1. international shipping associations
The
ROUND TABLE of
international shipping associations

2. International Chamber of Shipping (International Shipping Federation)
BIMCO
International Chamber of Shipping
(International Shipping Federation)
INTERCARGO
INTERTANKO

3. Vision for the shipping industry:
“ A responsible, sustainable and respected industry able to influence its own destiny ”

4. The ROUND TABLE of international shipping associations
– voluntary cooperation to:
Promote common policy positions – representative of wide common membership
Provide strong and united shipowner “voice” in International Forums
Ensure more effective use of limited resources
Avoid surprises / resolve potential conflicts in policies

5. Examples of Round Table cooperation
Joint submissions to IMO
Common positions with respect to EU issues
Establishment of INTERGROUP as formal stakeholder interface with EU Parliament, Commission, Council and EMSA
Tripartite meetings of owners, builders and class
Flag State guidelines (updated)
The “image” of shipping – working with IMO et al

6. AGENDA Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
Common Structural Rules & Goal Based Standards
Criminalisation of Seafarers
Challenges to Industry Governance Structures
Other:
People issues Piracy
Ship Recycling Environmental Challenges
Competition Rules Security
Oil Pollution Liability (& Compensation)

7. Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
Against the challenges of Local and Regional Legislation

8. 15 years ago the US
Today Europe !!

9. Increasing politicization of regulation
Examples:
Phase out of single hull tankers
West European Particularly Sensitive Sea Area
Moves to open up CLC/Fund Convention and link with substandard shipping
Penal sanctions adopted by EU, criminalising accidental pollution
Why?
Coastal state interests versus flag states, and reduced influence of maritime constituency
Power of EU Commission

10. THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS & the power plays
Commission
(The executive)
EMSA
European
Parliament
(Direct election)
Council
(Member States)

11. HOW IT WAS: Examples of positive regulatory developments (the “IMO spirit”)
ISM Code and STCW (training)
post ‘Estonia’ passenger ferry measures
IMO bulk carrier safety package
Development of ILO ‘Super Convention’
Outcomes broadly based on technical merits of arguments put forward.
Industry viewpoint understood, if not always accepted.

12. HOW IT IS: The Challenges Today
More political drivers and less consideration of the technical, operational, and commercial interests
More unworkable, inconsistent and illogical regulation and less consideration of the practical aspects
More pressure for local / regional regulation and less willingness to adopt and apply international regulation

13. Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
What are the threats?
15 Years Ago the United States (OPA90)
Today the European Union
Politics post Erika and Prestige
Conflict with International legislation (UNCLOS, MARPOL)
Criminalisation
EU Commission proposals for EU Common Position at IMO

14. Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
International Regulation for an International Industry
What the industry seeks from the Asian region:
Consistent support for IMO and the international approach
Rejection of regional initiatives
If possible, avoidance of “block” voting to combat EU moves in this direction

15. Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
International Regulation for an International Industry
Questions:
How can we involve Asian industry more effectively?
What are the principal concerns seen through Asian eyes?
Can the RT interact better with Asian shipping community on these matters?

16. Common Structural Rules
&
Goal Based Standards

17. Common Structural Rules
Background
Concerns over erosion of design margins and construction tolerances due to:
Competition for Market Share by Classification Societies
More refined design capabilities
Pressure from shipyards to minimise steel weights
Pressure from owners for lower costs of newbuildings

18. Common Structural Rules
Consequences of reduced design margins
Greater focus is placed on ship maintenance procedures
Increasing concerns expressed by regulators on structural integrity of existing ships
Challenges to function of classification societies
Introduction of Goal Based Standards for ship construction at IMO

19. Common Structural Rules
Current situation
TANKER rules (JTP) developed by Lloyds Register, ABS, Norske Veritas (LAN):
Generally acceptable to much of industry (subject certain caveats) but not all
Limited support from other IACS members
BULK CARRIER rules (JBP) developed by 7 IACS members:
Mixed reception from industry (many caveats)
Support from LAN IACS members not forthcoming
Only limited harmonisation of design assumptions and modelling techniques between JTP and JBP
IACS under considerable strain to maintain cohesive position and internal harmony

20. Common Structural Rules
Outstanding issues
Around harmonisation :
Influence of prescriptive requirements
Wave shear force and wave loads
Buckling and ultimate strength
Finite Element Calculation procedure
Fatigue analysis
Industry acceptance of :
Corrosion allowances
Verification of coatings (application & performance)

21. Goal Based Standards
Introduced in to IMO by Bahamas and Greece following Prestige accident
Initially addressing ship structural standards, but with potential for extension to much of SOLAS and MARPOL legislation and more
Principles still being debated versus other methodologies (prescriptive versus risk based)

22. Simplified Tier Concept
Goal-based Safety Objectives
Tier I
Tier II
Goal-based Functional Requirements
Design and
Construction
Maintenance
Operation
Tier III
Verification of
Compliance
Class Rules
(Detailed requirement)
Tier IV
Code of Practice for Construction,
Maintenance and Operation
Tier V

23. Common Structural Rules
Is there support for the principle of Common Structural Rules ?
Subject to clarification of current drafts, is it now prudent to support the latest versions of both JTP and JBP rules, while at the same time encouraging further progressive harmonisation between the tanker and bulker rules ?
How important is IACS unity and what can industry do to support & encourage this ?

24. Criminalisation of Seafarers

25. CRIMINALISATION
Traditionally accidents have been regarded as quite distinct from deliberate acts
Attitudes have changed (scapegoat mentality)
e.g. Captain Mangouras, The Karachi Eight
EU Directive on Ship-Source Pollution (despite wide industry coalition)
Canadian Bill C-15
US approach (whistle blowing, enormous fines and rewards)

26. Criminalisation
INDUSTRY supports the investigation and prosecution of illegal discharges of oil from ships.
INDUSTRY strongly objects to criminalising accidental oil pollution and to treating seafarers as criminals
Any criminal offence of pollution from a ship must be clearly defined and in accordance with international law.
Any penalties imposed on someone found guilty of such an offence must be proportionate.
There should also be parity with any penalties imposed for pollution from land based sources.
Any suspects must be treated fairly, impartially and in accordance with international law on human rights.

27. Criminalisation Additionally
INDUSTRY expects coastal states to comply with their existing treaty law obligations to provide adequate, affordable, oil waste reception facilities.
In order to safeguard the lives of seafarers and the marine environment, INDUSTRY urges coastal states to ensure proper contingency plans are put in place so that adequate assistance and if necessary a place of refuge can be made available to a ship in distress.

28. CRIMINALISATION Do Asian owners share these concerns ?
Is there a downside in fighting this?
How / where should we be concentrating our efforts?
&
INDUSTRY principles: are they universally supported?

29. Challenges to Industry Governance Structures Classification Societies
Flag
Classification Societies
Port State Control
P&I Clubs

30. The good, the bad and … all legitimate
Selection of Flag
The good, the bad and … all legitimate

31. Challenges for Flag
IMO Flag State Audit (currently voluntary but pressure to make mandatory)
Port State Control
- Currently: white, black and grey lists
- EU moving to target non-audited flags with preferential treatment measures
Political, public, union and media pressures – especially on open registers
Industry currently providing guidance / recommendations, and moving to do more

32. Flag State Guidelines - industry advice

33. Challenges for Classification Societies
EU Challenge on Role of Class
– perceived conflict of interest between statutory and classification activities
Common Structural Rules
– ability to deliver while maintaining IACS harmony
Role relative to Goal Based Standards
– IMO/Flag states versus IACS control of Goal Based Standards
Who sets class agenda – owners, builders, flag states or class managers ?
Example coatings standards (IMO – DE discussion)

34. Challenges for Port State Control (PSC)
Need :
Better harmonisation and consistency of standards, training, etc. across all PSC regimes
Consistency in inspection and targeting criteria – based in part on analysis of PSC records and not arbitrary mechansisms, such as quota systems
Global sharing and mutual recognition of records between MoUs, with data logged in central system such as EQUASIS
Uniformity in internal procedures, such as clear grounds for detention, independent appeal panels, close-out of deficiencies, etc.
&
To ensure that the integrity of PSC is maintained

35. Challenges for P&I Clubs & Club Boards
OECD Report – Role of P&I in respect of substandard shipping
IOPC Revision Procedures
Pending Compulsory Insurance requirements
Who manages the agenda
– Shipowners or Club Managers ?

