooring configuration of the ships “bow out” has been recommended for safe departure. Accordingly dredging plans to the 14 m isobath have been established and results of  the soil survey shown that enough good coral sand was available for reclaiming the necessary space for the additional LPG tank.

FIGURE 1: EXAMPLE OF BERTHING MANEUVER

2.R–7

3. DOCK NO. 3 LAY OUT OPTIMIZATION AND DESIGN OF BREASTING DOLPHINS AND MOORING DOLPHINS Although ships will generally moor bow out on dock no. 3, i.e. on the starboard side, the port side mooring has been systematically studied as well, not only for the optimization of the lay out of the dolphins, but also for other design areas, like the arms flanging areas, with the understanding that in case of conflict between port side and starboard side moorings, starboard side mooring will prevail and ships with restrictions for port side mooring will be clearly identified. 3.1 Breasting Dolphins Lay Out

The optimum location of the breasting dolphins has been determined by graphical analysis as shown on Figure 2, taking into account the flat part of the hull of the vessels, the hull curvature and flare angles and the OCIMF criteria with regard to the spacing of  breasting dolphins to be between 25 % and 40 % of ship’s Length Overall (LOA). Ships with possible restrictions were systematically studied in further details, assessing low tide/high tide conditions, loaded/ ballasted conditions and longitudinal drifts due to weather. An example of such study is given on Figure 3. As a conclusion : - the lay out of the main breasting dolphins and their number (four) has been optimized. It has to be further noted that the top of the inner breasting dolphins has been set at + 5.00 m while the top of the outer breasting dolphins has been set at + 6.50 m, while keeping the vertical angles of mooring lines within recommended OCIMF values, i.e. less than 25o - 30o (25o for spring lines) with no negative values. This arrangement significantly reduces the number of ships having a partial contact with the fender panels. - for smaller ships it has been necessary to provide, in addition to the four main breasting dolphins, a “sub-breasting” dolphin in the form of a berthing beam located in front of but not connected to the loading platform. Accordingly, the kinetic energy absorption of this beam is based exclusively on piles deflection and special high tensile steel grade has been used for that purpose.

2.R–8

FIGURE 2: EXAMPLE OF GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS FOR BREASTING DOLPHINS LOCATION

2.R–9

FIGURE 3: DETAILED STUDY ON THE RELATION FLAT BODY / FENDER PANELS 3.2

Mooring Dolphins Lay Out

The optimum location of the mooring dolphins has been obtained by the use of the graphical analysis method as shown on Figure 4 : the mooring lines and their orientations are plotted against the dock lay out in order to define the most suitable and best mooring configuration of each vessel. The basic principles used for the design are based on the good mooring practice recommended by OCIMF, i.e., head and stern lines are omitted as much as possible because they are not very effective in restraining vessels due to their long length and poor orientation. In other words, ships are moored “within their own lengths”. Furthermore it has been verified that the horizontal angles of the breast lines do not exceed in general +/- 15o. Finally mooring calculations were done for each ship, using a software incorporating mooring line elasticity in order to determine the maximum tensions in the lines (to remain under 55 % of the Minimum Breaking Limit - MBL) and the ships displacements.

2.R–10

FIGURE 4: EXAMPLE OF GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS FOR MOORING DOLPHINS LOCATION

As a conclusion: - the lay out of main mooring dolphins and their number (six) has been optimized according to good mooring practice and results in a dock length of 367.5 m (distance between outer mooring dolphins). - for a limited number of smaller and/or atypical ships, a seventh dolphin has been added (MD4) with a “two hooks assembly” in order to achieve a satisfactory spring lines arrangement in most cases. An example of use of this dolphin is given on Figure 5. Catwalks connecting to this dolphin are elevated to avoid mooring boats becoming trapped between the ship and this dolphin. - finally and for some ships using a mixed wire/synthetic mooring pattern or showing possible overstress in their breast lines, a shore augmentation consisting of a pulley has been added on three mooring dolphins. The use of this additional facility will be left to the masters discretion.

