IMO Goal Based New Construction Standards

Seminar in Heraklion17 October 2005

Dragos RautaINTERTANKO

INTERTANKO Involvement• INTERTANKO Position Paper in 1999• Joint paper with OCIMF in 2000• Discussions with individual Classification Societies &

IACS in 2000 - 2002• Tripartite initiative since 2001 (Singapore, Shanghai,

Seoul, Yokohama, Beijing) • Although GBS would apply to all ships,

INTERTANKO speaks on behalf of tanker operators• Tanker - the most “targeted” ship type followed by

bulkers• Everyone expects perfection• Tanker safety records is extremely good but• “Zero tolerance” is the rule of the game

Tanker incidents and age development

Source:LMIS/Informa/INTERTANKO

%

0

220

440

660

880

1100

0.0

3.2

6.4

9.6

12.8

16.0

Incidents

Age

Tanker pollution and age development

Source:LMIS/Informa/INTERTANKO

000 ts

0

130

260

390

520

650

78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04P05

0.0

3.2

6.4

9.6

12.8

16.0

Pollution

Age

Years

Z ERO

TO L ERANCE

TANKERS

GBS Basic Principles – INTERTANKO view

• Background – should industry alone have dealt with this? Absolutely YES but . . – did IMO need to get involved? Too late to ask isn’t it?

• What is intended on this regulatory project?Ships are to be designed and constructed for a specified design life to be safe and environmentally friendly, when properly operated and maintained under the specified operating and environmental conditions, in intact and specified damage conditions, throughout their life.

. . . . . . specified operating and environmental conditions are defined by the operating area for the ship throughout its life and cover the conditions, including intermediate conditions, arising from cargo and ballast operations in port, waterways and at sea.

Source: draft Tier I - Goals

GBS Basic Principles – INTERTANKO view

• Is the ”goal” too ambitious or is it achievable?– What should GBS cover

• design (Class rules & design approval)• construction standards• survey of ship building• (system for feedback reporting to ship yard after

delivery)

– What should GBS not address• POLITICS• ships in service (perhaps in phase II of the project)

Port State ControlPercentage of inspected ships detained

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

2003 est.200220012000199919981997

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

of which tankers

All ships

Inspections and detentions

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Num

ber

All inspections:55,121

Otherdetentions:

3,159

Tankerinspections:

8,893

Tanker detentions:328

TANKERSPRIMARY TARGET FORPORT STATE CONTROL

SIGNIFICANT LESSDEFICIENCIES THANALL OTHER COMMERCIAL SHIPS

GBS Basic Principles – INTERTANKO view

• Sufficient rules for monitoring ship in service• Poor monitoring for new building• Problems and errors on new buildings are primarily

due to lack of rule/standard implementation rather than ”unknown” stressess and efforts on the ship’s strucutre (e.g. minimising corrosion allowances although it has been prooved corrosion could be higher than assumed)

• Many problems with onboard equipment • Equipment built according to unclear regulations• ”deterministic” vs. ”risk based” approach?

Structural damages in SH VLCCs

Class NK: Comprehensive damage reviewof 2nd generation of VLCCs, Dec. 1998

Structural damages in SH VLCCs

Class NK: Comprehensive damage reviewof 2nd generation of VLCCs, Dec. 1998

Experience with structural defects on DH tankersAge profile

Source: JTP – Structural Defects Experience

DH tankers - Age profile

Source: JTP – Structural Defects Experience

Source: Class NK – Summary of hulldamage incidents in 2004

Damages in cargo areas of large bulk carriers

DEFECTS ON RUDDER

FOUND FEW MONTHS AFTERSHIP DELIVERY

Defects in large castings

FILLINGS IN A NEW PROPELLER

found 6 months after ship delivery

Defects in large castings

DEFECTS IN WINDLASSES

DEFECTS IN WINDLASSES

sub-dimensioned

very poor execution

Tier III Verification – INTERTANKO view

• The essential Tier of the GBS • What should be verifiable

– Class rules– Relevant IMO Regulations– Relevant Industy standards

• Who should be the Verification Authority– An Independent IACS body

• How to verify– Guidelines developed by an IMO Group of Experts

• How to monitor verification– Audit by the IMO Group of Experts

• IMO Group of Experts – professional expertise to be required

ships should be designed according to common regulations

ship designs should be basedon similar principles

improve further CSR

stop compete on producing the less costly design

Tanker fleet development m dwt

-20-15

-10-505

10152025

3035

92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10

Phase-out

Deliveries

Demolition

Net changeTotal phase out 2010

w ill be betw een 8-65 m dw t, subject to administrations

Tanker fleet double-hull development

Source: Fearnleys/INTERTANKO

%

622

51 59 67 70 73 76 8494

78

49 41 33 30 27 24 16

0

20

40

60

80

100

1991

1997

End 0

2

End 0

3

End 0

4

End 0

5

End 0

6

End 0

7

End 1

0*

DH SH/DB/DS

% dw t share*:

* Assumes phase out according to regulations (rounded upw ards, 25 years after 2010.

GBS Enforcement – INTERTANKO view

• ”zero tolerance” on tanker incidents

• INTERTANKO enviseages its new goals:– Zero deaths and serious injuries– Zero oil and chemicals entering the sea – Zero worldwide detentions

GBS Basic Principles – INTERTANKO view

• Operators cannot do this alone• What it takes to get a sound result?• Commitment required from:

– Owners– Flag Administrations– Class Societies/ROs– IACS– Ship builders

• Somebody has to take the responsibility that the ship delivered is up to standards needed to meet ”zero tolerance” expectations

• Statments ”but it is up to the owner” are not acceptable

Goal Based Standards - Conclusions• The SYSTEM should close loopholes on ”choices” for

substandard design/construction even if accepted by those buying new ships

• Key word: assuming responsibility• The industry cannot miss the opportunity and leave politics

and group interests to dominate these developments• Any delay will only harm the industry• Regulators have given priority for new regulations for

tankers in service• Same priority should be given to develop standards for

design and construction monitoring of these ships