36. Challenges to Industry Governance Structures
Do Asian shipowners share the same concerns over these challenges for Flag, Classification Societies, Port State Control and P&I Clubs ?
What are the particular concerns ?
Could we be doing more collectively to address any of these concerns ?

37. Two Questions that we have asked ourselves:
Can the Round Table involve regional shipping voices more effectively in global (and other regional) arenas ?
Does the Round Table have a role in supporting local and regional shipping associations in their local and regional issues ?

38. AGENDA Maintaining Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law
Common Structural Rules & Goal Based Standards
Criminalisation of Seafarers
Challenges to Industry Governance Structures
Other:
People issues Piracy
Ship Recycling Environmental Challenges
Competition Rules Security
Oil Pollution Liability (& Compensation)

39. PEOPLE ISSUES (HUMAN FACTORS)
Heavy recent concentration on “hardware” issues
(e.g. accelerated phase-out, CSRs, goal-based standards etc)
Yet people still “cause” most incidents

40. PEOPLE ISSUES (HUMAN FACTORS)
Industry has to address :
Shortages of qualified officers (BIMCO/ISF 2005)
Renewed criticisms of training standards (time to review STCW 95 ?)
Implications/causes of fatigue (ISPS etc.)
Manning levels
In the background, CONMARCON

41. PIRACY Extent of the problem Focus of attention on Regions
- Malacca Straits
- Somalia
- West Africa
Developments

42. There is still a problem Worldwide:
attacks
attacks
Malacca Straits
attacks
attacks

43. Crew Members:
killed, 30 missing
In Malacca Straits
killed, 3 injured, 36 kidnapped
Indonesia accounts for 25% of all attacks worldwide

44. Somalia
Concerted attacks against larger ships
60 nm off the coast
West Africa
- Denial of a problem
- Lagos has the highest record of attacks

45. Targets
Tug + Tows
Low in the water
Slow moving
Small Tankers
Bulk Carriers

46. Current developments
Improved cooperation and joint patrols in Malacca Strait, July 2004
Pan-Asia anti-piracy initiative – Regional Cooperation Agreement or ReCAAP
Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency – 6 patrol boats up to 40 vessels plus helicopters within 5 years.

47. Current developments (cont.)
Inventus UAV
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
Reconnaissance system for aerial surveillance
Secure Ship
volt pulse to deter boardings
Shiploc
Ship security alert system
Ship tracking device

48. PROBLEMS REMAIN
Hot Pursuit
Lack of Resources
Need for an effective deterrent

49. Ship Recycling – ship breaking, scrapping, demolition
Notes

50. International guidelines on “best practice”

51. Ship Recycling Industry supporting:
measures to ensure that ship recycling not just a sound but a sustainable industry
development of effective regulation through adoption of the relevant elements of the:
- IMO Guidelines on Ship Recycling
- ILO Safety & Health Guidelines on Shipbreaking
- Technical Guidelines of the Basel Convention

52. Ship Recycling Issues for shipowners
Green Passport – format to be standardised
IMO Guidelines
- key elements to be made mandatory via international convention
- guidance notes being developed on the implemenation of the Guidelines
Inventory of Hazardous Materials document
- still only limited utilisation
Demolition Contract related to the IMO Guidelines (such as BIMCO Demolishcon)
- only limited application to date

53. Ship Recycling Issues for shipbreakers
In general there is a need for:
development and introduction of Code of Practice for HSE management
and/or legislation to ensure compliance with best practice / international conventions
”breaking yards” to be licensed
& specifically:
Breakers need to adopt and implement:
Ship Recycling Plan as set out in the IMO Guidelines
Health and Safety plans as set out in the ILO Guidelines
Plans for the handling of hazardous waste as set out in the Basel Convention

54. Environmental Challenges
Air Emissions
(Low sulphur bunker issues)
Ballast Water Management

55. IOPC Compensation Limits - as revised 2003/2005
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
110
120
130
140
150
160
SDR Millions
151
302
453
604
755
906
1,057
1,209
USD Millions
'000 GT
1992 Fund, SDR 203 m, USD 307 m
1992 CLC pre STOPIA
Supplementary Fund (as from )
SDR 750 m, USD m)