What has been common practice in public buildings for years is also casting its shadow in shipping: deviating information in Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHMs) and their influence on the property value. This is generally interesting with regard to financing, but takes on a completely different dimension when it comes to ship sales.
For new buildings - especially from Asia - there is still a risk that asbestos will be used. The legally required decontamination as soon as "illegally installed asbestos" has been discovered often causes considerable costs. Added to this is the loss of earnings due to unplanned or longer stays in the shipyard. Who bears the costs and for what exactly? In addition to asbestos, another 15 groups of hazardous substances must be documented on board.
For existing vessels, it is important to consider the preparation of the IHM by so-called IHM experts. For cost reasons, many IHM experts have opted for assessments instead of samples, with far-reaching consequences and costs for the owner, or have used laboratories for sample analysis that did not apply the required methods (prices for this vary by a factor of five). What was sampled and tested for which substance, and what assessments and PCHM ("potentially containing hazardous materials") classifications were performed? What consequences does this have for everyday life on board and safety measures for the crew? Were decontamination measures (or were they) even necessary?
Most IHMs were commissioned without considering the quality or experience of the IHM expert or the laboratory used. IHM certifications also do not contribute to quality assurance.
The same problem arises with the required IHM maintenance. After the expected decline in demand for IHM creation in the operating fleet after 2020, many IHM experts now offer IHM maintenance as a service. However, this must be carried out according to fundamentally different principles. The result is that not only are incorrect or inefficient "services" offered, but that even initially high-quality IHMs become opaque and thus useless over time.
New IHMs and IHM maintenance must be based solely on declarations from suppliers or manufacturers. These manufacturers must request corresponding information from their own supply chain. Has this been done, and was the necessary due diligence exercised, or were the declarations generated based on "empirical values and estimates," by signing a zero-level declaration pre-filled by the "service provider," or even using an internet-based converter? It should be noted that false declarations from suppliers falsify the IHMs, and the supplier is responsible for this.
What risks exist when the required certified and maintained IHM is inspected in a port? How accurate is the IHM that is handed over to the new owner with the ship? What impact does incorrect information have on the ship's value, and what recourse claims are possible?
In short, is the IHM compliant or was the famous "pig in a poke" bought? As a publicly appointed and sworn expert "IHM - Hazardous Substance Data for Ships", I can clarify these and other questions for you.
Click on the following image for more details.
