Federal judge threatens to temporarily block Carnival ships from docking at U.S. port

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, twodaywonder said:

Where do you see me saying illegally? How about you read slowly one word at a time. You might notice there is no mention of the word illegally. So I would appreciate it if yo do not reply so something i did not say.  "You do understand that all the cruise lines dump. Merchant ships also" 

Legally discharging waste streams at legally defined limits is not dumping, as I said, any more than your car's emissions are "dumping".

1 hour ago, twodaywonder said:

Really. You make no sense at all. Location and dumping go hand in hand. If they were in an area that was OK to dump. They would not have been fined. I am correct. Dumping bilge oil is not illegal in itself. It is where it was dumped. Period.

Whoa, there big boy.  Dumping bilge oil is in fact illegal in itself.  Discharging treated bilge water that has an oil content of less than 15ppm is legal, not "dumping".  Can you tell me how much 15ppm is?  One drop in a gallon is 17ppm.  And there are areas where discharging treated bilge water, even below 15ppm is not allowed, like within 3 miles of shore, and when not underway.  You are not correct.  Period.  And I would not tackle Aquahound, as Paul is an investigative officer for the USCG.  I think he may know a wee bit more about marine pollution regulations than you do.

[Aquahound]

Just now, twodaywonder said:

Really. You make no sense at all. Location and dumping go hand in hand. If they were in an area that was OK to dump. They would not have been fined. I am correct. Dumping bilge oil is not illegal in itself. It is where it was dumped. Period.

 

Sorry but you are totally wrong.  Under international law, large oceangoing vessels must use oily water separators, known as OWS, to filter bilge water to no more than 15 parts per million of oil before it can be discharged overboard.  Intentionally bypassing the OWS by way of magic pipes or other means is illegal.   

 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

You are correct...it's all about where they dumped it.  In the Gulf of Mexico there are an estimated 200,000 barrels of oil that seep from the ocean floor into the water every day.  Mother Nature is pretty awesome and takes care of cleaning herself and her waters.  It's because they dumped in protected waters that they were busted.

No, its not.  They were "busted" because they had an overflow of a gray water tank into the engine room bilges.  The Chief Engineer decided to pump this water back into the gray water tank, and discharge it as gray water.  Unfortunately for him, once a liquid enters the engine room bilges, it is considered to be bilge water and must be treated as such before discharging overboard.  Gray water could be discharged at sea with no treatment, but this was done in a protected area, so violation #1.  Once it is bilge water, it must pass through an oil/water separator (even if there is no oil present), with an oil content meter that will only allow discharge if the oil content is below 15ppm.  Since this now bilge water (formerly gray water) was not discharged through the oil water separator, violation #2, regardless of location.  And since the discharge of now bilge water was not recorded in the Oil Record Book, as it is required to be, listing location and type of oil water separation equipment used, violation #3.

 

Why did he decide to pump it back and consider it still gray water?  Because an oil/water separator can only process oily mixtures at a slow rate (5 tons/hr), while his gray water pump could handle 100 tons/hr, getting rid of the problem very quickly in his mind.

 

And, if you believe that the oil seepage in the US Gulf has not, and is not affecting the ecosystem of the Gulf, you are sadly mistaken.

Edited June 5, 2019 by chengkp75

[Cruzaholic41]

Chengkp75 and Aquahound are our resident experts in this industry. One is a Chief Engineer and the other is a criminal investigator who works for the agency that busted Princess. I’d tread lightly when wanting to argue facts with them. Just sayn’. 

Edited June 5, 2019 by Cruzaholic41

[USCcruisecrazy]

Seems simple enough to me...guy makes mistake by pumping gray water back into holding tanks and discharging it when there was a potential for some oil in it...so, I say let's shoot the guy at sunrise to make an example to people for making a mistake and then maybe they won't make any more.  Or, we can use a little common sense and realize the guy made a mistake that in reality had no long-lasting impact on the environment, but was in a protected area...hand out a fine for such a discrepancy (which they did).  The other violations are all consequences of the one poor judgment and has no other impact on the environment.  Bottom line:  if people are going to go crazy and boycott Carnival lines for such a discrepancy, then fine...more room for me and mine!!  I personally think it's Much Ado About Nothing!!! 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Seems simple enough to me...guy makes mistake by pumping gray water back into holding tanks and discharging it when there was a potential for some oil in it...so, I say let's shoot the guy at sunrise to make an example to people for making a mistake and then maybe they won't make any more.  Or, we can use a little common sense and realize the guy made a mistake that in reality had no long-lasting impact on the environment, but was in a protected area...hand out a fine for such a discrepancy (which they did).  The other violations are all consequences of the one poor judgment and has no other impact on the environment.  Bottom line:  if people are going to go crazy and boycott Carnival lines for such a discrepancy, then fine...more room for me and mine!!  I personally think it's Much Ado About Nothing!!! 

