INTERNATIONAL SHIP-OWNERS ALLIANCE OF CANADA JUNE 4, 2008 UPDATE ON MAJOR SHIPPING ISSUES JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR

INTERNATIONAL SHIP-OWNERS INTERNATIONAL SHIP-OWNERS ALLIANCE OF CANADAALLIANCE OF CANADA

JUNE 4, 2008JUNE 4, 2008

UPDATE ON UPDATE ON MAJOR SHIPPING MAJOR SHIPPING

ISSUESISSUESJOSEPH ANGELOJOSEPH ANGELO

DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTORDEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR

INTERTANKOINTERTANKOAIR EMISSIONSAIR EMISSIONS

GREENHOUSE GASESGREENHOUSE GASESBALLAST WATERBALLAST WATER

RECYCLING OF SHIPS RECYCLING OF SHIPS ANTI-FOULING SYSTEMSANTI-FOULING SYSTEMS

LRITLRITUS PORT SECURITYUS PORT SECURITY

HUMAN ELEMENTHUMAN ELEMENT

INTERTANKOINTERTANKO

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT TANKER OWNERSINDEPENDENT TANKER OWNERS

A non-profit organization whose aims are:

• to further the interests of independent tanker owners;

• to work for safety at sea and the protection of the marine environment;

• to promote a free and competitive tanker market.

INTERTANKO INTERTANKO

MISSIONMISSION

Provide Leadership to the Tanker Industry

in serving the World

with the SAFE, ENVIRONMENTALLY

SOUND AND EFFICIENT seaborne transportation of oil, gas

and chemical products

INTERTANKOINTERTANKO

PRIMARY GOALPRIMARY GOAL

Lead the CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

of the Tanker Industry’s Performance

in striving to achieve the Goals of:

• ZERO FATALITIESZERO FATALITIES

• ZERO POLLUTIONZERO POLLUTION

• ZERO DETENTIONSZERO DETENTIONS

MEMBERSHIPMEMBERSHIP

MEMBERSHIPMEMBERSHIP is open to independent tanker owners and operators of oil and chemical tankers (i.e. non-oil companies and non-state controlled tanker owners) who fulfill the Association's membership criteria.

ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIPASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP is available to any entity with an interest in the shipping of oil and chemicals.


• 270+ MEMBERS

• 2,800+ TANKERS

• 230+ MILLION DWT

• MORE THAN MORE THAN 80%80% OF THE OF THE INDEPENDENT TANKER FLEETINDEPENDENT TANKER FLEET

• 300+ ASSOCIATE MEMBERS


0

55

110

165

220

275

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

No. members

m dwt

No. ships

No. members/million dwt No. members/million dwt No. tankers No. tankers

SECRETARIATSECRETARIAT

• 24 STAFF MEMBERS IN FOUR OFFICES24 STAFF MEMBERS IN FOUR OFFICES: : 12 – OSLO 10 – LONDON

1 – SINGAPORE 1 – USA

• STAFF INCLUDESSTAFF INCLUDES

- MANAGING DIRECTOR

- GENERAL COUNSEL

- TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

- DIRECTOR, REGULATORY AFFAIRS

- MARINE AND CHEMICAL DIRECTOR

Annual General Meeting

Council

Associate Members Committee

Bunker Sub-Committee

Chemical Tanker Committee

Chemical Tanker Sub-Committee Americas

Human Element in Shipping Committee

Documentary Committee

Environmental Committee

Insurance & Legal Committee

Executive Committee

Safety, Technical and Environmental Committee

Information Technology (IT) Committee

Offshore Tanker Committee

Short Sea Tanker Group

Vetting Committee

Worldscale Committee

ASIAN REGIONAL PANEL

HELLENIC FORUM

LATIN AMERICAN PANEL

NORTH AMERICAN PANEL

EUROPEAN REFERNCE GROUP

Q-Quest Sub-Committee

Management Committee

Shipowner Issues Sub-Committee

Governance Structure

14 Committees5 Regional Panels

AIR EMISSIONSAIR EMISSIONS

• SEPT 1997 – IMO adopts ANNEX VI to MARPOL, regulations for the prevention of air pollution from ships

• MAY 2005 – ANNEX VI enters into force internationally (US and Canada currently not party to Annex VI)

• JULY 2005 – MEPC 53 decides Annex VI should be revised to reduce air emissions from ships


INTERTANKO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE GUIDING PRINCIPLES –