FIGURE 5: EXAMPLE OF USE OF DOLPHIN MD4

2.R–11

3.3

Design of the Dolphins

- Breasting Dolphins: although the acceptable hull pressure of LNG carriers should be in the range of 15 t/m 2 for ship berthing at angles different from 0 o, a value of 11.6 t/m 2 has been chosen for dock no. 3 as the most conservative value resulting from ship data collection. The berthing speed chosen for the breasting dolphin design is 1 knot at an approaching angle of 10 o, which gives a normal component (berthing at 0 o) of 18.2 cm/s, while 15 cm/s is recommended by PIANC for an area such as Bontang. Breasting dolphins are of rigid structure type supporting low recoiling buckling rubber fenders. The breasting dolphins are calculated in accordance with the “weak line defence mechanism”, i.e. in a catastrophic scenario, the dolphins shall be capable of being reused in case of an overload resulting in plastic deformation of the subsoil without damaging the ship’s hull (deformation of the subsoil has been preferred to plastic deformation of the piles because a more or less inclined fender is preferred compared to a system where some piles cannot be relied upon any more). See reference [1] Further, safety factors are introduced namely : - The design absorption capacity of the fender units at 50 % fender compression and 0 o berthing angle is two times the berthing energy at controlled berthing speed of 18.2 cm/s. As a result the berthing energy is absorbed at approximately 30 % fender deflection based on the fender characteristic curve. This builds into the system a reserve energy allowing a berthing speed at 0 o of  18.2 2 =25.7cm/s preventing the risk of the rubber fender becoming rigid due to full compression. It has to be noted that the reaction force remains approximately the same between 30 % and 50 % compression for this type of fender and is in the range of 285 t. - Since the reaction force on the dolphin increases very sharply when the fender is fully compressed, the piles are designed with a load factor of 2, i.e. for an ultimate reaction force of 570 t, which is two times the reaction force corresponding to the design absorption capacity of the fender. Consequently, if the berthing speed at 0 o is above 25.7 cm/s, the ultimate soil bearing will be met at some point of energy absorption and the concrete cap will travel due to subsoil deformation while the dolphin structure will remain undamaged. Taking into account that the concrete cap of the dolphin can travel up to 1.70 m (remaining horizontal distance between the compressed fender and the edge of the loading platform), an emergency reserve of 485 t.m (= ½ ultimate reaction force x displacement) is built into the system which, when added to the design absorption capacity of 215 t.m of the fender, gives a total energy absorption of the dolphin of  700 t.m leading to a berthing velocity of  18.2 700 ÷ 107.5 =46 cm/s i.e., 2.5 times the design berthing velocity. In this catastrophic scenario, the ship’s hull will not be damaged and the damaged dolphin could still be used with some precautions.

2.R–12

- Mooring Dolphins: the mooring dolphins are both analysed for the sum of the MBL of  each line to be hooked to the dolphin perpendicular to the dolphin, including the extreme vertical angle and for the maximum horizontal angle due to the most extreme mooring line position, including the extreme vertical angle. This is in order to assess the maximum compression and extension forces on the piles. Extreme line positions are given by the graphical method showing the apex of the most extreme orientation of any mooring line. Because the strongest lines are used for the design (44 mm diameter with 127 t MBL), no further safety coefficient is taken.

4. LOADING PLATFORM AND TRESTLE The loading platform is 36.25 m in length and has three levels : main deck, 2nd deck  and 3rd deck. The main deck has a maneuvering platform and is connected to the shore by the main trestle -300 m in length, supporting a road 5 m width allowing the passage of a wheel crane for loading arms maintenance (barges are not readily available in Bontang). This road is also used for emergency access from the dock control room. The loading arms are mounted on the 3rd deck while the 2nd deck supports various valves and manifolds arrangements. The figure 6 shows the front view and various sections of the dock. After study of various solutions, the pipeway has been separated from the main road trestle. In addition, a completely separated catwalk connects the gangway platform to the shore.

