2.R–1

BONTANG FUTURE 3RD LNG/LPG DOCK:A DESIGN WHICH ACHIEVES VERY HIGH LEVELS OF

FLEXIBILITY, SAFETY AND RELIABILITY

LA FUTURE 3ÈME JETEE DE CHARGEMENT GNL/GPL DEBONTANG: UNE CONCEPTION QUI ASSURE DES

NIVEAUX TRES ELEVES DE FLEXIBILITE,SECURITE ET FIABILITE

Yosua SitepuTrain G and 3rd Dock/LPG Storage Project Manager

Pertamina Projects PKPGedung Patra Jasa, 13th Floor

Jl. Gatot Subroto Kav. 32-34 - Jakarta 12950, Indonesia

Bertrand LanquetinGas Shipping Department Technical Manager

Total S.A., Tour Total24 Cours Michelet

92069 Paris La Défense Cedex, France

ABSTRACT

The Bontang LNG/LPG expansion project includes a 8th liquefaction train, a 6th LNGtank, a 5th LPG tank and a 3rd LNG/LPG loading dock, making this plant the biggest inthe world with a forecast of 390 to 410 LNG cargoes and 30 to 40 LPG cargoes to belifted every year by year 2000.

Given the docking requirements, the design of the new loading dock has been anextremely challenging task for PERTAMINA and considerable emphasis has been put onflexibility, safety and reliability aspects :

- flexibility : the new dock has been designed for 65 LNG ships of all types with sizesranging from 18,000 m3 to 145,000 m3 and for 128 LPG ships with sizes ranging from15,000 m3 to 100,000 m3, which is the biggest fleet ever used for a loading dock design.

- safety : particular attention has been paid to all safety matters including : siting andorientation of the dock, fire fighting, emergency escape routes, prevention, alarms,emergency shut down and release systems, monitoring and control of loadingoperations.

2.R–2

- reliability : equipment overlap and appropriate methods of structures calculations allowa 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 newdock design.

RESUME

Le projet d'expansion en cours de l'usine GNL/GPL de Bontang inclut un 8ème trainde liquéfaction, un 6ème bac de stockage GNL, un 5ème bac de stockage GPL et une3ème jetée de chargement GNL/GPL, faisant de cette usine la plus grande du monde avec390 à 410 cargaisons de GNL et 30 à 40 cargaisons de GPL prévues annuellement àl'horizon 2000.

Dans ce contexte, la conception de la nouvelle jetée de chargement a constitué unénorme challenge pour PERTAMINA et une attention toute particulière a été portée surles aspects de flexibilité, sécurité et fiabilité :

- flexibilité : la jetée a été conçue pour 65 navires GNL de tous types et de taillescomprises entre 18 000 m3 et 145 000 m3 et pour 128 navires GPL de tailles comprisesentre 15 000 m3 et 100 000 m3, ce qui constitue la plus importante flotte jamais utiliséedans la conception d'un tel ouvrage.

- sécurité : l'accent a été mis sur toutes les questions de sécurité, incluant la recherche dusite optimum, l'orientation de la jetée, la lutte incendie, les routes d'évacuationd'urgence, la prévention, les alarmes, les dispositifs d'arrêt d'urgence des opérations etde déconnexion du navire, la surveillance et le contrôle des opérations.

- fiabilité : la redondance des équipements ainsi que des calculs de structure adaptéspermettent de réduire le risque d'une indisponibilité prolongée en cas de dommages surle jetée.

Le présent papier détaille les sujets ci-dessus et aborde encore divers autres aspects dela conception de la jetée.

2.R–3

BONTANG FUTURE 3RD LNG/LPG DOCK:A DESIGN WHICH ACHIEVES VERY HIGH LEVELS OF

FLEXIBILITY, SAFETY AND RELIABILITY

BONTANG EXPANSION PROJECT — 3rd DOCK / 5th 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 beoperational in year 2000, PERTAMINA and its Production Sharing Contractors : TOTALIndonesie, VICO and UNOCAL, decided, based on the results of port simulation studiescommissioned by TOTAL Indonesie, to build a 3rd loading dock for LNG and LPG shipstogether with one additional LNG Storage Tank and one additional LPG Storage Tank inorder to cope with the increasing traffic of ships.

After the completion of the 8th liquefaction train it is estimated that 21.6 million tonsper year of LNG will be lifted by 390 to 410 LNG cargoes under various sales contracts

2.R–4

mainly to Japan, Korea and Taiwan as well as around 1.35 million tons per year of LPGlifted 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 theassociated process (pipe racks, tie-ins, flares) were completed in 1995.

A fairly detailed and comprehensive Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) wasperformed by PT.INCONED Indonesia in 1995 and completed at the beginning of 1996.

Finally, the Detailed Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contract (EPC) wasawarded in January 1997 to a joint operation between IKPT (PT. Inti Karya PersadaTehnik Engineering and Construction) of Indonesia and CHIYODA CORPORATION ofJapan for a mechanical completion scheduled for January 1999 and an operationalacceptance three months later.

The LNG dock no. 1 was commissioned on 9 August, 1977 and the LNG/LPG dockno.2 was commissioned on 19 December, 1988, i.e. already twenty-one and ten years agoand with a much smaller fleet of ships. Consequently the design of dock no. 3 could notre-use previous studies : it had not only to accommodate the latest state of the art for dockdesigns and the latest technologies, but also the biggest fleet of LNG and LPG ships everused 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 LNGstorage tanks farm. It means that when enough storage inventory is available, up to threeLNG ships can load simultaneously in Bontang (one on each dock). A new LNG marineflare has been added, which can handle the simultaneous maximum vapor return rates fromboth dock no. 2 and dock no. 3. However during normal operation the vapor return fromdock no. 3 will use a new vapor return line connected to the vapor recovery system andused for both dock no. 2 and dock no. 3.

It was deemed necessary to have LPG loading facilities on two docks for flexibilityand back-up but simultaneous loading of LPG ships on two docks has not been consideredas 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 atthe 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 of10,000 m3/hr using three 16" liquid arms and one 20" vapor arm with a minimum batterylimit pressure at ship’s rail of 3.50 kg/cm2 abs (in order to take into account a mesh 60loading strainer). However, ships can be loaded at 12,500 m3/hr using the four liquid armsin place (fast loading scenario).

2.R–5

The LPG loading system for dock no. 3 is designed for loading at a minimum rate of5,000 m3/hr (single product C3 or C4) using the two 12" liquid arms and the two 8" vaporarms with a minimum battery limit pressure at ship’s rail of 2.10 kg/cm2 abs. However,most of the ships will load simultaneously C3 and C4 at 2,500 m3/hr each. Small shipswith smaller freeboard and smaller size of manifold can also load a single product (or twoproducts 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 contractsand LNG trades while LPG ships are nominated. For dock no. 3 being an extension ofexisting facilities, it was not possible to be satisfied with a design using a limited numberof “generic” ships as is often done for grassroot projects. Accordingly, an exhaustive listof ship type and size has been established for dock no. 3 design and 65 LNG ships havebeen selected, with sizes ranging from 18,000 m3 (SURYA AKI for Medium City GasCompanies in Japan) to the future 145,000 m3 ships still on the design boards. These 65ships 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. Shipsbigger than 145,000 m3 would require special consideration with regard to the corallinehard bottom in Bontang, the dredged depth limited to 14 m and the operational limits inuse.

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 flatbodies, decks arrangements, manifolds configurations, etc.

128 existing LPG ships (refrigerated) have been selected, ranging from 15,000 m3 to100,000 m3 , representing all the LPG fleet worldwide within these size limits.

In addition to data already held by PERTAMINA, inquiries have been sent to about55 companies worldwide for ships data collection in order to have enough information toperform the design. PERTAMINA would like to take this opportunity to thank warmly allships’ Owners/Managers, who contributed generously to the dock no. 3 design inproviding data on ships. Their contribution to all of the efforts made to design a safe porthas been invaluable and is a good example of how the LNG/LPG family stands closetogether in sharing the goal of safety.

2.R–6

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 onthe dock (unlike docks no. 1 and 2) and that the gangway platform will be separated fromthe loading platform in order to provide a remote emergency escape. This is furtherdeveloped 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 CarryingLiquefied Gases in Bulk (OCIMF) have been used extensively for the design as well as allrelevant SIGTTO publications. On the particular subject of regulations, the interestedreader could refer to the information paper no. 14 “Site Selection and Design for LNGPorts and Jetties” and to the information paper no. 15 “A Listing of Design Standards forLiquefied Gas Terminals (referencing Ports and Jetties)”, both produced by SIGTTO.They contain a fairly good background for dock siting and design aspects. (Theexplanation of various acronyms for the societies and international bodies mentioned isgiven at the end of the paper).

A Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) was conducted in May of 1997 and itsresults 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. 3using a weighted multi-criteria analysis technique. Ten possible locations have beenconsidered with evaluation criteria covering overall nautical, operational, safety,structural/construction and cost viewpoints.

In particular, safe distances and hazard zones have been evaluated using variousLNG/LPG spills scenarios and vapor cloud computations with the “DEGADIS” modeldeveloped by the US Coast Guards.

The recommended location for dock no. 3 was further subject to confirmation by anautical 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 MaritimeSimulation Center in the Netherlands (MSCN) simulator located at Wagenignen. Bontangpilots attended and performed the simulations using their Bontang port knowledge, thusbringing 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 nauticalpoint of view and to optimize the dock orientation through berthing/unberthing simulation

2.R–7

maneuvers in routine and emergency conditions for different weather patterns and with theassistance or not of tugs. An example of berthing maneuver is given on Figure 1.

Of the two lay outs 110o and 115o, derived from previous screening studies (also byDELFT HYDRAULICS but using the fast-time ship simulator SHIPMA-5), the 115o

orientation has been selected and a mooring configuration of the ships “bow out” has beenrecommended for safe departure.

Accordingly dredging plans to the 14 m isobath have been established and results ofthe soil survey shown that enough good coral sand was available for reclaiming thenecessary space for the additional LPG tank.

FIGURE 1: EXAMPLE OF BERTHING MANEUVER

2.R–8

3. DOCK NO. 3 LAY OUT OPTIMIZATION AND DESIGN OFBREASTING 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 optimizationof 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 sidemoorings, starboard side mooring will prevail and ships with restrictions for port sidemooring will be clearly identified.

3.1 Breasting Dolphins Lay Out

The optimum location of the breasting dolphins has been determined by graphicalanalysis 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 ofbreasting dolphins to be between 25 % and 40 % of ship’s Length Overall (LOA). Shipswith possible restrictions were systematically studied in further details, assessing lowtide/high tide conditions, loaded/ ballasted conditions and longitudinal drifts due toweather. 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. Ithas to be further noted that the top of the inner breasting dolphins has been set at + 5.00m while the top of the outer breasting dolphins has been set at + 6.50 m, while keepingthe vertical angles of mooring lines within recommended OCIMF values, i.e. less than25o - 30o (25o for spring lines) with no negative values. This arrangement significantlyreduces 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 breastingdolphins, a “sub-breasting” dolphin in the form of a berthing beam located in front of butnot connected to the loading platform. Accordingly, the kinetic energy absorption of thisbeam is based exclusively on piles deflection and special high tensile steel grade has beenused for that purpose.

2.R–9

FIGURE 2: EXAMPLE OF GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS FORBREASTING DOLPHINS LOCATION

2.R–10

FIGURE 3: DETAILED STUDY ON THE RELATIONFLAT BODY / FENDER PANELS

3.2 Mooring Dolphins Lay Out

The optimum location of the mooring dolphins has been obtained by the use of thegraphical analysis method as shown on Figure 4 : the mooring lines and their orientationsare plotted against the dock lay out in order to define the most suitable and best mooringconfiguration of each vessel.

