Presentation by Gunnar A. Knudsen Manager, Ports and Terminals Section for

1. Presentation by Gunnar A. Knudsen Manager, Ports and Terminals Section for Andromeda Shipping (India) Mumbai, 28 November 2003

2. INTERTANKO International Association of Independent Tanker Owners advocating Safe Transport Cleaner Seas Free Competition

3. 246 Members 2,150 tankers 160 million dwt 45 countries 280 Associate Members International Association of Independent Tanker OwnersINTERTANKO today Oslo London Singapore Washington

4. Spokesman, representative Services Meeting place • INTERTANKO’s purpose

5. Phase out single-hull tankers Liability Environment Chemical tankers, Revision of Annex II Vetting/Oil company screening Security Use of committees and Regional Panels INTERTANKO’s Agenda

6. Tankerperformancestrong • No disruption of trade • Safety record excellent • 99.998% of oil arrives safely Courtesy ; Thenamaris Ships Management Inc.

7. P&I Clubs Port State Control Flag State Class ISM Maritime Security Terminals Independent oil companies Multiple Inspections

8. Vetting Committee IMO SIRE, Class and PSC CDI “A Guide to the Vetting Process” C/P vetting clauses Feedback forms Multiple InspectionsAddressed through:

9. Frequency of inspections Industry partners IACS, PSC, P&I Clubs, Flags, CDI, SIRE, OCIMF, SIGTTO The quality considerations Multiple InspectionsINTERTANKO’s programme:

10. Pilot project Tanker terminals world-wide. Simple fact-sharing exercise Terminal and berth conditions One page/15-20 questions Directly from the ships Report form and simple explanation on the INTERTANKO web INTERTANKO can act on continuous problems Terminal Vetting DatabaseSummary:

11. Over 2000 entries Working group INTERTANKO’s Vetting Committee Source kept confidential Not an approval stamp of terminals Quality enhancement Officers participation Terminal Vetting DatabaseReview:

12. Active relations with Paris MoU, Tokyo MoU, Viña Del Mar, USCG NAV/IMO Co-operation with industry associations The INTERTANKO vetting and PSC feedback form 5th edition of “A Guide to the Vetting Process” Port State Control

13. Targeting USCG and Paris MoU already active Expanding the drive Naming the charterer Owners’ right to appeal “Close-out” Port State ControlINTERTANKO’s position:

14. MARPOL and EU Directive 2000.59 Constant problem for tanker owners Non-special fee system Feed-back from the industry FAL/IMO Flag states reporting non-conformities Targeting Port Waste Reception FacilitiesSummary:

15. Delays and extra cost High fees INTERTANKO’S Environmental Committee “Port Information” services European ports Port Waste Reception FacilitiesReview:

16. The Gulf as MARPOL Annex 1 Special Area INTERTANKO raises awareness EU court reactions Port Waste Reception FacilitiesINTERTANKO’s position: (cont.)

17. SOLAS 74 as amended International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA), Oct. 2002 U.S. Interim Temporary Rule, 1 July 2003 U.S. Final Rule, 22 October 2003 European Commission Proposed Regulations, 2 May 2003 Maritime SecurityApplicable laws/regulations:

18. IMO/MSC, USCG and EC Target of our work Extra cost for tanker owners Seamen’s living and working conditions Effects on seaborne trade Work partners WG on MARSEC Comments to IMO on Model Training Courses Deadline 1.7.2004 Maritime SecurityINTERTANKO’s work:

19. Appointment practices for CSO and SSO Confusing training requirements (internal/external) Flags’ delegation for SSP approval and shipboard verification not finalised. Lack of mandatory training courses Differing contents and duration Video and CBT training Maritime SecurityMembers’ reports:

20. Operational flexibility Approved training centres IMO Model Training Courses Office copies for internal training manuals Progress report for SSA/SSP work Assignment duties Maritime SecurityMembers’ reports: (cont.)

21. Onboard CCTV fitting Evacuation procedures Port compliance registered at IMO Readiness of coastal states Maritime SecurityMembers’ reports: (cont.)

22. Complete compliance? What if? Backlog of applications Consultants’ dropping fees tempt owners to start implementation work late Seafarers’ security concerns US MARSEC Budget USCG/Paris MoU pre-checks from 1.1.04 Approval by USCG after all? Maritime SecurityRecent observations:

23. How will a CSO know which PFSOs to talk to prior to assessing a ship tramping in worldwide trade? How can an SSP become so ship-specific that each crewmember’s security duties are identified to the ”T” and every recommendation of the SSA incorporated rigidly? Maritime SecurityQuestions:

24. Should only one Class society be appointed for all vessels or appoint for each vessel the assigned Class society or the Flag? How many ports have a PFSO who can advise the CSO of particular threats? Maritime SecurityQuestions:

25. Long Range Tracking An IMO Assessment/Inspection scheme Tracking of charterers USCG main MARSEC activities Maritime SecurityIMO Assembly this week

26. Thank you for your attention!