Held in the Casuarina Suite A

Held in the Casuarina Suite A

14 November 2005

Our Ref.: HS-10123/3150000

AGENDA

Vetting Committee #27

30th November 2005.

Held in the “Casuarina Suite A”

The Raffles Hotel

1, Beach Road

Start Time 09:00

Completion 16:30

1.ANTI-TRUST/COMPETITION LAW COMPLIANCE

INTERTANKO’s Anti-Trust/Competition law Compliance StatementINTERTANKO is firmly committed to maintaining a fair and competitive environment in the world tanker trade, and to adhering to all applicable laws which regulate INTERTANKO’s and its members’ activities in this market. These laws include the anti-trust and competition laws, which theUS, the European Union and many nations of the world have adopted to preserve the free enterprise system, promote competition and protect the public from monopolistic and other restrictive trade practices. This meeting will be conducted in compliance with these laws and in accordance with INTERTANKO’s anti-trust/competition law guidelines.

2.Minutes from the last meeting Vetting #26.

The committee approved the minutes from the last meeting by e-mail and these are placed on the member’s area of the INTERTANKO web site and circulated in the weekly news and the vetting contacts advised accordingly. A copy of the last minutes are enclosed in Appendix 1 for reference

  1. A session with Shell

We are very pleased to welcome Tony Moran from Shell Singapore to the vetting committee meeting to spend about 2 hours with us and engage in general discussion and questions and answers. We are very grateful to Shell for agreeing to spend some time with the committee and undertake general discussions.

  1. Action Points arising at the last meeting

Contained in Appendix 2 to this agenda is an overview of the action points arising at the last meeting and their status.

The committee is invited to review the action points.

5.Reports from the Vetting Committee Working Groups

5.1Charter Party Working Group – Chairman Lars Mossberg

The Documentary Committee isdrafting the vetting clause booklet and compiling the advice within it, with a view that the booklet will be completed towards the end of 2005/early 2006. The concept of the book is described as follows:

The book is aimed at helping members avoid the difficulties they could find themselves in, having agreed to a strong charterers vetting clause that requires the owner to maintain “approvals” by either several named oil companies or in some cases “all” oil companies. In recent years we have seen a withdrawal by oil companies from issuing “approvals” and thus such strong charterers clauses have become extremely difficult to comply with.It has thus become apparent that it is now almost impossible to produce a single, usable, model vetting clause that will satisfy both owner’s and the charterers needs.The working Group is of the general opinion that it is probably not possible to produce a single clause that meets all the requirements of the oil and chemical trades. In the main, the problem is the differences between the two trades and also the differences between our own members. Some members are involved in the “chartering in” of vessels, and, as such, desire a strong clause for the charterer that ties into fixed inspections and places the risk of the oil company acceptance onto the owner. On the other hand those members involved exclusively on the owning/operating side of the business wish to see a more relaxed vetting clause with more options and fewer restrictions.

The outcome of this Working Group’s work is therefore the vetting clause booklet, which we hope will offer useful help and advice to all our members, be they either wearing an owner’s hat or a charterer’s hat.

The book will highlight, using a selection of vetting clauses that exist today, the pros and cons of each vetting clause and will conclude by offering some guidelines on warranty clauses with particular regard to:

  • A hardship clause-if it is not possible to appoint an inspector or an inspection is not possible.
  • Reasonable time frames to allow the inspection to take place.
  • Suitable non-fulfilment elements to be included to protect the charterer

In conclusion:The aim of the booklet is to make the reader aware of the alternatives that exist and to understand the responsibilities and risks involved in the drafting and acceptance of a Vetting Clause, as well as the benefits that can be derived from a clause that meets somebody’s specific requirements.

The committee is invited to take note

5.2Terminal Vetting Working Group – Chairman Capt John Hill

Since our last meeting the promulgation and progress with the TVD continues to advance very well indeed with over 7200 reports now in the database, with more and more members logging into the system and participating within the scheme. Of particular note is the cooperation with BP on the project and we are very pleased to announce that BP (which is an associate member of INTERTANKO) is closely cooperating with INTERTANKO on this project. BP has amended its own terminal feedback report form to include the information required by INTERTANKO, and has also created an automated system so that a BP terminal report can be input directly to the INTERTANKO database.INTERTANKO is supplying feedback to BP on terminals that are reported with a low score.

