1361
1 INTRODUCTION
Due to the emission of detrimental by-products,
including, nitrogen oxides sulphur oxides, etc., which
therefore gives rise to severe environmental impacts,
the shipping regulatory authority has imposed several
rounds of increasingly stringent environmental
regulations controlling sulphur oxide emissions
between 2006 and 2015. These regulations have thus
prompted ship owners and operators to reconsider
their fuel choices. In place of heavy fuel oil, liquefied
natural gas (LNG) is one of the best alternatives as a
shipping fuel, which brings more advantages from
environmental viewpoints, practical and financial [1].
LNG bunkering demands careful attention to safe
operations as it entails potential risks pertaining
directly to the cryogenic liquid transfer and vapour
returns, much more than the conventional liquid fuel
bunkering.
It is apparent that further advancement of LNG as a
marine fuel relates to three factors: the building of new
vessels (or modification of existing ones), the
development of adequate bunkering infrastructure,
and the establishment of an adequate and
comprehensive regulatory framework. at this article
we will stop at regulatory framework to combine
bunker process and other operations, which vessel
should be carry on.
The purpose of this Simultaneous Operations
(SIMOPS) Procedure is to provide all personnel from
LNG Bunkering/Receiving vessels, Bunkering Truck
and Container Terminal who are involved with
simultaneous operations during LNG Bunkering with
a sound knowledge of the relevant safe work practices
and procedures applicable to simultaneous operations.
Simultaneous Operations During LNG Bunkering
at LNG-powered Vessels
I. Surinov
1
, V. Shemonayev
2
& V. Torskiy
2
1
Nordic Hamburg, Odessa, Ukraine
2
National University Odessa Maritime Academy, Odessa, Ukraine
ABSTRACT: The usage of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for maritime vessels is widely viewed as a
transitional option to meet the stringent EU and IMO regulations in the context of long-term decarbonization.
Usage of LNG as a transitional fuel is associated with the goal of reducing or completely eliminating CO2
production (related to the emissions from fossil fuel use such as oil, hard coal, and lignite) in the shipping
industry. Bunkering operations can be done by trucks, bunker barges and specialize ports. In case of bunkering
by trucks or barges, vessel can provide at the same time other operations, such as cargo operations or ballasting.
This article considers some key issues associated with Simultaneous Operations (SIMOPS) Procedure Guide. A
typical case study of bunkering LNG-powered vessel "Containerships Nord" by barge in Rotterdam is used to
demonstrate and verify the proposed SIMOPS Procedure. The results indicate that any SIMOPS activity
undertaken by LNG Bunker vessel, LNG receiving vessel and Container Terminal shall be reviewed and
scheduled to minimize any potential interference or safety impact.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 19
Number 4
December 2025
DOI: 10.12716/1001.19.04.36
1362
This Procedure shall also be used to determine the
compatibility, interference and limitations raised
during the planning and operational stages of LNG
Bunkering operations (Fig. 1).
Figure 1. The activities covered by SIMOPS Procedure.
The requirements of this SIMOPS Procedure shall
be applied to cargo operations during LNG bunkering
activities to highlight and mitigate any potential
restrictions and/or safety impact when planning
SIMOPS work activities due to take place at the same
time and in the same/vicinity location.
As a minimum, this Procedure shall be distributed
by Company to the personnel referenced in the list
below:
− Recognized Organization
− Port Authorities
− Container Terminal Administration
− LNG Supplier
− Bunkering vessel
− Bunkered vessel
− Simultaneous Operations Leader
− Simultaneous Operations Controller
− Person in Charge (PIC) of Bunkering operations
To summarize, Simultaneous operations are
allowed by Company on board of LNG fuelled vessel
when this recommended procedure are followed and
conditions outlines in the procedures are met.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW AND PROBLEM
STATEMENT
The maritime industry is under pressure to improve its
sustainability – especially its emissions to air. In terms
of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), the industry
needs to take advantage of improvements today – to
minimize the long-term impact on the planet [2].