• Ensure a solid platform of requirements• Be realistic and feasible • Seek positive reduction in air emissions from

ships• Contribute to a long term and predictable

regulatory regime• Prevent unilateral or regional regulations –

IMO standards accepted worldwide


• Proposals focused on air emission standards and abatement equipment

• Fuel standard was NOT being considered

• Root cause of air pollution from ships is the use of residual fuels

• Solution should focus on the root cause of the problem, not the effect of cleaning up the air pollution on the ship after it is created


INTERTANKO SUBMISSIONINTERTANKO SUBMISSION

• Distillate fuels with sulphur cap:

- From [2010], maximum of 1% sulphur

- For engines installed after [2015], maximum of 0.5% sulphur

• Global sulphur emission control area

• Revision of checking and monitoring of compliance


WHY DISTILLATE FUELS (MDO)??

• With no other measure, immediately reduces:– SOx emissions by 80% to 90%– PM emissions by 90%– NOx emissions by 10% to 15%

• Reduces fuel consumption by some 4% for ALL Ships

• Negates the need for abatement technology, associated wastes and disposal of such wastes!!

• Less incidents with engine breakdowns due to poor quality fuels

AIR EMISSIONS - SOXAIR EMISSIONS - SOX

OUTCOME FROM BLG 12 MEETING (FEB 2008)Alternatives (options) for Sulphur sulphur cap on fuels used in content Enforcement

1. Global/all seas 1.00% [2012]

0.50% [2015]__________________________________________________________________

2. Open seas 4.50% Present

SECAs 0.10% [2012]__________________________________________________________________

3. Open seas 3.00% [2012]

SECAs 1.00% [2010]

Micro-SECA 0.10% [2015] (max 24 nm off coastline)

AIR EMISSIONS - SOXAIR EMISSIONS - SOX

OUTCOME FROM MEPC 57 MEETING (APR 2008)

Open sea 4.50% Prior to Jan 1, 2012

3.50% Jan 1, 2012

0.50% Jan 1, 2020

(Review of 0.50% standard to be conducted by group of experts by 2018 to determine availability of such fuel. If determined not possible, then date becomes Jan 1, 2025)

SECAs 1.50% Prior to Mar 1, 2010

1.00% Jan 1, 2012

0.10% Jan 1, 2015

AIR EMISSIONS AIR EMISSIONS

Equivalent Measures

• An Administration may allow any fitting, material, appliance or apparatus to be fitted in a ship or other procedures, alternative fuel oils, or compliance methods used as an alternative to that required by this Annex if such methods are at least as effective in terms of emissions reductions as that required by this Annex, including those for SOx, PM and NOx.

• The Administration should take into account guidelines developed by the Organization.

• The Administration shall endeavour not to impair or damage its environment, human health, property or resources of those of another state.


Fuel Oil Availability and Quality

• Each Party shall take all reasonable steps to promote the availability of fuel oils to comply with this Annex.

• If a ship is not compliant it should present evidence/record it attempted to buy the compliant fuel in accordance with the voyage plan.

• The ship not required to deviate from the voyage and should not be delayed.

• If evidence is provided, there should be no measures against the ship.

• The ship will have to notify its Administration and the relevant port of call each time it cannot find the compliant fuel.

AIR EMISSIONS - NOXAIR EMISSIONS - NOX

• Tier I limits already apply to engines installed on ships after Jan 1, 2000. (17.0 g/kg, less than 130 rpm, 9.8 g/kg, more than 2000 rpm)

• Extend application to engines installed from Jan 1990 – Dec 1999 with power output of more than 5000 kW and a per cylinder displacement at or above 90 liters.

• Applies from first renewal survey after Jan 1, 2010. Compliance expected through in engine modification or abatement technologies.


• If the engine does not meet the Tier I NOx emission limitations, it is subject to measures:– ONLY if there is an upgrading system certified by a Party

to MARPOL Annex VI– ONLY if it certifies that such a system reduces the

emissions of that particular engine to Tier I limits– the upgrading system is considered commercially

available 12 months after a Party to MARPOL Annex VI deposits the notification on certification to IMO

– upgrade at the ship’s first renewal survey after the upgrading system becomes commercially available

– in case the upgrading system is not available at the time of completion of the renewal survey (ship owner has to document that), the flag would give an extension until the next Annual Survey


• As part of the certification, the Party should check that the upgrading system– does not decrease the engine rating by more than

