Umm Qasr Port Assessment
USAID TRN-03-009
Draft Report
Submitted to
United States Agency for
International Development
Submitted by
Stevedoring Services of America BERGER/ABAM April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .. 1
SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION .. 6
SECTION 2 – FACILITIES INSPECTED . 8
SECTION 3 – NAVIGATION.. 9
31 Phica Chcteristics .. 9
31.1 Location .. 9
31. Port Configurtion .. 9
31. Chnnel Dimensions .. 9
31. Tides .. 10
31. Geolog .. 10
31. Anchore Area. 10
31. Turning Bains .. 10
31. Naigtion Aids .. 11
31.9 Shoaing Patterns and Histor. 11 3 Present Condition .. 11 31 River Chnnel. 11 3 Port Berth .. 12 3 Anchore Area. 12 3 Turning Bains .. 12 3 Naigtion Aids .. 12 3 Reported Weck. 12 3 Mines .. 12 3 Pat Dredging and Disos Prctices . 13 39 Dredged Materia Disos Sites . 13 310 On-Site Fleet .. 14 311 Hoper Dredges .. 14 312 Cutter-Suction Dredge.. 14 3 Reactivtion Opertiona Requirements for Restoring Chnnel and Berthing Depth .. 15 31 Gener .. 15 3 Dredging Pln.. 15 3 Dredging Quantities. 16 3 Dredging Costs. 19 3 Materia Saing and Testing. 19 3 Other Needs and Priorities . 19 3 Long-Ter Needs .. 19 3 On-Site Fleet Activtion and Testing. 20
SECTION 4 – CARGO HANDLING CAPABILITIES . 41 Bul Facilities .. 21
41.1 Bul Opertiona Condition. 21
41. Bul Berth Chcteristics .. 31 21 Stevedoring Serices of America Pae ii 21 Apil 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
4 Breaul Facilities .. 40
41 Opertiona Condition.. 40 4 Breaul Berth Chcteristics . 4 4 Container Facilities. 5 41 Opertiona Condition.. 5 4 Container Berth Chcteristics 61 4 RO/RO .. 6 41 RO/RO Opertiona Condition. 6 4 RO/RO Berth Chcteristics . 69 4 Project Cao/ea Lift - Curent Status. 69 4 Other Opertiona Factor. 71
SECTION 5 – WAREHOUSE FACILITIES . 7
51 Present Condition .. 7
51.1 Structur Condition Asesent . 7
51. Electrica Condition Asesent . 7 5 Recomendations .. 7 51 Structur Recomendations . 7 5 Electrica Recomendations.. 7
SECTION 6 – SUPPORT FACILITIES .. 7
61 Maintenance .. 7
61.1 Curent Status .. 7
61. Recomendations .. 81
6 Administrtion .. 8
61 Gener .. 8
6 Port Administrtion Building - Curent Status. 8 6 Port Administrtion Building - Recomendations . 8 6 Comunications .. 8 61 Ship-to-Shore Radio (VF)/Maitime. 8 6 Ship-to-Shore Radio (HF)/Maitime. 8 6 Shore-to-Shore Radio (UHF)/Opertions . 8 6 Shore-to-Shore Opertions (UHF)/Comnd and Administrtion . 8 6 Telepones (Land-Line, Celul Satelite, Radio [i.e. Trunking Telepones).. 8 6 Automted Infortion Sytem (AIS)/Administrtion . 8 6 Automted Infortion Sytem (AIS)/Security . 8 6 Stores .. 8 61 Curent Status .. 8 6 Recomendations .. 8 6 Fuel .. 89 61 Curent Status .. 89 6 Recomendations .. 90 Stevedoring Serices of America Pae iii 21 Apil 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
SECTION 7 – TRANSPORTATION. 92
71 Roadw .. 92
71.1 Gener .. 92
71. “New Port .. 92
71. Old Port .. 95
71. Gin Elevtor .. 96
7 Railoads .. 96
71 Gener .. 96
7 New Port .. 97
7 Old Port .. 99
7 Gin Elevtor .. 100
7 Air .. 100
71 Gener .. 100
7 Inlnd Wter .. 100
71 Gener .. 100
SECTION 8 – UTILITIES .. 101
81 Hig Voltae Electrica .. 101
81.1 Iri Nationa Gid Subtations. 101
81. New Port Area .. 101
81. Gin Facility .. 104
81. Old Port Area. 107
81. Sug and Vegetae Oil Facility . 108
81. Cement Facility. 108
81. Um QaUN Comound . 108
8 Wter Sytem .. 109
81 Gener .. 109
8 New Port .. 110
8 Old Port .. 114
8 Gin Elevtor .. 116
8 Sanita Sewer .. 119
81 Sanita Sewer .. 119
8 Gener Recomendations. 119 8 Stor Drinae .. 119 81 Gener Condition Asesent. 119 8 Gener Recomendations. 119
SECTION 9 – SAFETY SECURITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL . 9.1 Introduction .. 120
9.1.1 Initia Saety Security and Environmenta Asesent Phe . 9.1. Port Phica Bounda .. 120
9.1. Asumtions.. 120
9. Facility Saety Security and Environmenta Orniztion. 12
9. Procedur Security.. 12
120
120
Stevedoring Serices of America Pae iv 21 Apil 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
9. Phica Security .. 12
9.1 Gener .. 12
9. Location .. 12
9. Phica Baier .. 12
9. Security Detection and Al Sytem. 12
9. Security Monitoring Sytem. 12
9. Security Identification Sytem .. 12
9. Electronic Acces Control Sytem .. 12
9.9 Infortion Security .. 12
9.10 Clified Store .. 12
9.11 Comunications Security .. 12
9.12 Tenant Customer and Contrctor Security Considertions. 12
9.13 Cao Security .. 129
9.14 Peronnel Security .. 129
9.15 Peronnel Reliaility (and “etting) Prog. 129
9.16 Security Guad Forces .. 129
9.17 Canine (K-9) Prog .. 129
9.18 Hor Sureilnce and Wteride Security 129
9.19 Hdous Materia (HAZMAT) and Dangerous Goods (DG) Hndling Record Keeping and Store. 131
9.0 HAZMAT and DG Disos .. 131
9.1 Emerency Resonse.. 131
9. Environmenta Sensitivity .. 131
9. Saety Security and Environmenta Trining . 131
9. Conclusions .. 131
9.1 Port Phica Bounda .. 13
9. Asumtions.. 13
9. Facility Security Asesent. 13
9. Budget .. 13
SECTION 10 – MARINE OPERATIONS . 13
10.1 Maine Opertions Deptment.. 13
10. Quaified Maine Pilots .. 13
10. Milita and Civil Port Control Comunications and Comnd Sytem. 13
SECTION 11 – CONCLUSIONS.. 13
APPENDIXES
A WAREHOUSE INVENTORY
B MOBILE EQUIPMENT SURVEY
C OLD PORT MOBILE CRANE SURVEY
Stevedoring Serices of America Pae v 21 Apil 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The two-week study of the Port of Umm Qasr by the Stevedoring Services of America (SSA) Assessment Team is now complete.
The Draft Port Assessment, being a report on the first phase of three phases comprising the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) /SSA contract is now hereunder presented for review and comment by USAID.
The second phase – CLIN 002 Planning Implementation of Port Management Improvements is now being undertaken and will be submitted to USAID for review, comment, and approval within one week of today.
OPERATIONAL SECURITY
One Port Integrity
Umm Qasr has been frequently referred to by its component parts, acknowledging its natural development from an “old” port, to a “new” port, a grain-handling facility, a cement-handling facility, etc. With this, SSA began to observe a trend to consider the Port as separate facilities within a geographic area. The perception that the Port is a few ports or activities will multiply the task of securing the area.
In addition, due to the fact that the Port has been historically underutilized (some estimates place the Port’s efficiency at 40 percent of its potential), and the fact that the Coalition Forces have cleared the Port of all remaining previous activity; there are ample resources (such as warehouses, buildings, and land) available to settle into. If we do not unilaterally control (or carefully allocate) the available resources (by analyzing cargo and Port safety traffic patterns and conducting tenant activity background investigations), we will compromise the integrity (safety and security) of the Port’s activities.
The assessment team has observed that some contractors and non-governmental agencies are “settling” into available Port facilities (for example, making habitability modifications to existing warehouses). We are confident that these contractors and activities have been initially screened and are serving an essential purpose; but we also wish to ensure that all of these tenants understand that their participation and/or location may be transitory and that SSA must evaluate the Port’s space utilization and resource integration in the overall management of the Port.
SSA strongly encourages the consideration of the Port of Umm Qasr as a composite unit operated by one entity and under the management and jurisdiction of one Port Authority. The Port Authority will establish the working rules to accomplish the Port’s missions and will manage the use and allocation of the Port’s real estate and resources.
In order to promote the concept of this “One Port” umbrella management, SSA will discuss the establishment of a defined Port Physical Boundary in this assessment’s Security section (Section 9).
Stevedoring Services of America Page 1 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Navigation
Navigation depths from the Persian Gulf to the Port of Umm Qasr and along the berths at the Port facilities currently preclude the safe transit and docking of 50,000-metric-ton vessels. The approach channel has draft limitations from isolated shoals ranging from 7 to 10 meters, Celestial Low Water, (CLW). Average depths for the 50-nautical mile channel, (from Buoy 1), are in the 11-meter range, CLW.
All berths in the “old” and “new” port have limited depths alongside ranging from 2 to 7 meters, CLW, at the berth. The approach channel at the “old” port has depths in the 12-meter range.
The approach channel to and within the “new” port has depths in the 7-meter range, with the exception of the formation of a natural spit across the entrance to the “new” port that limits depths to 4 or 5 meters, CLW.
On-site dredges are small in capacity. The four hopper dredges are in very poor condition. One of the two cutter-suction dredges is in poor condition and the other appears to be operable, but has only a small amount pipeline available. Crew staffing and reliability for a 24/6 or 7 work schedule is doubtful for more than training and limited berth and river channel maintenance.
A large medium hopper dredge for the river approach channel and a large cutter-suction dredge for the Port should be contracted to open the Port for service to vessels larger than 25,000 mt.
A number of reported wrecks exist in or near the river channel and at some of the berths in both Port areas. A wreck investigation and removal program to coincide with channel re-dredging is required.
A proposed dredging plan is provided for a scenario that would open the Port to safe service by larger vessels as early as possible.
Dredging quantities to provide full berthing of 25,000 ton to 50,000 ton vessels at five selected berths will be about 3,000,000 cubic meters in the Port area and about 8,200,000 cubic meters to provide a reduced width 120-meter by 12.5-meter approach channel from Buoy 1 at the Pilot Boat Station in the Persian Gulf. Of the channel dredging volume, 5,200,000 cubic meters have been delegated as Priority 2 dredging.
Power
The “new” port and “old” port, 11KV primary power systems, transformers, and switchgear are 20+ and 40+ years old. These systems have not been properly maintained or upgraded since their original installation. These systems and equipment need to be replaced in their entirety for safe and reliable operation of the Port Facilities.
The grain elevator, 33KV and 3.3KV primary power systems, transformers, and switchgear are 20+ years old. With maintenance and testing, these systems can be operational but need to be scheduled for replacement.
The grain elevator and grain evacuator secondary electrical distribution systems, transformers, switchgear, and panels have been improperly maintained and require total replacement for safe and reliable operation of the grain elevator and grain evacuators.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 2 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Site Lighting
Control of site lighting is at individual light towers. Over 50 percent of the 1000w high-pressure sodium-light fixtures are missing from the towers. Site lighting with the exception of the towers needs to be totally replaced and new lighting controls provided.
Site Communications
The existing communications throughout the entire Port area is nonfunctional and needs to be replaced entirely with new and modern systems.
Water
The existing fresh water system throughout the Port is non-operational. Portable generators will be required to supply power to the pump stations. All water-pumping equipment and electronic controls at each of the pump stations will need to be tested and repaired. In the interim, potable water will need to be either trucked or produced. Production would entail the use of a portable reverse osmosis treatment system – similar to that currently in use by the Coalition Forces.
Sanitation
The sanitary sewer infrastructure is presently inoperable. Portable toilets that are periodically pumped out and cleaned will be required throughout the Port until a permanent sanitary sewer masterplan is developed.
Cargo Ops
Umm Qasr Port possesses more than adequate berthing space on the face of it (over 4 km in length) and ample storage space: in excess of 160,000 square meters of covered storage and 800,000 square meters of open storage in the “old” and “new” ports combined. There is, however, a definite shortage of adequate and useable equipment in working order.
It will be most advantageous from all aspects – security, administration, labor, maintenance, and operations – to consolidate all cargo handling in the area of “new” port; and this is the goal to strive for. However, bulk grain vessels will need to be handled at the location of the working equipment, i.e., “old” port.
Grain Silo (Berth 10)
The elevator facility was constructed in the early 1980s and at that time would have been considered state-of-the-art. Since construction the elevator has suffered from years of neglect and improper maintenance. Accepting that emergency measures could be undertaken that would enable the large storage capacity of the silos to be utilized, the necessary time and capital could then be allocated to refurbish the entire grain facility complex. Only in this way can a safe, productive, and reliable operation of this facility be assured.
Bulk Food Grains (Berths 1 and 2) Taking into consideration the severe limitations on vessel draught that exists at the Port and in its near approaches and the pressing need for timely arrival of humanitarian aid in the form of Stevedoring Services of America Page 3 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
wheat grain and rice, this area of the Port offers the most viable solution; taking into account that the condition of the grain silo puts it beyond use for a considerable time. Given the capacity of the portable vacuators, the proximity of the nearby storage areas and the adequate open areas for marshalling truck and rail logistics, SSA believes that vessel discharge operations could be instituted at Berths 1 and 2 in the shortest possible time.
Equipment
There is a substantial quantity of cargo handling equipment available in Umm Qasr Port.
Unfortunately, because of the lack of electrical power it was not possible to function check the crane equipment but two relatively new quayside cranes appear to be in good condition and should be capable of handling the anticipated volumes of containerised cargo. Procurement of generator power for these cranes presents some technical challenges but SSA is already discussing options with original equipment manufacturers and solutions will be found. Other, smaller general purpose dockside cranes range in condition from very poor to good but SSA is confident there will be sufficient capacity to satisfy short term demand.
For the landside handling equipment, there are several pieces of good quality heavy-duty machines but a distinct shortage of forklift trucks to handle general cargo. This shortage will need to be addressed quickly for the purpose of satisfying the humanitarian aid requirements.
The support facilities for the ongoing maintenance of equipment are very poor, workshops are not well-equipped with adequate tooling, spare parts availability is a serious concern, and there is very little technical documentation remaining. Nevertheless, SSA has already been successful in establishing the source of supply for technical manuals and securing services to bring parts into Iraq very quickly once approvals are in place.
Berth Structures
“Old” port Berths 1 through 8 will be immediately useable for short-term operations pending the successful completion of dredging at Berths 1 and 2, where the portable vacuators are stationed. Ships landing at these berths in the immediate term need to provide their own camels/floating fenders as the existing fender systems are in poor condition. Operations lasting more than six months will require maintenance replacement of much of the existing fender systems.
“New” port Berth 10, the bulk grain facility, requires structural repairs and dredging prior to being operational. Repairs to the berth have recently been started but have not commenced further than the removal of spalled and damaged concrete. The fender system may be adequate for a number of landings, but requires rehabilitation before regular operations can proceed.
“New” port Berths 13 through 21, including the RO/RO facility, will be immediately useable pending the successful completion of dredging and removal of obstructing sunken vessels.
All berths require that water and power systems be repaired.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 4 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
It is strongly recommended that a thorough underwater inspection of all berths be completed by a licensed engineer/diver with a structural engineering background – not a typical commercial diver – to verify structural conditions. Neither coalition forces nor the SSA group performed an underwater structural inspection. Given the state of maintenance on the rest of the facilities, it is unlikely that one has ever been accomplished.
Transportation
Road and rail service to Basrah is in serviceable condition. Normal maintenance is required.
The nearest serviceable airport is Basrah International.
Costs
Priority 1 designated program costs, or those repairs deemed absolutely necessary to enable the shipment of humanitarian aid safely, are estimated to be US$90,565,000. Priority 2 designated program costs, or those repairs deemed necessary to provide continuing Port operations, are estimated to be US$74,267,000.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 5 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
2.0 — FACILITIES INSPECTED
The following facilities within the “old” port were inspected during the preparation of this report:
Berths 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8 Warehouse/Storage Buildings Fire Station Pump Station Rail Yards Generator Building Transformer/Switchgear Building Gate Building Scales The following facilities within the “new” port were inspected during the preparation of this report:
Berth 10, Bulk Grain Unloading Berth Grain Facility Silos and Associated Appurtenance Structures Berths 13 to 21 Main Administration Building Warehouse/Storage Buildings Site Communication Buildings Gate Entry Building Scale Houses Fire Station Pump Station Water Tower Rail Yards Lavatory Buildings High-Voltage Electrical System Transformer/Switchgear Buildings Backup Generator Building Diked Disposal Area across Waterway from Berths 14 to 18 The following facilities at and near the Port were not inspected during the preparation of this report:
“Old” Port Berths 3,and 4, (Dedicated Sulfur) “Old” Port Berth 9 (Dedicated Cement) “New” Port Berth 11 (Dedicated Sugar/Vegetable Oil) Water Tower and Treatment Facility in the Village of Umm Qasr Other facilities outside of secured and fenced area of the Port Stevedoring Services of America Page 8 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
SECTION 3.0 — NAVIGATION
3.1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
3.1.1 Location
The Port of Umm Qasr is located about 50 nautical miles upstream from Buoy 1 at the entrance into the Persian Gulf of the Khawr Az Zubar River on the west bank. The Khawr Zubar and Khawr Abddullah meet at the Port to form the Khawr Az Zubayr. The approximate position of the Port is 30 degrees, 02 minutes N, 47 degrees, 57 minutes E.
The prevailing winds are mainly northwesterly and occasionally reach Beaufort force 6 to 7.
Sea surface temperatures range from 17 degrees centigrade in winter to 32 degrees centigrade in the summer. During July and August, air temperatures reach 48 to 49 degrees centigrade with clear skies and low relative humidity of about 17 percent.
3.1.2 Port Configuration
The “old” port is located along the west bank parallel to the waterway that trends north and south. The “new” port is immediately upstream and in an excavated cut angling northwest from the waterway.
All berths, including 1 through 9 in the “old” port, the transitional Berths 10 and 11, and Berths 12 through 21 in the “new” port are situated on wharves parallel to the waterways. Berths 1 through 9 extend about 1 nautical mile along the waterway bank. Berths 12 through 21 extend about 2 nautical miles into a cut channel from the entrance area near Berths 10 and 11.
3.1.3 Channel Dimensions
The Port and approaches to Umm Qasr are covered by British Admiralty Charts 1235 and 1238, and by U.S. National Imagery and Mapping Agency chart 62437. A hydrographic survey underway by the HMS Roebuck will result in updated Admiralty Charts.
The navigation approach channel through the Khawr Az Zubar river channel is about 244 meters wide for the first 35 nautical miles from the Pilot Boat Station and then expands to about 305 meters wide for the remaining 15 nautical miles to the “old” port. The most recent information about design depths is British Admiralty Chart 1238 that indicates the first 35 nautical miles of the river channel from the Pilot Boat Station were dredged to 12.5 meters and the remaining 15 nautical miles upstream were dredged to 13.2 meters, in 1990.
The approach channel along the “old” port is generally about 488 meters wide with about 183 meters of separation from the average berth face to the near channel edge.
The “new” port cut beginning near Berths 10 and 11, is about 305 meters wide, with an expansion to about 488 meters in width from Berth 17 upstream. Based upon advance information from the HMS Roebuck surveys, it appears the entrance to the “new” port has been maintained only about 150 meters wide. The only information available about design depths for the Port berths are the notations on Admiralty Chart 1238 that indicate the “old” port berths were dredged to 13.2 meters and the “new” port cut was dredged to 12.5 meters in 1990.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 9 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
3.1.4 Tides
Tides in the Persian Gulf are complex, but at the head of the Gulf at the approaches to Umm Qasr, they are termed irregular semi-daily tides with two highs and two lows per day of markedly different elevations.