But you see, since the water was sent over as gray water, there is no way of knowing whether a tiny amount or 10 metric tons of oil went over with it.  No one will ever know, whether it had a long lasting impact or not.  I sure wish that I could say, "gee my bad, I didn't enter that discharge in the oil record book, but it won't have any effect on the environment", and then I wouldn't have to make the daily entries that I just finished, an average of 3 per day, and I wouldn't need license insurance to protect my livelihood.  And, what makes it much ado is not the original violation, but it is the fact that it has been happening for years with Carnival, fined time and again, and continued to make violations when on probation.

[USCcruisecrazy]

5 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Chengkp75 and Aquahound are our resident experts in this industry. One is a Chief Engineer and the other is a criminal investigator who works for the agency that busted Princess. I’d tread lightly when wanting to argue facts with them. Just sayn’. 

Nah!!!  Those are the best guys to have a discussion with.  Of course, being a professional myself I find it quite amusing that I like most professionals can't really see the forest for the trees because we assume others know the intricacies of which we speak.  Sometimes looking at an issue from the lowest common denominator is the best way to understand the underlying reason and thus make it easier to formulate potential fixes.  For what it's worth:  I plan on taking cruises with Princess as often as I can and their indiscretion hasn't pushed me away from that decision one iota! 

[USCcruisecrazy]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

But you see, since the water was sent over as gray water, there is no way of knowing whether a tiny amount or 10 metric tons of oil went over with it.  No one will ever know, whether it had a long lasting impact or not.  I sure wish that I could say, "gee my bad, I didn't enter that discharge in the oil record book, but it won't have any effect on the environment", and then I wouldn't have to make the daily entries that I just finished, an average of 3 per day, and I wouldn't need license insurance to protect my livelihood.  And, what makes it much ado is not the original violation, but it is the fact that it has been happening for years with Carnival, fined time and again, and continued to make violations when on probation.

Look, I understand the need for regulations, following them to the tee, and understanding the consequences for not doing that.  In my business, when I don't, people die.  The entire point I was trying to make from the beginning is people are overreacting (IMHO) to the issue.  The guy screwed up and it needs to be fixed.  Banning Carnival Lines form US ports or everyone going to sail elsewhere is an overreaction.  Fining the company and ensuring they fix the problem is the best road forward.  That's all I was advocating for!  Thanks, though, for the very informative posts.  They were good information to know for future discussions.  Cheers!  Gotta go!!

[Aquahound]

10 minutes ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Seems simple enough to me...guy makes mistake by pumping gray water back into holding tanks and discharging it when there was a potential for some oil in it...so, I say let's shoot the guy at sunrise to make an example to people for making a mistake and then maybe they won't make any more.  Or, we can use a little common sense and realize the guy made a mistake that in reality had no long-lasting impact on the environment, but was in a protected area...hand out a fine for such a discrepancy (which they did).  The other violations are all consequences of the one poor judgment and has no other impact on the environment.  Bottom line:  if people are going to go crazy and boycott Carnival lines for such a discrepancy, then fine...more room for me and mine!!  I personally think it's Much Ado About Nothing!!! 

 

That's only 1 small example of the much larger picture.  5 Princess ships, going back as far as 2005, routinely dumped illegally; some were so egregious as to construct magic pipes to bypass their OWS.  A shipping company doesn't receive a $40 million fine for one act.  It receives that fine for many years of intentional acts. I've been in this business a long time and what Princess did over the course of so many years was the worst I've ever seen. 

[Cruzaholic41]

34 minutes ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Nah!!!  Those are the best guys to have a discussion with.  

 

I agree. It wasn’t you I was referring to with my post. 

[Cindy]

Question for Aquahound or chengkp75 — 

 

Help me understand what was done in preparing for an inspection that shouldn’t have happened. I am absolutely NOT defending Carnival Corp. or PCL, but that part doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe I’m looking at it too simplistically, but I would think preparing and reviewing your systems and procedures is something that should be done constantly, not to try to trick someone, but to inspect what is expected and detect problems for immediate correction. Obviously, that isn’t what was happening, but what were they doing?