The basic principles used for the design are based on the good mooring practicerecommended by OCIMF, i.e., head and stern lines are omitted as much as possiblebecause they are not very effective in restraining vessels due to their long length and poororientation. In other words, ships are moored “within their own lengths”. Furthermore ithas 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 incorporatingmooring line elasticity in order to determine the maximum tensions in the lines (to remainunder 55 % of the Minimum Breaking Limit - MBL) and the ships displacements.

2.R–11

FIGURE 4: EXAMPLE OF GRAPHICAL ANALYSISFOR MOORING DOLPHINS LOCATION

As a conclusion:

- the lay out of main mooring dolphins and their number (six) has been optimizedaccording to good mooring practice and results in a dock length of 367.5 m (distancebetween 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 linesarrangement 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 becomingtrapped between the ship and this dolphin.

- finally and for some ships using a mixed wire/synthetic mooring pattern or showingpossible overstress in their breast lines, a shore augmentation consisting of a pulley hasbeen added on three mooring dolphins. The use of this additional facility will be left tothe masters discretion.

FIGURE 5: EXAMPLE OF USE OF DOLPHIN MD4

2.R–12

3.3 Design of the Dolphins

- Breasting Dolphins: although the acceptable hull pressure of LNG carriers should be inthe range of 15 t/m2 for ship berthing at angles different from 0o, a value of 11.6 t/m2

has been chosen for dock no. 3 as the most conservative value resulting from ship datacollection. The berthing speed chosen for the breasting dolphin design is 1 knot at anapproaching angle of 10o, which gives a normal component (berthing at 0o) of 18.2cm/s, while 15 cm/s is recommended by PIANC for an area such as Bontang. Breastingdolphins are of rigid structure type supporting low recoiling buckling rubber fenders.

The breasting dolphins are calculated in accordance with the “weak line defencemechanism”, i.e. in a catastrophic scenario, the dolphins shall be capable of being re-used in case of an overload resulting in plastic deformation of the subsoil withoutdamaging the ship’s hull (deformation of the subsoil has been preferred to plasticdeformation of the piles because a more or less inclined fender is preferred compared toa 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 0o

berthing angle is two times the berthing energy at controlled berthing speed of 18.2cm/s. As a result the berthing energy is absorbed at approximately 30 % fenderdeflection based on the fender characteristic curve.

This builds into the system a reserve energy allowing a berthing speed at 0o of

18.2 2 =25.7cm/spreventing 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 fullycompressed, the piles are designed with a load factor of 2, i.e. for an ultimate reactionforce of 570 t, which is two times the reaction force corresponding to the designabsorption capacity of the fender. Consequently, if the berthing speed at 0o is above 25.7cm/s, the ultimate soil bearing will be met at some point of energy absorption and theconcrete cap will travel due to subsoil deformation while the dolphin structure willremain 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 theloading platform), an emergency reserve of 485 t.m (= ½ ultimate reaction force xdisplacement) is built into the system which, when added to the design absorptioncapacity of 215 t.m of the fender, gives a total energy absorption of the dolphin of700 t.m leading to a berthing velocity of

18.2 700 1075÷ . =46 cm/si.e., 2.5 times the design berthing velocity. In this catastrophic scenario, the ship’s hullwill not be damaged and the damaged dolphin could still be used with some precautions.

2.R–13

- Mooring Dolphins: the mooring dolphins are both analysed for the sum of the MBL ofeach line to be hooked to the dolphin perpendicular to the dolphin, including theextreme vertical angle and for the maximum horizontal angle due to the most extrememooring line position, including the extreme vertical angle. This is in order to assess themaximum compression and extension forces on the piles. Extreme line positions aregiven by the graphical method showing the apex of the most extreme orientation of anymooring 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 deckand 3rd deck. The main deck has a maneuvering platform and is connected to the shore bythe main trestle -300 m in length, supporting a road 5 m width allowing the passage of awheel 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 loadingarms are mounted on the 3rd deck while the 2nd deck supports various valves andmanifolds arrangements. The figure 6 shows the front view and various sections of thedock. After study of various solutions, the pipeway has been separated from the main roadtrestle. In addition, a completely separated catwalk connects the gangway platform to theshore.

2.R–14

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 usedas vapor arm) in order to allow a loading rate up to 12,500 m3/hr. After a thorough vaporreturn 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 andweight reduction consideration. A 20" x 16" vapor arm equipped with a 12" reduced borePowered 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 of12" reduced bore PERC using for the first time the “no spill” technology, which reducesthe leakage of LNG to about 2 liters at the time of PERC opening compared to 10 litersfor a conventional reduced bore type PERC and 16 liters for a full bore type PERC. Thiswill significantly enhance the safety of the personnel in the vicinity of the manifold. Theprinciple illustrated on Figure 7 is that one of the ball valves has a concave shape whichallows for the reduction of the space between the two ball valves when closed (due tomechanical interlock, the upper valve closes first when ESD is initiated, and the lowervalves closes after when the ERS is initiated).

2.R–15

FIGURE 7: PERC WITH “NO SPILL” TECHNOLOGY

For LPG loading, two 12" arms are used for liquid and two 8" arms are used forexcess vapor. Both propane and butane can be loaded separately or simultaneously. Oneof the 8" arms is able to be used as a liquid arm so that smaller ships can be loaded usingthe 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 theLPG arms, for which the “no spill” technology was unfortunately not available at the timearms were ordered.

Dock no. 3 is also the first gas installation with the whole triple swivel assemblies forLNG 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 portableradio device (1.285 kg, battery life time 3 years), which is much easier to handle comparedto the traditional pendant with umbilical cable and also allows more functions.

Accumulators, Arms Position Monitoring System (PMS) and Uninterruptible PowerSupply (UPS) are designed in such a way that all arms will automatically retract clear froma drifting ship after PERC opening even in case of electricity black-out. This facility willalso 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 ofships calling at Bontang. However, arms and supporting structures are designed in such away 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 loadingarms specification Edition 1987 (the new Edition being not available at the time of dockno.3 design) except that the drifting area has been taken as a rectangular shape rather thana circular shape for conservative purposes.

However, it was decided not to follow the drifting speeds of 15 cm/s and 5 cm/s oftenused for setting up, respectively, the alarm 2nd step (ERS) and alarm 1st step (ESD). Astudy was provided by DELFT HYDRAULICS using the MSCN real time navigation

2.R–16

simulation programme in order to obtain an accurate estimation of longitudinal and lateralcomponents of the drifting speeds and drifting distances in the first seconds after a shipbreak out. Also, and in order to build more safety into the system in case of high driftingspeeds, it was decided that the closure time of the PERC valve will be 5 sec. (surgeanalysis calculation and surge protection are based on this figure) and that the closingtime of the ESD valve (arm MOV = Motorized Operated Valve) will be reduced to 20sec., this figure still being compatible with the design of the loading lines compared to themore traditional value of 30 sec. It was finally decided that the alarm 1st step, if triggeredby the PMS, will be in spherical coordinates rather than more commonly used rectangularcoordinates, because the spherical coordinates are also used for alarm detection byproximity 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 windand 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 25s170 cm = drifting distance after 20s.2 cm/s = PMS accuracy.

A similar calculation is done for longitudinal drift for which the dimensioning case is aquarterly wind and current (and not a longitudinal wind and current which generatessmaller effort on the ship).

It has to be noted that the scenario of the ship break-out due to starting of the enginefull ahead harbor has not been kept as the worst scenario particularly for the lateraldrifting speeds and distances.

Based on the hereabove, the loading arms envelopes are given on Figure 9 for LNGarms.

2.R–17

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 5

3 0

0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5

T I M E F R O M B R E A K - O U T ( s e c . )

DR

IFT

ING

SP

EE

D (

cm/s

ec.)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

TIME FROM BREAK-OUT (sec . )

DR

IFT

ING

DIS

TA

NC

E (

cm)

FIGURE 8: LATERAL DRIFTINGSPEEDS AND DISTANCES

FIGURE 9: LOADING ARMSENVELOPES (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 bethe best possible having regard to :

- an “unmanned” dock concept, i.e., the loading operations do not require any operator tobe present on dock 3 from the moment the gas is introduced into the arms for armscooldown prior to loading startup until the purging of the arms after the loading iscompleted. Obviously this does not exclude patrols by safety/operations/marine staff onthe dock, but no permanent attendance is needed.

2.R–18

- segregation of authorized safety/operations/marine people involved with operationsfrom “unauthorized” people on the loading platform not directly involved withoperations (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 theloading platform using the road trestle, while “unauthorized” people must use theseparate catwalk trestle giving direct access to the gangway tower and pass a securitycheck at catwalk entrance.

- emergency escapes : the gangway tower is voluntarily separated from the loadingplatform and is located on a dedicated dolphin at a distance of 31.6 m from the closestloading arm. Accordingly the gangway bulwark ladder on board the ship is at somedistance from the manifold, where a fire is most likely to occur, and closer to the shipaccommodation space. The catwalk connecting the gangway to the shore is thereforeused as an emergency escape between ship and shore while the road trestle is used as anemergency escape between the loading platform and the shore. Secondary escapes arealso provided for personnel trapped on dolphins to reach a safe area without passingover the loading platform. Two ladders are also provided on each dolphin for access tothe water. Finally a connection is provided at the middle of the trestle between thecatwalk and the main road trestle. This arrangement is in line with OCIMFrecommendations which require that two remotely separate evacuation routes from allwork or occupied areas are provided for emergency egress.

FIGURE 10: ACCESSES, EMERGENCY ESCAPE ROUTES AND GANGWAY

2.R–19

6.2 Gangway

Due to the great diversity of ships sizes and deck obstructions the choice of thegangway design is a tower type gangway with four intermediate platforms, provided withstairways 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 theend 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 theships’ movements by gravity (free-wheel mode).

In case of emergency the gangway is equipped with an emergency raise and retract systemin order to be clear of a drifting ship.

The finalization of the gangway envelopes has required a considerable effort for theidentification of ships deck obstructions which are particularly numerous when going awayfrom the manifold platform, like : LN2 tank, dry chemical units, ship’s accommodationand pilot ladders, cargo machinery room , etc. An example of such study is given onFigure 11.

The number of intermediate platforms has been fixed to four to restrict the maximumvertical angle to 22o or less for safety reasons. The gangway is equipped with a safety netand generally follows SIGTTO Guidelines for Ship to Shore Access for Gas Carriers.

FIGURE 11: GANGWAY LANDING AREA STUDY

2.R–20

7. SHIP TO SHORE COMMUNICATION AND DOCK NO. 3MONITORING AND CONTROL OPERATIONS FROM THECONTROL 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 publictelephone (similar to docks no. 1 and 2).

- one pneumatic ESD link with connector for the ESD signals from shore or ship (similarto docks no. 1 and 2).

- one telemetry link for the integrated Marine Monitoring System (MMS) in order todisplay the MMS information (wind and current on dock no. 3, approaching/departingspeeds and distances of the ship and mooring lines tensions) on a portable computerplaced 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 withJapan), an optical fiber cable with connector is also provided for convenience with thefollowing 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 as well equipped as LNG ships, the following isprovided:

- 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 Hazardsdue 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 blastproof 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 emphasishas been put on monitoring and control of operations.

The overall control of the installation is through a Distributed Control System (DCS).

2.R–21

Additional monitoring and control devices are as follows :

- for the loading arms: a Position Monitoring System (PMS) is provided. The PMS willnot only display the position of the arm flange closest to the alarm 1st step but will alsotrigger the pre-alarm, the alarm 1st step (ESD) and the alarm 2nd step (ERS) in parallelto proximity switches for alarms detection. The PMS is equipped with a failure autocheck mode.

