spacer
 
Articles
Education & Training
Manning/Crewing
Safety & Security
Regulations
Shipbuilding
Shipping
Links
MARINA MARINA
PRC PRC
MTC MTC
TESDA TESDA
CHED CHED
PPA PPA
POEA POEA
PCG PCG
DOLE DOLE
DFA DFA
LSM LSM



 
Shipping

Keppel sets up another subsidiary to cater to offshore market

SINGAPORE’S Keppel Corporation Ltd. announced last month the establishment of another subsidiary that would engage in the fabrication of top modules for various offshore vessels in the Philippines.

In a statement, Keppel said that its subsidiary, KS Investments Pte. Ltd. and its associated company, Dyna-Mac Holdings Ltd. (Dyna-Mac) had entered into a shareholders’ agreement and have jointly incorporated a company in the Philippines known as Dyna-Mac Keppel Philippines Inc. (DMKP).  The shareholding interests of KSI and Dyna-Mac in DMKP are 40% and 60% respectively.

DMKP will be engaged in the business of fabrication of topside modules for floating, production, storage and offloading (FPSO), and floating, storage and offloading (FSO) vessels in the Philippines.

The initial paid-up capital of DMKP of P15 million (equivalent to approximately
S$452,067.89, based on the exchange rate of S$1:PhP33.1809) was arrived at after taking into account the requirements for DMKP’s initial phase of business.

Based on their respective shareholding proportion, KSI and Dyna-Mac’s capital contribution amounted to P6 million (approximately S$180,826.92) and P9 million (approximately S$271,240.38) respectively. The capital contribution by KSI was paid in cash and funded entirely through internal resources.
Following its incorporation, DMKP is now an associated company of Keppel.

In another development, Keppel Offshore & Marine Ltd. (Keppel O&M) has secured two contracts worth S$200 million from repeat customers.  Its two subsidiaries - Keppel FELS Brasil S.A. (Keppel FELS Brasil) and Keppel Shipyard Ltd. (Keppel Shipyard)—got the contracts.
Keppel FELS Brasil’s contract is with MODEC and Toyo Offshore Production Systems Pte. Ltd., to integrate the topside modules of an FPSO unit. This project will be carried out at Keppel FELS Brasil’s yard in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

The FPSO project has been chartered for operations offshore Brazil for 20 years. Integration works for the FPSO will take place from third quarter of 2014 to third quarter of 2015. The completed unit will have a production capacity of 150,000 barrels of oil per day and storage capacity of 1,600,000 barrels of oil.

In Singapore, Keppel Shipyard has been engaged by SBM Offshore N.V. (SBM Offshore) to fabricate an internal turret for a newbuild FPSO, which will be installed in the Ichthys Field, in the Browse Basin, offshore of Western Australia.

Keppel Shipyard’s work on the 6,800-ton Ichthys FPSO turret is scheduled to be completed by third quarter of 2014.

Mr. Tong Chong Heong, chief executive officer of Keppel O&M, said the repeat projects are strong affirmations of the quality of Keppel’s services.  “Keppel FELS Brasil and MTOPS’ first FPSO project was delivered safely and 19 days ahead of schedule; the second project is underway and on track for delivery in the second quarter of 2014,” he said.

Keppel Shipyard, meanwhile, has collaborated with SBM Offshore on some 17 major conversion and fabrication projects.


This Category is currently empty

  • Education&Training  ( 1 items )

    Did CHED short circuit the process in issuing the orders?

     While frantic in trying their best to correct the deficiencies identified that warranted the issuance of either closure or phase-out order of their maritime programs, owners of maritime schools have lodged their complaint to the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) over the unfavorable order.

       Though CHED did not divulge their actual number, many of the schools were ordered last month to close or phase-out their B.S. Marine Transportation (BSMT) and B.S. Marine Engineering (BSMarE) programs.

       In response, they have written CHED, through the Philippine Association of Maritime Institutions (PAMI), complaining that they were not accorded due process before the agency decided to issue the order inimical to their interest.  It appears that their sentiment may have some basis.

       In an interview, Dr. Felicito Dalaguete recalled that CHED Chairperson “Dr. Patricia Licuanan was very emphatic as she directed us to review the compliance of maritime schools insofar as CHED standards is concerned.”

                                                             

    Dr. Dalaguete, a member of the Technical Panel for Maritime Education (TPME), said: “The secretary wanted the technical panel to recommend what schools really need some drastic action in terms of either closing or phasing-out (their BSMT or BSMarE programs). He sits in the panel on behalf of PAMI.

       Chaired by Capt. George Pimentel with MARINA Officer-in-Charge Atty. Nicasio Conti as vice chairman, the panel is composed of representatives from manning groups, PRC boards for deck and engine officers, PAMI and the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SONAME).

      “(Hence) the panel decided we look at results of the monitoring of CHED over the years.  When we requested CHED a summary of evaluation of schools over the years, CHED was able to present four monitoring reports, (once each in) 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012.”

       Dr. Dalaguete, however, admitted that not all schools were monitored four times. “Some were visited by CHED assessors only once, other twice, the most is three times.”

       The member of TPME decided that the school should have been subjected to at least two evaluations in order for the panel to rule whether these schools have consistent minor or major non-compliance. “For schools with at least two major non-compliance, they would be listed for closure, but we’re only talking here of listing (only),” he emphasized.

       “For those with consistent minor non-compliance, they would be in the list for phase-out and those with no non-compliance will be in the list of compliant schools.”

       In evaluating the schools, a member of the TPME proposed to zero in only on schools with non-conformance, but the panel said  “that to be fair to all, let’s evaluate the 94 schools.

      “We remove the names of the schools and present them only by number; that’s what transpired during the two-day session held some time in March.”

      “So what we did from school 1 to school 94, we discuss each school then categorize them, then discuss again; then we found out that there were schools that need to be verified  first prior to the issuance of the closure or phase-out order.

      “There are schools that were evaluated in 2010 and 2011 but were not visited in 2012, so the guidance of the panel (to CHED) is to immediately verify the school before issuing the order,” he further said.

       As far as he could recall, there were 30-plus schools listed for phase-out, and about 20 for closure, but the panel recommended to CHED not to make public the names of the schools since there is still a need for immediate verification whether the schools have not really complied their deficiencies. “The recommendation is revisit,” he reiterated.

       When April came, some of the panel members were surprised to learn that CHED had already started sending orders. “But we don’t know whether they verified first before they issued the orders,” Dr. Dalaguete pointed out.

       He had not seen the closure or phase-out order; he was informed only by some PAMI members that they had learned the order against their maritime programs merely through their CHED regional office.

       He nevertheless maintained that there was due process.  The former PAMI president explained that part of that issuance of the order is the appeal period; so there is due process. “Any school can still appeal but conceded that the proper procedure is to verify first before issuing the order. It’s more of a decision of CHED after all we (TPME) can only recommend,” he said.

      “Probably in the next (TPME) meeting we can ask CHED to apprise the panel on the orders it issued  and what transpired after it issued the order, how many were revisited and verified,” he said.

        

                    ***

     CHED explains side on the outcome of EMSA visit

      The Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) was unusually quiet after a team from the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) visited the country last April 15-19 in contrast with the atmosphere at the agency on the eve of the visit.

       When asked for the outcome of the EMSA inspection -- some people refused to call it an audit since its objective was just to verify the progress in the implementation of the corrective measures already committed by the government – MARINA Officer-in-Charge Atty. Nicasio Conti merely said: “Let’s just wait for the official report from EMSA.”
      Keeping a tight lid on the results of the visit only indicated an unfavorable outcome which was confirmed later by people who personally met the EMSA team composed of Dr. Jaime Veiga and Capt. Antonio Hevia Rodriguez.

      At the very least, the team was displeased at what they learned.  “They are disappointed at the slow pace of the implementation,” observed Dr. Felicito Dalaguete, a consultant of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) who was present when the team conferred with CHED officials.

      “Because when we represented to them, it’s still draft on policies and standards and they are saying EO 75 has been there for one year but you’re still doing the draft,” recounted Dr. Dalaguete, quoting one of the members of the team who commented on the integration of the Manila Amendments to the BS Marine Transportation and BS Marine Engineering curricula.
      Of the government agencies visited, it appears that the team was most unhappy about developments at CHED, yet the agency remains confident that it will be able to redeem itself from its current predicament come October 2013.

           

        

      CHED Executive Director Atty. Julito Vitriolo still maintained that the agency only lacked the time to carry out its corrective actions.

      Aside from needed curricular changes for BSMT and BSMArE, other salient issues raised by the EMSA team against CHED include the lack of a harmonized quality standard system (QSS) and the issue of conflict of interest among its assessors.
      Downplaying the negative feedbacks from the EMSA officials, Atty. Vitriolo explained the agency’s side on these issues.