2.R–13

FIGURE 6: FRONT VIEW OF THE DOCK AND VARIOUS SECTIONS

5. LOADING ARMS 5.1

Description

For LNG loading, four 16" liquid loading arms are provided (one being able to be used as vapor arm) in order to allow a loading rate up to 12,500 m 3 /hr. After a thorough vapor return calculation study, it was decided that the vapor arm will be 20" terminated by a 16" triple swivel assembly for better interchangeability of components with dock no. 2 and weight reduction consideration. A 20" x 16" vapor arm equipped with a 12" reduced bore Powered Emergency Release Coupling (PERC) has also a lower pressure drop than a 16" vapor arm with full bore PERC. These five arms are equipped with an Emergency Release System (ERS) consisting of  12" reduced bore PERC using for the first time the “no spill” technology, which reduces the leakage of LNG to about 2 liters at the time of PERC opening compared to 10 liters for a conventional reduced bore type PERC and 16 liters for a full bore type PERC. This will significantly enhance the safety of the personnel in the vicinity of the manifold. The principle illustrated on Figure 7 is that one of the ball valves has a concave shape which allows for the reduction of the space between the two ball valves when closed (due to mechanical interlock, the upper valve closes first when ESD is initiated, and the lower valves closes after when the ERS is initiated).

2.R–14

FIGURE 7: PERC WITH “NO SPILL” TECHNOLOGY

For LPG loading, two 12" arms are used for liquid and two 8" arms are used for excess vapor. Both propane and butane can be loaded separately or simultaneously. One of the 8" arms is able to be used as a liquid arm so that smaller ships can be loaded using the two 8" arms only. For this reason the 8" arms are also slightly longer than the 12" arms. After hydraulic calculation, the decision was taken to use full bore PERC for the LPG arms, for which the “no spill” technology was unfortunately not available at the time arms were ordered. Dock no. 3 is also the first gas installation with the whole triple swivel assemblies for LNG and LPG arms being fire resistant (OCIMF requests this for PERC and QCDC only). All arms’ normal connecting and disconnecting operations, are controlled by a portable radio device (1.285 kg, battery life time 3 years), which is much easier to handle compared to the traditional pendant with umbilical cable and also allows more functions. Accumulators, Arms Position Monitoring System (PMS) and Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) are designed in such a way that all arms will automatically retract clear from a drifting ship after PERC opening even in case of electricity black-out. This facility will also allow a better protection of the loading arms in case of a fire on the ship’s manifold. Finally, it was decided that a Hydraulic Quick Connect/Disconnect Coupling (QCDC) will not be installed due to flanging problems yet to be solved due to the great variety of  ships calling at Bontang. However, arms and supporting structures are designed in such a way that this equipment can be easily retrofitted in the future. 5.2

Arms Envelopes and Alarms

The arms design and their mechanical limit envelopes have followed OCIMF loading arms specification Edition 1987 (the new Edition being not available at the time of dock  no.3 design) except that the drifting area has been taken as a rectangular shape rather than a circular shape for conservative purposes. However, it was decided not to follow the drifting speeds of 15 cm/s and 5 cm/s often used for setting up, respectively, the alarm 2nd step (ERS) and alarm 1st step (ESD). A study was provided by DELFT HYDRAULICS using the MSCN real time navigation

2.R–15

simulation programme in order to obtain an accurate estimation of longitudinal and lateral components of the drifting speeds and drifting distances in the first seconds after a ship break out. Also, and in order to build more safety into the system in case of high drifting speeds, it was decided that the closure time of the PERC valve will be 5 sec. (surge analysis calculation and surge protection are based on this figure) and that the closing time of the ESD valve (arm MOV = Motorized Operated Valve) will be reduced to 20 sec., this figure still being compatible with the design of the loading lines compared to the more traditional value of 30 sec. It was finally decided that the alarm 1st step, if triggered by the PMS, will be in spherical coordinates rather than more commonly used rectangular coordinates, because the spherical coordinates are also used for alarm detection by proximity switches and both systems back-up each other in our design philosophy. The lateral drifting distances and speeds used are given on Figure 8 for lateral wind and current pushing the ship off the berth. With these values, the distance from mechanical limit of the arm to the alarm 2nd step is: (20 cm/s + 2 cm/s).5s = 110 cm rounded up to 1,200 mm ; and the distance alarm 2nd step to alarm 1st step is: 170 cm + margin for PMS accuracy = 2,000 mm ; where : 20 cm/s = drifting speed after 25s 170 cm = drifting distance after 20s. 2 cm/s = PMS accuracy. A similar calculation is done for longitudinal drift for which the dimensioning case is a quarterly wind and current (and not a longitudinal wind and current which generates smaller effort on the ship). It has to be noted that the scenario of the ship break-out due to starting of the engine full ahead harbor has not been kept as the worst scenario particularly for the lateral drifting speeds and distances. Based on the hereabove, the loading arms envelopes are given on Figure 9 for LNG arms.