British Admiralty Chart 1238 lists the tide range as: 0 for CLW; Mean Lower Low Water,(MLLW),
1.0 meter; Mean Low Water, (MLW), 1.9 meters; Mean Sea Level, (MSL), 2.9 meters; Mean High Water,(MHW), 4.0 meters; and Mean Higher High Water, (MHHW), 4.6 meters. These readings indicate a maximum tide range of about 5 meters, with a range from MLLW to MHHW of about 3.6 meters.
The tidal currents set mainly north-northwest and south-southeast in the area of the entrance and can reach 1.5 meters per second (3 knots).
3.1.5 Geology
The streams are alluvial and the channels are apparently composed primarily of sand and silt.
Clay may be present, but no clay balls were seen in the dredged material disposal areas. There is a thin film of sun-cracked silt or clay at some of the final settlement ponding areas. Boring information shows the materials encountered in the original “new” port excavation as silty sand with small fine gravel and clay. Infill sediments since then may be of a finer, more silty nature.
3.1.6 Anchorage Areas
The HMS Roebuck has surveyed the previously charted anchorage area 3.5 NM SE of the end of Jazirat Warbah, and found two uncharted large wrecks in the area. They suggest moving the anchorage area to 29 degrees 01 minutes N by 048 degrees 12.7 minutes E. This anchorage is about 10 nautical miles downstream from the “old” port. They also suggest that vessels should navigate with caution when approaching the area because of the nearby wrecks.
Navigation charts show there are two deep-water anchorage areas in the Persian Gulf near the entrance to the Port of Umm Qasr navigation channel.
Vessels awaiting an inbound pilot should rendezvous in the vicinity of Buoy 1. Communications between the pilot and traffic control have been maintained by Umm Qasr Radio “YIU” on VHF Channel 16. Adequate anchorage is available in the vicinity of the pilot boat station.
3.1.7 Turning Basins
A turning basin is available adjacent to Berths 1 through 9 at the “old” port. The width of the channel and access area along the berths here is about 488 meters, providing sufficient turning room well away from the berths when the channel depths are maintained for the full width.
The upper end of the “new” port cut from Berths 19 through 21 is widened from 305 meters to 488 meters and is probably meant to be a turning basin. Berths 17 through 19 are in a transitional area from the general width of about 305 meters wide from Berths 12 to 16.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 10 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
3.1.8 Navigation Aids
The British Military report that existing buoys are old, some are missing, and many are out of place. The existing system does mark most of the river channel, but none are lighted. The U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) Buoy Tender Walnut will be installing mostly new lighted buoys starting about 17 April 2003.
3.1.9 Shoaling Patterns and History Umm Qasr Port is adjacent to an embayment at the north end of the Persian Gulf. The embayment also is the estuary for several small rivers that drain a wetland area north of the Port. In addition, a canal was cut connecting the rivers to the Shaat al Arab waterway at Basra so that additional flow is added from the Tigris-Euphrates River system. Even so, the dominant flow pattern in the Port area is tidal with currents of up to 4 knots, (2.1m/s).
The channel downstream is sinuous and follows the typical pattern of sediments deposited in bar formations on the insides of the bends. Additionally, as the inlet widens downstream and current velocities are reduced, cross channel bars are deposited that are shaped by upstream and downstream tidal currents into typical ebb-flood pairs.
The channel bends and the cross channel bars are areas where maintenance dredging will be focused. In the Port, deposition occurs along both sides in the “old” port, requiring maintenance dredging along the berths and along the opposite shore to maintain the channel width for the turning basin.
The “new” port is a cut more than 4 kilometers long and some 300 meters wide and widens to nearly 490 meters at its head. Suspended sediments entering the cut on the incoming tide settle out in the quiet water primarily at the sides creating the need for maintenance dredging at the berths. The eastern side of the cut is shoaled extensively. The source of the shoaling was probably from uncontrolled runoff originating from the undiked dredged material disposal on adjacent upland. Recently constructed dikes should eliminate this shoaling source. Removal of the shoal is not a requirement at this time as adequate channel widths will be provided for the near future in the recommended dredging program.
A spit grows from river channel sediments at the entrance of the “new” port cut. This spit requires regular maintenance dredging.
Nearly continuous maintenance dredging of the berths and approach channel from the Pilot Boat Station will be required to keep the Port viable. The existence of a large number of dredge vessels in various states of functionality appear to confirm that requirement.
3.2 PRESENT CONDITION
3.2.1 River Channel
Average channel depths throughout the 50-nautical-mile channel are about 11 to 11.5 meters.
Actual limiting shoals above 13 meters occur in the upper 44 nautical miles of the channel and begin about 6 nautical miles above entrance Buoy 1. The least soundings are in the 7-meter range but are isolated to the upper reaches near the Port. The least soundings in the lower river channel are in the 8-meter range at several isolated locations.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 11 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
3.2.2 Port Berths
Shoals along the berth areas at the “old” port are 70 to 80 meters in width and taper from a least sounding of about 8 or 9 meters at the berth face to an average 13-meter depth in the center portion of the channel. Shoals along the transitional Berths 10 and 11 taper from a least sounding of about 2 meters to about 7 meters in the channel. The entrance to the “new” port berths, including Berths 10 and 11, has a maximum depth of only about 5 meters. Shoals along the “new” port berths range from least depths of about 3 or 4 meters along Berths 12 to 15, to 7 to 8 meters at Berths 20 and 21, and taper to the current interior depths of about 7 meters.
Historical arrival drafts in recent years were limited to a maximum of about 11 meters. These vessels were routinely grounded at lows tides at the berth faces. It is almost certain the tides played an important role in the passage of arriving fully loaded vessels.
3.2.3 Anchorage Areas
No soundings are available for anchorage in the river channel described by the HMS Roebuck.
Those depths are anticipated be published in the new charts under preparation. The anchorage areas in the Persian Gulf are stable and are shown on existing charts as exceeding at least 20 meter depths.
3.2.4 Turning Basins
The turning basin along the reach adjacent to “old” port Berths 1 to 9, has depths of about 12 meters from about 80 meters outward from the berth faces across the entire center channel to about 100 meters from the opposite channel limits.
The turning basin at the upper end of the “new” port cut has depths of mostly in the 7-meter range in the central portion of the cut area.
3.2.5 Navigation Aids
As noted above, the navigation aid system is in a poor and nearly unusable state and has no lighting. It is scheduled to be rebuilt this month by the USCG.
3.2.6 Reported Wrecks
The HMS Roebuck noted and charted at least 30 wrecks from the Pilot Boat Station to the Port of Umm Qasr. It is anticipated they will be noted on the soon to be published new Admiralty Charts for the area.
Older charts show wrecks at Berths 13, 15, 17 and 18 in the “new” port, at Berth 1 in the “old” port, and at numerous locations in or near the approach channel.
3.2.7 Mines
The US Navy has swept an area about 200 meters wide on each side of the approach channels and the areas adjacent to the berths in the “old” and “new” ports. Sweeping methods included energy, noise, and divers with dolphins accomplished by helicopter, ship, and small surface craft. They are currently expanding the swept area to about 600 meters on each side of the channel centerline, which should sufficiently cover potential hopper dredge disposal sites.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 12 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Elements of the British Military that are clearing the Port area for reactivation indicate that there is no land mine danger for the Port and immediately surrounding property, including the previously used dredged material disposal areas.
3.2.8 Past Dredging and Disposal Practices Both cutter-suction and hopper dredge plants have been utilized at the Port. Former Port operators indicate that a barge-mounted clamshell crane serviced by three self-propelled dump barges was also utilized. The clam and one dump barge are reported to have sunk. The remaining two dump barges have their hoppers welded shut and were being used as fuel and lube lighters.
The small cutter-suction dredges were almost certainly utilized for maintaining depths along the berths and in the anchorage areas and turning basins. The naturally recurring spit at the entrance to the “new” port cut was probably dredged by a cutter-suction operation.
The approach channel was primarily maintained by hopper dredge.
There are sizeable upland dredged material disposal areas nearby, opposite both the “old” and “new” ports. A large estuary area behind Berths 13 to 16 has also been utilized as a cutter- suction dredge disposal site. Dike and spillway construction and maintenance do not appear to be a high priority, with some dredged materials finding their way back to the Port waters.
The British Military indicate that interviews with some of the few available former Port workers reveal that some of the cutter-suction dredge materials were simply sidecast in the river channel opposite or downstream of the “old” port. This was because of the lack of or poor condition of discharge pipeline.
Hopper dredged disposal was reported to be just downstream of the work areas. There does not appear to have been any consistent effort to haul the dredged materials any distance to insure their non-return to the shoaling locations.
3.2.9 Dredged Material Disposal Sites For the “old” port reach, there is a diked disposal area located on the island immediately opposite the Port. This island has been utilized in the past. Some improvements to the retaining dikes and spillways may be required.
For the “new” port, the uplands to the opposite side of the waterway have been used in the past as dredged material disposal sites. A large new site encompassing about 60 hectares, located at the waters edge within easy reach of the dredging areas, has had new dikes about 3 to 4 meters in height constructed and appears nearly ready for use, except for spillway construction. The estimated capacity of these newly diked disposal areas is about 2 million cubic meters.
The recent hydrographic surveys by the HMS Roebuck covered a continuous swath about 800 meters wide along the approach channel. Bottom depths remain in excess of 10 meters throughout most of the surveyed area and indicate that a medium hopper dredge plant could operate and dispose of dredged materials a sufficient distance from the navigation channel.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 13 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Dredge operators should be required to determine from the Military the actual area swept for mines and further explore the depths outside the surveyed area so that the dredged materials could be deposited as far from the channel as safely possible.