1%,– does not increase the fuel consumption by more

than 2% and – it has no other adverse effect on the durability or

reliability of the engine

• Upgrading to an acceptable cost/benefit level calculated according to a cost efficiency formula


• Tier II standards (emission reductions related to Tier I limits):– 15.5% reduction (engines with n<130 rpm) (i.e. 14.36

g/kWh)– reductions between 15.5% and 21.8% depending on

the engine’s rpm (engines with 130 rpm < n < 2000 rpm)

– 21.8% reduction (engines n > 2000 rpm) (i.e. 7.66 g/kWh)

• Applies to engines installed on ships constructed on and after 1 January 2011


• Tier III standards – 80% emission reductions from Tier I limits

– 3.40 g/kWh (engines with n<130 rpm)– 9*n(-0.2) g/kWh (engines with 130 rpm < n < 2000 rpm)– 1.96 g/kWh (engines n > 2000 rpm

• Tier III limits apply to engines:– installed on ships constructed on & after 1 Jan 2016– power output of > 750 kW

(130 kW – 750 kW may be exempted by the Administration)

• Tier III limits in ECAs only (to be designated)

• Outside ECAs - Tier II limits


FINAL STEPS IN PROCESS

• PARTIES to ANNEX VI formally adopt amendments to Annex VI at MEPC 58 in October 2008

• AMENDMENTS enters into force (earliest possible date is Feb 1, 2010)

WILL the United States, the European Commission and California Air Resources Board accept the Annex VI amendments ????

GREENHOUSE GASESGREENHOUSE GASES

• December 2003 – IMO Assembly adopts Resolution A.963(23), IMO Policies and Practices Related to the Reduction of GHG from Ships. Tasks MEPC to develop mechanisms to reduce GHG from shipping

• MEPC attempts to make progress, but is hampered by developing countries insistence that Article 2.2 Kyoto Protocol applies, ie. only Annex 1 countries are required to reduce GHG from shipping - “common but differentiated responsibilities”


• July 2005 – MEPC adopts MEPC/Circ.471, Interim Guidelines for Voluntary Ship CO2 Emission Indexing for Use in Trials

• NOV 2007 – IMO Secretary General informs Assembly of his intentions to recommend to MEPC a way forward to expedite IMO work on GHG emissions from ships

• APRIL 2008 – SG presents expedited work plan to MEPC 57 which proposes completion of tasks by July 2009, including intersessional working group meeting in Oslo June 23-27, 2008


MEPC 57

• Agreed with the Secretary General’s expedited work plan

• Approved short term and long term measures to reduce GHG emissions from ships for further consideration

• Established terms of reference for Oslo working group meeting


Short term measures

• Improvement in fuel consumption• Energy efficient ship design• Onshore power supply• Use of wind power• Rating performance of ships and operators• Limitations on leakage rates of refrigerants• Vessel speed reductions• Measures to improve traffic control and cargo

handling• Hybrid economic measures• Voluntary commitments

GREENHOUSE GASESGREENHOUSE GASESLong Term Measures

• Technical measures for ship design• Use of alternative fuels• Mandatory ship design index for new ships• External verification scheme for operational index• Operational index limit combined with penalty for

non-compliance• Emission trading scheme• Clean development mechanisms• Mandatory CO2 element in port infrastructure

charging

GREENHOUSE GASESGREENHOUSE GASESWorking Group Terms of Reference

• Develop mandatory CO2 design index for new ships• Review existing CO2 operational index guidelines

(MEPC/Circ.471), develop methodology for baseline and consider purpose of such an index

• Develop further mechanisms, such as:1. Global fuel levy or hybrid mechanism;2. Emissions trading schemes (ETS) and/or clean development mechanism (CDM);3. Best practices on the range of short and long term measures identified

• Consider the level of reductions achieved and address the design, implementation, cost benefit, regulatory, legal impacts, as well as the impacts on the shipping industry, flag and port states and other stakeholders, of each option

GREENHOUSE GASESGREENHOUSE GASESVessel Operational Index

MEPC Circ 471 Index (gram CO2/tonne mile) =

∑ FCi × Ccarbon / ∑ m cargo i × D I

FC is fuel consumption, C is carbon content indexM cargo is cargo mass, D is distance sailed

Issues for consideration• Application to all ship types ?• No distinction between technical/commercial actions• Effects of ballast voyages• Effects of time averaging• Verification mechanisms


Vessel Design Index

Japanese Proposed Index (gram CO2/tonne-mile) =

Fuel Cons (g/kW hr) x (ME power (kW) x (1+K2)) x C/c

DWT (tonne) x Max Speed (n mile/hr) x K1

K1 is Coefficient of decreased propulsion efficiency in actual sea conditions

K2 is Coefficient of contribution to CO2 from aux engines and energy conservation equipment

Issues for consideration• Application to all ship types ?• One or more design conditions ? – e.g. load/ballast• One or more sea conditions ? – how weighted ?• How measured / normalised / verified ?