2.R–16

30

   )  .   c   e   s    / 2 5   m   c    ( 20    D    E    E1 5    P    S    G1 0    N    I    T    F    I 5    R    D 0 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

TIME FROM BREAK-OUT (sec.)

50 0

   )   m45 0   c    ( 40 0

   E    C 35 0    N    A 30 0    T    S    I 25 0    D    G20 0    N    I    T 15 0    F    I 10 0    R    D 50 0 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

TIME FROM BREAK-OUT (sec.)

FIGURE 8: LATERAL DRIFTING SPEEDS AND DISTANCES

FIGURE 9: LOADING ARMS ENVELOPES (LNG)

6. ACCESSES, EMERGENCY ESCAPE ROUTES, GANGWAY 6.1

General Philosophy

Present arrangement of dock no. 3 trestle is given on Figure 10 and was found to be the best possible having regard to : - an “unmanned” dock concept, i.e., the loading operations do not require any operator to be present on dock 3 from the moment the gas is introduced into the arms for arms cooldown prior to loading startup until the purging of the arms after the loading is completed. Obviously this does not exclude patrols by safety/operations/marine staff on the dock, but no permanent attendance is needed.

2.R–17

- segregation of authorized safety/operations/marine people involved with operations from “unauthorized” people on the loading platform not directly involved with operations (like immigration, customs, shipping agent, crew change, visits on board, etc...). The authorized people have a dedicated access from the dock 3 control building to the loading platform using the road trestle, while “unauthorized” people must use the separate catwalk trestle giving direct access to the gangway tower and pass a security check at catwalk entrance. - emergency escapes : the gangway tower is voluntarily separated from the loading platform and is located on a dedicated dolphin at a distance of 31.6 m from the closest loading arm. Accordingly the gangway bulwark ladder on board the ship is at some distance from the manifold, where a fire is most likely to occur, and closer to the ship accommodation space. The catwalk connecting the gangway to the shore is therefore used as an emergency escape between ship and shore while the road trestle is used as an emergency escape between the loading platform and the shore. Secondary escapes are also provided for personnel trapped on dolphins to reach a safe area without passing over the loading platform. Two ladders are also provided on each dolphin for access to the water. Finally a connection is provided at the middle of the trestle between the catwalk and the main road trestle. This arrangement is in line with OCIMF recommendations which require that two remotely separate evacuation routes from all work or occupied areas are provided for emergency egress.

FIGURE 10: ACCESSES, EMERGENCY ESCAPE ROUTES AND GANGWAY

2.R–18

6.2

Gangway

Due to the great diversity of ships sizes and deck obstructions the choice of the gangway design is a tower type gangway with four intermediate platforms, provided with stairways and equipped with a steel turntable going up and down by means of a cable lift. The turntable platform supports an aluminum telescopic gangway ladder equipped at the end of the telescopic part with a bulwark ladder for easy access to the ship’s deck. The gangway is of the gravity type, i.e., it lands directly on ships decks and follow the ships’ movements by gravity (free-wheel mode). In case of emergency the gangway is equipped with an emergency raise and retract system in order to be clear of a drifting ship. The finalization of the gangway envelopes has required a considerable effort for the identification of ships deck obstructions which are particularly numerous when going away from the manifold platform, like : LN2 tank, dry chemical units, ship’s accommodation and pilot ladders, cargo machinery room , etc. An example of such study is given on Figure 11. The number of intermediate platforms has been fixed to four to restrict the maximum vertical angle to 22 o or less for safety reasons. The gangway is equipped with a safety net and generally follows SIGTTO Guidelines for Ship to Shore Access for Gas Carriers.

FIGURE 11: GANGWAY LANDING AREA STUDY

2.R–19

7. SHIP TO SHORE COMMUNICATION AND DOCK NO. 3 MONITORING AND CONTROL OPERATIONS FROM THE CONTROL BUILDING 7.1

Ship to Shore Communication

For LNG ships the following means of communications are provided : - one communication cable with connector for the hot line, interphone and public telephone (similar to docks no. 1 and 2). - one pneumatic ESD link with connector for the ESD signals from shore or ship (similar to docks no. 1 and 2). - one telemetry link for the integrated Marine Monitoring System (MMS) in order to display the MMS information (wind and current on dock no. 3, approaching/departing speeds and distances of the ship and mooring lines tensions) on a portable computer placed on board the ship cargo control room at the time of the pre-loading meeting. For those LNG ships equipped with an optical fiber link (mainly ships trading with Japan), an optical fiber cable with connector is also provided for convenience with the following functions: -

communications (3 lines). ESD link (signal from shore and signal from ship). MMS information interfaced with ship computer facilities. two spare cores are available for possible future use.

For LPG ships, which are not provided:

as well equipped as LNG ships, the following is

- one communication cable with telephone handset to be put on board, used as a hot line. - one electric ESD link with a pendant to be put on board the ship (“SIGTTO ESD link”). - one telemetry link for the MMS information to be displayed on a portable computer put on board the ship upon arrival. All radio transmissions generally follow the SIGTTO guidelines for “Ignition Hazards due to Marine Radios and Radio Transmission.” 7.2

Dock no. 3 Monitoring and Control

The dock no. 3 monitoring and control of operations are done from a remote blast proof control building located onshore at approximately 330 m from the loading platform. The dock design is based on the “unmanned concept”, which means that a lot of emphasis has been put on monitoring and control of operations. The overall control of the installation is through a Distributed Control System (DCS).

2.R–20

Additional monitoring and control devices are as follows : - for the loading arms: a Position Monitoring System (PMS) is provided. The PMS will not only display the position of the arm flange closest to the alarm 1st step but will also trigger the pre-alarm, the alarm 1st step (ESD) and the alarm 2nd step (ERS) in parallel to proximity switches for alarms detection. The PMS is equipped with a failure auto check mode. - for marine operations : the integrated Marine Monitoring System (MMS) will provide long term weather data collection in the vicinity of dock no. 3 (i.e. wind and current, Bontang port not being subject to waves). It will monitor, when a ship is approaching or departing, the distances and speeds fore and aft together with wind and current conditions (with a handy display for the pilot) and, when the ship is alongside, the tensions in the mooring lines and ship drift off together with wind and current conditions. This later information will be also displayed by telemetry on a portable computer placed on board the ship during the pre-loading meeting with alarms provided on the handy display as well. Trouble shooting assistance is provided by the vendor of the MMS through a dedicated (or part-time dedicated) telephone line to be made available at the Bontang plant. The schematic drawing of the MMS is given on Figure 12.

FIGURE 12: MMS CONFIGURATION

2.R–21

- CCTV system : three remote controlled cameras with pictures displayed on three large color monitors are provided : one on each side of the loading arms to permanently watch the ship manifold, and one on an elevated tower to permanently watch the gangway. Five other remote controlled cameras (dock entrance, main deck, 2nd deck (x 2) and 3rd deck) are provided with scanned pictures displayed on two other color monitors (i.e. a total of 5 monitors is provided in the control room). - a complete Hazard and Monitoring Systems (HMS) is also provided in the dock no. 3 control room. Finally, quick disconnection of the ship is possible using the loading arms Emergency Release System (ERS) through PERC activation by push button or excessive ship drift, by the Quick Release Hooks (QRH) system for the disconnection of the mooring lines and by the emergency raise/retract system of the gangway. 7.3

