Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Tanker Event

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
STCW ‘78 The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers
Advertisements

1 The Role of the Pilot October, 2009 Copyright © 2009 by Paul G. Kirchner.
Terminal Safety. Objectives Identify main causes Outline terminal safety organization State the safe working practices.
1 CONCENTRATED INSPECTION CAMPAIGN by PAIRS MOU and TOKYO MOU STCW Hours of Rest.
Alaska Regional Response Team Places of Refuge By John Bauer Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
BP Inspector Vetting Seminar 25th October 2007 INTERTANKO
Workplan Priorities INTERTANKO Mission Provide Leadership to the Tanker Industry in serving the World with safe, environmentally sound and efficient.
Contractor Management and ISO 14001:2004
Bahrain- 2nd March 2010 The Vetting Committee
Check list ISM Code DOC.
Manning & Watch Keeping
Auditing Standards IFTA\IRP Audit Guidance Government Auditing Standards (GAO) Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) International Standards on.
Leading the way; making a difference Latin American Panel November 6, 2013 BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
North American Emission Control Area
Identify the Causes 2009 MORT Management Oversight and Risk Tree
WHO WE ARE 2007 BP SHIPPING clean seas safe ships commercial success.
GWS SMS INTRODUCTION MSM Manual. 3. MISSION STATEMENT AND CORE VALUES OF THE COMPANY  MISSION  Our Mission is to provide expertise in the fields of.
The Herald of Free Enterprise capsized 6 March 1987, moments after leaving the Belgian port of Zeebrugge, killing 193 passengers and crew. This was the.
Company duties under the ISM Code
Intertanko Vetting Seminar
2010 Manila Amendments to the STCW Convention and Code – Port State Control Perspective Jeff Lantz Director, Office of Operating and Environmental Standards.
International Labour Organisation Convention 180 – Article 5 Maritime Labour Convention 2006 – Regulation 2.3 including multi- language support. International.
Mediterranean MoU 7th Committee Meeting on PSC Alexandria, EGYPT 31st January - 2nd February A Presentation by INTERTANKO Port State Control Capt.
Partnerships and Relations between Charterers and Owners in the current economic landscape Tim Wilkins Regional Manager Asia-Pacific Environmental Manager.
1 VETTING CLAUSES: A REVIEW HOUSTON March 29, 2007 William J. Honan Holland & Knight LLP New York.
LATIN AMERICAN PANEL OCTOBER 16, 2009 MARINE ISSUES JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
To Share & To Absorb The Lessons Vessel Collision Incident Vessel Collision Incident Lecturer – Capt Cao jihui Aoxing Ship Management (Shanghai) Ltd.
MODU Safety Committee Objective The objective of this Procedure is to establish the terms of reference for the Safety Committee on board the MODU.
Chapter 9 Training. Introduction Training is a career-long commitment that all emergency service personnel must make We must gather and examine information.
INTERCARGO International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners Presentation to the Public Forum, Anchorage March 29th, 2005.
MARITIME SECURITY STATUS REPORT JOSEPH ANGELO U.S. COAST GUARD.
SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Non Conformance Reporting
Informal Tanker Operators Safety Forum (ITOSF) Singapore
INTERTANKO Vetting Seminar Tanker Officer Training Standards (TOTS) 16 th May 2007 Capt Howard N. Snaith Director, Marine, Ports, Terminals, Environmental.