Danish proposal – Global fuel levy

• Most viable short term solution to reduce GHG (?)• Apply to all ships in international trade• Revenue collected nationally and channeled to

independent international GHG fund• Revenue generated applied to:

1. acquisition of emission quotas/credits generated in other industrial sectors2. funding projects in developing nations3. funding IMO Technical Cooperation program

• Recognition that numerous details need be further addressed in detail and have submitted details to Oslo working group meeting


Other outstanding questions

• Will maritime transportation be included in a future global framework under the UNFCCC/Kyoto Protocol OR will IMO be allowed to address GHG from ships?

• Will it apply to all ships OR will a “common but differentiated responsibilities” prevail?

• If through IMO, will it be a revision of Annex VI of MARPOL or a new IMO treaty?

BALLAST WATERBALLAST WATER

• International Convention for the Control and Management of Ship’s Ballast Water is adopted at IMO Conference in 2004

• Entry in Force – 30 countries representing 35% of the world’s gross tonnage

• Current ratifications – 11 countries representing 3.46% of world’s gross tonnage


TREATY REQUIREMENTS

• Ballast Water Management Plan

• Ballast Water Record Book

• Ballast Water Management Certificate and surveys to verify compliance

• Mandates ships to conduct ballast water exchange until equipment is approved to meet ballast water standard


BALLAST WATER STANDARD

• Less than 10 viable organism greater than 50 microns is size per cubic meter of water

• Less than 10 viable organism smaller than 50 microns and greater than 10 micron is size per cubic meter of water

• Human health standards for cholerae, coli and cocci


Dates NEW ships must meet standard

• Ships constructed in or after 2009 with ballast water capacity of less than 5000 cubic meters – When built

• Ships constructed in or after 2009, but before 2012 with ballast water capacity of 5000 cubic meters or more – 2016

• Ships constructed in or after 2012 with a ballast water capacity of 5000 cubic meters or more – When built


Dates EXISTING ships must meet standard

• Ships constructed before 2009 with ballast water capacity between 1500 cubic meters and 5000 cubic meters - 2014

• Ships constructed before 2009 with ballast water capacity of less than 1500 cubic meters OR greater than 5000 cubic meters - 2016


STATUS OF EQUIPMENT APPROVALS

• Type Approval 1

(NEI Treatment Systems)• Final Approval 2

(Pureballast System)

(SEDNA)• Basic Approval 10• Under Development 8

(Systems using “active substances” require IMO “basic” and then “final” approval)


November 2007 - IMO Assembly adopts resolution delaying 2009 date

• Recognizes that there is “uncertainties as to whether technology is available” for ships to comply with the standard

• Recommends delaying implementation date of 2009 until Dec 2011

• Requests MEPC to keep matter under review and determine feasibility of 2010 date


FIVE KEY IMO GUIDELINES (out of 16) that are aimed at assisting the ship operator

• Ballast water sampling• Ballast water management and the development

of ballast water management plans• Ballast water exchange• Ballast water exchange design and construction

standards• Sediment control on ships


Countries that have taken national actionAustralia Argentina

Brazil Canada

Chile Georgia

Israel Lithuania

New Zealand Panama

Peru Russia

Ukraine USA

To see the details of their requirements, go to www.intertanko.com – Environment – Ballast Water – Ballast Water Legislation

SHIP RECYCLINGSHIP RECYCLING

NOV 2005 IMO agrees to develop a new treaty for ship recycling to regulate:

• Design, construction, operation and preparation of ships for environmentally sound recycling

• Operation of recycling facilities in safe, environmentally sound manner

• Appropriate enforcement of both through certification and reporting


• Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of IMO is developing new treaty

• Initial draft treaty has been prepared and is undergoing review and revision

• Target is to adopt the new treaty at an international conference in 2009 in Hong Kong with entry into force in 2012(?)