We welcome the opportunity to work together with BP on this project, as we believe that such a joint venture is a major step forward in improving terminal safety. This will not only enhance the work that we have been undertaking, but will also be an immense assistance with the task of ensuring that terminals quickly correct reported safety deficiencies.Daniel Lewis, BP Shipping’s Port Information Superintendent, commented that “This is an excellent opportunity for BP Shipping to participate in a project of this magnitude and adds another dimension to our Assurance portfolio to achieve our simple goals of clean seas, safe ships and commercial success”. The committee is invited to also note that the vetting seminar on the 29th November includes a presentation by BP on Terminal vetting. We are also in dialogue with other oil companies who have expressed an interest in also participating in the scheme. One of the suggestions we have received in this context is to better define the scoring mechanisms we utilise. i.e. to define the scores 1-5 such that a comparison could be drawn to the requirements with ISGOTT.

The committee is invited to discuss and review this suggestion and if an agreement to offer suggestions with regards to such definitions.

5.3Officer Matrix Working Group- Chairman Steve Hardy

The working group has completed its collation of the Officer matrix Questionnaires received from committee members into a single spreadsheet. This has been de-sensitised so that it is not possible to evaluate which companies have replied - as was initially agreed.

The concept we agreed upon when seeking this information was for the time being to simply assess what the reality is today collate the information received in a confidential manner and then assess it within the WG before proceeding further. The group is now in the process of evaluating the data against existing criteria. A copy of the spreadsheet will be made available at the meeting.

The committee is invited to discuss and review accordingly.

5.4Detention Statistic Working Group- Chairman Peter Abildgaard

The work with this working group has been severely hampered in producing our annual detention statistical overview for 2005 due a change in the way the Paris MoU disseminates in information on detentions. When requesting access to this information earlier this year we were by the Paris MoU to formally apply for access to the information, We do so accordingly and sent a copy of the 2003 detention report to highlight the benefits we can obtain from the report and also offered to share the report with the Paris MoU when it was updated.

In a subsequent reply in October this year we have been advised that The MoU Advisory Board had presented the proposal to the 38th meeting of the Port State Control Committee meeting held in Helsinki 9th -13th May, Finland. Several proposals were considered in a more global context with regards to exchanging data with 3rd parties and the committee adopted a general policy in this respect and has authorised the MOU Advisory Board to consider individual requests on a case by case basis. The committee has therefore instructed the MAB to consider our request in light of the adopted policy along the following guidelines;

  • No data would be released which is intended to be used subsequently by the receiver in any commercial manner.
  • The secretariat would have no responsibility for the accuracy of the data
  • There would be no cost to the Paris MoU and clear benefits, It may require the agreement of a contract between both parties.
  • The extent of the data provided would be decided by the MAB but would in no case be more extensive than the items listed in annex 5 of the Paris MoU text
  • MAB to take a view on each application and be guided by the above and the proposal put forward by the organisation to show the data would be used to improve safety and reduce pollution.

We are therefore advised that it is anticipated that we would be granted access to the detention data basically in return for the Paris MoU members being granted direct access to the Q88.com website. There would however appear to be some confusion regarding access to the information within Q88 as this is already available from our web site and there are also direct links to the Q88 information from the EQUASIS web site. We will make further contact with The Paris MoU accordingly and clarify what is required.

The committee is requested to take note

5.56th Edition “A Guide to The Vetting Process” – Chairman Alan Johnson

The 6th edition of this book is now completed and printed, this has been advised to all INTERTANKO members via the weekly news our web site and the vetting contact bulletin systems, and orders are been received. We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all the contributors to the book, to Alan Johnson for is work in chairing this group and to Adele Garnett at INTERTANKO for her hard work in pulling this all together and formatting and producing the finished article. The book is a considerable expansion to the 5th edition and now contains over 180 pages of information.

The committee will be invited to purchase copies for their fleets at the meeting.

5.6SIRE/CDI Harmonisation Working Group- Chairman Patrick Russi

The work of this group does continue although it continues to be a large task, one aspect that the group has assessed relates to “establishing if SIRE will allow the likes of DOW and BASF for example to have access to the SIRE reports even though they are not members of SIRE”. We have enquired into this aspect and we are advised that the majority of the chemical companies are in effect members of the SIRE system by virtue of their associations with the oil companies.However, an aspect which the committee is requested to review and comment upon which also bears considerably upon the work of this group relates to an announcement by CDI at their recent Executive Board meeting as follows:

1. develop the next ISIS database to provide a more integrated Risk Assessment tool, providing the vetting departments with casualty reports, port state detentions, ship management history, class society reports, etc all via a single ship report screen.

2. enhance the inspection process. To review the SIR to test for the existence of behavior based safety on board. To test for compliance rather than the existence of now mandated procedures. To take the inspector out of the Captain'soffice and focus him on the physical inspection of the ship and ability of the crew. To maintain the objectivity through the questions of the SIR, but create a more holistic picture of the ship.

