NVIC 08-84: Submitting merchant vessel plans and specifications

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD U.S. Coast Guard (G-MTH-4)) Washington, DC 20593 Phone: (202) 426-2197 NVIC 8-84 23 AUG 1984 NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 8-84 Subj: Recommendations for the Submittal of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications Ref: (a) Navigation and Vessel inspection Circular No. l0-82, "Acceptance of Plan Review and Inspection Tasks Performed by the American Bureau of Shipping for New Construction or Major Modifications of U.S. Flag Vessels" (b) Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular No. 3-84 "Acceptance of Stability Related Review Performed by the American Bureau of Shipping for New U.S. Flag Vessels"

Recommendations for the Submittal of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications — PURPOSE. The purpose of this Circular is to revise Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular

(NVIC) 6-79, "Coast Guard Review of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications", to reflect the procedures outlined in references (a) and (b), and to overcome deficiencies in NVIC 6-79.

Recommendations for the Submittal of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications — DIRECTIVE AND. NVIC 6-79 is canceled.

DIRECTIVE AND. NVIC 6-79 is canceled.

Recommendations for the Submittal of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications — DISCUSSION.

a. Titles 33 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations require certain plans and specifications regarding the construction and alteration of various types of vessels to be submitted to the Coast Guard for review. In the past, the majority of this plan review was conducted by the Coast Guard’s field technical offices. b. As a result of the agreement signed by the Coast Guard and the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) on 27 April 1982, the Coast Guard expanded its acceptance of ABS plan review and inspection for vessels certificated by the Coast Guard and classed by ABS. The details of this agreement are contained in NVIC l0-82. c. The Coast Guard will accept stability review performed by ABS for certain vessels receiving a load line assigned by ABS. The details of this acceptance are contained in NVIC 3-84. d. The recommendations found in Enclosure (l) of this Circular apply to all plans that are submitted to the Coast Guard, or ABS, for those functions ABS performs on behalf of the Coast Guard. For ABS class requirements, ABS Circulars and ABS Rules should be consulted.

Recommendations for the Submittal of Merchant Vessel Plans and Specifications — ACTION. All affected members of the marine community are urged to adopt and support the

procedures outlined in this Circular. NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 8-84 a. Enclosure (1) contains Coast Guard recommendations regarding effective plan submittal procedures that would facilitate the review process. Plan submitters should ensure that plans submitted contain, as a minimum, the information listed in the enclosure. This should assure an orderly transmittal of necessary information. Since the Code of Federal Regulations addresses submittal requirements, enclosure (l) is provided only for guidance in determining the extent of information needed for plan review. For vessels classed by ABS, adherence to the provisions of NVIC l0-82 concerning plan review procedures is highly encouraged. For vessels receiving a load line assigned by ABS, the procedures of NVIC 3-84 may be utilized. b. To help eliminate unnecessary plan review, the following plan submittal policy is recommended:

(1) District Commander (mmt) off ices or ABS, as applicable, in accordance with plan submittal recommendations found in enclosure (1), will review design non- working) plans. Significant revisions to these plans should be submitted to the cognizant reviewing offices for approval action. Plan revisions should be directed to the same organization which approved the original drawings, in accordance with NVIC l0-82 or NVIC 3-84, and Enclosure (l).

(2) Reviewing offices may also review the original issue of key shipyard “working” plans, depending on the nature of the information shown on these drawings. Them plans often snow important information not shown on the design drawings. All subsequent revisions to the original shipyard “working” plans should be submitted directly to the Coast Guard resident inspector (if one is assigned to the shipyard), the cognizant Officer in Charge Marine Inspection, or to the local ABS surveyor, as appropriate, for action. The intent of this procedure is to screen plans to determine whether additional formal review and approval is necessary.

(3) All revised plans submitted for approval should clearly identify those areas modified from the previous revisions. c. District Commander (mmt) offices will not provide courtesy review of proposed designs. Informal question and answer sessions concerning the applicability of specific regulations or new concepts are, however, encouraged. d. The Coast Guard desires to review contract plans and specifications once it has become evident that a vessel (or class of vessels) will be built. This action will facilitate the development of working plans. A signed shipyard contract and the submission, as appropriate, of an application for inspection (CG Form 3752) to the cognizant officer in Charge, Marine Inspection will normally be indicative of an owner’s intent to build. e. It is recommended that, unless specifically exempted by the Commandant, all vendor and subcontractor plans and specifications submitted to the Coast Guard be submitted through a single point (i.e. the prime contractor). The Coast Guard's experience with this procedure, notably with foreign construction and the foreign vessel letter of Compliance program, has shown the following benefits:

(1) The Coast Guard will be able to more effectively set plan review priorities for a vessel project by dealing with only one point of contact. NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 8-84

(2) Plan review is facilitated by reducing confusion, delays, and requests for additional information, and by minimizing the Coast Guard's involvement in disputes between owner, prime contractor and subcontractor.

(3) A reduction in the Coast Guard's involvement in paper management, and unnecessary and redundant plan review can be achieved by placing the burden of responsibility for an effective plan submittal (timing sequence, organization, compactness, and completeness) upon one owner-designated individual or group of individuals. f.

All plans submitted to the Coast Guard for review action that do not contain required information will be returned without action to the submitter.

The original submittal letter will be returned with an appropriate note indicating which plans referenced in the letter are returned. g.

Those plans determined to be grossly at variance with the regulations, contrary to basic engineering principles, or in general not ready for review (i.e. illegible not in English, or diagrammatics without an attached bill of material, etc.) will be returned disapproved without itemized comments.

The submitter will be referred to a major section of regulations or plan review policy as appropriate. h.

As an incentive for submitters to identify and document, when practicable, previously approved design details (i.e. structure, arrangement, system components, etc.) to be incorporated into a new vernal project, the Coast Guard will place a higher priority on the review of such submittals.

The most effective means of implementing this procedure would be to submit a copy of the drawing (showing the Coast Guard approval stamp) and/or a copy of the approval letter en enclosed with the new vessel plan package.

This will help reduce time delays caused by having to retrieve material from files which may not be readily accessible. i.

Standard design booklets applicable to the practices of a particular shipyard (rather than a specific vessel as in 4.h. above) also can provide useful information that could save plan review time.

If submitted to a District Commander (mmt) these booklets will be reviewed and kept on file for a period of no longer than five years. j.

One copy of the approved plans are forwarded to the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection in whose zone the vessel is being built.

The approved plans are used by the local marine inspector to verify construction in accordance with the approved plans. k.

Nothing herein shall be taken as amending applicable regulations, or as prescribing or limiting the authority and responsibility of the Coast Guard in requiring all information necessary in the review of merchant vessel plans.

NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 8-84 End: (1) Plan Submittal Recommendations Non-Standard Distribution: C:e Baltimore (45); Alameda (40)1 Port Arthur, Honolulu, Puget Sound (35); Miami, Mobile, Long Beach (25); Norfolk, Jacksonville, Portland OR (20); Boston, Portland ME, Charleston, Anchorage (15); Cleveland (12); Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Nashville, Paducah, Pittsburgh, St.

Louis, Savannah San Juan, Tampa, Galveston, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit, Duluth, San Diego, Jureau, Valdez (10); Providence, Huntington, Wilmington, Corpus Christi, Toledo (5).

C:m New Orleans (140); New York (70); Philadelphia (35); Houston (25); St.

Ignace (5); Sturgeon Bay

(4). D:l CG Liaison Officer MILSEALIFTCOMD M-65 STRAT MOB, CG Liaison Officer JUSMAGPHIL (1).