MAJOR ELEMENTS OF TREATY (SHIP)–

• Control of ship’s hazardous material (prohibit or restrict its use)

• Ship inventory of hazardous materials

• Ship recycling plan

• Ship “ready for recycling”

• Ship survey and certification

• Reporting (Notify of intent)


MAJOR ELEMENTS (FACILITY) –

• Standards for facility design/operations

• Document of authorization

• Recycling Management Plan

• Safe and environmentally sound operational procedures

• Emergency preparedness/response plan

• Worker safety and training

• Reporting (upon completion)


Complicating Factor

• US proposes to include provisions in treaty that allows ships to be recycled in non-party states (free trade issue)

• MEPC 57 rejects proposal because it could encourage recycling states not to ratify

• Problem is that flag states may not ratify treaty until major recycling states do so


INTERTANKO INTERIM STRATEGY –

• Due diligence in selection recycling facility• Ship to maintain a hazardous materials

inventory• Minimize residues to facilitate “gas free for

hot work”• Provide info to facility to facilitate

development of Ship Recycling Plan (by facility)

• Submit delivery declaration to flag state

ANTI-FOULING SYSTEMSANTI-FOULING SYSTEMS

• October 2001 – IMO Conference adopts International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships

• September 2007 – With Panama ratification of treaty, entry into force conditions are met

• September 17, 2008 – Anti-Fouling Treaty will enter into force for all parties (US and Canada are currently not party)


Countries party to Anti-Fouling Treaty

Antigua & Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Bulgaria, Cook Islands, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Japan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Poland, Romania, St. Kitts & Nevis, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Tuvalu,


Treaty Requirements

• By January 1, 2003 no ship shall apply or re-apply organotin compounds which act as biocides in anti-fouling systems

• By January 1, 2008, ships shall either:1. not bear such compounds on their hulls or external parts or surfaces; or2. bear a coating that forms a barrier to such compounds leaching from the underlying non-compliant anti-fouling systems

• Ships shall carry:1. an International Anti-Fouling System Certificate2. a Declaration on Anti-Fouling Systems


MEPC 57 issue – should the treaty requirement dates (Jan 1, 2003 and Jan 1, 2008) be deemed to take effect on entry into force date (Sept 17, 2008) OR should there be retroactive application??

DECISION –1. No consensus on the date on which these requirements should be applied;2. Agreement to let each party apply provisions in accordance with its national law; and3. Invite each party to inform IMO of its decision on implementation and enforcement of provisions

NOTE: EC states that under European regulation, no ship may enter a European port with a tin-based anti-fouling system after January 1, 2008. US???

SECURITY SECURITY

LONG RANGE IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING

OF SHIPS

(LRIT)

PURPOSE OF LRITPURPOSE OF LRIT

To enable Contracting Governments to SOLAS to undertake the

Long-Range Identification and Tracking of ships

approaching their shores

LRIT – WHICH SHIPS?LRIT – WHICH SHIPS?

Ships engaged on international voyages:

- Passenger ships

- Cargo ships, 300 GRT and above

- Mobile offshore drilling units

LRIT – WHAT INFO?LRIT – WHAT INFO?

The ship shall automatically transmit the following information:

- Identity of the ship (IMO No.)

- Ship position (Latitude and longitude)

- Date and time of position

(However, IMO has already agreed to startlooking into what other information could be transmitted for environmental purposes)

LRIT - EXCEPTIONSLRIT - EXCEPTIONS

Transmission my cease –

- Where international agreements, regulations, etc. provide for the protection of navigation information; or

- Operation is considered by the Master to compromise safety or security of the ship

LRIT – LOCATED WHERE?LRIT – LOCATED WHERE?

• Ships flying the flag of the contracting government – ANYWHERE

• Ships indicating their intention to call at a port of contracting government – ANYWHERE

• Ships not intending to call at a port of the contracting government – WITHIN 1000 MILES OF ITS COAST

LRIT – WHEN?LRIT – WHEN?

• New Regulation 19-1 of CHAPTER V OF SOLAS entered into force on Jan 1, 2008

• Ships must be fitted with a system to automatically transmit info:

- New ships constructed on or after Dec 31, 2008

- Ships constructed before Dec 31, 2008, not later than first survey of radio installation after July 1, 2009

LRIT – COSTS?LRIT – COSTS?

