Working together

for a safer world

CONDITION ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (CAP)

Rating Guidance for Clients
HULL STRUCTURE

11 April 2020

Reference:
CAP Hull Guidance Rev. 11

Revision date:
11 April 2020

Approved:
Ehud Bar-lev
Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. RATING DEFINITIONS 2
The programme rating system will be consistent with the following: 2
2.1 STRUCTURAL CONDITION 2
2.2 COATING CONDITION 3

3. Guidance on CAP ratings 4

3.1 RATING 1 (Superior Condition) - Guidance 4
3.2 RATING 2 (Charterer's Standard) - Guidance 5

i
 Ship Inspection & Assessment Services (SIAS)
Condition Assessment Programme

1. Introduction
This document describes the condition that a ship is expected to be in when assigned a
rating under the Condition Assessment Programme (CAP) and should be read in
conjunction with the latest version of the "Condition Assessment Programme" book,
relevant to the type of the vessel.
The rating that is given to a ship depends on the condition as finally reported by the
surveyors. This information is assessed by the Ship Inspection and Assessment Services
team (SIAS) and its Global Manager. The rating is based on all the evidence presented
including thickness measurements.
There are definitions within the CAP book that give the overall condition according to the
rating awarded. However these do not address specific instances which may lead to
questions on the extent of remedial work to achieve a rating.
The intention of this document is to give guidance to a client on the structural condition a
ship should have before a specific rating can be awarded.
It must be emphasised that a specific rating cannot be guaranteed in advance.
The oil majors and other companies that use CAP in their vetting procedures will accept a
CAP rating of ‘1’ or ‘2’. Lloyd’s Register will work on the premise that a CAP ‘2’ rating is
sought and where deficiencies affect this level then advice will be given. Where a client
wishes to obtain the higher rating of ‘1’ this should be made clear at the earliest
opportunity so that the report and advice can reflect this.

1
2. RATING DEFINITIONS

The programme rating system will be consistent with the following:

Rating Hull

1 Items examined and measured found with only superficial

reductions from as new or current rule scantlings. No
maintenance or repair required.

2 Items examined and measured found to have deficiencies of a

minor nature not requiring correction or repair and/or found to
have all thicknesses significantly above class limits.

3 Items examined and measured either found to have deficiencies

which do not require immediate corrective action, or found to
have thicknesses, although generally above class renewal levels,
with substantial corrosion.

4 Items examined and measured either found to have a deficiency

or deficiencies which may affect the ship's potential to remain in
class, or found to have, in some areas, thicknesses which are at
or below the class renewal levels.

2.1 STRUCTURAL CONDITION

The condition of the various elements of the structure are defined in accordance with the
following terms:

Rating Definition
GOOD Unimpaired condition without significant wear or
deviation from original strength and operation
efficiency. No maintenance or repair required.
SATISFACTORY Condition with wear and tear and other deficiencies of a
minor nature not requiring correction or repair.
UNSATISFACTORY Condition in which the adequacy of strength and/or
operational efficiency is marginally below acceptable
limits or is in doubt. Remedial action required.

2
 Ship Inspection & Assessment Services (SIAS)
Condition Assessment Programme

POOR Condition of undoubtedly inadequate strength or

operational efficiency. Immediate extensive repair or
renewal required to reinstate serviceability.

2.2 COATING CONDITION

The condition of protective coatings are in accordance with the following terms:

Rating Definition
GOOD Condition with spot rusting on less than 3% of the area
under consideration without visible failure of the
coating. Rusting at edges or welds, must be on less than
20 % of edges or weld lines in the area under
consideration.
FAIR Condition with breakdown of coating or rust
penetration on less than 20 % of the area under
consideration. Hard rust scale rust penetration must be
less than 10% of the area under consideration. Rusting
at edges or welds must be on less than 50 % of edges or
weld lines in the area under consideration.
POOR Condition with breakdown of coating or rust
penetration on more than 20% or hard rust scale on
more than 10% of the area under consideration or local
breakdown concentrated at edges or welds on more
than 50 % of edges or weld lines in the area under
consideration.

3
3. Guidance on CAP ratings
The following is guidance only to allow the client to put renovation work in hand that can
assist in obtaining the required rating. A certain amount of leeway is allowed by the rating
committee within each rating level. However a combination of minor deficiencies may
lead to a rating that is less than implied in the following list. It is recommended to contact
the relevant SIAS office to obtain guidance on specific circumstances if there is any doubt.
A specific rating cannot be guaranteed in advance if renovation work is undertaken until
full analysis is completed.