- for marine operations : the integrated Marine Monitoring System (MMS) will providelong 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 ordeparting, the distances and speeds fore and aft together with wind and currentconditions (with a handy display for the pilot) and, when the ship is alongside, thetensions 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 placedon board the ship during the pre-loading meeting with alarms provided on the handydisplay as well. Trouble shooting assistance is provided by the vendor of the MMSthrough a dedicated (or part-time dedicated) telephone line to be made available at theBontang plant. The schematic drawing of the MMS is given on Figure 12.

FIGURE 12: MMS CONFIGURATION

2.R–22

- CCTV system : three remote controlled cameras with pictures displayed on three largecolor monitors are provided : one on each side of the loading arms to permanentlywatch the ship manifold, and one on an elevated tower to permanently watch thegangway. Five other remote controlled cameras (dock entrance, main deck, 2nd deck (x2) and 3rd deck) are provided with scanned pictures displayed on two other colormonitors (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. 3control room.

Finally, quick disconnection of the ship is possible using the loading arms EmergencyRelease System (ERS) through PERC activation by push button or excessive ship drift, bythe Quick Release Hooks (QRH) system for the disconnection of the mooring lines and bythe 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 distancefrom the loading platform was considered safer for personnel and control equipment thana 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 theemergency park lot or by feet for authorized personnel.

The control room is at 330 m from the loading platform, however safety studies haveshown that it can be engulfed in an LPG gas cloud in the most serious spillage scenario ondock no 3. Although this scenario is very unlikely, it was decided, after a detailed reviewof various regulations for buildings design in such case, that the recommendation“Process Plant Hazard and Control Building Design” from Chemical IndustriesAssociation would apply for the dock no. 3 control building, i.e., the building willwithstand a static blast pressure of 3 psi and an incident dynamic blast pressure of 2.9/14.5psi 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 controlbuilding has also an instrument room, an electrical room, an air condition room and othercommon rooms. A transformers yard is provided near this building. The control buildinglay out is given on Figure 13.

2.R–23

FIGURE 13: CONTROL BUILDING LAY OUT

8. FIRE PROTECTION

A detailed review of regulations and guidelines has been done at the beginning of theproject including international conventions, advice from kindred societies: OCIMF,SIGTTO, ICS, IAPH, national regulatory bodies, with the conclusion that there appears tobe no international regulations but rather broad, general and often inconsistent guidelineson 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 waspossible. The following design is still under finalization at the time of preparation of thispaper, 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 armsprotection.

- under deck fixed water curtains are provided on the sea-side front for curbed areas onmain deck platform and 2nd deck.

2.R–24

- two tower elevated oscillating fire water monitors remotely controlled from a fire stationlocated at a 60 m distance on the trestle are provided for the cooldown of the surfacesof the main deck platform and 3rd deck (one of these monitors can reach the gangwaytower and the pipeway close to the loading platform as well).

- the gangway tower and telescopic part are protected by water curtains from heatradiations. The part of the catwalk close to the gangway tower is protected by a waterspray.

- two pre-aimed tower elevated dry chemical monitors are provided on the 3rd deck inorder 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 chemicalfire fighting system with hose reels and flooding system.

- hydrants with hoses together with portable and wheeled fire extinguishers are providedat 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 madenot only from the dock no. 3 control room, but also from the plant main control room inorder 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 allcomputer based systems that are provided for the dock no. 3 in order to insure a troublefree passage to year 2000.

2.R–25

10. CONCLUSION

Past operating experience with loading docks no. 1 and no. 2 has been used widely forthe design of the new dock no. 3 in Bontang.

Besides, a lot of effort has been deployed in order to emphasize the flexibility, safetyand reliability aspects of this new facility. In this regard, the design of dock no. 3 goesinto many aspects which are beyond more conventional and perhaps less costly designs. Ithighlights PERTAMINA’s desire to consistently promote safe and efficient operations inthe 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.