According to article [3], various incentives and
motivations, including laws and regulations, to reduce
shipping's exhaust emissions are being adopted. One
of the emission reduction attempts is the use of LNG as
a marine fuel. LNG, as a marine fuel, produces
virtually 0% sulphur dioxide emissions. Moreover,
compared with conventional marine bunker fuels,
LNG has the potential to reduce carbon dioxide
emissions by 10% to 20%, nitrogen oxide emissions by
up to 80% or 90%, and particulate matter emission by
98% to 100%. At this paper examines the regulatory
legal regime in relation to the use of LNG as marine
fuel and highlights the areas where further
development is necessary. But this analysis was done
only by presenting regulations and requirements for
use of LNG as fuel. For further development of it need
to collect all practical data such as costs, reduction of
CO2 emission, quantity of vessel, etc.
Paper [4] states the general regulation for actions to
cut the GHG emission from shipping. The main
strategy of GHG envisages the reduction of
international shipping in carbon intensity (reducing
CO2 emissions from transport activities on average for
international shipping from 40% to 70% by 2050).
According to this, growing the problem concerning
new opportunities for seafarers. However, article is not
covered new requirements for seafarer who will work
at LNG-powered vessels (which certificates and
training they should have).
Study [5] consider about issues with LNG
terminals. It shows the main aspect of problems that
can arise during bunkering at such terminals. Further
research could be in comparing specialized terminals
and bunkering through the barges. At the other study
[6] employs a second-stage empirical analysis
approach that selects criteria for shipping companies’
selection of a LNG bunkering port through a literature
review and interviews, and then adopts a fuzzy-AHP
methodology to reveal the priority of the LNG
bunkering port selection criteria in LNG bunkering
decision making. The results indicate that most
shipping companies decide on LNG bunkering port
with a stronger emphasis on safety/security or port
services rather than port reputation. According to this
research, port Rotterdam provides safe operation to
bunker vessels through barges. In our paper will
provide an example on using SIMOPS directly in port
of Rotterdam.
The usage of LNG as fuel for maritime vessels (Fig.
2) is widely viewed as a transitional option to meet the
stringent EU and IMO regulations in the context of
long-term decarbonization [7].
Figure 2. Associations with usage use of LNG as a
transitional fuel
LNG as a shipping fuel has been gaining supporters
worldwide and is considered the most advanced new
technology in the shipbuilding industry. Compared to
conventional fuels, the use of LNG as marine fuel
makes it possible to reduce the following [8, 9]:
1. Sulfur oxide emissions by ca. 90–95%;
2. Carbon dioxide emissions by ca. 20–25%.
The most important of the criteria mentioned above
is the possibility of bunkering LNG on key shipping
routes. The existing LNG-bunkering infrastructure is
poorly developed and situated along the coast. The
ultimate LNG-bunkering infrastructure should
1363
comprise facilities, LNG-powered ships, and LNG
bunkering vessels capable of meeting the demand in
SECA while adhering to the principles of rational
management [10].
Paper [11] proposes the size of the distribution of
LNG as a marine fuel using the example of the
southern Baltic Sea. This paper [11] presents the
distribution network for LNG as a marine fuel in the
southern Baltic Sea. An analysis of ship traffic intensity
was presented and the demand for LNG as a bunker
fuel was determined. Research was carried out for
polish ports. For further development it can be done in
same manner for Asian ports.
Analysis of prices for LNG as fuel was done in
Netherlands (Fig. 3). As shown, prices are dropping
down. That makes more benefits for owners to transfer
to LNG fuel.
Figure 3. Prices for LNG fuel in Netherlands
Research [12] compares nine different scenarios
with the use of different fuel for vessels such as
ammonia, LNG, scrubber, low Sulphur fuel use and
selective catalytic reduction, and each scenario is
analyzed both environmentally and economically and
compared to each other. However, this study does not
indicate all available technologies to reduce emission.
Paper [13] presents an experimental methodology
for LNG ship handling in ports using the full mission
simulator and describes the implementation of the
proposed procedure in simulation development. For
the methodology of conducting a fruitful simulation,
this paper provides the detailed experimental
procedure systematically. Simulation was in the
Meizhou Bay terminal in China. However, the high
cost of the full mission simulation is controversial, and
it may be a disadvantage to this method.