3.1 RATING 1 (Superior Condition) - Guidance

 All thickness measurements shall be better than 40% of the allowable class limit.
No readings shall exceed the allowable class limit.
 There shall be no thinning of plate edges either at plate edges, drain cut-outs,
lightening holes etc. or fractures or buckling.
 Doublers and additional intercostals to compensate for corroded steel are to be
removed and the corroded steel renovated.
 Repairs using SPS method (Sandwich Plate System) may be accepted only where
there are no areas with corrosion over 100% of the allowable Class limit and
following consideration by the CAP committee on a case by case basis. The SPS
repair must be approved by Class and applied strictly according to the approved
procedure. It is strongly recommended to consult the relevant Ship Inspection &
Assessment Services (SIAS) office prior intended repairs.
 The Classification records do not indicate any repetitive defect.
 Paint coating shall be classed as ‘good’ in all painted spaces. All new steel should
be fully painted. Where there has been renovation work due to corrosion and the
remaining painted areas that have breakdown are left without being re-coated a
rating of 1 is unlikely.
 For Tankers, coated areas which were previously painted in cargo tanks and found
in ‘Poor’ condition will be reported and considered by the end user.
 For Bulk Carriers, paint coating condition in cargo holds shall be classed as ‘good’.
Cargo hold bottom areas, up to 300mm below side shell frame lower brackets shall
be specially considered if classed as ‘poor’.
 The ship will not have Hull Conditions of Class outstanding.

4
 Ship Inspection & Assessment Services (SIAS)
Condition Assessment Programme

3.2 RATING 2 (Charterer's Standard) - Guidance

 There shall be no thickness measurements that is considered substantial corrosion,
(i.e. exceeds 75% of the allowable class limit).
 No fractures.
 Thinning of plates edges, cut-outs, lightening holes shall be limited in number
within each space and further corrosion prevented by paint coatings (not anodes).
 Buckling shall be limited in number within each space and shall be identified for
regular inspection.
 Doublers and additional intercostals to compensate for corroded steel are to be
removed and the corroded steel renovated.
 Repairs using SPS method (Sandwich Plate System) may be accepted only where
there are no areas with corrosion over 50% of the original plate thickness,
following consideration by the CAP committee on a case by case basis. The SPS
repair must be approved by Class and applied strictly according to the approved
procedure. It is strongly recommended to consult the relevant Ship Inspection &
Assessment (SIA) office prior intended repairs.
 Defects that have occurred before will have been repaired and modified to prevent
re-occurrence.
 Paint coating shall be classed as ‘fair‘ or ‘good’ in all ballast spaces. Previously
painted areas in cargo tanks (for tankers) will be reported. If found in ‘poor’
condition, special consideration will be given by the end-user. All new steel should
be fully painted.
 The ship will not have Hull Conditions of Class outstanding affecting the ship’s safe
and efficient operation.
Note:
 The presence of buckling, thinning will be detrimental to the final rating and it is
best that such items are renovated.
 Pitting will be detrimental and any exceeding 30% of plate thickness should be
repaired.

5
  The attending surveyors may request ‘Pit Mapping’ in cases where there is evidence
for extensive pitting in one tank or more. The Pit Mapping is to be provided by the
attending TM company as per the surveyors instructions.
 For Bulk Carriers under ‘RightShip’ requirements, diminution readings of 65% (of
Class limit) and above will be considered by RightShip as acceptable with time
limitation (e.g. 3 years instead of 5 years).
Specific advice should be sought in respect to coatings, thinning edges, buckling
and compensatory repairs found during the course of the surveys.

6
For more information, contact one of our regional Ship Inspection and Assessment Services (SIAS) offices:

Piraeus Ottawa Singapore Southampton

T +30 211 990 7700 T +1 (1)613 236 3526 (ext. 26) T +65 3163 0607 T +44 (0) 330 414 0205
F +30 211 268 6985 F +1 (1)613 236 7431 F +65 6273 1662 E capsouthampton@lr.org
E piraeus@lr.org E ravi.kumar@lr.org E SIASsingapore@lr.org

www.lr.org

Lloyd’s Register Group Limited, its subsidiaries and affiliates and their respective officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively,
referred to in this clause as ‘Lloyd’s Register’. Lloyd’s Register assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any person for any loss,
damage or expense caused by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that person has signed a
contract with the relevant Lloyd’s Register entity for the provision of this information or advice and in that case any responsibility or liability is
exclusively on the terms and conditions set out in that contract.

Lloyd’s Register and variants of it are trading names of Lloyd’s Register Group Limited, its subsidiaries and affiliates.
Copyright © Ship Inspection & Assessment Services 2020.