Tankers PERFORMING INTERNATIONAL SALVAGE UNION 17 March 2004 Peter M. Swift

US CIF oil price* - USD/bbl *Costs of oil transported from the Persian Gulf to LOOP

Accidental pollution from tankers 1,000 ts Largest spills since ABT Summer260,000 ts 1991Haven144,000 ” 1992Agean Sea 74,000 ” 1992Katina P 72,000 ” 1993Braer 85,000 ” 1996Sea Empress 72,000 ” 1999Erika 20,000 ” 2002Prestige 77,000 ” 2003Tasman Spirit 30,000 ”

Tanker incidents Source: LMIS, Informa, press, INTERTANKO Number

Tanker incidents

Fleet by hull percentage

Port State Control – tankers share of detentions

Oil pollution into the sea Maritime sources Source: Gesamp

Tankers PERFORMING Not complacent. More to do……………  Improved feedback and analysis  Better information sharing  Strengthened partnerships

Port State Control – tanker detentions, reasons 1.Lifesaving appliances (72) 2.Certificates and documents (52) 3.Fire fighting measures (42) 4.Safety of navigation, charts, publications (21) 5.MARPOL Annex I – oil filtering equipment (18) 6.ISM Code related (11) These 6 categories above cover about 70% of the 2003 tanker detentions. The remaining includes a vast number of different reasons.

Port State Control – detentions by year of build

Port State Control – detentions

Port State Control – details of inspections/detentions

Tankers PERFORMING Improved Feedback Mechansims  A new approach to Accident Investigations ?  Involvement of Shipbuilders beyond the One-Year Guarantee Period  Greater use of the Tanker Structure Cooperative Forum  Extension of Common Rules and Goal Based Standards for Newbuildings to Maintenance and Surveys of Ships in Service  Joint development of Industry Guidelines for “Best Practice”

Tankers PERFORMING Better information sharing  Information sharing between inspection regimes  Cargo information – MSDS et al  Ship’s particulars and records  Ship’s performance (e.g. through expanded EQUASIS)  Enhanced incident reporting (e.g. including CHIRP) BUT also need to recognise and deal with the impediments, such as recrimination, commercial disadvantaging and criminalisation, and the lack of incentives for openness

Stengthened partnerships SHIPOWNER SHIPYARDS INSURERS BANKS & INVESTORS CARGO OWNER CHARTERER PORTS & TERMINALS CLASS SOCIETIES FLAG STATES PARTNERSHIP: Working with regulators and legislators

Tankers PERFORMING More to do  Owners to be better prepared to handle a casualty - More drills, ERS, incident and media handling  And we need governments to deliver

Places of Refuge A Solution Waiting to be Implemented Erika II Package – December 2000 Requires Each Member State to Draw up Emergency Plans for Hosting Ships in Distress in Places of Refuge

Conventions – A STATUS REPORT  CONVENTION : Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS 1996)  RATIFIED BY : Angola, Morocco, Russian Federation, Tonga  EU Transport Council, December 2002: ”ENCOURAGES Member States, as soon as possible, to ratify or accede to the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea, 1996”

Conventions – A STATUS REPORT  CONVENTION : Protocol on Preparedness, Response and Co-operation to Pollution Incidents by Hazardous and Noxious Substances (OPRC-HNS Protocol 2000)  RATIFIED BY : Ecuador, Greece, Malta, The Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, Sweden, Uruguay

Conventions – A STATUS REPORT  CONVENTION : Bunkers Convention (2001)  RATIFIED BY : Jamaica, Spain, Tonga  EU Transport Council, December 2002: ”ENCOURAGES Member States, as soon as possible, to ratify or accede to the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001”

Conventions – A STATUS REPORT  CONVENTION : MARPOL Annex VI: Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships (Sept. 1997)  RATIFIED BY : Bahamas, Bangladesh, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Norway, Panama, Singapore, Spain, Sweden  Europe : 1999/32 (Seriously flawed and now being amended)

Conventions – A STATUS REPORT  CONVENTION : Antifouling Convention (2001)  RATIFIED BY : Antigua & Barbuda, Denmark, Japan, Nigeria, Norway  European Ban on TBT since plus encouragement to Member states to ratify AFS Convention

Port Reception Facilities An International Failure: - Inadequacy of Reception of Annex I wastes still an issue for Tanker Owners - States turning to policing measures w/o first providing the solution (Mediterranean aerial surveillance, Baltic oil tagging) – must return to the source of the problem, not end of pipe solutions A European Concern: Implementation of Directive not uniform – ports allowed to implement w/o direction from state leading to different interpretation of: - Capability of ship to reach next port w/o need for discharging waste - Fee systems increased beyond previous levels - Over-regulation of facilities causing closures, e.g. Italy

Spain rejects Mangouras appeal

Thank you