• Contracting government shall bear all costs associated with any LRIT information they request and receive

• Unless national legislation provides otherwise, ships flying an Administrations flag shall not incur any charges for transmitting LRIT information (???)

LRIT COSTSLRIT COSTS

• Financial viability of LRIT system in doubt

• Less than 20% of LRIT date collected will be requested by port/coastal states

• Proposal to reduce position reports from every 6 hours to every 12 hours is rejected

• MSC 84 endorses financial model based upon “user pays principle”

• Contracting governments setting up data centers are responsible for costs to establish and maintain such centers

LRIT COSTSLRIT COSTS

• Contracting governments should be able to seek recovery of costs, but not at a profit

• Ship to shore communication cost estimated at 0.25 – 0.35 USD per transmission

• Data center entitled to cover overhead up to twice the communication cost

• If charge exceeds twice the cost, it should be justified and sent to IMO

• All charges for poll requests, changes in intervals or archive reports shall be borne by requester

LRIT - EQUIPMENTLRIT - EQUIPMENT

Shipboard equipment shall be:

• Capable of automatically transmitting ship’s LRIT information at 6-hour intervals

• Capable of being configured remotely to transmit LRIT information at variable intervals

• Capable of transmitting LRIT information following receipt of polling commands

LRIT - EQUIPMENTLRIT - EQUIPMENT

Shipboard equipment shall (con’t):

• Interface directly with shipboard navigation satellite system equipment

• Be supplied with energy from the main and emergency source of electrical power

• Be tested for electromagnetic compatibility (IMO RES A.813(19))

LRITLRIT

Contracting governments shall:

• Recognize the importance of LRIT information

• Recognize/respect commercial confidentiality and sensitivity of LRIT information received

• Protect information they receive from unauthorized access or disclosure

• Use LRIT information they receive in a manner consistent with international law

LRIT – SYSTEM DESIGNLRIT – SYSTEM DESIGN

• LRIT Data Users (Coastal State)

• LRIT Data Providers (Flag State)

• LRIT Data Centers

- National

- Regional

- International (no longer an option)

• LRIT Data Exchange

• LRIT Data Distribution Plan

US PORT SECURITYUS PORT SECURITY

• US Maritime Transportation Security Act mandates USCG to evaluate effectiveness of security in foreign ports

• USCG conducts foreign port assessments around the world

• USCG offers reciprocal assessment of US ports by foreign governments

• Currently 10 countries listed as having ports not maintaining effective measures:


CAMEROONCUBA

EQUATORIAL GUINEAGUINEA BISSAU

INDONESIAIRAN

LIBERIAMAURITANIA

SOA TOME & PRINCIPLESYRIA

Note: Not all ports in these countries are considered as not having effective measures. (USCG website)


Action required of vessels visiting these ports in last 5 port calls

• Implement measures equivalent to Security Level 2 while in those ports

• Ensure all ship access points are guarded

• Attempt to execute Declaration of Security

• Log all security actions in ship’s log

• Report to USCG COTP actions taken prior to arrival in the US


Actions required by such vessels when in US ports

• Each access point to the ship must be guarded by armed security guards while in US ports 24/7

• Number and location of guards must be to the satisfaction of the USCG COTP

Those vessels that can demonstrate good security compliance and document the measures taken while in that port, the armed security guard requirement MAY be waived

HUMAN ELEMENTHUMAN ELEMENT

• MANNING

- IMO Safe Manning Document

- ILO Convention 180

- Maritime universities

• TRAINING

- Cadet berths

- Tanker Officer Training Standards (TOTS)

HUMAN ELEMENT - MANNINGHUMAN ELEMENT - MANNING

IMO SAFE MANNING DOCUMENT (SOLAS V/14)

• IMO Resolution A.890(21) contains guidelines on the principles of safe manning

• IMO objective is to revise these guidelines to ensure that ships are properly manned for the safe and secure operation of the ship and the avoidance of seafarer fatigue

• IMO Maritime Safety Committee has tasked STW Subcommittee with considering the need for mandatory requirements for safe manning

• INTERTANKO is actively involved in STW Subcommittee deliberations


• ILO CONVENTION No. 180 – adopted in 1996, seafarers hours of work and manning of ships - 14 hours of work in any 24 hour period; and - 72 hours in any 7 day period, OR Minimum hours of rest – - 10 hours in any 24 hour period; and - 77 hours in any 7 day period

• INTERTANKO recognized – - difficulties by shipboard staff to comply with the regulations for hours of work and rest; and

- PSC regimes would inspect for compliance

• INTERTANKO has developed “Guidance Booklet on Seafarers Hours of Work and Rest”


INTERTANKO GUIDANCE BOOKLET ON SEAFARERS HOURS OF REST AND WORK

• Summary of ILO 180 requirements• Summary of IMO STCW work/rest requirements• Explanation of IMO safe manning document• General guidelines regarding manning levels• Guidelines for compliance with requirements• Implementation of ILO 180 hours of rest/work• Maintaining records, endorsements and monitoring• Watch keeping patterns• Optional watch keeping systems• Evidence of compliance for Port State Control officers


MARITIME UNIVERSITIES

• Working with maritime universities around the world who have alumni, graduates and cadets seeking at sea and shoreside positions to bring “the supply” in contact with “the demand”

• Helping to identify specific needs of maritime industry with regard to necessary skills and expertise and numbers that need training

• Working with ABS to possible develop a “Guide for Crew Habitability on Ships” to improve crew living conditions on board ships

HUMAN ELEMENT - TRAININGHUMAN ELEMENT - TRAINING

CADET BERTHING

Conducted survey of members in 2006 and determined that there were insufficient berths on new buildings to accommodate cadets

INTERTANKO “BEST PRACTICES” revised to reflect members commitment or agreement to:

• Enlist cadets and cadet officers on each ship where suitable cabin space exists

• New-buildings should include suitable cabin space for cadets in new-building specifications


• Growing concern over recent increase in tanker incidents caused by the lack of expertise

• Regulatory response – review and update of IMO Standards for Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) Convention

• Oil Company Response -

- Currently, STCW and Tanker Endorsements do not provide the level of comfort required- Officer Matrix Requirements (“Time with Company” and “Time in Rank”) established by TOTAL, Shell, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, Koch


Tanker Officer Training Standards (TOTS)

INTERTANKO initiative which:1. Addresses increasing trend in tanker accidents2. Provides a coordinated response to oil companies

which:- Demonstrates an enhanced level of competency on board (via training and verification process)

- Eases compliance with Officer Matrix Requirements

It is NOT a replacement Tanker EndorsementIt is NOT an alternative Tanker EndorsementIt is a VOLUNTARY program


Four Elements of the TOTS

1. TOTS: Training Record Books: Time in RankTime with Company

2. TOTS: Computer Based Assessment (CBA)Time in Rank

3. TOTS: Company Verification (CBA)Time with Company

4. TOTS: Ship Specific Practical Simulator Verification/Training

Tanker Type SpecificTime in Rank Specific


1. TRAINING RECORD BOOKS

• TOTS: Time in Rank

Three levels of training record book established:

1A. Command Module

1B. Senior Engineer Officers

1C. Junior Officer Tanker Module (Deck and Engine)

• TOTS: Time with Company

One generic record book

1D. Generic Record Book Module

HUMAN ELEMENT - TRAININGHUMAN ELEMENT - TRAININGCommand Module

• A.1 Ship Handling & Characteristics• A.2 Pilotage• A.3 Mooring Equipment & Operations• A.4 Passage Planning/Navigation• A.5 Navigating in Restricted Visibility• A.6 Heavy Weather Navigation• A.7 Emergencies, Drills & Fire Fighting Equipment• A.8 Ship/Shore Interface• A.9 Ship to Ship Transfer• A.10 Helicopter Operations• A.11 Pollution Prevention & Environmental Protection• B.1 General Tanker Section• B.2.1 Flammability Composition Diagram• B.3 Fixed & Portable Gas Detections Systems• B.4 Enclosed Spaces/Tank Atmosphere Evaluation• B.5 Familiarisation prior Cargo Operations• B.6 Cargo Information Personnel Safety – Health • C. CHEMICAL TANKERS• D. PRODUCT TANKERS• E. CRUDE OIL TANKERS