 

Looking at this from a customer perspective, it reeks of corporate meddling in marine operations. I can’t fathom a sea-going professional coming up with ideas to cut costs at the expense of the environment, and I’m dumbfounded that obviously some bought into the schemes. The scary thing about that is the practice of cutting corners to save money is not limited to the environmental practices, but things like maintenance and repairs.😰 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Cindy said:

Question for Aquahound or chengkp75 — 

 

Help me understand what was done in preparing for an inspection that shouldn’t have happened. I am absolutely NOT defending Carnival Corp. or PCL, but that part doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe I’m looking at it too simplistically, but I would think preparing and reviewing your systems and procedures is something that should be done constantly, not to try to trick someone, but to inspect what is expected and detect problems for immediate correction. Obviously, that isn’t what was happening, but what were they doing?

 

Looking at this from a customer perspective, it reeks of corporate meddling in marine operations. I can’t fathom a sea-going professional coming up with ideas to cut costs at the expense of the environment, and I’m dumbfounded that obviously some bought into the schemes. The scary thing about that is the practice of cutting corners to save money is not limited to the environmental practices, but things like maintenance and repairs.😰 

What Carnival did was to go to the ships before the auditor teams, and find violations and have the crew change equipment or records to reflect no violation, and to fail to inform the auditors that they had found violations.  Preparing for an audit is one thing, and done all the time.  Covering up illegal activities and failing to report those activities and the cover up is a far different thing.

 

Why would crew "buy into" these schemes?  Because they are told by corporate that if they don't, their replacement will be at the next port.

[Cindy]

26 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

What Carnival did was to go to the ships before the auditor teams, and find violations and have the crew change equipment or records to reflect no violation, and to fail to inform the auditors that they had found violations.  Preparing for an audit is one thing, and done all the time.  Covering up illegal activities and failing to report those activities and the cover up is a far different thing.

 

Why would crew "buy into" these schemes?  Because they are told by corporate that if they don't, their replacement will be at the next port.

 

Thanks! You confirmed my suspicions...they weren’t preparing in order to improve, they were falsifying records, cheating, and lying. Pretty disgusting behavior in my opinion. 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Cindy said:

 

Thanks! You confirmed my suspicions...they weren’t preparing in order to improve, they were falsifying records, cheating, and lying. Pretty disgusting behavior in my opinion. 

That's right.  If Carnival had sent a team to the ship, found a violation, reported it, trained the crew in how and why it was a violation, and how it could be prevented in the future, and then reported all of this to the auditor team, they would have said "fair enough, the process is working, you are catching things and working to improve".  Having worked for companies under DOJ probation like this, this is exactly what the auditors and monitors are there for, and how they would have handled it.

[Aquahound]

Cindy, the chief is pretty much spot on.  Carnival Corp was pretty disgusting in all this.  Lots a lot for the corporation and the individual lines like Princess to be ashamed of. 

 

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

Yes Carnival Corp needs to get there act together. There was no excuse for any of this at all. I do not understand why they did this. Could have done it legally. Money had nothing to do with it. So why? What dumb reason?

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

Whenever we cruise on any ship or cruise line, there is always an announcement about tossing anything over board. Also during the muster drill. 

[AmazedByCruising]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

hey were "busted" because they had an overflow of a gray water tank into the engine room bilges.  The Chief Engineer decided to pump this water back into the gray water tank, and discharge it as gray water. 

 

Am I correct that the reason for the overflow of the gray water tank was that they weren't in an area where it could be discharged? What's a likely reason for this to go wrong in the first place?  More gray water than expected, forgetting to pump out gray water when they were still allowed to? Using the wrong tank while another had enough space?

 

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Why did he decide to pump it back and consider it still gray water?  Because an oil/water separator can only process oily mixtures at a slow rate (5 tons/hr), while his gray water pump could handle 100 tons/hr, getting rid of the problem very quickly in his mind.

 

What would have happened if he simply waited for the oil/water separator do slowly get of the (probably much?) larger amount of bilge water? Would it have reached levels where engines could fail or would rust faster? I don't understand why he chose to take the difficult (in terms of violations) way instead of simply let the seperator do its work. (Wikipedia names several reasons, but cost is not one of them)

 

[richsea]

4 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

 The entire point I was trying to make from the beginning is people are overreacting (IMHO) to the issue.  The guy screwed up and it needs to be fixed.  Banning Carnival Lines form US ports or everyone going to sail elsewhere is an overreaction.  Fining the company and ensuring they fix the problem is the best road forward.  That's all I was advocating for! 

The guy screwed up? From what I understand is there was systematic false reporting filed, & ship’s plumbing was altered to facilitate bypassing regulations. That’s not “a guy screwing up”.

 

 

[Pierlesscruisers]

6 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Look, I understand the need for regulations, following them to the tee, and understanding the consequences for not doing that.  In my business, when I don't, people die.  The entire point I was trying to make from the beginning is people are overreacting (IMHO) to the issue.  The guy screwed up and it needs to be fixed.  Banning Carnival Lines form US ports or everyone going to sail elsewhere is an overreaction.  Fining the company and ensuring they fix the problem is the best road forward.  That's all I was advocating for!  Thanks, though, for the very informative posts.  They were good information to know for future discussions.  Cheers!  Gotta go!!

 

1 hour ago, richsea said:

The guy screwed up? From what I understand is there was systematic false reporting filed, & ship’s plumbing was altered to facilitate bypassing regulations. That’s not “a guy screwing up”.

 

Seems to me that you two are basically agreeing on the end of the problem, you're just arguing "degrees" here.

 

Tom

[Cruzaholic41]

6 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Nah!!!  Those are the best guys to have a discussion with.  

 

I agree. It wasn’t you I was referring to with my post. 

[Cruzaholic41]

I’m confused by some of the recent posts. Do some of you think this was just one incident?

[chengkp75]

9 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

Am I correct that the reason for the overflow of the gray water tank was that they weren't in an area where it could be discharged? What's a likely reason for this to go wrong in the first place?  More gray water than expected, forgetting to pump out gray water when they were still allowed to? Using the wrong tank while another had enough space?

 

 

What would have happened if he simply waited for the oil/water separator do slowly get of the (probably much?) larger amount of bilge water? Would it have reached levels where engines could fail or would rust faster? I don't understand why he chose to take the difficult (in terms of violations) way instead of simply let the seperator do its work. (Wikipedia names several reasons, but cost is not one of them)

 

Not being familiar with the piping or layout of Princess ships, I can't say for sure, it could have been several reasons.  I would be surprised, though, that Princess was in the habit of pumping untreated gray water overboard, as most newer ships (within the last 20 years) have waste water treatment plants that allow them to treat both black water and gray water together before it goes overboard.  So, why the tank overflowed is unknown to me, and I have no guesses.  Even if the gray water was treated in the waste water treatment plant, as gray water should be, once that water touched the bilges, it was no longer gray water, and was not allowed to be treated in the waste water system.

 

Again, not knowing the actual volume of the gray water overflow can change the scenario.  The bilges are pumped to a bilge water holding tank, where it is kept until such time as it can be treated and sent overboard.  How much capacity this tank has, how much room was available, and how much he needed to get rid of are unknowns.  Now, even if he had been able to pump it all to the bilge holding tank, it is likely he would not have been able to process it through the OWS for one or two days, if the ship was in Glacier Bay or using the inside passage, as discharge of even treated bilge water is not allowed in those waters, and he would have had additional bilge water accumulating from "normal" sources.  Leaving it in the bilges would likely have caused a lot of mess, smell, and the possibility of damage to electrical equipment as the ship rolled and the water sloshed back and forth.

 

My feelings as to why he did what he did are several fold.  One, he knew that Princess management, if notified of the problem, would simply tell him to make it go away, they didn't want to know about it.  Second, he knew that if he did process things the right way, there was the possibility of damage to the ship's systems, and he would have to answer for that, and third that in all likelihood he could do what he did and get away with it.  Given the "blame culture" that the auditors have found throughout Carnival Corp lines, he likely felt that if he did the right thing, but something happened because of the problem, he would lose his job.

[AmazedByCruising]

16 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

My feelings as to why he did what he did are several fold.  One, he knew that Princess management, if notified of the problem, would simply tell him to make it go away, they didn't want to know about it.  Second, he knew that if he did process things the right way, there was the possibility of damage to the ship's systems, and he would have to answer for that, and third that in all likelihood he could do what he did and get away with it.  Given the "blame culture" that the auditors have found throughout Carnival Corp lines, he likely felt that if he did the right thing, but something happened because of the problem, he would lose his job.

 

I do hope others look at such "company culture", as well, besides pollution. A supposedly kosher meal cooked wrong but not wanting to put all the food in the bin and start over. Peanutbutter in the desert, and when the allergic guest gets sick tell them it's probably seasickness. Or much worse, a ship's doctor facing a similar dillema, where again he's requesting the Captain to return to the last port leading to missing the next. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by AmazedByCruising

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

I will just keep on cruising. Enjoy my cruises and be happy. That is why we cruise and have no reason to condemn any cruise line. It is there business to govern and run and their problem along with the share holders. Nothing I do will change anything including getting upset over there problems. If you cannot fix it, forget it.