240 likes | 1.21k Views
Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Baltic Exchange London 2 October 2006. How Koch views officer experience:. The following guidelines apply to Koch Shipping Inc’s vetting process for tankers: To be chartered by KSI, or To carry Koch affiliate owned cargo, or
E N D
Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Baltic Exchange London 2 October 2006
How Koch views officer experience: • The following guidelines apply to Koch Shipping Inc’s vetting process for tankers: • To be chartered by KSI, or • To carry Koch affiliate owned cargo, or • To call at a Koch owned or term-leased terminal. • Each OCIMF member has a different criteria for reviewing crew experience.
How Koch views officer experience: • The basic KSI vetting “flag” 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 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 views 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 views 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 views 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 yet.
How Koch views 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.
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 a criteria for submission of N-Cs. • Using a management of change process to address the causes of the N-Cs. One management 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 acceptable – even if some N-Cs are continuing.
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 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 2005) was $150,000,000.
What is STCW compliance worth? The US Coast Guard exhaustively investigated the incident and reported:
What is STCW compliance worth? The Coast Guard reported 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: $150,000,000 Cost to owners if in compliance: $ 45,000,000 Value of STCW compliance: $105,000,000 “Owners” = vessel owner & vessel P&I Club
Thank you! There’s more to tanker shipping than meets the eye.