INTERTANKO/HEIDMAR Terminal Vetting Database UPDATE FOR PREVENTION FIRST 2004 SYMPOSIUM by Capt John N. Hill Heidmar, Inc September 14, 2004.
INTERTANKO Technical Seminar Mumbai 19 th September 2005 Ship Inspections & The Screening Process Capt Howard N. Snaith. Master Mariner. M.N.I. Director,
Vetting Inspection Closing Meetings INTERTANKO Vetting Seminar Manila November, 2007.
Why do I Have Miners’ Rights? 4 The Act gives miners and their representatives many rights because Congress wanted to encourage them to take an active,
CANADIAN COAST GUARD AUXILIARY - PACIFIC ARTE CANADIAN COAST GUARD AUXILIARY - PACIFIC Nov 2010.
One Inspection, Two Inspections, Three Inspections, More Peter M Swift.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master text styles Second level TOOLBOX TALK MANAGING AIRSIDE SAFETY.
Leading the way; making a difference Lunchtime Seminar October 10, 2012 Ballast Water Management JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Marine Symposium – World Shipping Forum Chennai 19th November 2004
Lars Carlsson Athens, 25 October Shipowners role in the Safety Chain.
Shortage of Trained Tanker Officers ? “The INTERTANKO Solution” Hellenic Mediterranean Panel 23 rd October 2008 Athens Capt Howard N. Snaith. Marine Director.
1 VETTING CLAUSES: A REVIEW MUMBAI October 3, 2006 William J. Honan Holland & Knight LLP New York.
Role of the Fire Service During Shipboard Fires. The Unified Command System.
Leading the way; making a difference The ship, The people, The equipment Ensuring integration for the right reason Dr Phillip Belcher Marine Director INTERTANKO.
Introduction to BP Ship Terminal Feedback integration with Intertanko Terminal Vetting Database. March 2006 Jim Fortnum Offshore Assurance Superintendent,
Authority: Who Does What?. Los Angeles – Long Beach Area Contingency Plan Marine Firefighting and Salvage Plan.
Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Baltic Exchange London 2 October 2006.
Leading the way; making a difference Ballast Water Management State of Affairs Hong Kong, 26 November 2013 Tim Wilkins INTERTANKO Senior Manager - Environment.
Due Diligence – Risk Management in STS The onlineSTS.net concept.
INTERTANKO MEETING Houston Presented by Eric Osen 24 September 2002 ChevronTexaco Shipping Company LLC Clearance & Vetting System.
Oil Pollution Act (OPA) Signed into law August 1990 This act amends the Clean Water Act (1972) This act is National Law Matt Vedrani.
ISM Code 2010: Part A - Implementation Malcolm Maclachlan.
AMERICAN PILOTS ASSOCIATION OCTOBER 22, 2008 INTERTANKO PARTNERING WITHPILOTS JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Vetting Seminar Singapore Tanker Officer Training Standards (TOTS) INTERTANKO Vetting Seminar Singapore 28 th November 2007 Capt Howard N. Snaith Director,
Rating as defined on STCW Code, means a member of the ship's crew
Tanker industry from the shipowners and safety perspective
Asian Regional Panel Tokyo
Vetting Committee Report
Vessels and Facilities that are Temporarily Out of Service or Laid-up
Terminal Vetting Database FOR INTERTANKO VETTING SEMINAR
MEPAC March 2017 Task 95 Inland Fire Fighting Requirement's for towing vessel watch officers MASTERS/PILOTS Maritime Services Group of Louisian, LLC.
Comprehensive Review of the STCW Convention
OVID Refresher Inspector Course
People Responsible For Health and Safety
Sustaining the Industry’s Safety and Environmental Performance
BRM Ch10 Error Chain.
Presentation transcript:

Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Tanker Event Houston 26 March 2007

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: The following guidelines apply to Koch Shipping Inc.’s vetting process for tankers: To be chartered by KSI, or To carry Koch owned cargo, or To call at a Koch company owned or term-leased terminal. Each OCIMF member has different criteria for reviewing crew experience.

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: The first KSI vetting check for Crew Officer Experience is the total “Time in Rank” (TIR), for all officers on board – Deck + Engine. Radio Operators and Electricians are not counted. Koch Shipping sets the “bar” at 25 years – total or aggregate for all officers – with “reasonable” distribution. Range of TIR experience for vessels reviewed has ranged from 5 to 143 years total TIR.

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Why: 1963: the Secretary of the Treasury's Committee on Tanker Hazards reported that "safety problems relate more to personnel than to materiel." 1994: the U.S. Coast Guard recognized that roughly 80% of all marine-related accidents are rooted in the human element---with the majority of these caused by organizational factors.

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Why? An example: A cadet and a First Assistant engineer are sitting at the control station of a steam tanker underway in confined waters. There is a sudden noise. The cadet says: “What was …..” The Engineer says: “damn!” and disappears down the ladder to the feed-pump flat.

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Or – to put it another way, we fail ships with low TIR because we think that the officers have not seen enough trouble!

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Exceptions: The officers with low TIR also show high numbers in years of “Time on Same Type Tankers”, and There are few procedural errors or omissions noted as observations elsewhere in the SIRE report, and There are no training or certification observations in the SIRE report.

How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: The numbers: In the past 12 months, we have reviewed 1162 ocean-going tankers, and found 101 of them, or 9% had, at some time, had a SIRE report showing possible time in rank issues, and 23 of these, or 2% failed to obtain approval, often due to more than TIR issues alone. Overall 118 ships, or 10% were not accepted.

Koch Shipping and Time In Rank - some examples:

Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

TIR issues – drilling down: In the last previous example, the owner appealed. We asked for and received the vessel’s: Chief Officer’s records for work and rest hours for the last 4 port calls, and The vessel’s Statement of Facts for the same 4 port calls, which revealed:

TIR issues – drilling down: On the face of the records: 2 incidents of breach of STCW work/rest hours requirements, and In comparison of the work hours to SOF reports: two apparent cases of under-reporting of work hours, and No non-conformities raised as a result of work hours being exceeded.

TIR issues – drilling down: After considerable discussion and advice to the owners to: “think about it and get back to us.” the owner set an “expectation” of 2 STCW non-conformities per year for his fleet for work/rest violations, compared to: an extrapolated number based on our “sample” of 4 x 12 x 30 = 1440 STCW violations/year for the company fleet.

TIR issues – drilling down: Dealing with 1000+ N-C’s/year would overwhelm most management systems – so what is reasonable? Accurately recording work/rest hours. Setting criteria for submission of N-Cs. Using a management of change process to address the causes of the N-Cs. One owner was noted as doing this and their vessel received vetting approval.

TIR issues – drilling down: DENIAL is not an acceptable response to the issue of STCW compliance and crew fatigue. Demonstrating the presence of management awareness, and an active management system engaged in correcting causes of STCW non-compliance is critical – and may be sufficient to gain vetting approval.

Crew number vs. the vessel trade: Tankers engaged in STS ops need an adequate crew for mooring ops. (not 14) Tankers engaged in short-sea trading cannot be safely operated with 2 officers. Tankers assigned to short-voyage lightering operations need an extra deck officer and an extra engineer. See: http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources/Bridge_watchkeeping_safety_study.pdf

Crew number vs. the vessel trade: (click on the image below to start the video.)

What is STCW compliance worth? Under OPA-90, a vessel causing pollution of US waters must be in compliance with “all applicable federal safety, construction and operating laws and regulations” in order to limit its liability. The Athos 1 grounded in Delaware Bay in November 2004. The cost of the cleanup (to end 2006) was $164,000,000.

What is STCW compliance worth? The US Coast Guard exhaustively investigated the incident and their report

What is STCW compliance worth? indicated that the Master, Pilots and Navigating Officer: “had not shown any signs of fatigue and met STCW and OPA90 rest requirements.” ***************** The owners were therefore able to limit their liability to $45,000,000 under OPA90.

What is STCW compliance worth? So the calculation of the value of STCW compliance in the case of the Athos 1 grounding and spill is: Cost to owners if not in compliance: $164,000,000 Cost to owners if in compliance: $ 45,000,000 Value of STCW compliance: $119,000,000 “Owners” = vessel owner & vessel P&I Club

At the end of the day, it is not the ship alone that successfully gets our cargo safely from A to B, but also the crew, who are the custodians of the ship and its cargo. Each voyage is an adventure varying only in the intensity of its challenges. Each challenge is faced by a dedicated, intelligent, experienced officer who knows what to do next …. or not. The human factor remains the most important. Thank you!