3.2.10 On-Site Fleet
A listing provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) shows an impressive array of historical dredge and attendant plant existing, or formerly existing in the area. The list was based upon previous United Nations reports. Much of the equipment listed could not be found by the British Military in their reactivation investigations. There is some speculation that some of the more viable equipment may have been relocated upstream to the military port at Az Zubar, just prior to the war. That will be confirmed or clarified during the coming weeks as the British Military operations migrate upstream to include that port.
The reports do indicate only a small fraction of the listed equipment was operable at any given time, however.
3.2.11 Hopper Dredges
There appears to be only one or two old hopper dredges reasonably available for reactivation for use in the Port and approach channel area, see Photo 3.2.11-1. The British Military are attempting to repair and restart the dredges and man them with local workers supervised at least temporarily by the British Military. If the dredges have been unused for some time and were poorly maintained, as is apparent, reactivation on a reliable basis may be impractical without major overhaul. Retraining a local crew, especially replacing the officers, will take considerable time.
3.2.12 Cutter-Suction Dredge One medium cutter-suction dredge of about 500 mm discharge line, see Photo 3.2.12-1, is in reasonable condition for reactivation. This dredge currently has a very short discharge pipeline with a nozzle welded on to provide the minimum required centrifugal pump back pressure and to spread the dredged materials as far as possible without longer lines available. Another smaller cutter-suction is on site, but has not been evaluated fully at this time. The locals have indicated it was scheduled to be placed in the on-site dry dock for needed repairs. The unavailability of Photo 3.2.11-1 The Hopper Dredge Alzubair Dredging at the Grain Terminal.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 14 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 3.2.12-1 Cutter Suction Dredge.
useable discharge pipeline for either dredge appears to be a serious problem, and the effective use of the dredges may be impaired.
The British Military have
succeeded in placing a
skeleton local crew,
supervised by their officers, on the larger cutter-suction dredge and are attempting to work it at the present time.
However, the small capacity of the dredge and the probability that continuous operation from a repair and crew standpoint is not viable raises serious doubts about its potential contribution for harbor maintenance. Lack of viable discharge pipeline also prevents the dredged materials from being placed in a neutral disposal location.
3.3 REACTIVATION OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTORING CHANNEL
AND BERTHING DEPTHS
3.3.1 General
The current criteria for reactivation of the berths at both the “old” and “new” ports is to provide transit and berthing depths for vessels of approximately 50,000 tons at “old” port Berths 1 and 2, the grain terminal, Berth 10, and Berths 20 and 21, in the “new” port. A 50,000-ton vessel has an average draft of about 11 meters. Providing a minimum keel clearance of about 0.5 meter and advanced maintenance dredging of about 1 meter will require a restored dredged depth of about 12.5 meters, for full- and long-term vessel access. The number of documented wrecks in the area will require a program to investigate and remove many of them.
3.3.2 Dredging Plan
Depths are to be provided at Berths 1 and 2 as soon as practicable. Berth 10 will be the next priority followed by Berths 20 and 21. This plan follows the schedule that has been developed for reactivation of the receiving facilities at the ports.
To provide depths at the berths, a large cutter-suction dredge should be contracted. Utilization of a large contract cutter-suction dredge will insure a continuous and viable dredging program, expedite the removal of the restrictive shoaling and enable placement of the dredged materials on uplands well away from the navigation channel areas. A large dredge will also enable more rapid follow-on opening of additional berths. To provide for an early opening of the channel for the larger draft vessels, a phased approach by medium or large hopper dredge plant is recommended. A reduced channel width to about 120 meters for the initial dredging would also be recommended. This reduced width channel would be used primarily by incoming vessels.
Outgoing vessels would use any portion of the channel not subject to inbound vessels. Hopper Stevedoring Services of America Page 15 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
dredging enables a layered approach to depth restoration that opens the full length of the channel more rapidly to ever increasing drafts. The channel requires only a minor amount of isolated shoal removal to provide continuous minimum depths of 11.5 meters or greater.
Phase 1 dredging operations could be directed to eliminating the shoals above the 11.5-meter average depth. An 11.5-meter channel would provide safe transit by most 50,000-ton vessels at most tide stages. But limiting the dredge depth to 11.5 meters does not provide a long-term solution, as there would be no advance maintenance depths to absorb continued shoaling.
Phase 2 dredging would be to deepen the channel to the recommended advance maintenance depths of about 12.5 meters. Phase 2 could be accomplished in two increments. The first increment would be to dredge only the upper 22 nautical miles of the reduced width channel to the full 12.5-meter depths and the second increment would be to complete the 12.5-meter channel to daylight downstream. This scenario would expedite early transit of the channel by vessels larger than 50,000 tons utilizing the tides for the lower portion.
Phase 3 would be to continue to widen the channel depths to previously utilized dimensions.
Hydrographic surveys from the HMS Roebuck indicate that sufficient depths exist alongside the channel to enable short disposal runs by hopper plant. The dredge should be required to dispose of the dredged materials as far as safely possible from the channel limits.
3.3.3 Dredging Quantities
Estimated monthly production rates for a large cutter-suction dredge or a medium hopper dredge can be up to one million cubic meters.
“Old” port Berths 1 and 2 would be dredged to 12.5 meters. The estimated quantity for these berths and the first materials to be removed in renewed maintenance dredging program is about 60,000 cubic meters. Berth 10 would be dredged to 13.5 meters. The estimated quantity for restoring the local access channel to the Berth to 12.5 meters and for dredging the berth itself is about 1,240,000 cubic meters. Berths 20 and 21 would be dredged to 12.5 meters. Access to these berths would require the dredging of a 122-meter access channel through the entrance to the “new” port and along the length of Berths 12 through 19. A 305-meter-square turning basin adjacent to Berths 20 and 21 would also be dredged. The total additional estimated quantity from Berth 10 to Berths 20 and 21, including the turning basin, is 1,700,000 cubic meters. The location of the access channel, the turning basin, the berth dredging, and the upland disposal area are illustrated on Figure 3-1.
For the 50 nautical miles of the approach channel, the quantities to provide the first phase channel to 11.5 meters to a width of about 122 meters is about 3 million cubic meters. The additional quantity to provide the second phase, Increment 1, a 12.5-meter by 122-meter channel for the 25 nautical miles nearest the Port, would be about 1.3 million cubic meters. The additional quantity to provide for the second phase, Increment 2, a 12.5-meter by 122-meter channel for the lower 25 nautical miles to Buoy 1, would be about 3.8 million cubic meters. In summary, the total estimated quantity to provide a 12.5-meter by 122-meter channel from the Pilot Boat Station to the Port is about 8.2 million cubic meters. The total quantity to provide for Phase 3, a 12.5-meter, full-width channel for the 50 nautical miles is about 18 million cubic meters.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 16 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
The quantities are based on rough calculations from preliminary data available from the recent HMS Roebuck hydrographic surveying efforts, and will require further analysis when more detailed hydrographic survey data is available.
Figure 3-2 illustrates various options and the applicable estimated dredging quantities for reactivating the Port. The graph indicates the approximate volumes in millions of cubic meters required to be dredged to achieve a range of depths from 10.5 to 13.5 meters below the datum at various locations. The legend summarizes the plotted points and curves. The present channel is 244 meters wide downstream and 305 meters wide above Warbah shoal. The first legend entry is the volumes for dredging only the inbound channel to a width of 122 meters from the channel entrance to the “old” port to various depths. These volumes were calculated from average survey depths in each of six sections of the channel and do not accurately reflect the shoals. Therefore, the single green square labeled as the volume to skim the inbound half of the channel to 11.5 meters, the last legend entry, was the result of calculating the volume of each shoal in the channel reaching above 11.5 meters and more accurately reflects the volume to be removed. This value is higher than that calculated using the average depth but was only calculated for one dredge depth. The other single pink point labeled “berths” includes the required dredging volume to extend the 122-meter channel to the head of the “new” port at a depth of 12.5 meters and to dredge a 305-meter by 305-meter turning basin at the head of the “new” port, as well a dredging Berths 1, 2, 20, and 21 to the same depth and the grain Berth 10 to 13.5 meters. The point is plotted at the 12.5-meter depth on the graph. The other legend entries include the dredging volumes for the full width of the channel up to the “old” port, the “old” port including full waterway width and berths, and the entire “new” port. The total entries include the “old” and “new” port volumes plus the 122-meter and full-width channels respectively.
UMM QASR DREDGING OPTIONS
DREDGED VOLUME MILLIONS (M3)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
122 M CHANNEL
FULL CHANNEL
OLD PORT
NEW PORT
TOTAL 122 M
TOTAL FULL
BERTHS
SKIM 122M CH
10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 DREDGE DEPTHS (M)
Figure 3-2 Dredging Options Stevedoring Services of America Page 18 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
3.3.4 Dredging Costs
Dredging costs are highly variable depending upon many factors. The ability of the particular plant to perform at its designed maximum efficiency, or lack thereof, is the determining factors for the on-site dredge costs. Unit costs for the general area for dredging typically sandy materials when the risks and uncertainties are minimized are reported to range about US$4.00 to US$5.00 per cubic meter. Working short-length berth locations, dredging shallow bank thicknesses, moving frequently from one location to another, such as hopper dredging isolated shoals, increased disposal pumping or haul distances can easily add at least another US$1.00 per cubic meter or more. The next items that are highly variable are mobilization and demobilization. Dredges that come from Bahrain, for example may require two to three weeks for assembly of plant, movement, and setup at the new location. For the dredges discussed above, an average cost might amount to about US$50,000 per day for a large cutter suction dredge and attendant plant and multiple towboats, etc., and about US$40,000 per day for a medium hopper plant, plus any extraordinary items for either plant. Preparation of disposal areas for the cutter suction dredging also will be included in the mobilization item. Lastly, the housing and supply provisions will impact the costs.
Requiring dredge plant to report to this project on an expedited basis may also result in costs for interrupting the present work and for subsequent return to that work, as well as for expedited assistance from suppliers and subcontractors, such as towing, spares, etc.
These items and others must be included in evaluating proposed bid costs.
