Cargo leakage into double-hull spaces
What is being checked
The inspector is checking whether the emergency plan, crew competence, equipment readiness and recent drills demonstrate a coordinated response to cargo vapour or liquid detected in a double-hull or double-bottom space, including realistic decisions rather than a paper exercise.
Ready onboard
0/6 completePractice questions
Answer aloud, then open the preparation point.
1What are your first actions for cargo vapour or liquid detected in a double-hull or double-bottom space?
Raise the correct alarm, establish command and then explain the immediate priorities: stop or alter transfer, identify the source, control ignition and entry, monitor atmosphere, manage pressure and pollution risk and notify shore.
2Who assumes command if the designated person is unavailable?
Identify the deputy from the muster list or emergency plan and explain how command transfer is communicated.
3Which equipment must be immediately available?
Identify, locate and explain the readiness checks for fixed or portable gas detection, remote sampling, tank level and pressure monitoring, communications and emergency transfer arrangements.
4Show what was learned from the last relevant drill.
Use gas trends, cargo records, structural inspections and incident follow-up to trace one finding through responsibility, correction and verification.
5How are shore and external parties contacted?
Use the scenario-specific contact list and reporting sequence, distinguishing immediate distress or emergency calls from company notification.
Where an observation may arise
The emergency plan did not adequately address stop or alter transfer, identify the source, control ignition and entry, monitor atmosphere, manage pressure and pollution risk and notify shore.
Crew members could not explain their alarm, muster, communication or deputy responsibilities.
Required equipment was inaccessible, defective or not prepared: fixed or portable gas detection, remote sampling, tank level and pressure monitoring, communications and emergency transfer arrangements.
The record showed attendance but no credible equipment use, decision-making or scenario development.
Times, participants or results could not be reconciled with gas trends, cargo records, structural inspections and incident follow-up.
Repeated deficiencies remained open or were closed without testing the corrective action.
Master's practical note
Select one recent drill and ask three different ranks to continue the scenario from an unplanned complication. Consistent actions are stronger evidence than a polished drill report.
Equipment boundary and references
Equipment boundary: Apply the statutory and company drill frequency and scope relevant to the vessel, equipment and trade. Do not operate equipment during an interview where doing so would create risk.
References
- OCIMF SIRE 2.0 Question Library Part 1, Version 1.0, Question 5.1.18
- SOLAS Chapter II-2
- MARPOL Annex I
- OCIMF ISGOTT
Last reviewed: 2026-09-13