3. to protect the credibility of the scheme, reduce the new proliferation of ship inspections and move closer in line with the oil majors, CDI-M is to introduce a system for appointing the inspector. (See Overview below)

4. withoutdetraction from the interests of the chemical company

Members, extend the services of CDI-M beyond the chemical industry. This

Immediately relates to the development of the dry bulk shipping scheme.

5. Extend the activity of CDI to become the No1 organization forproducing chemical industry guidance on the transportation of bulk liquidchemicals.

6. Grow the scheme in other regions. This will require each EBdeveloping a communication plan to promote the scheme in regions where

CDI is not so prominent.

7. Monitor and influence when necessary marine regulations on behalf ofthe global chemical company membership. This will involve securing NGOstatus at the IMO.

Overview:

  1. CDI Marine Inspection Department will be created
  2. Inspectors will be allocated to global zones
  3. Ship owners make inspection request via website or e-mail
  4. Inspector will be nominated using a ‘’Mechanical Rotation System’’, incorporating the existing restrictions
  5. Ship owner will be notified of the nominated inspector
  6. With ‘’motivated reason’’, ship owner may reject first inspector
  7. Ship owner will be nominated a second inspector
  8. Ship owner now has the choice of two inspectors
  9. Inspection takes place as per existing procedure

The committee is requested in particular to note the changes in CDI Inspector appointment (Item 3) and INTERTANKO is requested by CDI to supply its comments on the above by the end of January 2006.

5.7 TMSA working Group- Chairman Michael Wilson

This is a new working group that has been formed since the last committee meeting, in view of the three main elements within TMSA (vetting Technical and Environmental aspects) the group consists of members from the Vetting Committee, ISTEC and the Environmental Committee, but its parent committee is the Vetting Committee.

The group has been quite active and has established some Terms of Reference to scope out is work (although not formally signed off by the working group) the draft TOR’s are;

  • Issue guidelines and assistance pertaining to TMSA for the benefit of INTERTANKO members
  • Help and assist INTERTANKO members in establishing what the TMSA requirements are for each oil company.
  • Issue general guidelines regarding how to complete a TMSA submission.
  • Establish how TMSA is applied by each Oil company with regards to Spot, COA & Time Charters
  • Maintain an open dialogue with OCIMF and the oil companies to encourage input of INTERTANKO’s ideas.
  • Participate in relevant industry work pertaining to TMSA.
  • Promote inclusion of INTERTANKO in future revisions of TMSA
  • Production of relevant Benchmarking/KPI systems for the benefit of INTERTANKO members
  • Production of relevant analytical data
  • Ensure that work of this group assists in achieving the long term goals of INTERTANKO.

The group is also reviewing the reply we received from OCIMF to the INTERTANKO letter regarding TMSA. The reply from OCIMF is included in Appendix 3to this agenda, as well as formulating a definition regarding Management of Change.

The committee is invited to discuss

6.Vetting Inspection Feedback Forms

The vetting information feedback forms continue to be well utilised and are submitted to INTERTANKO. Comparison statistical data has been completed between the feedback forms received for 2003 and those received for 2005. This information has been passed to both SIRE and CDI for use at their own inspector seminars and made available on the INTERTANKO web site and weekly news etc. We would like to thank all our members for submitting the INTERTANKO Vetting Inspection Feedback Forms to us. This is a most useful tool to assist us in the identification of problem areas pertaining to vetting and Port State Control (PSC) inspections, as well as highlighting areas which are working well.

The committee is invited to review the comparisons available on our web site at the following link

  1. PSC/EQUASIS-Close out of Deficiencies

We continue to pursue the issue of closing out deficiencies raised within the various MoU web sites and EQUASIS, however despite receiving a quite positive response from EQAUSIS and The Paris MoU at the last EQUASIS Editorial board meeting, progress has been slow. INTERTANKO will be attending the next Editorial Board meeting in London on the 15th November 2005 where will re-raise the issue. We will report further on this issue at the meeting

  1. Administrative Matters
  2. Vetting Committee Chairman

As advised at the last committee meeting - The Vetting Committee Chairman (Lars Mossberg) will, on completion of this meeting have achieved the end of his second term as Chairman of the Vetting Committee and will be standing down as Chairman at the end of this meeting. It was agreed that a formal election would be undertaken at this meeting to appoint a new Chairman. Subsequent to the discussions at the last meeting where the committee agreed it would be natural for the Vice-Chairman to move into this position, the committee is therefore invited to elect the current Vice-Chairman (Bob Bishop) to be the new chairman of the Vetting Committee.

Top View