HATCH COVERS - Part 2

In the last article published in May, we discussed the difference between watertight and weathertight; it was very clear, as per the International Convention on Load Lines, that hatch covers are constructed to be weathertight. We also discussed the wrong notion that some seafarers have about the hatch cover sealing, "The tighter we compress the hatch packing, the better the seal". Weather tightness is achieved by the weight of the hatch cover, and it does not depend on the tightening of the cleats.

- Capt. Robert Vaz

In this article, we will discuss the rules and conventions regarding hatch covers and how we can fulfil our obligations. We will not go into details and keep this more practical.

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

Some of the rules and conventions related to hatch covers are:

• The Load Line Convention

• SOLAS

• Marpol

• The ISM code

• The Code of Safe Working Practices

• The Maritime Labour Convention

• Classification Society rules, and

• P & I club/Insurance rules

When it comes to the carrier's responsibility for cargo damage relating to seawater ingress via the hatch covers, this largely depends on whether the carrier can demonstrate that they exercised due diligence to make the vessel seaworthy before and at the beginning of the voyage. This is where the Company's SMS, PMS, testing schedules, maintenance schedules, and, most importantly, record keeping will be minutely scrutinised.

PREVENTION OF WATER INGRESS

Now that we know about the hatch packing, bearing pads, and quick-acting cleats, let's see the other barriers in place and the testing arrangements.

The Hatch steel plating is the main barrier to prevent water ingress; in addition, we have other safety barriers, which include the hatch cover rubber packing and the inboard drain channel.