3.3.5 Material Sampling and Testing Cursory observation appears to indicate the materials to be dredged to restore the Port approach and berth areas to required user depths will be sands and silts. More detailed sampling and analysis should be accomplished as soon as practicable to provide important information to the dredging companies during present or future the bidding process. Simple “grab” and sieve analysis could be sufficient if advertised depth requirements are within previously dredged limits.
3.3.6 Other Needs and Priorities Dredging contracts must include a need for a hydrographic survey capability for at least weekly surveys of the dredged areas together with quantity computations and hardcopies of the data.
Monthly hydrographic surveys of the entire approach channel and the berthing areas would also be required.
3.3.7 Long-Term Needs
Initial reports of shoaling characteristics at the Port and in the river channel indicated a rapid shoaling rate. A review of preliminary hydrographic survey data from the HMS Roebuck shows that although the berths have shoal deposits along the actual mooring locations, the center one- third or greater of the river channel has depths in the 12-meter range.
The entire 50 or so nautical miles of the river channel to the Pilot Boat Station, averages about 11 or 11.5 meters, with limiting depths at isolated locations of around 7 to 9 meters.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 19 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Long-term needs will depend upon a number of variables and are difficult to evaluate at this time. The success in getting effective utilization of the currently existing on-site plant and the potential availability of more plant that may be moored upstream will impact the needs for contracting for additional capability. The experience in the next few months in reactivating the on-site plant, close observation of shoaling characteristics, and the number of berths to be maintained will all contribute to determining the long range planning.
3.3.8 On-Site Fleet Activation and Training The British Military are currently supervising the restart of the two useable on-site dredges.
They are working a few hours in the daytime and mostly to retrain a minimum crew. The mechanical viability of those dredges will only be proven after a successful start up period. The crews will need to have a complete training program to learn to work through a range of dredge operations and enough people must be trained to enable 24/6 or 7 operations. The British Military will be leaving in a relatively short time.
A contract to provide supervision/training to operate and maintain the on-site dredges should be prepared now to provide seamless activation. If experience over the intervening weeks shows the dredges cannot be kept operating without major overhaul, then the advertisement could be cancelled.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 20 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
SECTION 4 — CARGO HANDLING CAPABILITIES
4.1 BULK FACILITIES
4.1.1 Operational Condition
4.1.1.1 Current Status
It is understood from previous reports that Umm Qasr Port was the main point of entry into Iraq for grain and rice products having a volume throughput in excess of 3 million tons per annum.
In addition to grain products, the Port also provided a facility for import of sugar, vegetable oil, and cement, along with export facilities for sulphur. For the purpose of this assessment, the time available for inspection, and the condition of bulk handling equipment found in the Port, SSA will focus attention upon the bulk handling of grain and rice products only. Other products such as vegetable oil are handled more efficiently as containerized cargo while sugar and cement can both be accommodated as general cargo in bagged condition either with ships gear or existing dockside cranes.
There are two distinct facilities for handling grain and rice bulk cargo in the Port of Umm Qasr, each has its own limitations and characteristics governed by the nature of the equipment installed and both are considered separately to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the capability.
4.1.1.1.1 Grain Silo – Berth 10 This facility consists of 48 silos with approximately 45,000 MT of storage. See Photo
4.1.1.1.1-1.
The ship unloading system
consists of four suction
pumps, a conveyor system
along with load-out capabilities for vessel, railcar, and road transport. See Photos
4.1.1.1.1-2 and 4.1.1.1.1-3 and 4.1.1.1.1-3.
The wharf area consists of four vessel suction pumps;
three are operable but are in poor condition and are in need of maintenance and repair.
Electrical cable insulation in exposed areas was found to be degraded throughout the installation, oil leaks between seals on main blowers was common, and flange bolts were found to be missing on several components indicating possible blower wear or misalignment problems. The unit, which is inoperable, has a main suction fan coupling missing and, in addition, the telescopic wire was broken leaving a Photo 4.1.1.1.1-1 Grain Silos.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 21 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-2 Ship Unloaders and Conveyor System to the Grain Silo.
grain chute fully extended. The wharf is equipped with a receiving belt structure to provide protection for materials in transit to the silo.
During our inspection it was noted that the entire section of rubber roof capping seal was missing allowing access for birds and other airborne contaminants. This is a serious consideration; an expensive item to procure and no spares were located during our visits, see Photo 4.1.1.1.1-4.
The wharf and lifter tower appear to be in reasonable condition but with component wear and severe lack of appropriate maintenance. Lifter No. 5 in the wharf receiving/shipping tower was discovered to have an electrical problem whereby it would start but not shut down, even if the main breaker was disengaged. This is a serious potential operational and/or safety issue, which must be addressed before the facility is placed into operation. In addition, the short shipping conveyor in this tower will not start, the reason has not been identified but this is not considered to be a major problem providing it does not become necessary to provide a vessel load-out feature. It is noted that throughout the facility numerous repairs, preventive maintenance, and house cleaning is required.
There are two reversible receiving/shipping belts connecting the wharf and silo area, only one is operating at the present time and the problem with the remaining belt has not yet been identified.
The incoming product to the silo is received by one or two bucket lifters and directed to storage or load-out. One of these lifters is out of service awaiting repairs to spouting and distributor components, which is presently in progress by the Royal Engineers, see Photo 4.1.1.1.1-5. The repairs, though large in scale, are quite minor and we can anticipate the lifter to be in operation soon. There are two in-house lifters that are functional and appear to be in good order.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-3 Ship Unloader at Berth 10 Wharf Stevedoring Services of America Page 22 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-4 Wharf Conveyor has No Capping Seal between Roof Sections The shipping and load-out functions may be accomplished in various configurations:
1. There are two railcar
load-out conveyors, one
of which is not functional with a problem yet to be diagnosed.
2. There are two truck load- out conveyors that are operational but reportedly never used previously as the primary truck load-out facility.
3. Individual, manual load- out spouts from several other silos are reported to be the primary truck load-out facility normally employed.
4. Two wharf spouts for vessel loading. As previously noted, a shipping conveyor located on the wharf is not currently operating, as is one of the main belts from the silo to the wharf.
The structure of the internal weight scales appear to be in order and may function correctly but the control room scale console and printer is missing and no replacements have been located.
This could create difficulties in controlling inventory because there is no alternative method for weighing incoming cargo.
Compressed air pressure is required for safe operation of gates and valves is supplied by five compressor units, two of which are operating, one is out of service requiring minor repairs, and the other two need complete replacement. This severely limits the quantity of compressed air available for efficient and safe operation.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-5 Rail and Truck Load-Out Spouting Stevedoring Services of America Page 23 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Communications throughout the facility are nonfunctional; many of the handsets are missing or broken creating an unacceptable compromise to efficiency and safety of the plant. See Photo
4.1.1.1.1-6.
Fire protection water is divided into two separate systems, the wharf area system appears to be intact but its pump has not been energized or its system pressurized at this time. The silo area system has been pressurized and appears to be intact but, due to limited availability of water, complete testing has not yet been fulfilled.
Electrical HV power to this facility was not available during the period of inspection and is not anticipated to come on stream for several months. Standby power is supplied by two stationary diesel generators, each of 2.5MVA capacity, see Photo 4.1.1.1.1-7. One has produced intermittent power during the equipment testing but has proved to be an unreliable source. The other unit has been nonfunctional during SSA’s entire visit.
Recommendations for electrical power solutions are addressed elsewhere in this report.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-6 Communication System.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-7 Two Standby Generators, each 2.5MVA Stevedoring Services of America Page 24 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
There are no rail or truck weighbridges that are functional at the present time. No other facilities for output inventory control are available. See photos
4.1.1.1.1-8 and 4.1.1.1.1-9.
General conditions of
housekeeping and cleanliness are deplorable. Missing windows and doors remaining open have allowed the silo structure to be inundated by birds that have created a very unsanitary condition requiring significant attention to eliminate health and safety hazards.
Maintenance and repairs have been lacking for an extended period of time, some repairs have been completed but at substandard level and do not meet codes or acceptable standards. See Photo 4.1.1.1.1-10.
According to our visual observations, it appears that basic safety standards have not been met Photo 4.1.1.1.1-8 60-Foot Weighbridge Facilities Comprised of an Inbound and Outbound Scale at the Grain Elevator.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-9 Weighbridge Components Damaged.
Photo 4.1.1.1.1-10 Hot Work Near to Grain Dust.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 25 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
(i.e., evidence of cigarette smoking in lifter house and basement, missing handrails at access shafts, and welding repairs being made in a dust laden environment). Substantial work will be required in this area prior to operations to ensure a safe working environment.
Production Rates
Design capacity rates for the grain terminal are currently not available, reports from former employees indicate that a rate of 600 metric tons (MT) per hour, per receiving belt was achieved giving a maximum capacity of 1200MT per hour with all four vacuum pumps operating and yielding a total daily production of 24,000MT per day, allowing for 20 hours operation each day.
Considering that one pump is inoperable, a daily production rate of 18000MT should be possible. Due to the condition and age of the three operating pumps, a more realistic daily production would be 9000MT per day.
4.1.1.1.2 Mobile Grain Vacuators – Berths 1 and 2 This facility is located in the “old” port having access through the main gate with two storage warehouses and five plus (5+) hectares of operating area. The existing facility functions as a grain unloading yard, transferring grain from vessel to trucks utilizing 6 mobile ship unloaders to perform the transfer. See Photo 4.1.1.1.2-1.
Five of the unloaders are operable and in apparent good condition with the exception of the rubber flexible transfer hoses, which need replacement.
The sixth unit sustained damage to its fuel tank during the conflict but could be back in service very quickly if a new tank could be procured. See Photo
4.1.1.1.2-2. No spare parts for this equipment were found during our inspections. The units are relatively new and are extremely versatile having on-board diesel generators that provide all power requirements independently from exterior sources.
Production Rates
The manufacturer of this equipment, Roncuzzi of Italy, declares the target design capacity of each unit to be 280MT per hour for wheat. Considering the condition of the flexible rubber hoses and allowing for the normal set-up and movement, realistic production is anticipated to be 100MT per hour, yielding a maximum berth production of 10,000MT per 20-hour day for the five units.