Article [14] provides an overview of performing
shore-to-ship and ship-to-ship (Fig. 4) compatibility
studies. The key aspects of ship-to-ship compatibility
study are:
− Manifold configurations between bunkering and
receiving vessels;
− Receiving vessel flat surface and bunkering vessel
fender surface contact;
− Vessel mooring analysis;
− Personnel transfer approach;
− Crane outreach;
− Hose length.
Figure 4. Types of LNG bunkering
Also, need to mentioned about importance of
placement of LNG tanks. Most ships have two basic
options for bunker tank placement: in the middle of the
vessel, instead of the hold, and at the rear of the vessel's
superstructure. Both of these options provide safety
during SIMOPS [15]. This type of design can be seen in
the example of the company Nordic Hamburg: mv
“Containerships Nord” and mv “CMA CGM
Mermaid”.
Paper [16] proposes the concrete actions in case of
different emergency situations during LNG bunkering.
The proposed prevention actions and activeness in case
of emergency further safety regulations, such as using
Personal protective equipment, at ports and port areas
for LNG bunkering should be developed. Further
study of the problem of ensuring the safe operation of
the LNG-powered vessels is relevant.
To sum-up, LNG bunkering is challenging process.
It requires appropriate knowledge and skills. But
during bunkering should not be postpone cargo
operations or any other. For this reason, the importance
of proper SIMOPS is leading to safe time for shipping
and keep safety all operations.
3 FORMULATION OF THE GOALS OF THE
ARTICLE (STATEMENT OF THE TASK)
The main aim of the article is to study the process of the
possibility of conducting simultaneous operations
during LNG bunkering, as well as the impact of this on
the safety of the receiving vessel, bunkering vessel, and
port terminal. The main secondary operation will be
considered cargo operations on the vessel since they
are of particular importance. The article demonstrates
the possibility of reducing the minimum impact on the
delay of cargo operations during LNG bunkering in the
port of Rotterdam using the example of a m/v
“Containerships Nord”. Any SIMOPS activity
undertaken by LNG Bunker vessel, LNG receiving
vessel and Container Terminal shall be reviewed and
scheduled to minimize any potential interference or
safety impact.
To achieve this goal there are several tasks which
should be determine:
1. Responsibilities of all relevant parties.
2. Area Classification on LNG-powered vessel.
3. Cargo operations SIMOPS
4. SIMOPS organization
1364
The methodology of this research presents at Fig. 5.
To attain the first task is necessary to designate
responsibilities between SIMOPS Leaders and
Controllers. To accomplish second goal, need to
determine the location and quantity of hazardous and
safety zones. The next step is distribution of tasks for
cargo operation between terminal and vessel. Only
after that will be possible to formulate the time
management for organization of SIMOPS and create
check lists. Also, it is important to organize assistance
in case of emergency and support team. As the result
of this article, Risk analysis flow chart will be
presented.
Figure 5. Methodology of the research article
4 PRESENTATION OF THE RESEARCH
MATERIAL WITH A FULL JUSTIFICATION OF
THE OBTAINED SCIENTIFIC RESULTS
4.1 Responsibility of the SIMOPS Leader and Controller
form vessel and terminal parts
Information relevant to any SIMOPS activity, which
has potential impact to the other personnel working in
the same area, shall be informed to all concerned
personnel prior to the commencement of the planned
SIMOPS activity.
Urgent decisions regarding any SIMOPS shall fall
under the responsibility of the SIMOPS Leader and
Terminal Leader, who, through joint agreement, shall
reach conclusion as to which activity takes precedent.
For this reason is necessary to obtain the role of each
participant at SIMPOS.
The company appointed Master (Chief Officer as
deputy) on board the vessel to perform duties of
SIMOPS Leader. The Simultaneous Operations Leader
is responsible for proper coordination and safe
simultaneous interfaces between parties as well as
identification and resolution of any potential impact on
other operations. The SIMOPS Leader liaises with all
involved parties and supervisors such as Terminal
leader, SIMOPS Controller, Bunkering vessel/truck
Leader and Port Authorities. The SIMOPS Leader
ensures that all members of the operational teams duly
enforce the requirements of this SIMOPS procedure.
However, Bunkering vessel, Bunkering truck and
Terminal’s team shall remain fully responsible for the
safe management of their own operations. The SIMOPS
Leader acts under guidance and control of the
Company, additionally he reports and liaises with
Company as required.