Senior Engineer Officers

• A.1 Engine Room Operations during manoeuvring• A.2 Engine Room Operations during special circumstances• A.3 Watchkeeping in the Engine Room• A.4 Operation, monitoring and trouble shooting machinery• A.5 Electrical, Electronic and Control Operations• A.6 Maintenance and Repair• A.7 Control of operations and Care of personnel onboard• B.1 Management of the Engineering Department• C. EMERGENCIES, DRILLS & FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT• C.1 Emergencies, Drills & Fire Fighting Equipment.• D. POLLUTION & ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION• D.1 Pollution & Environment Protection• E. GENERAL TANKER SECTION• E.1 General Tanker Section• F. FLAMMABILITY COMPOSITION DIAGRAM• F.1 The Flammability Diagram (Ref: ISGOTT 5th Edition)• G. FIXED & PORTABLE GAS DETECTION SYSTEMS• G.1 Fixed and Portable Gas Detection systems• G.2 Enclosed Spaces/Tank Atmosphere Evaluation• H. FAMILIARISATION PRIOR CARGO OPERATIONS• H.1 Familiarisation prior cargo operations• H.2 Cargo Information-Requirements-Precautions-Personnel Safety-Health

Data

HUMAN ELEMENT - TRAININGHUMAN ELEMENT - TRAININGJunior Officer Tanker Module (Deck and Engine)

• A. GENERAL SHIPBOARD OPERATIONS (DECK)• A.1 Ship Handling & Characteristics (Deck)• A.2 Pilotage (Deck)• A.3 Mooring Equipment & Operations (Deck)• A.4 Emergencies, Drills & Fire Fighting Equipment • A.5 Pollution Prevention & Environmental Protection • B. NAVIGATION (DECK)• B.1 Passage Planning/Navigation/Chart Correction• B.2 Navigating in Restricted Visibility (Deck)• B.3 Heavy Weather & Ice Navigation (Deck)• C. GENERAL TANKER SECTION • C.2.1 Flammability Composition Diagram• C.3 Fixed & Portable Gas Detections Systems• C.4 Enclosed Spaces/Tank Atmosphere Evaluation• C.5 Familiarisation Prior Cargo Operations (Deck)• C.6 Cargo Information-Precautions-Personnel Safety• D. CHEMICAL TANKER SUPPLEMENT• E. PRODUCT TANKER SUPPLEMENT• F. CRUDE OIL TANKER SUPPLEMENT• G. GENERAL SHIPBOARD OPERATIONS• G.1 Engine room operations during Manoeuvring • G.2 Watchkeeping in the Engine Room (Engine)• G.3 Operation, monitoring troubleshooting Machinery • G.4 Maintenance and Repair • G.5 Control of Operations and Care of Persons• H.1 Management of the Engineering Department • I. POLLUTION & ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION


TOTS: Time in RankHuman Element addressed in each record Book:

– Situational awareness– Planning & Decision making– Communications– Teamwork– Emotional climate– Stress– Managing Stress– Commercial Organizational Pressures & Morale– Fatigue


2. COMPUTER BASED ASSESSMENT (CBA)

• TOTS: Time in Rank

CBA (CD-ROM) to verify candidates understanding of “Time in Rank” tasks

– CBA = ~2000 Questions: Total Dataset– 18-20 CBA assessments per Record book

• TOTS Time in Rank Certification follows the Candidate


3. COMPANY VERIFICATION

• TOTS: Time with Company

- CBA based company verification process to verify candidates understanding of “Time with Company”

- Tailor made Company Specific

- If the Officer changes company, they must re-train for Time in Company with the new company


4. Ship Specific Practical Simulator Verification and Training

• Simulator courses designed to meet TOTS standard

• Can be run by any externally accredited Maritime Training Centre

• Trains & Verifies tanker type knowledge with 6 courses in three areas…


4. Ship Specific Practical Simulator Verification and Training

6 TOTS Specific Model Simulator Courses

• 4A Chemical Tanker Simulator Model Training Course• 4B Chemical Tanker Simulator Model Verification Course

• 4C Product Tanker Simulator Model Training Course• 4D Product Tanker Simulator Model Verification Course

• 4E Crude Oil Tanker Simulator Training Course• 4F Crude Oil Tanker Simulator Verification Course


• Meetings with OCIMF, Chevron and SIRE Focus Group (Chevron, BP, Shell, Total, ExxonMobil) – TOTS positively received

• “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQ) and detailed summary brochure

• TOTS Working Books: completed

• TOTS CD-ROMs for CBA: completed

• TOTS launched April 22 at INTERTANKO Annual Tanker Event in Istanbul, Turkey

THANKTHANKYOU!!YOU!!

WWW.INTERTANKO.COMWWW.INTERTANKO.COM

Documents

INTERNATIONAL SHIP-OWNERS ALLIANCE OF CANADA JUNE 4, 2008 UPDATE ON MAJOR SHIPPING ISSUES JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR