Strategies for Obtaining Ship Services Alternatives for NOAA (1988) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4. Comparison of NOAA-Owned and -Operated Vessels Versus Charter Vessel Alternatives: A Methodology
4. Comparison of NOAA-Owned and -Operated Vessels Versus Charter Vessel Alternatives: A Methodology
Pages 29-48
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 29... ...
A cost comparison demonstrated using project descriptions typical of NOAA's mission responsibilities and cost data from seven vessel charter organizations In addition to the cost comparison, the methodology includes discussion of other important "decision factors" that need to be addressed in order for NOAA to optimize the benefits of vessel chartering. Each decision factor is discussed in terms of its implications to vessel chartering and approaches for resolving each factor are suggested.
|
From page 30... ...
Direct costs are relatively easy to access whereas indirect costs may be more difficult for shipowners to measure when applied to a particular ship project. Direct and indirect costs were defined as follows: Direct Costs · crew costs (ship and scientific staff)
|
From page 31... ...
Possible reasons for variation include: low costs due to efficient methods devised by private firms to compete (such as custom-designed ships) , high costs due to the need for expensive specialized equipment amortized over very short periods, and both high and low costs due to different interpretations of the same project description (for example, for the same project and contract alternative, specialized equipment costs varied from $200,000 to $3,180,000 -- for the multibeam survey/ 1-year charter -- and scientific crew costs varied from $313,627 to $678, 000~.
|
From page 32... ...
32 TABLE 4-1 Ship Operations Cost Comparison ($000/day) Task Ground- Fish Ocean At- General Provider/ fish -- Survey -- mosphere Purpose Contract Ba thy/ Gulf of Gulf of (physical/ OAR Type Years Mapping Alaska Mexico chemical)
|
From page 33... ...
33 TABLE 4-1 Continued Task Ground- Fish Ocean At- General Provider/ fish -- Survey -- mosphere Purpose Contract Bathy/ Gulf of Gulf of (physical/ OAR Type Years Mapping Alaska Mexico chemical) Vessel Company 'C" Bare boat Ship with crew Ship with contractor 2 10 1 2 10 1 2 10 10.9 8.8 6.4 12.9 10.8 8.3 Company D Bare 1 22.0 boat 2 11.0 10 2.2 Ship with 1 27.7 crew 2 16.7 10 7.9 Ship with 1 31.5 con- 2 20.5 tractor 10 11.7 Company ''E" Bare 1 - boat 2 - 10 - Ship with 1 - crew 2 - 10 Ship with 1 - con- 2 - tractor 10 -6.6 10.9 8.8 6.4 12.9 10.8 8.3 6.4 5.6 5.6 9.1 8.3 8.3 10.9 8.8 6.4 12.9 10.8 8.3 6.4 5.6 5.6 9.1 8.3 8.3
|
From page 34... ...
DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT DECISION FACTORS In many published reports by NOAA and other federal agencies, common concerns are raised by users of government-owned and -operated vessels with regard to chartering vessel services. These concerns with contractor operations fall into several areas:
|
From page 35... ...
SCIENTIFIC CREW Salaries Benefits Overtime Travel Rations Training Total TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES C SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT OTHER SHIP-OPERATING EXPENSES Rents (Port fees, etc.)
|
From page 36... ...
8 _ 6 _ 4 _ 2 _ 0 _ NOM COMPANY A O COMPANY B COMPANY C COMPANY 1 YR . 2YRS 10 YRS CHARTER DURATION FIGURE 4-3 Bathymetry/mapping -- day rate for ship with crew.
|
From page 37... ...
tr: 4 3 2 1 o FIGURE 4-4 8 7 6 o to o I* NOM COMPANY A COMPANY F COMPANY G 1 YR 2YRS 10 YRS CHARTER DURATION 5 4 _ 3 _ 2 _ 1 _ O _ Gulf of Mexico fish survey -- day rate for ship with crew NOM COMPANY A COM PANY F COMPANY G ,,\`,,,``,, `''~ '\i':'., 1 YR 2 YRS 10YRS CHAPTER DURATION "COMPANY" FIGURE 4-5 Gulf of Mexico fish survey -- day rate for ship with crew.
|
From page 38... ...
38 8 6 g 5 4 3 2 1 o NOAA COMPANY A COMPANY E COMPANY G E 1 , , 1YR 2YRS 10YRS CHARTER DURATION FIGURE 4-6 Gulf of Alaska groundfish -- day rate for ship with crew NOM COMPANY A COMPANY E 8 7 6 o o o _ CC 4 2 1 o COMPANY G 2 YRS 1 YR CHARTER DURATION 10 YRS FIGURE 4-7 Gulf of Alaska groundfish -- day rate for ship with crew.
|
From page 39... ...
40 35 30 25 w 20 10 5 o NOM COMPANY B COMPANY C ~3 COM PANY D COMPANY G 1 YR 2 YRS 10 YRS CHARTER DURATION FIGURE 4-9 General purpose oceanic and atmospheric research (OAR) vessel -- day rate for ship with crew.
|
From page 40... ...
. 1 YR 2YRS 10 YRS CHARTER DURATION Oceanographic and atmospheric study -- day rate for ship NOM / COMPANY A O COMPANY C 1~1 COMPANY D 1= COMPANY G 1~ _ it 1 YR 2YRS 10 YRS CHARTER DURATION FIGURE 4-11 Oceanographic and atmospheric study -- day rate for ship with crew.
|
From page 41... ...
These factors include: · variable charter market; · data continuity; · contracting capability and procedures; and · personnel. Cost Analysis Factors amenable to cost analysis have been segregated and guidance for methodology suggested.
|
From page 42... ...
If long-term chartering appears to be a viable alternative, an initial modest reduction in NOAA's fleet would be prudent to permit an evaluation of chartered operations and costs before replacing NOAA ships with additional chartered vessels. If chartering vessels for fisheries' research is structured on a short-term basis, planning problems could arise .
|
From page 43... ...
If the NOAA commissioned corps strength is based on numbers of NOAA ships, reduction of numbers of ships due to replacement of NOAA vessels with contractor-operated ships would adversely affect NOAA programs dependent on officers with specialized experience. However, this reduction of corps strength would not be as critical an issue with bare-boat or time charter arrangements where NOAA would maintain responsibility for the scientific mission.
|
From page 44... ...
Installation and Removal of Equipment NOAA vessels are outfitted with suites of oceanographic equipment that differ on each vessel. A chartered vessel, particularly for short-term use, may not provide comparable equipment even though day rates included in this report attempt to cover the costs.
|
From page 45... ...
Potential exists for a negative impact on data quality if the charter vessel crew is not sensitive to the requirements for acquiring high-quality data. Contractor Default and Termination While provision may be made in the contract for charter vessel default, collection of damages by NOAA may be difficult due to the relative insolvency of the charter vessel owner or the political focus that may be brought to bear on NOAA.
|
From page 46... ...
The contract will specify the necessary Coast Guard and NOAA safety regulations, including those dictating fire detection systems, life rafts, survival suits, carbon dioxide systems, and diving equipment and procedures. The regulations will be in effect for all of the charter alternatives, that is, bare boat, time charter, and turnkey.
|
From page 47... ...
However, vessel response to national emergencies could be specified as a requirement in the contract of a charter vessel also.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.