      “Kailangan lang iayos yung mga procedures.Unang-una kasi late nang naaprubahan‘yung NQSS ng MARINA kaya di agad kami nakapag-align. Ngayon na-align na namin ito this month (We just have to fix some procedures. In the first place, we could not align our system because of the late approval of MARINA’s National Quality Standards System; but now, we’re already aligned only this month),” he said in an interview, referring to the agency’s QSS.

      “Now on evaluators nain, pinapa-approve kasi namin sa MARINA yan at hinihintay namin ang evaluators nila kaya hindi pa namin na firm up. Pero ngayon okay na, mayroon na tayong joint evaluators, nagmiting na sila this month (About the evaluators, we asked MARINA for approval.  We were waiting for their evaluators before we could firm up our list, but now we already have joint evaluators and they met just this month).”

       On the list of 42 schools CHED submitted to EMSA that need to be visited, he commented:

      “Sabi ng EMSA unrealistic daw.  Hindi kasi nila nakita na we have MOA with MARINA; at may pool of evaluators ang MARINA.  Kaya iyan up to July, siguro maximum na August (EMSA said it’s unrealistic.  They did not see our MOA with MARINA, the agency has a pool of evaluators. We can finish that until July or at the latest August),” he informed Seaway.
      The CHED official added that the issue of conflict of interest cropped up during the meeting with visitors from Europe.

      “Na bring up nila yun, pero in-explain namin that the list na nakita nila is not the one we are using.  Nagkamali ata ng bigay sa kanila, it’s an old list, kinorek na namin iyon (The issue was brought up, we explained that we’re not using the list of assessors that they have, it seems they were given the old list.  We already corrected that),” he further said, indicating that its assessors are no longer connected whatsoever with any maritime schools.

      Finally, on the integration of the Manila Amendments to the curriculum, Atty. Vitriolo disclosed that the Commission had just given its nod on the new Policies, Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for maritime programs.  “The PSG is already approved to be implemented by June (2013),” Atty. Vitriolo said.

      In fact, CHED met with maritime schools early this month to orient them about the new PSG.  In response, school officials gathered a week later to hold a three –day conference to discuss the course syllabi of the new curriculum that will commence implementation this school year, 2013-2014.

      “So our next move is, between June and maybe August, bibisitahin‘yung (to visit the) 42 schools,” he nonchalantly said.

      He exuded optimism, expectant that the agency will produce significant results before October 2013, the next scheduled EMSA visit.

      Many in the industry, however, do not share his optimism.


  • Manning/Crewing  ( 1 items )

    What can industry expect from Angkla?


    AT long last, the maritime industry’s dream to have a representative in the nation’s Legislative branch, the House of Representatives (HOR), has become a reality.
     Through the partrylist group Angkla, the industry’s hope of having a voice in Congress through the group’s No.1 nominee, Atty. Jess Manalo, has come true.
      The question now: what can the maritime sector expect from its lone representative in Congress?
      The series of failed attempts of previous groups since the partylist system was put into practice in 1998 may have inadvertently raised industry expectations.
      Moreover, the fact that the industry badly needs new legislation, to replace archaic laws that have long hindered the growth of the maritime sector, has further heightened expectations.
      Amid these strong hopes, however, one partylist representative from the labor sector was candid enough to admit recently that a lawmaker can only do so much. The representative was fortunate to have co-authored a bill that was enacted into law last year.
      In a forum just before the last elections, the representative, who was relentless in pushing for the partylist’s priority bills, conceded that without the support from a significant number of fellow lawmakers one cannot achieve much.  That’s the reality in Congress. 
      Yet the industry is now pinning its hopes on Atty. Manalo. And apparently the lone Angkla representative is feeling the mounting pressure.
      He’s not dashing the industry’s hopes, but he conceded at the outset that he does not have all the answers to all the sector’s problems.
      “I’m not going to solve all the problems, I cannot.  I will be honest.  How can I solve all the problems?” he told Seaway.
      Nonetheless, he disclosed how he would spend his three years while serving as a member of the House.
    Single maritime administration
      He is aware that a proposed Maritime Code has been pending for years in Congress, without any significant progress.
      “Titingnan ko kung paano ko mabi-break into Book 1, Book2 to Book 3 ang Code. So para sa akin, ang priority ko iyung single maritime
    agency muna (I will study how can I break the  Code into Book 1, Book 2 to Book 3.  For me, my priority will be the creation of the single maritime agency),” he said.
     The lawyer explained that although there is already Executive Order 75 that designated the Transportation department, through the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA), as the country’s single maritime administration, there’s still a need for a law to reconcile its provisions with other conflicting laws.
      Hence, on July 1, the first day of the 16th Congress, he filed House Bill No. 719, which “calls for the immediate establishment of MARINA as the sole maritime regulating agency in the country.”
      Even then, Atty. Manalo could not give firm assurance that his bill would come out from the halls of Congress as law within three years. As lawyer, he knows how Congress works, if you have the support of the majority of fellow lawmakers, there is greater chance that your bill would become a law.
      Notwithstanding the difficulties posed by lawmaking in the country, the Angkla representative could still score significant accomplishments during his term.
      In addition to filing a bill on the single maritime agency, Atty. Manalo intends to spend his first 100 days in Congress in reviewing the bills on the maritime industry that were passed over by the last Congress.
     “I can co-sponsor some of them, including the Maritime Code.  Then I will look into existing rules and regulations which is actually government policies in the maritime industry,” he said.

    Single maritime administration
      He is aware that a proposed Maritime Code has been pending for years in Congress, without any significant progress.
      “Titingnan ko kung paano ko mabi-break into Book 1, Book2 to Book 3 ang Code. So para sa akin, ang priority ko iyung single maritime
    agency muna (I will study how can I break the  Code into Book 1, Book 2 to Book 3.  For me, my priority will be the creation of the single maritime agency),” he said.
     The lawyer explained that although there is already Executive Order 75 that designated the Transportation department, through the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA), as the country’s single maritime administration, there’s still a need for a law to reconcile its provisions with other conflicting laws.
      Hence, on July 1, the first day of the 16th Congress, he filed House Bill No. 719, which “calls for the immediate establishment of MARINA as the sole maritime regulating agency in the country.”
      Even then, Atty. Manalo could not give firm assurance that his bill would come out from the halls of Congress as law within three years. As lawyer, he knows how Congress works, if you have the support of the majority of fellow lawmakers, there is greater chance that your bill would become a law.
      Notwithstanding the difficulties posed by lawmaking in the country, the Angkla representative could still score significant accomplishments during his term.
      In addition to filing a bill on the single maritime agency, Atty. Manalo intends to spend his first 100 days in Congress in reviewing the bills on the maritime industry that were passed over by the last Congress.
     “I can co-sponsor some of them, including the Maritime Code.  Then I will look into existing rules and regulations which is actually government policies in the maritime industry,” he said.


    Single maritime administration
      He is aware that a proposed Maritime Code has been pending for years in Congress, without any significant progress.
      “Titingnan ko kung paano ko mabi-break into Book 1, Book2 to Book 3 ang Code. So para sa akin, ang priority ko iyung single maritime
    agency muna (I will study how can I break the  Code into Book 1, Book 2 to Book 3.  For me, my priority will be the creation of the single maritime agency),” he said.
     The lawyer explained that although there is already Executive Order 75 that designated the Transportation department, through the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA), as the country’s single maritime administration, there’s still a need for a law to reconcile its provisions with other conflicting laws.
      Hence, on July 1, the first day of the 16th Congress, he filed House Bill No. 719, which “calls for the immediate establishment of MARINA as the sole maritime regulating agency in the country.”
      Even then, Atty. Manalo could not give firm assurance that his bill would come out from the halls of Congress as law within three years. As lawyer, he knows how Congress works, if you have the support of the majority of fellow lawmakers, there is greater chance that your bill would become a law.
      Notwithstanding the difficulties posed by lawmaking in the country, the Angkla representative could still score significant accomplishments during his term.
      In addition to filing a bill on the single maritime agency, Atty. Manalo intends to spend his first 100 days in Congress in reviewing the bills on the maritime industry that were passed over by the last Congress.
     “I can co-sponsor some of them, including the Maritime Code.  Then I will look into existing rules and regulations which is actually government policies in the maritime industry,” he said.

spacer
Regular Sections
Dear Reader
Local Update
Overseas Update
Memo/AOs
Who's Who
Health
Tourism
Shipmanagement
Sports
Starbuzz
Other Links

 


 
© 2014 Seaway Magazine
Powered by WebReady
spacer
Loading...