It is the responsibility of the SIMOPS Leader to
follow up to completion of all planned SIMOPS
activities and to report to the Company any trend or
omission, which could potentially jeopardize the
planning schedule, work areas or terminal. In the event
of a disagreement regarding the safety or schedule of a
proposed simultaneous operation or the continuation
of activity, the matter should be decided by the
SIMOPS Leader. The SIMOPS Leader must oversee
work coordination meeting.
The responsibilities of SIMOPS Leader present at
Fig. 6, but this list is not limited.
Figure 6. SIMOPS Leader responsibilities
The Company appointed Chief Officer (2nd.Off as
deputy) on board Managed vessels to perform duties
of SIMOPS Controller. His duties provide at Table 1.
Table 1. Duties of Terminal and Vessel Controllers
No.
Duties of Terminal Controller
1
Control of SIMOPS activities from
terminal side
2
Ensuring proper authorization, issue
and cancellation of Permits for
SIMOPS in terminal areas
3
Reporting deviations in the
conditions of the Permit during
cargo operations and, if necessary,
the suspend or cancel SIMOPS
4
Arranging means of emergency stop
of cargo operations during SIMOPS
activities
5
Coordinating with the terminal’s
planner to ensure most optimum
schedule is achieved for cargo
operations during SIMOPS activities
6
7
8
4.2 Differences between Terminal and Operation areas
with example
Two types of areas are defined on LNG Bunkering:
Terminal areas and Operation area on board of
receiving vessel (Hazard and Safety Zone).
All berths fall under the responsibility of the
Container terminal and Port Authorities (Terminal
area) shall be deemed as Monitoring and Security zone.
The Monitoring and Security Zone is the area around
the bunkering vessel and receiving vessel where ship
traffic and other activities are monitored (and
controlled) to prevent entry and provide a ‘stand-off’
distance during the bunkering operation (Fig. 7).
1365
All areas which fall under the responsibility of the
SIMOPS Leader (Operation area) shall be deemed as
Restricted Areas. Restricted areas shall be surrounded
by security fencing and shall have warning signs
erected. All work in restricted areas must be performed
with a valid permit to work and entry is also restricted
to authorized/permitted personnel (Fig. 7).
The Restricted areas fall into two zones as follows:
− Hazardous zone;
− Safety zone.
Figure 7. Restricted areas during LNG bunkering
Bunkering-related hazardous areas (Fig. 8) means
any hazardous area zone 1 and zone 2 defined for:
− The receiving ship in accordance with IGF Code,
regulation 12.5.
− The bunkering ship in accordance with IGC Code,
regulation 1.2.24.
Figure 8. Determination of Hazardous areas on board
The bunkering-related hazardous zone (Fig. 9) also
includes areas around LNG bunker vessel or shore-
based bunkering facility. Depending on the outcomes
of the risk assessment and the specific details of the
bunkering process (equipment and transfer flow rates
and pressures) the size of these areas may be increased.
Figure 9. Hazardous zone during LNG bunkering
In the hazardous zones, only electrical equipment
certified in accordance with IEC 60079 is permitted.
Attention is drawn to the following equipment,
which is not intrinsically safe and should therefore be
disabled, except if otherwise justified:
− The radar equipment on bunkering and receiving
vessels, which may emit high power densities.
− Other electrical equipment of the ship, such as radio
equipment and satellite communication equipment.
The “Safety Zone” (Fig. 10) is defined as an area
around the bunkering station where only dedicated
and essential personnel and activities are allowed. The
Safety Zone shall be established around LNG
Bunkering Operation. This is to control ignition
sources and ensure that only essential personnel and
activities are allowed in the area that could be exposed
to flammable gas in the event of an accidental release
during the LNG Bunkering Operation.
The dimensions of the safety zone are determined
by a horizontal safety zone distance for each dispersion
surface (depending on the actual wind direction) and a
vertical safety zone distance above each dispersion
surface. All horizontal distances should be seen from
the location of the bunker station at the container
vessel.
Figure 10. Safety zone during LNG bunkering
As an example we take m/v “Containerships Nord”
and determine the Safety Zone on it during bunkering
with “LNG London” in port Rotterdam.
The horizontal safety zone distances are as follows:
− In the direction of the container vessel / quay: 24
meters from bunker manifold
− In the direction of the LNG bunker vessel / water:
43 meters from bunker manifold
− In the direction parallel to the length of both vessels
(above the water in between the vessels):48 meters
from bunker manifold
It is important to note that the deck width of the
container vessel is 26.5 m. The horizontal safety zone
remains on the container vessel (extends 24 m from
bunker manifold).
The extent of the horizontal safety zone in the three
different directions is illustrated in the Fig. 11. There is
a discontinuity of the safety zone at the bow of the LNG
bunker vessel (intersection of dispersion surface water
and LNG bunker vessel). This the area where the cloud
still be flammable as determined by a detailed
1366
evaluation of the dispersion on water in this area. The
extent of the zone is conservatively assumed based on
the maximum cloud width as function distance
downwind, taking into account the possible wind
directions and the physical obstruction of the bow of
the bunker vessel.
Figure 11. Horizontal Safety zone
The maximum extent of the vertical safety zone is
based on the same cases that are used to determine the
horizontal safety zone (the maximum height is taken).
The vertical zone should be seen relative to the
dispersion surfaces and extends over the entire
horizontal safety zone in the same direction.
The vertical safety zone distances are as follows:
− Above the container vessel: 10 m;
− Above the LNG bunker vessel (and further on the
water): 11 m;
− Above the water in between the two vessels: 17 m.
The extent of the vertical safety zone in the three
different directions is illustrated in the Fig. 12.
Figure 12. Vertical Safety zone
Each company should establish restrictions during
SIMOPS in Hazardous and Safety Zones. As example,
here provides requirements by Nordic Hamburg:
1. In order to protect the bunkering station from
dropped objects, all container operations (for outer
row on top of Fuel Gas Handling Room Bay 21) next
to bunkering station while bunkering activities are
under progress must be suspended.
2. Smoking outside of accommodation is strictly
prohibited any time. Smoking allowed in dedicated
smoking room only.
3. Presence of naked lights, mobile phones, cameras,
and other non-certified portable electrical
equipment in Safety Zone are strictly prohibited
during LNG bunkering. Safety posters to be placed
at the gangway. Every visitor to be instructed before
boarding the vessel. All unauthorized devices to be
collected and stored in dedicated area.
4. Access to the safety zone is granted to authorized
staff if they are fitted with personal protective
equipment (PPE) with anti-static properties.
5. Prior SIMOPS activities the Generic Risk
assessment for LNG bunkering to be reviewed,
Operation part to be completed by SIMOPS
controller and signed by SIMOPS Leader.
6. Receiving any kinds of stores and supplies
prohibited in Safety zone
7. Any maintenance jobs within Safety zone strictly
prohibited
8. Cargo Holds ventilation within Safety zone shall be
stopped. In case of specific cargo required
ventilation of cargo holds covered by safety zone,
only exhaust mechanical ventilators to be used as
far as practically possible from Hazardous zone.
9. Reefer containers plugging/unplugging to vessel’s
power supply sockets within Safety zone not
allowed during LNG Bunkering. In case of any
abnormal parameters of LNG transfer, the reefer’s
power supply to be cut off from main switchboard
10. In case of any abnormal parameters or alarms
appear during LNG transfer, the bunkering/cargo
operations to be stopped immediately and
Container terminal’s staff to be informed
accordingly
11. Due to permanent location of Hazardous zone on
Bay 1, Bay 19 and Bay 21, twist lock’s installation
and lashing of containers to be performed under
supervision of qualified crew only. In case of any
alarms or notification of abnormal parameters any
activities in Hazardous and Safety zones to be
suspended and crew/stevedores evacuated
immediately.
4.3 Objectives and planning of cargo operations during
LNG bunkering as part of SIMOPS
The SIMOPS Leader has responsibility (Fig. 13) for the
planning of cargo operations SIMOPS and for
establishing, together with the Container
Figure 13. Responsibilities of SIMOPS Leader
The SIMOPS Leader has to notify and agree the
Simultaneous Operations with terminal Leader . When
SIMOPS are identified, the SIMOPS Leader will advise
all involved parties (LNG bunkering/receiving vessels)
the planning of SIMOPS. The cargo operations shall
incorporate all relevant information relating to
SIMOPS including limitations, areas of conflict and
include or refer to applicable emergency procedures.
They should did this agreement in paper manner. For
this reason much better to have some checklist to easier
understanding. As example, provide Nordic Hamburg
Checklist (Fig. 14) between Terminal and Vessel.
1367
Figure 14. Ship-Terminal SIMOPS checklist
Prior to commencing Simultaneous operations the
SIMOPS Leader and SIMOPS Controller will meet with
all involved parties to verify the aspects of the
operation, confirm emergency procedures and identify
any constraints and/or limitations and conflicting
activities. Once the plan of the operation is confirmed
and the detailed program and/or procedures
approved, every effort shall be extended to mobilize
equipment and personnel to meet and achieve the
schedule. Methods of communication shall be clearly
established between all work parties during the
planning of any SIMOPS activity.
4.4 SIMOPS organization including Work Permits and
Check Lists
Prior SIMOPS activities the pre-bunkering conference
shall be carried out by the SIMOPS Leader, Terminal
Leader and SIMOPS Controller to ensure that all
precautions have been implemented and equipment is
available to fulfil the planned schedule. Special
attention will be given to the methods of raising the
alarm and acting on emergency. Pre-bunkering
conference shall include discussion of necessary escape
routes, location of safety equipment and muster points.
SIMOPS meetings shall be held and are required to:
1. Ensure the highest standards of safety awareness
for all personnel.
2. Ensure proper communication, cooperation and
coordination is maintained between the parties.
3. Ensure proper understanding of planning and
progress of SIMOPS activities to minimize time
losses.
Also, need to carry out The Work Permit
Procedures and Risk Assessment for each LNG
bunkering and SIMOPS. Near miss and incident
reporting for any SIMOPS activity shall be in
accordance with the Company requirements.
The preparation of the SIMOPS activities as far as
organization, equipment, material and procedures are
concerned, shall be shared with Terminal and sign the
Checklists (Fig. 14 – 15).
Figure 15. SIMOPS Internal Check List
All equipment shall be in conformance with
classification for hazardous area. Other equipment will
be subject to and controlled by the Permit to Work
System.
1368
Such equipment may include, but not limited to:
− Power tools
− Communication system
− Lifting equipment
− Hand tools
All plant and equipment for use within the SIMOPS
areas will be subject to pre-inspection.
5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
All areas under simultaneous operations shall be
restricted to unauthorized access by personnel not
involved in the operation. Measures presented on Fig.
16 shall be put in place to control entry into these areas.
Figure 16. Precautions measures during SIMOPS
All the time SIMOPS Controller shall monitor
restricted areas and maintain communication between
vessels and Terminal Leader. Firm communication to
be established and tested with regular interval during
SIMOPS. Means of Emergency stop and alarm to be
discussed during SIMOPS toolbox meeting.
Additional supporting groups (Table 2) shall be
available and shall fully support any SIMOPS activity
as required.
Table 2. Additional Support Groups regulations
Fire and Emergency Team
Safety Guard
1. The onboard the fire and
rescue team as prescribed by
Muster List shall be ready for
immediate use during SIMOPS
works and shall fully support the
Bunkering/receiving vessel and
Terminal personnel on board
during SIMOPS activity.
1. All personnel are in possession
of an authorized work permit
prior to entry into a Restricted
zone.
2. Fire team shall be mustered in
designated area in case of
emergency.
2. Check all personnel upon entry
and exit from the Restricted zone
for unauthorized equipment
tools, materials and equipment.
3. In the event of an emergency,
the fire and rescue team shall
take immediate action to secure
the area and commence
preparations for control of the
situation.
3. All personnel must be recorded
in Visitor’s log book before entry
to Restricted area.
4. As necessary, the firefighting
Port Emergency team may be
called to assist with control of the
situation (refer to Emergency
Contact list for Ports).
4. No hand phones are carried
into the Safety zone.
5. No cameras are carried into the
Safety zone.
6. All walkie-talkies used within
the Safety zone are ex-proof.
7. “No smoking” rule is enforced
within the safety zone.
As an example of SIMOPS requirements take LNG
bunkering of m/v “Containerships Nord” and bunker
vessel “LNG London” in port Rotterdam, Netherlands
terminal RST. There is an Agreement (Fig. 17) between
3 parties (Terminal, bunkering vessel and receiving
vessel) that cargo operations shall carry out in
accordance with following rules:
1. Loading or discharging is allowed under the
following conditions:
− Crew conducting the cargo operation is not
directly involved in the LNG bunker operation;
− No loading or discharging of containers in the
below described bay's and rows when the
bunker boom is operated. Meaning on
connection, purging and disconnection:
− outer 2 rows of containers on the bay 17 to
bay 25 on deck;
− outer row of containers on the bay bay 17 to
bay 25 from cargo holds below deck.
− No loading or discharging of the containers in
the outer 2 rows of containers in bay 21.
2. Lashing of containers is allowed under the
following conditions:
− Crew conducting the lashing is not directly
involved in the LNG bunker operation - Crew in
safety zone is clearly instructed communication
procedure;
− The crew of the bunker barge will inform the PIC
of the receiving vessel when the restrictions will
start and inform the PIC of the receiving vessel
when the restrictions are lifted.
3. The connection part of the bunkering can be
matched with the terminals schedule on the affected
bay's when agreed prior operations.
4. The draining and disconnection must be done
directly done after the completion of the transfer of
LNG, as waiting is not possible as trapped LNG will
form a high safety risk. Therefore the crew will
inform the PIC of the receiving ship 30min. before
completion of the LNG transfer.
5. Container vessel will inform terminal that bunker
boom will be used and the described bay's and
rows.
6. Terminal confirms compliance to restrictions.
Figure 17. Agreement between parties for SIMOPS
As result of this research we propose SIMOPS Risk
Analysis Flow Chart (Fig. 18).
1369
Figure 18. SIMOPS Risk Analysis Flow Chart
According the Flow chart before commence any
SIMOPS it is necessary to:
1. Identify operation, which will be carry out;
Hazardous locations and complexity of operation.
2. Analyze all risk factors which could be raised.
3. Informed all involved parties.
6 CONCLUSIONS
To summarize, the process of the possibility of
conducting simultaneous operations during LNG
bunkering was found acceptable. The impact of cargo
operations on the safety of the receiving vessel,
bunkering vessel, and port terminal is minimize in case
all parties will follow SIMOPS Risk Analysis Flow
Chart. As result of this study:
1. All SIMOPS shall have the SIMOPS Leader and
Terminal Leader, who, through joint agreement,
shall reach conclusion as to which activity takes
precedent. Leaders can delegate some of their
duties to Controllers.
2. Near both vessels establish Safety zone and
hazardous zone. Hazardous zone includes 2 zone.
And Safety zone divides for Horizontal safety zone
and Vertical Safety zone.
3. Before commence of anu operations Ship-Terminal
SIMOPS checklist shall be discuss and sign.
4. All Risk Assessment shall be taken in account.
As statement of the requirements of SIMOPS
Procedure we can mention following:
1. Establish a mechanism for the review of proposed
activities to identify roles and responsibilities
2. Establish an organization chart of responsible
personnel who shall authorize simultaneous
activities.
3. Ensure simultaneous activities are controlled and
performed in a safe manner by:
− Defining the responsibilities of all personnel
involved in the tasks.
− Appointing a Simultaneous Operations Leader
to coordinate the activities between the vessel
and terminal.
− Identifying any preventive safety measures,
which shall be implemented prior to
commencement of the simultaneous activities
− Establishing communication channels.
− Providing training of all personnel involved in
the tasks.
4. To minimize the potential for personnel injury and
equipment damage by:
− Controlling and restricting personnel access to
areas where simultaneous activities may be
taking place.
− Providing specific instruction for securing
operations and mustering personnel in case of
emergency.
This study is a continuation of previous work such
as [4] about requirements for transferring for green
opportunities to reduce greenhouses gases and [16] –
training crew to perform LNG bunkering. Further
research is needed in description of safety concept of
LNG bunker facility.
REFERENCES
[1] Tam JH. 2022. Overview of performing shore-to-ship and
ship-to-ship compatibility studies for LNG bunker
vessels. J Mar Eng Technol. 21:257–270. Available at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20464177.
2020.1827489?scroll=top&needAccess=true (viewed at
15.11.2024) doi:10.1080/20464177.2020.1827489.
[2] Why LNG as fuel. DNV. URL:
https://www.dnv.com/maritime/insights/topics/lng-as-
marine-fuel/ (date of access: 06.02.2025).
[3] Xu J., Testa D., Mukherjee P. K. The Use of LNG as a
Marine Fuel: The International Regulatory Framework.
Ocean Development & International Law. 2015. Vol. 46,
no. 3. P. 225–240. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2015.1054744 (date of
access: 06.02.2025).
https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2015.1054744.
[4] Surinov I., Shemonayev V. New opportunities for
seafarers owing to reduction emission and arising the
number of Dual fuel vessels. IOP Conference Series: Earth
and Environmental Science. 2021. Vol. 915, no. 1. P.
012029. URL: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-
1315/915/1/012029 (date of access: 06.02.2025).
[5] Coates M. LNG Receiving Terminals – Some Key Legal
Issues. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law. 2010.
Vol. 28, no. 2. P. 207–231. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2010.11435244 (date of
access: 08.02.2025).
[6] Kim A.-R., Kwak D.-W., Seo Y.-J. Evaluation of liquefied
natural gas bunkering port selection. International
Journal of Logistics Research and Applications. 2019. P.
1–14. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2019.1642311
(date of access: 08.02.2025).
[7] Decarbonizing Maritime Transport: The Importance of
Engine Technology and Regulations for LNG to Serve as
a Transition Fuel / E. Lindstad et al. Sustainability. 2020.
Vol. 12, no. 21. P. 8793. URL:
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218793 (date of access:
08.02.2025).
[8] A Study and Design on Tank Container for Fuel Tank of
LNG Fueled Ship / T.-W. Kim et al. Journal of the Society
of Naval Architects of Korea. 2012. Vol. 49, no. 6. P. 504–
511. URL: https://doi.org/10.3744/snak.2012.49.6.504 (date
of access: 08.02.2025).
[9] Skarżyński M. Śródlądowe punkty tankowania LNG w
polityce energetycznej Unii Europejskiej. Przegląd
Politologiczny. 2022. No. 1. P. 73–81. URL:
https://doi.org/10.14746/pp.2022.27.1.5 (date of access:
08.02.2025).
1370
[10] IGU. World LNG Report, 2020 Edition; IGU: Oslo,
Norway, 2020.
[11] Orysiak E., Shuper M. Determination of Demand for
LNG in Poland. Energies. 2024. Vol. 17, no. 17. P. 4414.
URL: https://doi.org/10.3390/en17174414 (date of access:
08.02.2025).
[12] Ejder E., Karatuğ Ç., Arslanoğlu Y. Cost-benefit analysis
of emission reduction techniques: a case for container
vessel. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology.
2024. P. 1–11. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2024.2317511 (date of
access: 08.02.2025).
[13] A systematic simulation methodology for LNG ship
operations in port waters: a case study in Meizhou Bay /
L.-j. Chen et al. Journal of Marine Engineering &
Technology. 2017. P. 1–21. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2016.1276823 (date of
access: 10.02.2025).
[14] Tam J. H. Overview of performing shore-to-ship and
ship-to-ship compatibility studies for LNG bunker
vessels. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology.
2020. P. 1–14. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2020.1827489 (date of
access: 13.02.2025).
[15] Evaluation of safety exclusion zone for LNG bunkering
station on LNG-fuelled ships / B. Jeong et al. Journal of
Marine Engineering & Technology. 2017. Vol. 16, no. 3. P.
121–144. URL:
https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2017.1295786 (date of
access: 18.02.2025).
[16] Surinov I. Studying the impact of proper crew trainings
and safety procedure during LNG bunkering. Advanced
Materials Proceedings. 2023. Vol. 8, no. 1. P. 1–7. URL:
https://doi.org/10.5185/amp.2023.5582.1004 (date of
access: 18.02.2025).