Dock no. 3 Control Building

As explained before it has been judged that a control building located at some distance from the loading platform was considered safer for personnel and control equipment than a control room located on the loading platform or in its immediate vicinity. Easy access to the loading platform is possible by vehicles or bicycles parked on the emergency park lot or by feet for authorized personnel. The control room is at 330 m from the loading platform, however safety studies have shown that it can be engulfed in an LPG gas cloud in the most serious spillage scenario on dock no 3. Although this scenario is very unlikely, it was decided, after a detailed review of various regulations for buildings design in such case, that the recommendation “Process Plant Hazard and Control Building Design” from Chemical Industries Association would apply for the dock no. 3 control building, i.e., the building will withstand a static blast pressure of 3 psi and an incident dynamic blast pressure of 2.9/14.5 psi for respectively 100/30 milliseconds duration times. Apart from the control room, the stand by mooring team room and the safety room (equipped with fire protection suits, respiratory masks, etc...), the dock no. 3 control building has also an instrument room, an electrical room, an air condition room and other common rooms. A transformers yard is provided near this building. The control building lay out is given on Figure 13.

2.R–22

FIGURE 13: CONTROL BUILDING LAY OUT

8. FIRE PROTECTION A detailed review of regulations and guidelines has been done at the beginning of the project including international conventions, advice from kindred societies: OCIMF, SIGTTO, ICS, IAPH, national regulatory bodies, with the conclusion that there appears to be no international regulations but rather broad, general and often inconsistent guidelines on fire protection for jetties. Risk analysis studies did not seem to be available as well. For the dock no. 3 it was therefore decided to cover as many fire scenarios as was possible. The following design is still under finalization at the time of preparation of this paper, in particular in relation with the protection of the top of the loading arms : - one fixed water curtain is provided on the sea-side front on 3rd deck for loading arms protection. - under deck fixed water curtains are provided on the sea-side front for curbed areas on main deck platform and 2nd deck.

2.R–23

- two tower elevated oscillating fire water monitors remotely controlled from a fire station located at a 60 m distance on the trestle are provided for the cooldown of the surfaces of the main deck platform and 3rd deck (one of these monitors can reach the gangway tower and the pipeway close to the loading platform as well). - the gangway tower and telescopic part are protected by water curtains from heat radiations. The part of the catwalk close to the gangway tower is protected by a water spray. - two pre-aimed tower elevated dry chemical monitors are provided on the 3rd deck in order to help extinguish a possible fire on a ship manifold or on loading arms. - curbed deck areas on main deck and 2nd deck are also protected by fixed dry chemical fire fighting system with hose reels and flooding system. - hydrants with hoses together with portable and wheeled fire extinguishers are provided at different places. - an international fire connection with hose reel is provided on the 3rd deck. - besides the CCTV already described, the dock no. 3 is provided with automatic flame, smoke, gas, and spill detection with alarms system. Controls for fire fighting are made not only from the dock no. 3 control room, but also from the plant main control room in order to have two fire control safe remote places.

9. MISCELLANEOUS The following other items are provided: -

cathodic protection by impressed current. ship grounding cable. lighting. protection against lightning for both external (direct strike) and internal (induced voltage) phenomena. - telephone, paging, speaker system and public address. - navigational aids following IALA recommendations. Finally the millennium problem has been carefully assessed with the vendors of all computer based systems that are provided for the dock no. 3 in order to insure a trouble free passage to year 2000.

2.R–24

10.

CONCLUSION

Past operating experience with loading docks no. 1 and no. 2 has been used widely for the design of the new dock no. 3 in Bontang. Besides, a lot of effort has been deployed in order to emphasize the flexibility, safety and reliability aspects of this new facility. In this regard, the design of dock no. 3 goes into many aspects which are beyond more conventional and perhaps less costly designs. It highlights PERTAMINA’s desire to consistently promote safe and efficient operations in the Bontang port to maintain its reputation as a reliable LNG and LPG supplier.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED

(in the order they appear in the paper)

ICS

=

International Chamber of Shipping

OCIMF

=

Oil Companies International Marine Forum

IAPH

=

International Association of Ports and Harbors

SIGTTO =

Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators

PIANC

=

Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses

IALA

=

International Association of Lighthouse Authorities

REFERENCE CITED [1] “Second Loading Dock for LEG Purposes in Bontang, East Kalimantan, Indonesia” International Harbor Congress Antwerp, June 1988, R.F. Janssen.

2.R–25