Of course, this production could increase to a maximum of 12,000MT per day if the sixth vacuator is brought back into operation. The mode of operation is to transfer grain directly from the unloader into awaiting trucks, there is no feature for grain storage in this operation but the unloaders do have a diverter gate that permits uninterrupted grain flow when exchanging trucks.
Photo 4.1.1.1.2-1 Mobile Grain Vacuator at Berths 1 and 2.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 26 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.1.1.2-2 Fuel Tank on One Vacuator Sustained Damage.
Using this equipment, maintained in good condition the berth is capable of discharging a typical 50,000MT vessel in five days through 2,500 trucks. In the event that outbound transportation is unavailable, in such a quantity, that would allow for uninterrupted discharge operations, provisions should be included, that would utilize one or two of the covered storage warehouses available for Berths 1 and 2.
This would be accomplished by procuring a fleet of 25 metric ton self-dumping trucks to operate between the unloaders and the nearby warehouses. Considering the output capacity of the vessel unloader at 100 metric tons per hour; a minimum of two trucks per unloader would be required (total of 12 trucks) to insure a fluid transition of grain cargoes between the unloaders and the warehouses.
With the assistance of a large front-end loader, grain would be stockpiled until outbound transportation becomes available. The addition of a self-contained portable conveyor belt would further enhance the stockpiling capability and expedite the discharge of cargo from the warehouse into outbound transportation.
Three weighbridges are available within the “old” port to weigh grain trucks in both directions. See Photo
4.1.1.1.2-3. Unfortunately, all sustained damage during the conflict or by looting, which may have taken place afterwards. Repairs to the weighbridges, calibration and procurement of new computer equipment will be required to provide accurate measurements. This work is fairly minor and could be completed within a few months.
Photo 4.1.1.1.2-3 Weighbridge in the Old Port for Berths 1 and 2.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 27 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
4.1.1.2 Recommendations
Grain Elevator and Ship Unloaders – Berth 10 In view of the complexity, age, and poor condition of the grain elevator, its associated handling equipment, safety considerations and reduced production capability, it is the recommendation of this assessment that the mobile grain unloaders on Berths 1 and 2 be considered as the prime method of servicing grain discharge in Umm Qasr Port. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the grain elevator has an important unique feature, being able to provide vast storage of product until transportation becomes available. In this post-war situation, a shortage of distribution rail and road transport trucks may influence the operation decision towards elevator utilization but the efficiency, reliability, and factor of safety will be extremely low. This assessment recognizes the urgent need to service vessels at a time when transport facilities may not be available but a substantial refurbishment of the elevator should be commissioned as soon as possible if prolonged future use is unavoidable. Some emergency repairs and actions are required before the grain terminal is operated. The following recommendations are submitted for consideration:
1. Procure adequate electrical power necessary to operate all equipment to ensure that safety interlock components are functioning correctly. Since utility power is not expected to be available in the immediate future and since the existing standby generators are old and unreliable, we must recommend the purchase of two new generators of 2.5MVA each as replacements. This procurement will also provide a more reliable standby facility to substitute utility power in the future.
Cost Estimate: $US1.5 million for two generators installed.
2. Undertake essential safety repairs and training before any future operation is considered. This will include the following items:
Reinstate the telephone communications network.
Test and repair fire protection services throughout the entire facility.
Establish basic safety training to ensure all operators are familiar with the possibility of grain dust explosions.
General cleanup throughout the facility, fit auto door closers, replace broken windows, and secure all other apertures that allow birds to enter the internal structures.
Establish health and safety policy to ensure minimum regulations are met.
Establish repair and maintenance policy to improve reliability of the system.
Cost Estimate: $US100,000
3. Prepare workscope and award contract for thorough refurbishment of the entire plant, inclusive of the elevator, its control, the conveyor systems, and the vessel unloaders.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 28 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
4. Due to the age and poor condition of the elevator plant, this refurbishment will be very costly but is necessary to provide a safe and efficient operation. It should encompass all areas of the elevator facility including the following:
Replacement of vacuum unloader pumps.
Repair of vacuum pump booms.
Replace or repair vacuum pump hydraulic systems.
Replace all worn conveyor belts.
Bucket replacement on lifters using polyurethane in place of steel.
Extensive spouting replacement.
Replacement of the internal weigh-scale, console, and printer.
Replacement of degraded and damaged electrical cabling.
Repair and/or replacement of damaged lighting systems.
Refurbishment of the control room area, including control board, windows, structure, air conditioning and switchgear.
Replace air conditioning systems on all motor control centers in order to provide appropriate working environment.
Refurbish access systems, platforms and handrails throughout the plant to provide minimum safe access.
Refurbish and re-equip maintenance workshop.
Refurbish local office accommodation for management staff and provide washrooms and break rooms for all workers.
Upgrade the dust control systems.
Refurbish and upgrade railcar and truck load-out area, inclusive of flexible spout hoses and platforms.
Cost Estimate: $US7 Million Repair and refurbish truck scales on the IN and OUT gates to provide accurate inventory and quality control. This should include load cells replacement, processing computer, and the weigh-masters office that was damaged during the conflict.
Cost Estimate: $US100,000
Stevedoring Services of America Page 29 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
5. Consolidate all spare parts within a single warehouse, establish inventory of recommended parts to support the operation, introduce an inventory control scheme and procure those components that are required. Upgrade the stores by provision of heavy- duty pallet racking and shelving to maximize the storage space, include controlled environment for delicate high-value items such as electrical control boards.
Cost Estimate: $US500,000
Mobile Grain Vacuators – Berths 1 and 2
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Repair hoses and suction leaks on six Roncuzzi vacuators. Replace fuel tank for the vacuator damaged during the conflict. Arrange for visit from the manufacturer or his representative for purpose of function testing the fleet of vacuators, generating a report of recommendations for efficient operation and component replacement, training of operators and maintenance staff, and to provide comprehensive documentation such as maintenance, spare parts and operator manuals.
Cost Estimate: US$75,000
Repair office and provide small maintenance facility within the adjacent warehouse, inclusive of tools, washroom and spares lockup.
Cost Estimate: US$40,000
Repair and refurbish two existing truck scales that were damaged during the conflict, inclusive of load cells, scale processing equipment, calibration, and the weigh-masters office.
Cost Estimate: US$100,000
Review and establish a recommended listing of spare parts to support the operation in a reliable fashion. Procure spares according to manufacturers recommendations and experience.
Cost Estimate: US$400,000
Provide for transportation to the covered warehouses at Berth 1 and Berth 2 from the mobile ship unloaders. Additional equipment necessary for stockpiling bulk grain and rice cargoes that will maximize warehouse space utilization and will be used to assist with the warehouse discharge process.
12 each – 20-metric-ton, self-dumping trucks 1 each - front-end loader Self-contained conveyor system Cost Estimate: US$1.1 Million Temporary power necessary for lighting wharf area, warehouse interiors, and yard handling area for 24-hours-per-day operations. 400kva generator.
Cost Estimate: US$120,000
Stevedoring Services of America Page 30 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
7. Clean, prepare, and bird-proof both warehouses making them acceptable for storing bulk grain and rice cargoes.
Cost Estimate: US$40,000
4.1.2 Bulk Berth Characteristics Bulk terminals exist for grain, sugar and vegetable oil, cement, and sulphur. Refer to Figure 4.1 for facility locations within the Port. The grain and the sugar/vegetable oil terminals have been used as import terminals. Cement and sulphur have been used as export terminals. For the delivery of the core humanitarian aid cargo, only the grain facilities are being considered.
4.1.2.1 Bulk Berth Condition Assessment
4.1.2.1.1 Berths 1-2
Bulk handling of grain occurs at Berths 1 and 2 by means of portable vacuators. The structural condition of the berths and facilities is described in the breakbulk section of this report.
4.1.2.1.2 Berths 3 and 4
Bulk handling of sulphur occurs at Berths 3 and 4 along the main marginal wharf in the “old” port. These berths have not been evaluated because the facility is not required for the delivery of humanitarian aid products.
4.1.2.1.3 Berth 9
Bulk handling of cement
occurs at Berth 9 at the
northern edge of the “old” port.
It is a Thead pier of concrete construction and has not been evaluated because the facility is not required for the delivery of humanitarian aid products.
See Photo 4.1.2.3-1.
4.1.2.1.4 Berth 10
Berth 10 is the dedicated grain terminal. The terminal is located just inside the “new” port cut just off the mouth to the KAA, between the “old” port and the “new” port. It is separated from the two ports by tidal wetlands. The terminal is divided between the upland grain silos and the offshore ship berth. The two are separated by a tidal wetland and are connected across the wetland for grain with an overhead conveyor and for pedestrian or vehicles by a concrete trestle. Berth 10 was constructed during the early 1980s.
Photo 4.1.2.3-1 Cement Export, Berth 9 Stevedoring Services of America Page 31 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
The wharf is comprised of two sections. The main wharf is 219 meters long and 16.2 meters wide.
This wharf segment supports an 8- story building, 13.4 meters by 15.5 meters and a 183 meters long by 5.8 meters wide shed. It also supports two rail-mounted vacuator-type ship unloaders with an 11.2 meter gauge.
See Photo 4.1.2.1.4-1 and Photo
4.1.2.1.4-2. The wharf structure is cast-in-place concrete supported by steel pipe piles. The deck is 200 mm thick and has a 50-mm-thick wearing surface. The deck is in fair condition, with distress located primarily along the slab edges. See Photo 4.1.2.1.4-
3. The cap structures, located under the two crane rails and transversely at 3.5 meters on center, are in poor condition, with exposed or missing rebar predominant at the caps’ bottom curtain of reinforcement steel. The cap concrete appears to be hard and sound and the extensive distress found appears to be due to insufficient concrete cover. It also appears that the concrete may have been in the process of being prepped for repair by the removal of all loose portions. See Photo 4.1.2.1.4-4. The pile sections above the waterline appear to be in fair condition.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-1 Grain Berth with Two Fixed Vacuators Forward and Two Crane-Mounted Vacuators Behind.
The second wharf section is of lighter duty construction, similar to the trestle and supports two fixed loaders. It is 7 meters wide by
63.7 meters long. A cast-in-place concrete deck spans between cast-in-place caps located every
3.7 meters. The concrete and piles appear to be in good condition. Two vacuators are fixed to the deck of this wharf segment. See Photo 4.1.2.1.4-5 Photo 4.1.2.1.4-2 Back Face of Main Wharf.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 33 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-3 Area of Exposed Rebar on Decking, Does Not Appear to be Prepped for Repair.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-4 Exposed or Missing Rebar on All Concrete Caps, Appears to Have Had Some Prep Work for Repair.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 34 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-5 Back Side of Second Wharf Section.
Off either end of the wharf is a mooring dolphin connected to the wharf by steel truss walkways.
The east dolphin is octagonal with a 3.8-meter least dimension and has a center bollard. See Photo
4.1.2.1.4-6. It has a cast-in-place concrete cap that appears to be in moderate to poor condition and six steel pipe piles that appear to be in good condition. The west dolphin is octagonal with an 8.1- meter least dimension and has a center bollard. See Photo
4.1.2.1.4-7. It has a cast-in-place concrete cap that appears to be in poor condition and eight steel pipe piles that appear to be in good condition. The bottom curtain of steel is exposed and/or missing.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-6 East Dolphin Elevation.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 35 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-7 Bottom of West Dolphin Appears to Have Had Some Prep Work for Repair.
The design dredge depth at the face of the berths could not be determined. The dredged depth of the channel adjacent to the berth is shown as -12.5 m CD on Admiralty Chart 1238.
The fendering system at the main wharf is in poor condition. See Photos 4.1.2.1.4-8 and 4.1.2.1.4-9.
At the main wharf section, it consists of steel H piles at 3.5 meters on center with two horizontal steel wales. See Photo 4.1.2.1.4-10. The wearing face of the fender system is timber. The fendering system is attached back to the wharf by rubber buckling fenders. The H piles have fairly thick flanges and appear to have little section loss.
The fendering system at the second wharf section consists of three independent steel pile dolphin structures, and is in fair condition.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-8 Fendering at Main Wharf.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 36 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-9 Bollards and Fendering at Main Wharf.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-10 Fendering at Main Wharf;
Pile-to-Wale Connection.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 37 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Bollards at these berths are spaced at 20 meters on center.
With the exception of fire water, vessel service utilities and other utilities at Berth 10 are non-existent.
It was not determined if the fire water system was operable because its pump system was not powered.
Current status of the berth is non- operational due to access, will become marginal after dredging and mechanical issues are addressed.
Structural repair of the wharf structure is required to support continuing service of any kind at the grain berth.
Photo 4.1.2.1.4-11 Fendering at Second Wharf.
Photo 4.1.2.1.5-2 Sugar/Vegetable Oil Terminal; West Side Elevation.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 38 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.1.2.1.5-1 Sugar/Vegetable Oil Terminal; Eastern and Center Portion of the Front Elevation.
4.1.2.1.5 Berth 11
Bulk handling of sugar and vegetable oil occurs at Berth 11. It is a T-head pier and has not been evaluated because the facility is not required for the delivery of humanitarian aid products. See Photo 4.1.2.1.5-1.
4.1.2.2 Bulk Berth
Recommendations
4.1.2.2.1 Berth 10
Recommended solutions to priority constraints for Berth 10 are as follows.
Structural repairs to the wharf structure.
Structural repairs to the
dolphin structures.
Structural repairs to the fender system.
Berth 10 structural repairs to the main wharf section may be accomplished by the addition of reinforcement shotcreted to the damaged bottoms of the caps and to portions of the deck. It is anticipated that approximately 1,433 linear meters of cap and 30 square meters of deck will require repair.
The estimated cost of repair is: US$5,250,000 Berth 10 structural repairs to the dolphins may be accomplished by the addition of reinforcement shotcreted to the entire bottom of each of the cap.
The estimated cost of repair is: US$150,000 Berth 10 structural repairs to the fendering system will require replacement, although, the H piles may be salvaged for reuse in the new fendering system.
The estimated cost of replacement is US$950,000 Other constraints requiring action include the following.
The fire suppression system needs to be brought back on line, refer to Section 8.
Berth dredging as described in Section 3 is required.
It is strongly recommended that a thorough underwater inspection of all berths be completed by a licensed engineer/diver with a structural engineering background – and not a typical Stevedoring Services of America Page 39 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
commercial diver – to verify structural conditions. Neither Coalition Forces nor the SSA group performed an underwater structural inspection. Given the state of maintenance on the rest of the facilities, it is unlikely that one has ever been accomplished.
4.2 BREAKBULK FACILITIES
4.2.1 Operational Condition
4.2.1.1 Breakbulk – Operational – Current Status The Port of Umm Qasr was designed to handle breakbulk cargo. See Photo 4.2.1.1-1.
There are sufficient berths to simultaneously work multiple vessels. Additionally, there are numerous freestanding warehouses for cargo requiring covered protection. Ideally situated, these warehouses are lined up two deep throughout most of the Port with ample paved outside storage areas located between them. These open paved areas are also ideal for traffic flow to and from the vessel as well as providing ample space for the smooth delivery of the cargo to outside trucks. Wide areas also exist between the buildings perpendicular to the berth for ease of traffic flow.
During 2000, the Port of Umm Qasr was reported to be handling over 2 million MT of bagged and general cargo each year, but this assessment is based upon continuing volumes of this magnitude. This is a substantial throughput requiring an infrastructure of reliable crane and support equipment. The Port is clearly organized to accommodate this type of cargo, dedicating a large number of berths with the most obvious constraint for breakbulk operations being the limited amount of equipment available. See Photo 4.2.1.1-2.
The ship to shore portal jib cranes along the berths offer a primary example of the equipment deficiencies. It is estimated that only 20 percent of these cranes can be put into service after a reasonable amount of repair. The rest are either beyond repair or not worth being repaired.
Operations would be enhanced if these bad order cranes were simply removed from the terminal. These cranes are further limited in their restricted outreach for larger vessels and SWL capacity.
Photo 4.2.1.1-1 General View of the “New” Port Warehouse Complex.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 40 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.2.1.1-2 General Purpose Portal Cranes in the “New” Port.
Multiple breakbulk vessel operations will also be severely restricted by the limited availability of operational forklifts. This is especially true for the smaller 3- to 5-ton forklifts, see Photo 4.2.1.1-
3. As an example, if three vessels were working simultaneously with multiple gangs, up to thirty-six 3- to 5-ton forklifts would be required. When considering the total forklifts required for vessel, yard, and maintenance operations, the number of smaller lifts quickly multiplies.
Photo 4.2.1.1-3 3-Ton Fork Lift Trucks.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 41 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.2.1.1-4 Chinese Manufacture, Dalian Fork Lift Trucks.
Apart from forklifts, additional tractors and flatbeds for the movement of various types of breakbulk cargo will also be required. We did identify some trailers that were pulled by traditional type farm tractors. See Photo 4.2.1.1-5. These trailers were approximately 3 meters wide and 5 meters long and are similar to those conventionally used the handling of long steel products in U.S. ports. The condition of the trailers appears to be good but the status of the tractors has not been determined. However, they do appear to be of recent vintage.
Photo 4.2.1.1-5 Flat Trailer for General Cargo Handling.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 42 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.2.1.1-6 Tractor Suitable for Towing Flat, General-Purpose Trailers.
A search of the Port revealed only a minimum amount of soft gear, i.e., wire rope, slings, nets, shackles, lifting bars, etc. Additional soft gear will be required for vessel operations. Lifting gear of this type should be marked and proof load tested to comply with international regulations affecting safety. The components inspected did not display any form of safe load marking or identification that could be traceable to testing certificates.
Nevertheless, most of the gear appeared to be in good condition and could possibly be used in a de-rated application. There is also a requirement for lifting platforms of various types and sizes and a need for large number of cargo boards (pallets) (500 to 1,000 estimated).
Photo 4.2.1.1-7 Freight Container Holding an Assortment of Used and Uncertificated Slings, Shackles, and Cargo Hooks.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 43 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.2.1.1-8 Lifting Beam 35T SWL with Slings and Lifter Legs.
4.2.1.2 Other Considerations Delivery of breakbulk cargo to ultimate destinations will be dependent on the adequacy and availability of rail and truck transportation.
It will be necessary to ascertain from the carrier’s load list the various lot numbers, marks, piece count, and consignee particulars, in order to sort and consolidate shipments for accurate delivery ex-vessel. Such load lists, ship’s stowage plans and cargo manifest, including hazardous and dangerous cargo lists, are required by the Operations Department prior to the vessel’s arrival and are normally provided at the time of sailing from the final loading port.
It should also be noted that in most cases it is not advisable to attempt direct loading to truck or railcar from ship’s hold. Too many variables such as miss tallies, unrecorded cargo damage, and intermittent delays in the movement of trucks or railcars to shipside come into play. A seamless and controlled transition from ship to consignee with full accounting of quantity and destination can best be achieved by moving the goods from shipside to transit warehouse and thence to land transport for delivery to destination.
Methods must be established by the port authorities and Iraq customs control to deal with abandoned cargo. There presently exists cargo on the terminal that was left over prior to the port’s cease of operations that must be identified and distributed.
4.2.1.3 Recommendations
In the near term, we recommend the use of self-contained vessels for the delivery of USAID- funded and humanitarian aid cargo because of the very limited number of working ship to shore terminal cranes.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 44 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Establish a gear locker to provide, maintain, and control all gear for breakbulk operations. We also recommend the purchase of additional stevedore soft gear listed elsewhere in this report.
Cost Estimate: US$100,000 to US$150,000.
In order to simultaneously work general cargo from three vessels and utilizing four gangs on each vessel, a total of thirty-six 3- to 5-ton forklifts are required.
Cost Estimate: US$35,000 per unit To work crated and other cargo requires a total of six 15-ton forklifts and four 10-ton forklifts.
Cost Estimate: 10-ton forklift = US$75,000 per unit, 15-ton forklift = US$90,000 per unit When cargo volumes sufficiently increase and the small shore side cranes now available become too restrictive, consideration should be given to the purchase of a minimum of two mobile harbor cranes. These cranes can efficiently work either breakbulk or containerized cargo. Mobile harbor cranes have the flexibility of easily moving from one berth to another and provide a versatile and reliable shore side support. The purchase of two used or new MPCs with a capacity range of 100 tons is recommended.
Cost Estimate: US$2.5 million per unit
4.2.2 Breakbulk Berth Characteristics
4.2.2.1 Breakbulk Berth Condition Assessment Three different breakbulk handling facilities occur at Berths 1 to 2, Berths 6 to 8, and Berths 13 to 19. Additionally, breakbulk could also be handled at the container Berths 5 and 20 whose condition is described in section 4.3. All 13 of these berths are equipped with the 4.6-meter gauge crane rails.
4.2.2.1.1 Berths 1 and 2
Berths 1 and 2 are located along a concrete decked and steel pile supported marginal wharf with a vertical sheet pile quay wall along the upland edge. The combined dimension of the wharf at the two berths is approximately 500 meters long by 24.4 meters wide.
An upland yard sits in front of two warehouses at Berth 1 and a warehouse building sits along the quay wall at Berth 2.
Photo 4.2.2.1.1-1 Berth 1.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 45 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Photo 4.2.2.1.1-2 Berth 2.
The design dredge depth at the face of the berths could not be determined. The dredged depth of the channel adjacent to the berth is shown as -13.2 m CD on Admiralty Chart 1238.
Photo 4.2.2.1.1-3 V Fenders at Berth 1 and Buckling Column Fenders at Berth 2.
Fendering at Berth 1 consists of two V fenders spaced at 6.1 meters on center bolted to the face of the wharf. The rubber fender elements are in poor shape with UV deterioration and high abrasion evident.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 46 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
Fendering at Berth 2 consists of buckling column fenders spaced at 12 meters on center and are in poor condition. The facing panel is composed of three steel H piles and a UHMW wearing face.
Bollards along Berth 1 are spaced at 25.9 meters on center and are spaced at 24 meters on center along Berth 2.
The two berths are served by a
4.6-meter gauge crane rails. At Berth 2, two train rail lines run along the wharf. Two additional rail lines perpendicular to the berth extend into the upland yard between the two warehouse buildings at Berth 1. One rail line shown on the site plan is discontinuous before reaching the wharf.
Photo 4.2.2.1.1-4 Damaged Fender at Berth 1.
Photo 4.2.2.1.1-5 Cathodic Protection Equipment.
With the exception of fire water, vessel service utilities and other utilities at Berths 1 and 2 are nonexistent. It was not determined if the fire water system was operable because its pump system was not powered.
Lighting at the berths consists of tower mounted HPS light fixtures.
Branch circuit wiring on the towers is badly deteriorated and requires replacement. The towers are set up for forty light fixtures each. Currently there are only 8-10 light fixtures per tower.
There is an active cathodic protection system at these berths for the steel pipe piles (see Photo
4.2.2.1.1-5). The status of the system is unknown.
4.2.2.1.2 Berths 6, 7, and 8 Berths 6, 7 and 8 are located along a concrete-decked and steel-pile-supported-marginal wharf with a vertical sheet pile quay wall along the upland edge. The combined dimension of the wharf at the three berths is approximately 630 meters long by 24.7 meters wide. One warehouse at each berth sits along the quay wall.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 47 21 April 2003
DRAFT UMM QASR PORT ASSESSMENT USAID CLIN 01-009
The design dredge depth at the face of the berths could not be determined. The dredged depth of the channel adjacent to the berth is shown as -13.2-m CD on Admiralty Chart 1238.
Fendering along the berths is light duty and consists of a timber-faced H pile with a square extruded rubber fender to the wharf spaced at just over 3 meters on center. The condition of the fendering system is poor at Berths 6 and 8 and fair at berth 7. About 40 percent of the fenders at berths 6 and 8 were non functional.
Photo 4.2.2.1.2 Berths 6, 7, and 8.
Bollards at these berths are spaced at
24.4 meters on center.
The three berths are served by a 4.6- meter gauge crane rails and two rail lines.
Firewater and freshwater services were located along the bullrail at 48.8 meters on center. Other vessel service utilities and other utilities at Berths 6, 7, and 8 are nonexistent. It was not determined if the two water systems were operable because their pump systems were not powered. Lighting at the berths consists of tower mounted HPS light fixtures. Branch circuit wiring on the towers is badly deteriorated and requires replacement. The towers are set up for forty light fixtures each.
Currently there are only 8-10 light fixtures per tower There is an active cathodic protection system at these berths for the steel pipe piles (see Photo
4.2.2.1.1-5). The status of the system is unknown.
Photo 4.2.2.1.2-2 Damaged Fenders.
Stevedoring Services of America Page 48 21 April 2003
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
DATED 14 APR 03
OLD PORT DOCKSIDE CRANE CONDITION SURVEY (VISUAL INSPECTION)
Ser Crane
Description
Serviceability
Location /
ID No Mechanical Electrical Structural Recommendations Remarks 01 8 ton Berth 1 No1 Feed to turntable No control panel Some control gear missing Some switchgear missing turntable Beyond repair Not recommended for further investigation (NRFI) 02 Sumitomo 15 ton No 2 No brake offside Some controls missing Main breaker u/s Beyond repair NRFI 03 Sumitomo 8 ton No 3 Break assy inop Motors stripped Main breaker u/s Controls damaged Main cable damage Beyond repair NRFI 04 Sumitomo 8 ton No 4 Gen poor condition Power suply cable beyond repair Damaged walkways and platfors Beyond repair NRFI 05 3 ton No 5 Running gear u/s Breaking system u/s Controls damaged Jib ladders damaged Beyond repair NRFI 06 15 ton No 6 Lift gear cable damaged Power cable damaged 8m from crane Incoming slip rings poor condition Further detailed inspection recommended (FDIR) 07 IHI 3 Ton No 7 Main brake offside1 missing Main power sliprings require cleaning.
No brake controls offside
NRFI Not used for a number of years 08 40 ton ISO lift crane ISO lift 1 3.3kV power supply cable cut and slip ring motor missing Cable feed supports severely damaged Repair HV cable and slip ring motor assy Crane has been prepared for use with LV supply to lift boom only. 500kW genset required 09 40 ton ISO lift crane ISO lift 2 OK OK OK Functional 1 Offside is furthest from dockside.
10 15 ton No 8 Local
no 12
OK General electrical damage FDIR 11 15 ton No 9 local No2 Hoist brake missing.
Oil leak on
turntable
Running gear power
supply cut.
Main power distribution
damaged
Beyond repair
NRFI
12 3 ton No 10 local
No 3
Cable realer u/s Power to travel gear u/s Beyond repair NRFI 13 3 ton No 11 local No 4 Cable realer u/s Power to travel gear u/s Beyond repair NRFI 14 N/K No 12 local No 5 Large oil leak on jib gearbox Main power distribution damaged Beyond repair due to age NRFI 15 N/K No 13 local No 6 Extensive oil leaks Main power distribution damaged Beyond repair due to age NRFI 16 N/K No 14 local No 7 OK OK OK Operational with separate generator supply.
Load test reqd.
17 N/K No 15 local
No 8
OK Travel function inop
within cab. Functional at
ground level control.
OK Operational with
separate generator
supply.
Load test reqd.
18 N/K No 16 local
No 9
Turntable u/s
(wheel missing)
Power cable u/s Beyond repair due to age NRFI 19 N/K No 17 local No 10 Jib oil leak Power to travel u/s Cab unsafe Poss further investigation 20 8/5t SPMP No 18 local No 11 OK OK OK Visual OK Detailed inspection ongoing 2 Local numbering annotated with spray paint Functional Functional Reqd for priority assessment
21 5t SPMP No 19 local
12
22 15/8/5t
SPMP
No 20 local
13
23 5t SPMP No 21 local
14
24 IHI 3t No 22 local
15
25 IHI 8t No 23 local
16
26 3t No 24 local
17
27 8/5t SPMP No 25 local
18
28 5t No 26 local
19
29 15/8/5t
SPMP
No 27 local
20
30 5t SPMP No 28 local
21
OK OK OK Visual OK
Detailed inspection
ongoing
Reqd for priority
assessment
OK OK OK Operational with
separate generator
supply.
Load test reqd
Functional
OK OK OK Operational with
separate generator
supply.
Load test reqd
Functional
Travel electrical controls missing.
Transformer for jib and
hoist u/s
Electrical components
missing
Access ladder
unsafe
NRFI
Various electrical
components missing
(mainly controls)
Access ladder
damaged
MDIR
Uu/s due to age
NRFI
OK Minor electrical housing damage OK Good condition MDIR OK Travel function inop within cab. Functional at ground level control OK Operational with separate generator supply.
Load test reqd
OK OK Minor access
ladder damage
Operational with
separate generator
supply.
Load test reqd
OK Minor component damage Minor damage Good MDIR
31 5t Sumitomo No 29 local 22 Brake damage Cable realer damaged Extensive electrical components and controls missing Hand rails damaged Superficial structure damage NRFI 32 N/K NRFI Jibs removed Cranes u/s 33 N/K NRFI Jibs removed Cranes u/s Notes
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. All cranes can be moved by towing with minimal preparation..
Generally all main power cable connections at socket are in poor condition.
FDIR - Further detailed inspection recommended.
NRFI - Not recommended for further investigation.
All cranes annotated SPMP are of Chinese origin and are approximately 3-5 years old and generally in good condition with only minor faults All low load electrical distribution and controls generally in poor condition but can and have been bypassed or disconnected to operate crane without some safety features unless otherwise stated.
الرئيسية / الوكالة الأمريكية للتنمية / AID-67ea9cbd
الوكالة الأمريكية للتنمية
USAID Iraq contract document: iirii_rfp031002attach9
- التاريخ
- غير معروف
- النص متوفر
- الإنكليزية
- المصدر
- الوكالة الأمريكية للتنمية — أرشيف الإنترنت
تظليل نتائج البحث عن: