SIGNALS

PEOPLE LEGAL CARGO SHIPS NEWS RISK MANAGEMENT

Page 2 Page 5 Page 6 Page 8 Page 10 Page 11INSIDE:

ww

w.n

epia

.com

the Loss Prevention newsletter for North of England Members ISSUE 63APRIL 2006

North of Englandlaunches E News

PassageplanningproblemsThe Tokyo Port State Control MOU has recentlystated that passage plans are not always SOLAScompliant, leading to increasing detentions. Thisissue explains how to avoid the risk of detention by undertaking proper passage planning and befollowing recommended procedures for exchangingpassage planning information with pilots.

See page 8 for full story

Problemswith petcokeProblems arising from carrying petroleum coke(Petcoke) have been highlighted recently,particularly relating to the disposal of cargoresidues and water used in hold washing. Petcokemay also be corrosive. Based on advice from anumber of sources, this issue clarifies some of theproblems and provides ship operators with advice.

See page 6 for full story

Pirates remain a great cause for concern in many parts of the world but nowhere more thanSomalia, where the attacks are increasinglyvicious and long-range. Captain Mukundan,Director of the ICC International Maritime Bureau,provides an insight into the region’s pirateactivities and suggests protective measures thatcan be taken.

See page 2 for full story

Piracy inSomalia

Master / pilotexchangesEvery year millions of acts of pilotage are carriedout around the world without incident. The master / pilot exchange is absolutely critical to this success. In this issue Nick Cutmore, SecretaryGeneral of the International Maritime Pilots’Association, examines the crucial relationshipbetween master and pilot and how their initialexchanges can be improved.

See page 10 for full story

Port StatecontrolguidancePort State control inspections are a fact of life andhere to stay. The risk of a port State controlinspector finding defects, or even imposing adetention, can be reduced by putting in place some straightforward control measures. North of England has prepared a guidance card tocomplement ship management guidelines and a copy is enclosed with this issue.

See page 9 for full story

North of England is now offering a new email newsservice to Members called E News, providing amonthly digest of industry news items, club circularsand press releases. It complements the online

Industry News service on the Club’s website and isan additional information service to Signals, whichis also now being distributed in electronic format.

See back page for full story

Read your emailsWe all now get lots of unsolicited emails but not allof it is spam. Messages of considerable legalimportance are now emailed as a matter ofroutine, including notices of proceedings andarbitration. A recent English court case shows youcannot use a ‘spam’ defence – but equally youshould not rely on email to serve legal notices.

See page 5 for full story

Somali pirate attacksreach record levels

2 PEOPLE

Pirates have been in the news regularly over the last few months and are a great cause for concern in many parts of the world regularly visited bymerchant shipping. In this article, CaptainMukundan, Director of the ICC InternationalMaritime Bureau, provides an insight into the recent surge in pirate activities off Somalia andsuggests some of the protective measures thatshould be taken.

In 2005, the Piracy Reporting Centre (PRC) run bythe ICC International Maritime Bureau (IMB)recorded a drop in attacks against vessels worldwidefor the second year in succession. A total of 276attacks were recorded last year compared to 325attacks in 2004.

However, despite the headline numbers, there arestill areas of concern. A total of 440 crew were takenhostage in 2005, the highest since the PRC startedcompiling statistics in 1992, and the number ofhijackings rose to 23, the highest since 2002.

New hotspots of piracy also emerged in 2005. Forexample, there were no attacks recorded in Iraq in2004 yet in 2005 there were 10 attacks againstvessels waiting to berth at the Basrah Oil Terminal oroff Umm Qasr. The pirates are well-armed – as onewould expect in a country awash with weapons –and have shot at crew members causing seriousinjuries. Analysis reveals that the purpose of these

attacks appears to be to steal cash, personal effectsand small pieces of equipment rather than anythingmore sinister.

Somalia arguably became the highest risk area in2005. In 2004, there were two attacks reported tothe PRC whereas, from 15 March 2005 to the end ofthe year, 35 attacks were recorded. The purpose ofthese attacks is to hijack the vessels, force them well inside Somali waters and then demand aransom for the return of the vessel and its crew. Inall except one case, no attempt was made to stealthe cargo. Vulnerable vessels such as tankers andgas carriers have been hijacked and returned onlyafter a substantial ransom was paid.

Long-range attacksMany of the attacks took place hundreds of miles offthe Somali coast, well outside the territorial limits ofSomalia. On 8 November 2005, a general cargovessel proceeding from the Mozambique Channeltowards Pakistan was attacked 390 miles off the coast.

Such attacks cannot be done by small pirate craftoperating on their own. In these long-range attackspirate mother ships provide support. The mothership, which is typically a large fishing trawler or amotorised dhow with a single derrick at the stern,will steam towards the course of an approachingtarget vessel. When the target vessel draws close,

the mother ship launches one or two fast boats withpowerful outboard motors and around six pirateseach on board, armed with automatic weapons and,in some cases, rocket-propelled grenade launchers.These craft close in on the target vessel at speed,firing on the bridge windows of the vessel. If thevessel slows down or stops, the vessel will beboarded and hijacked.

In one case, a bulk carrier was boarded by pirateswho were unable to get into the accommodation. Allaccess to the accommodation block had beensecured from the inside by the crew. Frustrated, thepirates set fire to a life boat. The Master, fearing forhis crew managed to fire a distress flare from aporthole. A passing LPG carrier seeing the flamesfrom the burning lifeboat and the distress flarealtered course to provide assistance. As it drew closethe pirates abandoned the bulk carrier, emergedfrom its lee and approached the LPG carrierthreatening to fire its rocket-propelled grendadelauncher. The master slowed down, was boarded and hijacked. It took three weeks of anxiousnegotiations before the vessel was finally released.

Once a vessel is hijacked and taken into Somaliwaters, foreign naval vessels will not usuallyintervene. The number of pirates on board willtypically increase to about 15 – enough to keep thecrew under control and deter other gangs fromseizing the ‘prize’. Then begin the tortuousnegotiations with intermediaries ashore.

At the time of writing, there are currently fivevessels in pirate captivity four fishing vessels andone general cargo vessel. In early November 2005after a rash of hijackings, seven vessels and over 100seamen were captured.

A pirate group under the name ‘National VoluntaryCoastguard’ operates from Kismayo Island south ofMogadiscio specialising in seizing fishing vesselsallegedly for breaching national fishing regulations.Other centres of pirate activity appear to beXarardheere, Hobyo and a group operating off CapGuardafui in north-east Somalia.

Responding to the threatDealing with piracy in Somalia poses uniquechallenges. This is a country with no effectivenational government and hence no national legal orlaw-enforcement infrastructure. Except for the afew provinces in northern Somalia which arereasonably well governed, the rest of the country iscontrolled by local militias, some of which see piracyas an additional income stream.

It is vital that shipmasters report every sighting ofsuspicious activity off the coast of Somalia to the

PRC. This information is passed to the Coalitionnaval forces in the region and forms vitalintelligence in the fight against Somali piracy.

On 20 January 2006, a bulk carrier reported to thePRC an attempted attack by a mother ship and hertwo attack craft over 200 miles off the Somali coast.This information was promptly relayed to theCoalition naval authorities. The USS WinstonChurchill and other naval vessels responded. Aftershadowing a suspicious craft through the night of20 January, it was finally boarded by US navalpersonnel on the morning of 21 January and 10Somalis and 16 Indians on board have been detained.The Indians claimed that the Somalis had hijackedtheir vessel and used it as a pirate mother ship toattack a number of merchant vessels off the coast. Itis precisely this kind of naval response which willbring about a long-term reduction in piracy in thesewaters. It cannot be done without prompt reportsfrom masters and the key role played by the PRC.

In reporting attacks, it is also relevant to note thatmany purse-seiner fishing trawlers launch theirboats to lay their nets over a wide area, up to a mileaway from the trawler. These boats cannot altercourse easily to avoid a passing merchant vessel andsometimes may appear as if they are chasing themerchant vessel. However, what distinguishes agenuine fishing craft from a pirate craft are the netstrailing from the craft – and the lack of a largenumber of armed pirates on board!

The IMB advises merchant vessels not calling atSomali ports to sail at least 200 nautical miles awayfrom the coast. We further advise vessels to keep aclose lookout for suspicious craft in the vicinity andalter course to pass well clear of them, away fromthe mother vessel and preferably away from theSomali coast. As the pirate craft operate from themother vessel, the further away the target vessel,the less likely it is they will attack.

The experience of masters who have avoidedboarding is that the pirate craft will give up thechase after about 40 minutes if they are drawnaway from the mother vessel and further away fromthe Somali coast.

Vital role of Coalition navyCoalition naval units play a key role. Legally theycan intervene outside Somali territorial limits. In ourview, they should stop and search suspicious crafton the high seas, in an area where recent attackshave been reported by the PRC. Vessels carrying asuspiciously large quantity of arms on board shouldbe further investigated and crew questioned. Issuesremain as to what the naval vessel will do if theirinvestigations confirm those questioned as pirates.Neither the flag State nor the coastal State,Somalia, may wish to or be able to take over theinvestigation and prosecute.

Once a vessel has been hijacked a naval unit can, ifthey have the right boarding teams available,attempt to board the vessel. The objective is todiffuse the situation peacefully. This may not alwaysbe achievable. At the very least they can prevent thevessel from heading into the pirate’s ‘comfort zone’,

the 12 mile Somali territorial limit. It may persuadethe pirates to choose the safer option of abandoningthe hijacked vessel.

The presence of an active coalition naval unit in apiracy hotspot has had an immediate deterrenteffect on pirate activity. It sends a clear signal thatthese waters are not a pirate’s charter and illegalactivity will be investigated. The converse is alsotrue, in that the absence of naval units fromhotspots for a sustained period encourages pirateactivity. Recent history has shown that the longerthe absence of the naval units, the more audaciousthe attacks.

In a country torn by civil strife, the response mustfall to agencies outside the government. Theneighbouring countries lack the resources to patrolthe long Somali coastline. The IMO referred theissue of Somali piracy to the UN secretary general in December 2005 and it is hoped that this matterwill be raised at the UN Security Council.

Despite the challenges, in the unusualcircumstances of Somalia, the Coalition naval unitsare the only forces which can make a difference onthe water, in the short term. We should supportthem in their task.

For the purposes of this article ‘piracy’ and ‘pirates’refer to incidents which fall under the definition of piracy in article 101 of UNCLOS and ‘armed attack’under the IMO MSC/Circ.984 article 2.2 (The Code of Practice).

The Association is grateful to P Mukundan, Director, ICC International Maritime Bureau for providing this article. Tel: +60 3 2078 576, email: IMBKL@icc-ccs.org, website: www.icc-ccs.org

3P E O P L E

North of England has become aware of a potentialproblem with Indian crew contracts, where theperson named as next of kin is frequently not their dependent. This can result in unnecessarydifficulties for injured crew member’s families aswell as extra expense for Members.

Seafarers are generally required to nominate a nextof kin at the start of their contract. In India thisnominee is considered to be the individual who should be contacted in the event of seriousillness or injury rather than the legal beneficiary of their estate.

Members employing Indian seafarers are thusadvised to provide a separate ‘next-of-kindeclaration’, in which a seafarer nominates aspecific person as being their legal beneficiary. Thisdocument is considered to be legally binding andwill enable Members quickly to identify who shouldreceive the benefit of any compensation.

Avoiding costly disputesUnfortunately, without such a declaration it cansometimes be very difficult to identify the correct

next of kin and, where there is a dispute, this caninvolve a lengthy legal process. Such confusioncauses additional expense for Members but, moreimportantly, causes unnecessary anguish andfrustration on the part of a crew member’s family ata time when it is least appropriate.

Members should always seek advice from North of England when drafting new contracts ofemployment for their seafarers. This can be helpfulfor several reasons, most notably because the termsof such contracts need to be approved by theAssociation if they are to be covered under P&Ipolicies.

In addition, the Club’s experience in dealing withcrew contracts from a wide variety of jurisdictionsenables staff to provide advice and assistance andhelps to avoid any ambiguity, thus benefiting bothMembers and their crews.

A sample wording of a next-of-kin declaration can be obtained by contacting the Association’spersonal injury department.

Next-of-kin declarations

North of England is one of the sponsors of the PiracyReporting Centre operated by the InternationalMaritime Bureau in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The centre coordinates reports and issues alertsabout pirate-type activities and assists owners ofvessels that have been attacked. It also publishes aWeekly Piracy Report on the internet containingdetails of areas at risk, suspicious craft and attacks.

Members and ships are advised to maintain anti-piracy watches in areas at risk and report any attacksand suspicious movements of craft to the IMB PiracyReporting Centre.

Further information is available from the ICC IMB (Far Eastern Regional Office), PO Box 12559, 50782Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: +60 3 2078 5763, fax: +60 3 2078 5769, email: imbkl@icc-ccs.org, website: www.icc-ccs.org

There is also a 24-hour anti-piracyhelpline, tel: +60 3 2031 0014.

IMB Piracy Reporting Centre

PEOPLE4

Pilot ladders continue to failThere are still many tragic accidents every year inwhich pilots are injured or killed as a result of pilotladders being defective or improperly rigged. Thiscan result in the pilot either falling into the sea,being crushed by the pilot boat or falling onto itsdeck, sometimes from a great height.

Earlier this year the Maritime and Port Authority ofSingapore (MPA) highlighted an incident where apilot ladder rung broke in Singapore harbour,causing a pilot to lose his balance and fall into thesea. Fortunately he was rescued by the pilot boat,but the accident could easily have been prevented.

Investigations revealed that the wooden rung hadan inherent defect in the form of a hidden knotwhich, over a period of time, had weakened therung and eventually caused it to break under thepilot’s weight.

More recently there was a similar incident, a crewmember was working over the side to rig a pilot

ladder when an apparent defect caused the ladderto fail and the crew member to fall into the water.Despite being picked up within minutes, he did not survive.

Extensive guidance availableSignals 56 highlighted the risk faced by pilots whenboarding and disembarking vessels of all typesaround the world. This included valuable input fromthe International Maritime Pilot Association (IMPA) and was accompanied by North of England’sIf only... poster on pilot boarding arrangements.

Members are also referred to the IMPA posterRequired Boarding Arrangements for Pilot, a copy ofwhich is included on the Club’s If only… poster andcan also be found in the International Chamber ofShipping’s Bridge Procedures Guide.

In addition ships’ crews should be made aware of IMO Resolution A.889(21) - Pilot Transfer

Arrangements, which provides detailed guidanceon pilot ladders including position andconstruction, winch arrangements, testing andaccess to deck.

Members can obtain additional copies of the If Only… pilot boarding arrangements poster fromthe Association’s risk-management department.

It is widely accepted today that a well-nourishedperson is a healthy person. It is thus vital for thehealth and happiness of ship’s crews that individualcrew members look after their bodies, both at seaand ashore.

Proper nutrition, along with adequate rest andsleep, regular exercise and good hygiene all help tostrengthen the immune system and a strongimmune system in turn helps prevent diseases andimproves health overall.

When referring to proper nutrition, this means abalanced diet. There should be sufficient protein forthe formation and repair of body tissues, adequatesupply of minerals to reinforce body tissues andsufficient carbohydrates and the right amount offats for energy. There must also be vitamins to keepthe brain, nerves and other vital organs functioning.

Proper nutrition also includes the intake of safedrinking water, the recommended amount isnormally quoted as 2 litres or approximately eightglasses of water every day.

Eating too much. This results in becoming overweightas extra calories are stored in the body as fat.

Eating between meals. This has the effect ofreducing the appetite for regular meals and deprivesthe digestive system of the opportunity to rest.

Eating too much sugar. While sugar provides quickenergy, the calories do not contain any vitamins orminerals and are therefore unhealthy in the long run.

Eating too much processed food. Unfortunately the

natural nutrients in food are often lost or reduced inprocessed food so that the end product is not ashealthy as its fresh counter part.

Neglecting breakfast. As the first meal of the day,breakfast is very important. During the night energyhas been drawn from the body which needs to bereplaced with nutritious foods.

Excess cholesterol. Cholesterol has a proper functionto perform, but excess cholesterol in the blood can be

associated with a hardening of the arteries, one ofthe risk factors in the development of hypertension.This causes a gradual deterioration of the artery wallsand is a fundamental cause of heart problems andstrokes. Blood cholesterol tends to rise when the dietincludes excess amounts of saturated fats such as ineggs, meat and cheese. However, blood cholesteroltends to decline if the diet consists mostly of poly-unsaturated fats such as in vegetable fats like peanutoil, corn oil, soyabean oil and sunflower oil.

Diet – the key to healthy, happy ships

Eat a littleoils,

butter, sweets, table sugar, desserts,

honey, salt, soya sauce.

Eat somechicken, pork, beef, fish, crabs, shrimp, tofu, eggs, milk, yoghurt, nuts, cheese.

Eat morevegetables and fruit.

Eat mostrice, root crops, cassava, noodles, bread, sweet potato,

corn, oatmeal, potato, steamed bread, cereal.

Drink a lotwater, light juices, clear broth.

Common nutritional problems

The Association is grateful to Dr Fe A Bacungan for this advice. He is the Medical Director of the SM Lazo Medical Clinic in Manila, Philippines, an institution thatspecialises in checking the overall health of Filipino crewmembers.

L E G A L 5

Shellvoy 6and deadfreight

Since the introduction of the ISPS Code and othersecurity measures around the world a particularissue of contention between owners and charterershas been whether any time lost as a result ofsecurity inspections should count as off hire. TheEnglish Court of Appeal recently confirmed it may,meaning owners need to look more closely at theircharterparties.

In the case of Hyundai Merchant Marine v. FurnessWithy (Australia) Pty, the Doric Pride was fixed on atime-charter trip basis from New Orleans to SouthKorea. The ship had not traded to the USA beforeand was therefore designated a ‘high interest ship’by the Coast Guard and had to wait six days for aninspection.

The charterer relied on the following charterpartyclause to place the ship off hire for the time spentwaiting.

‘Should the vessel be captured, ... seized or detainedor arrested by any authority or by any legal process…the payment of hire shall be suspended until thetime of her release… unless such… detention is

occasioned by any personal act… omission ordefault of the charterers’.

The High Court originally held that the ship hadbeen ‘detained’ within the meaning of the clauseand was therefore off hire. As the detention wasbecause this was the ship’s first call at a US port, itwas not caused by something for which chartererwas responsible.

Delay was owner’s riskThe ship was going to the USA not as the result ofthe charterer’s discretion with regard to the tradingof the ship but as a result of something expresslyagreed by the parties in the charterparty. The risk ofdelay was therefore something that the owner itselfhad accepted.

On the terms of the particular clause the ship wasstill off hire notwithstanding that it would not havebeen able to enter port in any event, New Orleanshaving been closed because of hurricane Katrina.

The Court of Appeal has now upheld the judgementof the High Court and has confirmed that the shipwas indeed off hire.

The practical importance of the decision is thatowners, particularly when fixing ships that may callat ports in the USA need to think carefully about the likelihood of delays as a result of securityinspections, respectively if the ship has never calledat the USA or is otherwise likely to attract the closeattention of the Coast Guard.

Careful thought then needs to be given to thewording of any off hire provisions and other clausesthat may relate to security issues if the owner is toavoid the ship being placed off hire or otherwise toshare any time loss with the charterer. Particularattention should also be paid to ensuring that thecharterparty contains an appropriate clause, such asthe BIMCO ISPS/MTSA (Maritime TransportationSecurity Act) Clause for voyage charterparties ortime charterparties 2005.

North of England has become aware of a potentialproblem with dead freight claims for Membersfixing tankers on the new Shellvoy 6 form.

Clause 8 of the new charterparty may have theeffect of limiting the charterer’s liability for deadfreight up to the volumetric capacity of the ship,where less than the full agreed quantity of cargo isloaded. This may mean that if a cargo is loaded thatfills the ship’s volumetric capacity but is less thanthe agreed contractual quantity, an owner may haveno claim for dead freight – or at least it may bereduced.

Its is therefore important for Members to ensurethat, when fixing, a minimum quantity of cargo tobe loaded is specified and appears on thecharterparty.

The London Commercial Court has recently decidedan emailed notice of arbitration was properly servedeven though the charterer thought it was spam andignored it. However, emails still cannot be relied onas it was only the charterer’s appeal that gave proofof receipt

In the recent case of Bernuth Lines Limited v. HighSeas Shipping Limited (the Eastern Navigator), anemail to the charterer calling on it to agree to theappointment of a sole arbitrator under the smallclaims procedure of the London MaritimeArbitrators Association was sent to an email addressfound in a maritime directory and on the website ofthe charterer (which also gave a postal address andtelephone and fax numbers).

The claim submissions were also sent by email aswere all further communications with thearbitrator. The charterer did not respond until theaward finding against them was published. Itappealed to the Commercial Court on the basis of aserious irregularity, in that the arbitrationproceedings had not been properly brought to theirattention. In particular they had been sent to anemail address not previously used by the parties.

Mr Justice Clarke held that the emails had beenreceived by the charterer and that under section 76 (4) of the Arbitration Act 1996, ‘a notice or other document may be served by any effectivemeans’ and email was an effective means. Also, the small claims procedure actually states thatcommunications may be ‘by letter, telex, telefaxor email’.

Charterer forced to admit receiptA major factor in the decision was that, for theappeal, the charterer had to explain what hadhappened to all the emails sent to it. The chartererconfirmed that they had been received but ignoredas ‘spam’ by the booking department, as they didnot consider that any serious legal correspondencewould be sent to them. The judge decided there wasno good reason for the charterer to ignore theemails: this was an internal failing on their part so it

was effective service on an email address held outto the world on a website.

Usually when an arbitration notice is sent, the otherparty responds to it. The difficulty with mostmethods of communication is that it is possible toprove that they have been sent but harder to provethat they have been received in a complete form. Inthe Eastern Navigator, as the charterer participatedin the matter by appealing to the court, evidencewas available from them as to whether the emailshad been received or not.

The more difficult situation is where the other partysimply does not participate in the arbitration,leading eventually to an award based on theinformation provided only by the claimant. This canlead to awkward questions being asked by theappropriate court when it comes time to seek toenforce the award, as the other party can then raisethe defence that the arbitration proceedings werenever properly brought to their attention and this is why they did not participate.

Advice for serving noticeTo minimise the scope for problems when servingnotice, the Association would recommend thefollowing.

1. If there is any time bar, do not leave the start ofarbitration proceedings until the last few weeks.

2. Even though communications are often onlythrough a broker, try to obtain a direct fax numberor email address and postal address for the otherparty.

3. Serve any notices by fax, email and post, ifpossible and, in extreme cases, by hand delivery to the registered office of the other party.

4. If notices are served through a broker, getevidence that the broker has passed on themessages and that they have been acknowledged by the other party.

5. Bear the above in mind when serving any otherimportant messages under the charterparty, forexample, presenting demurrage documentationwithin 90-day time limit.

US security inspections – sharing the time cost

‘Spam’ was notice properly served

6 CARGO

Petcoke: it can be dirtier than you think

Petcoke is short for petroleum coke, which is a by-product of the oil refinery coking process thatproduces low-cost fuel, often with a high sulphurcontent. Petcoke may also be known as greendelayed coke, sponge coke, needle coke, delayedcoke or raw coke-fuel grade.

Petcoke takes the form of a black residue that canvary from a powder to small pieces. It is shipped as abulk or packaged cargo mainly from North America,Western Europe, China and Japan. It is used as a fuel in power stations, cement kilns and domesticheating or it can be involved in making anodes forchemical and metals processing.

The Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes,2004, (BC Code) contains no specific requirementfor hold cleaning after discharge but petcoke can bea very dirty cargo. Some types have very high oilcontent, leaving oily stains which are difficult toremove, whereas others are fairly dry, making thewashing of holds quite an easy process followingdischarge.

All cargo stains left after discharging petcokeshould be removed as soon as possible in order to

avoid accumulated cleaning problems. Stains canbe removed by using high-pressure spray systemsfor applying chemicals from the tank top.

The choice of chemicals and/or cleaning agentsshould be carefully considered. Personnel must wearappropriate protective clothing and equipment (seeChemical suits: not all the same in Signals 62).Petcoke residues and chemicals suspended in waterspray can be an irritant to eyes and skin.

Petcoke residuesAll grades of petcoke originate from crude oil.Grades such as green delayed petcoke can be highin oil content and pose the most difficult cleaningproblems. Calcined petcokes are easier to clean asthe oily residues are burnt off during the calciningprocess.

Wash water from calcined grades of petcoke willhave cargo residues but may have little or no traceof oil and low-hazard wash chemicals that emulsifyinto a harmless solution. Wash chemicals thatemulsify and can be discharged overboard are listedin Annex 12 of IMO MEPC.2/Circular 11 -Provisional categorization of liquid substances.

Wash water from cleaning after carriage of greendelayed petcoke will also have cargo residues but islikely to contain oil or hydrocarbon traces that mayleave an oily type sheen on the surface of water,which will almost certainly prevent dischargeoverboard. In addition, the wash chemicals used forcleaning may be of the more hazardous grades thatdo not emulsify and also cannot be dischargedoverboard.

Disposal into the sea of all cargo residues is not allowed within a special area as defined inMARPOL Annex V, and outside a special area thewash chemicals and/or oil residues may preventdischarge overboard. It may be difficult for suchwash water to be held on board due to its largequantity, especially if there are no suitable portreception facilities.

Members are advised to check with wash chemicalmanufacturers before planning hold-washingoperations.

Allocating responsibility for the time and cost ofsuch operations should also form part of the ‘checkbefore fixing’ process prior to entering intocharterparty agreements. BIMCO is working toproduce a standard clause for the disposal of holdwashings in recognition that disposing of such holdwashings may become a problem for ship operators.

High sulphur and corrosion riskAll grades of petcokes have a sulphur content butthe lower grades of uncalcined (sponge) petcokesare primarily used as low-cost high-sulphur fuels.Some of this sulphur may leach into the wash wateralthough expert advice suggests that petcokesulphur is not water-soluble.

If the sulphur content of the petcoke is high it maybe prudent to test the wash water for pH valuebefore discharge overboard.

Corrosion can occur where there is pre-existingdamage or where the petcoke damages the holdpaint system. An electrochemical corrosionmechanism is set up where the exposed steelbecomes anodic in the presence of moisture as theelectrolyte.

The large surface area of petcoke pieces increasesthe likelihood of a high moisture content which canpromote corrosion. Specialist advice to anticipate,minimise or correct this type of corrosion is stronglyrecommended.

The Association is grateful to Minton, Trehane &Davies Group, www.minton.co.uk, and Stromme,www.stromme.com, for their help in preparing thisarticle.

MARPOL Annex V requirementsThe cargo residues are category 4 garbageunder MARPOL Annex V.

Regulation 3(2) or 5(3) of Annex V may apply:When the garbage is mixed with other dischargeshaving different disposal or dischargerequirements the more stringent requirementsshall apply.

Residues from petcoke Cargo residues

Oil or hydrocarbon traces – may leave an oily typesheen on the surface

Wash chemicals – non-hazardous whichemulsify into harmless solution or morehazardous grades which do not emulsify

7CARGO

Loading South American vegetable oilsWe recently assisted a Member loading vegetableoils at Argentinean ports and the advice obtainedboth from Argentina and from China, the intendedcountry of discharge, is worth summarising for theuse of other Members.

At the load port, an empty and full ullage survey ofthe relevant tanks should be carried out by anindependent surveyor appointed by owners or theirP&I Club.

Masters should ensure that mates receipts aresigned only after completion of loading and afterullaging. Argentinean shippers often seek to putpressure on masters to sign mates receipts beforeall cargo is on board.

Though Argentinean customs require that bills oflading show the shore weights – that being thefigure on which customs duties will be paid -Argentinean law does permit the master toannotate the mates receipts and bills of lading

with the ship’s own figures of the quantity of cargo loaded where the master has reasonabledoubts over the shippers figures.

Argentinean shippers will often put pressure on themaster to accept a difference of 0.3% as beingacceptable and this is, apparently, accepted asbeing a customary allowance by the Argentineancustoms authorities. However, if there is a shortage,the authorities at the discharge ports may notaccept any trade allowance.

Shippers may sometimes offer a joint ullaging ofshore tanks as an alternative to the master’smeasurement of ships tanks but this is to beavoided. Equally, the inclusion in the charterpartyof any term requiring the ship to issue clean bills of lading stating only shore figures is also to be avoided.

In China, the advice was that some courts accept a trade allowance – and where they do it is more

usually 0.3% - but others do not. There is no generalpractice accepted in all courts.

Chinese law does allow a master to annotate a billof lading to show the ships figures and does give themaster protection against claimants where he hasdone so and the actual quantity of cargo dischargedin China is greater than or equal to the ships figuresannotated on the bill of lading.

Chinese law also protects the master’s right toannotate a bill of lading if he has reason to doubtthe shippers declared figure or if he did not have thereasonable means of checking it. The master may,however, have to state on the bill of lading thereasons for his doubt or the circumstances in whichhe was unable to check the shippers figure.

Members requiring further advice should contactPeter Scott at the Association.

Avoiding ‘salty air’claims for steel cargoesIt has recently come to light that cargo interests’surveyors in Houston, USA, one of the world’sbusiest steel receiving ports, have started usinghighly sensitive conductivity meters to test for salt-water contamination on steel cargoes.

There is concern this indicates a trend by receiversto pursue the question of surface contamination toan abnormal degree – possibly resulting in claimssimply for exposure to salty sea air.

Such meters are routinely used in the steel coatingsand processing industry. They measure theconductivity of water on the steel surface and anysurface contaminant that produces an increase inconductivity will result in a positive reading. Theresults therefore do not just indicate seawater butalso any salt or chemical which might affect surfaceconductivity.

Modern conductivity meters detect even minuteamounts of surface contaminants and it issuggested that a positive reading will be obtainedfor any material that has been exposed to a marineatmosphere, such as would be experienced at atypical port.

Steel pre-load surveysTo protect Members against claims on steel cargoes,the Association regularly arranges steel pre-loadsurveys on finished and semi-finished steelproducts. In cases where it is suspected the cargohas been in contact with salt water, such as fromsea spray, this should be confirmed by silver nitratetesting and the cargo condition recorded on theBills of lading.

However, in view of the use of conductivity metersand the likelihood of minor but neverthelesspositive reactions on cargoes exposed to a normalmarine atmosphere, load port surveyors may notwish to give any absolute assurance in a pre-loadsurvey report that there are no chlorides present.

West AfricantheftscontinueOne of North of England’s correspondents hasrecently advised that shore workers in West Africahave taken to stealing not only the rice cargo, butalso the empty bags that are usually shipped for re-bagging purposes at the discharge port.

This provides a good opportunity of remindingeverybody that theft of cargo, and anything elsethat is not secured on board a ship, is unfortunatelyendemic is West Africa. We have previously drawnattention to the matter and suggest the followingloss-prevention steps.

• Monitor the identities of those coming on boardclosely. This should be part of the ship’s securityplan as required by the ISPS Code.

• Protest frequently in writing if stevedores areseen to be stealing cargo or using hooks indischarging the cargo, or using other methods ofdischarge that damages the cargo still on board.

• Members should always appoint a surveyor ortally man to monitor discharge.

8 SHIPS

Keeping a safe navigational watch‘Poor watchkeeping’ is a constantly recurring factorin published marine accident investigation reports.Such reports define poor watchkeeping as a failureof officers of the watch (OOW) to carry out one ormore of their primary duties in maintaining a safenavigational watch. It follows that many accidentsmight be avoided if all officers in charge of anavigational watch at sea considered how well theyactually understand their duties in maintaining asafe navigational watch.

The duties of the OOW in maintaining a safenavigational watch can be divided into three mainfunctions

• watchkeeping

• navigation

• Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS).

In this issue of Signals we conclude the review ofthese functions described in issues 61 and 62 ofSignals with the GMDSS duties of the OOW inmaintaining a safe navigational watch.

GMDSS safe watchkeeping 1The third main function of the OOW is to takeresponsibility for ensuring that the ship complieswith the radio watchkeeping requirements ofSOLAS and any other flag State or coastal Stateregulations.

SOLAS requires a continuous watch on whicheverequipment is required – VHF, MF, HF or satellite

communications equipment – in relation to thedistance from land.

The continuous watch extends to broadcasts ofmaritime safety information for the area in whichthe ship is navigating. Within a NAVTEX area theNAVTEX receiver fulfils this requirement. The OOWshould regularly check for new maritime safetyinformation including meteorological warnings and forecasts.

GMDSS and bridge team management 2In certain circumstances at least one qualifiedGMDSS operator is required to perform onlyradiocommunication duties – this cannot be theOOW, who must continue with their primarywatchkeeping functions.

For example, on passenger ships, SOLAS requiresone person to take sole responsibility for radiocommunication duties during distress incidents.

Also, recommended practice when in or near areasof potential piracy is that a suitably qualified,dedicated crew member performs radiocommunication duties. This allows the OOW andthe master to concentrate on navigational dutiesand maintaining the extra vigilance that is requiredwhen operating in high-risk areas.

GMDSS watchkeeping checks andrecords 3The OOW should have knowledge of the limitations,sources of error and methods of correction for allelectronic navigational systems. Under SOLASchapter IV this can include checking the ship’sposition input into the distress alert radiocommunication equipment even when that input isprovided automatically.

SOLAS Chapter VI also requires records of allincidents connected with the radio communicationservice which appear to be of importance to safetyof life at sea. IMO guidelines in Resolution 916(22)state that records need not be duplicated – if asuitable record is made in a special-purpose log, itneed not be repeated in the ship’s log book.

Good time management will allow the OOW toconcentrate on keeping a safe navigational watch.

Members and seafarers wanting further informationshould refer to the Bridge Procedures Guidepublished by the International Chamber of Shipping,STCW 95 Chapter VIII and SOLAS Chapter IV.

Planning a safe passageThe Tokyo Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)on Port State Control has recently highlighted thatan increasing number of Port State detentionsfeature passage plans that do not comply with SOLAS.

The two most common reasons are failure to takeaccount of relevant ship routeing systems, andinadequate passage planning from berth-to-berth.

Ship routeing systemsIf a passage plan fails to take account of a shiprouteing system and the ship is observed by a vesseltraffic management scheme to be navigatingcontrary to COLREGS Rule 10 in a traffic separationscheme, then the ship may be subjected to a portState control inspection at the next port of call.

The inspector may look at the passage plan to see if itmeets the requirements of Rule 10 and, if there is adeficiency, it could increase the risk of detention. Themaster may even be fined for contravening Rule 10.

Masters must plan voyages prior to departure. If theship is to transit a ship routeing system with whichthe master is unfamiliar, the planning should allowsufficient time to seek advice. Once masters areclear on how safely to navigate a ship routeingsystem in compliance with COLREGS Rule 10, theycan brief the navigator who is preparing the plan ontheir behalf. Masters should only delegate the

passage planning when they have decided how theship is to be navigated.

Failure to manage the passage planning properlycould lead to an unsafe situation where on passagethe bridge team become aware that the courses laiddown by the navigator are not suitable.

Berth-to-berth planningSOLAS chapter V, regulation 34, requires thatmasters shall, prior to proceeding to sea, plan thepassage taking into account the IMO guidelines inResolution A.893(21). These state in paragraph 3.1that the plan should cover the entire voyage fromberth to berth.

Passage plans must include the navigation from theberth to the pilot on departure and from the pilot tothe berth on arrival next port. This section of thepassage plan should be completed in conjunctionwith the pilot / master information exchange andshould be part of the accepted procedure for thebridge team to monitor the advice of the pilot.

North of England and other P&I clubs have noted anincrease in collision, grounding and property-damage claims where pilot error is considered to bea contributory factor. This increase might be linkedto the fact that passage plans are not completed toand from the berth, leaving the master and bridgeteam ill-equipped to question the pilot in relation to

navigation courses, traffic encountered, tides,weather, handling characteristics, manoeuvringspeeds and use of tugs.

IMO recommends (IMO Resolution A.960(23) annex2 - Recommendation on operational procedures formaritime pilots other than deep-sea pilots) that themaster and the pilot should exchange informationregarding navigational procedures, local conditionsand rules and the ship’s characteristics. Thisexchange should be a continuous process duringthe pilotage and should at least include thefollowing information:

• completed standard pilot card

• general discussion of passage plan

• weather, depth of water, tidal currents and marinetraffic expected

• ship-handling characteristics and equipmentstatus

• berthing plan, tugs, mooring boats and mooringarrangements.

The important point for masters to remember is thatany passage plan is a basic indication of preferredintention. Both the pilot and the master should beprepared to safely depart from the plan whencircumstances dictate. The master is not expectedto plan the passage to the extent that the servicesof a pilot can be dispensed with.

Port State control inspections that result indetentions or banning orders may lead toconsiderable financial losses for shipowners.

For a start there are costs and expenses involved in having to rectify any deficiencies in order to getthe detention lifted. These costs can be increased bythe urgency of the situation and have the potentialto increase dramatically if the ship is delayedbeyond the time of cargo operations. It is possiblethat a deficiency cannot be rectified while cargowork is in progress and the ship may have to moveto a lay-by berth.

The performance of contracts such ascharterparties, carriage of goods and sale andpurchase agreements can also be affected.Performance may be delayed or even prevented. As a result, freedom to contract in future may be compromised and ability to trade the ship may be limited or restricted. There could also beimplications for the ship’s insurances and even the basis upon which it is financed.

The risk of a detention resulting from a port Statecontrol inspection can be reduced by putting inplace some straightforward control measures. These should be combined into an ISM safetymanagement system procedure so that ship’s crewcan be trained to understand the situation and howthe control measures are to be applied andmanaged.

Port State control inspections are a fact of life andare here to stay. Rather than criticise the process, itmakes far better operational sense to takepragmatic steps to control the process. The betterthe control of the process, the better the controlover the outcome.

The following observations and suggestions are forconsideration by ship and shore management tohelp them get better control of the port Statecontrol inspection process.

Are you targeted?• On voyage, was your ship contacted by vessel

traffic management while transiting a trafficseparation scheme and requested to clarify thepassage plan or instructed to adopt a differentroute? If the answer is ‘yes’ then your ship may besubjected to a port State control inspection at thenext port of call.

• Has a pilot or a port authority official recentlyquestioned or commented on some aspectrelating to the safe navigation of the ship? If theanswer is ‘yes’ then that pilot or port authorityofficial may have reported a deficiency.

• Be aware of concentrated inspection campaignsbeing conducted by the various port State controlregions (MOUs) – they may increase the likelihoodof inspections.

• If your ship has been detained and hassuccessfully completed the corrective actionrequired and been released to sail, it willnevertheless probably be inspected at future portsof call under the jurisdiction of another MOU.

All the major MOUs publish their targeting criteriaon their websites. Members can use these toestablish the likelihood of being targeted.

Meet and greetAs with any process or visit involving a third party tothe ship, one of the essential factors in controllingthe situation is to be prepared. Be prepared with aprocedure that the crew have been trained in to dealwith the arrival of a Port State Control Officer. Keepthe procedure simple but effective.

• Anticipate that an inspection will take place andplan work accordingly so that senior officers areavailable to take responsibility for Port StateControl Officers without keeping them waiting.

• Have the certificates and documents alreadyassembled in the order that the MOU lists themfor inspection.

• Have a pre-prepared written port State controlbriefing with the information that you wish toexchange with the officer.

Information exchangeRather than let Port State Control Officers conducttheir initial inspection and discover the overallcondition of the ship including the engine room,accommodation and hygiene conditions forthemselves, present them with an up-to-datebriefing of the ship’s condition. Tell them:

• all deficiencies that you are aware of including thecorrective action you have taken – if the buoyantsignal on the port bridge wing lifebuoy is out ofdate tell the surveyor, tell him why and tell himwhen the new one will arrive

• what maintenance work is taking place

• what accidents or near misses have been recordedrecently

• where access is restricted due to safety or securityreasons

• if there are any sanitary problems or food storageproblems and what action has already been takento solve them.

Plan maintenance workIf you have decided the likelihood of your ship beingtargeted is very high, then consider whatmaintenance work might be in progress during theport stay where you anticipate an inspection.

• Is the maintenance work going to create a dirtyenvironment and housekeeping problem?

• If the answer is ‘yes’ then consider whether thework can be done at sea where the housekeepingissues can be controlled without the addedpressure of an inspection.

• If the maintenance work is essential then tell thePort State Control Officer in advance of the workand the housekeeping measures. This will createthe right impression.

Do not let Port State Control Officers wander into awork area and have to ask for an explanation. Thiswill create the wrong impression.

Be assertive!Remember to be polite and cooperative but also tobe assertive. Being assertive requires knowing yourfacts or your rights. Learn about the port Statecontrol process by reading marine notices or bookssuch as the Association’s Port State Control lossprevention guide.

Be aware of IMO conventions under which the shipcan be detained including amendments adoptedand due to enter into force. A ship can be detained

under a number of IMO codes and conventions,including the SOLAS, MARPOL, Load Line and STCWconventions as well as ILO conventions.

At a recent inspection a Port State Control Officerrequested a survival craft drill with the lifeboatsbeing manned and launched. The ship stated thatfor safety reasons they had already adopted a 1July2006 amendment to SOLAS allowing lifeboatswhich have to be manoeuvred at abandon-shipdrills by an assigned crew to be launched withoutthe crew on board. The officer accepted this prudentapproach and withdrew the request to launch thelifeboats.

In the event of a detention it is important that themaster fully understands the nature of thedeficiencies recorded and the corrective actionrequired to avoid any possibility of extending thepotential delay to the ship. Ask Port State ControlOfficers to explain fully the nature of thedeficiencies and what corrective action they requireof the ship.

Many of the major port State control MOUs publishguidelines on how ship operators can appealagainst detentions.

Detailed information and guidance is contained inthe Association’s loss prevention guide - Port StateControl (2nd edition) – which Members can obtainfrom the risk management department.

9SHIPS

Port State control MOU websitesBaltic www.bsmou.org

Caribbean www.medmou.org/caribbean.html

Paris www.parismou.org

Latin American www.acuerdolatino.int.ar

Mediterranean www.medmou.org

Tokyo www.tokyo-mou.org

USCG www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/pscweb

Indian Ocean www.iomou.org

To assist Members and seafarers with theirpreparations for successful port State controlinspections, the Association has prepared aguidance card to complement a ship operator’smanagement guidelines. Copies of the card for allMembers and entered ships are enclosed with thiscopy of Signals.

Gaining control of portState inspections

10 SHIPS

The master / pilot relationship and passage planning

The master / pilot relationship is one of those great unwritten topics which almost defiescomprehension in our modern world, whereeverything has to be documented to the nth degreeand where no latitude is permissible in any shape or form.

How this relationship develops and how the jointpassage plans of the master and pilot evolve is crucialto the safe and timely arrival of a ship. Remarkably,very little is set down beyond a few paragraphs inIMO recommendations and a few thousand years ofhistory. If there is one word that summarises themaster / pilot relationship it is ‘trust’.

In ancient times, Jason took a pilot to travel throughthe Turkish Straits with his Argonauts and fewwould doubt his wisdom today, watching theterrifying array of vessels all on seeminglyconflicting courses as they career past Istanbul.

The trust that masters and pilots have to show eachother is unique. They are both plunged within minutesinto a symbiotic relationship: each must trust that theother can deliver what they say. The master has tobelieve that the pilot will bring excellent localknowledge and ship-handling skills and the pilot willwant to believe that the master has a well-foundvessel with all equipment and machinery working welland an alert and responsive crew.

Master and pilot will meet only a few minutesbefore embarking on the most hazardous part of aship’s voyage. This would seem on the face of it arecipe for disaster, yet every year millions of acts ofpilotage are carried out around the world withoutincident. It is interesting to ruminate on whether itwould be possible to set up such a system fromscratch in today’s increasingly litigious society. Thefact is that the system endures because it works.

Initial impressionsEven before pilots board a ship they are alreadymaking judgements about what they will find. Mostpilots will say that they can tell with 90% accuracywhat they will find on the bridge simply by the stateof the ladder, paintwork and reception at thegangway, even before the ascent to the bridge.

Likewise, a master will be considering the nature ofthe pilot who has been sent to him based on thepromptness of the communications from the pilotstation and the efficacy of the pilot launch.

When the two meet on the bridge for the first time,everything has to gel very quickly and there will bemany factors which impinge on how successful thisprocess is. The more obvious factors, such as thepresentation of each party, will be subtly affected byissues such as age, gender and nationality.

Passage planningVery quickly both master and pilot will have tomerge their respective passage plans into acomposite plan on which action will have to betaken almost immediately.

Pilot boarding grounds can be congested placeswhere ships still have way on when approaching the

fairway. Masters for their part have IMOrequirements for berth passage planning. This is asomewhat difficult concept to adhere to rigidly,because masters may well not know which berththey are going to or, in some cases, even which port.In today’s world, it is not unusual for shipsundergoing international voyages to be unclear asto even which country they will finally discharge at.

The pilot is bound by other IMO requirements toprovide a draft passage plan which inevitablycontains more intricate detail that a master couldnot be expected to be aware of. Indeed, this is one ofthe pilot’s prime functions – to provide detailedlocal data.

Master / pilot exchangeThe master / pilot exchange is therefore absolutelycritical to the successful outcome of this part of thevoyage and never is the axiom ‘fail to plan, plan tofail’ more true.

The master / pilot exchange will of course be furthercomplicated by issues of language: if the masterand pilot do not share a native language then theywill use English. Obviously if pilots speak to VTS,tugs, linemen on passage they will have tosummarise what they have said in local tongue tothe master because, throughout the passage, it isessential that the bridge team are there both tosupport and to monitor the pilot.

As part of the passage-planning process, there hasto be consideration of a number of events thatmight take place and how they should be tackled.This would cover traffic that might be encountered,the characteristics and use of tugs and, ultimately, ifthe worse happens and there is machinery failure,how to deal with this.

Much of what takes place during the master / pilotexchange is pre-processed in written form ahead ofthe face-to-face meeting. Ships provide cards withdata to a standard format and many pilots will bringon board a chartlet showing the general passagearrangements to be undertaken.

The successful completion of the initial exchangeshould lead to a harmonious passage, but muchdepends on the personal investment that bothmaster and pilot put into this. The subsequentconduct of the vessel by the pilot and thesituational awareness displayed by the crew all flowfrom this very delicate seed that is planted right atthe beginning of the process. Repeatedly accidentreports refer to the failure to get the initialexchange carried out satisfactorily as the root causeof subsequent problems during the passage.

Pilotage is a very valuable layer of insurance whichthe shipping industry has long enjoyed. But, likemost insurance, unless it is well-written andplanned ahead, it has little value if problems arise.

The Association is very grateful to Nick Cutmore,Secretary General of the International MaritimePilots’ Association, for writing this article. Website: www.internationalpilots.org

Industry News is a proactive loss-prevention serviceprovided for Members. News items are researchedand selected on the basis that they will provideadvice on which to base loss-prevention decisions

Members can access Industry News from the directlink on the left-hand side of the Association’swebsite at www.nepia.com

VISIT: WWW.NEPIA.COM

The Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk cargo (BCCode) includes practical guidance on procedures tobe followed and appropriate precautions to be takenin loading, trimming, carriage and discharge of bulkcargoes. The 2004 edition, which has recently beenpublished, includes all the amendments that wereadopted by the Maritime Safety Committee at its79th session by resolution MSC.193(79).

A number of major changes have been made. Theappendices in the 2001 edition of the BC Codegiving details of different groups of cargoes havebeen replaced by a new appendix 1 containingindividual schedules for each cargo. Cargoes arenow identified by groups A, B or C in each schedule,as follows:

Group A – may liquefy if shipped at a moisturecontent in excess of their transportable moisturelimit.

Group B – possess a chemical hazard which couldgive rise to dangerous situation on a ship.

Group C – neither liable to liquefy nor to possesschemical hazards.

The new BC Code also includes appendices withrecommendations for entering enclosed spacesaboard ships, and lists of solid bulk cargoes forwhich a fixed-gas fire-fighting system may beexempted or ineffective.

Members can obtain copies of the 2004 BC Codefrom their normal publications provider or from theIMO. Website: www.imo.org

NEW BC CODE PUBLISHED

11NEWS

The International Labour Organisation (ILO), theUnited Nations agency charged with responsibility formaintaining proper working conditions for seafarers,has announced the adoption of a comprehensive newlabour standard for the maritime industry.

It is intended that the new Maritime LabourConvention, which will consolidate and update manyexisting ILO instruments, will serve as the fourthpillar of regulation for the international shippingindustry alongside the IMO SOLAS, STCW andMARPOL conventions. The convention will come intoforce after it has been ratified by 30 ILO memberstates with a total share of at least 33% of worldgross tonnage, which could be achieved by 2009.

The new convention is designed to encouragecompliance by operators and owners of ships andstrengthen enforcement. It includes

• minimum requirements for seafarers to work on ships

• conditions of employment

• standards for accommodation, recreationalfacilities, food and catering

• standards for health protection, medical care,welfare and social security protection.

Ships over 500 GT engaged in international voyagesor voyages between foreign ports will be required tocarry a maritime labour certificate and a declarationof maritime labour compliance.

Declarations will set out ship operators’ plans forensuring that applicable national laws, regulationsor other measures required to implement theconvention are complied with on an ongoing basis.Masters will then be responsible for carrying outship operators’ stated plans and keeping properrecords to provide evidence of compliance with theconvention.

ILO MARITIME LABOUR CONVENTION 2006

A group of international shipping industryorganisations – including BIMCO, Intercargo, theInternational Chamber of Shipping (ICS), Intertankoand the Oil Companies International Marine Forum– has developed some basic guidance for shipoperators and crews about the use of oily-waterseparators called Oily Water Separators – Ensuringcompliance with MARPOL.

An electronic version of the publication can bedownloaded from the ICS website: www.marisec.org.ows

GUIDANCE ON USE OFOILY-WATER SEPARATORS

RISK MANAGEMENT

4

South Tyneside College and Lumley Castle Hotel

A RESIDENTIAL COURSEIN P& I INSURANCE ANDLOSS PREVENTION9 - 16 June 2006

3

2

1

Staff from North of England’s risk managementdepartment have already made several visits thisyear, including to Members’ offices in Germany,Greece, Iran, Mexico and the UK, and will continueto participate in in-office seminars and workshopsfor Members in many parts of the world.

Key topic areas for 2006 include avoiding collisionsand other incidents plus other subjects of interest toship operators and their seagoing staff.

Loss preventionseminars

The Association’s annual residential course in P&Iinsurance and loss prevention will take place on9–16 June 2006 at Lumley Castle near Newcastle,England.

A brochure was distributed to all Members withSignals 62 and the course is already proving verypopular. Members wishing to enrol staff are advisedto register as soon as possible to avoiddisappointment.

Further details of the course, as well as a brochureand enrolment form, can be downloaded from therisk management pages of the Association’s website.

P&I residentialcourse 2006

Brian McGregor, (left, in picture 4 above) who hasrecently joined the Association as a claims executive,was the overall winner of the 2004/2005 NewcastleUniversity award for the best MSc graduate in theSchool of Marine Science and Technology.

The award is sponsored by North of England, which also provides tutoring and support for theMSc course.

North of England is joining forces with the MerchantMarine Academy of Hydra, one of the oldest navalacademies in Greece, to provide training seminars onP&I insurance and scope of cover, including briefingson current loss-prevention issues.

There has been a naval college on island of Hydra tothe south of Athens since 1749, which in the pastoperated as an educational establishment of theHellenic Navy. Today the academy is operated by theHellenic Ministry of the Merchant Marine and isunder the supervision of the Hellenic Coast Guard,producing merchant marine officers for the Greekmerchant marine and coastguard as well asexecutives for Greek shipping companies.

Greek navalacademy seminars

Pictures: 1 Veracruz, Mexico2 Tehran, Iran3 Residential course brochure4 Newcastle University award winners 2004/2005

Newcastle University award

‘Signals’ is published by North of England P&I Association Limited The Quayside Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 3DU UK Tel:+44 (0)1912325221Fax: +44 (0)191 261 0540 Email: risk.management@nepia.com Website: www.nepia.com

12 RISK MANAGEMENT

1. What type of meter has been used recently for testing surface contamination of steel?

2. What is a better known name for “green delayed coke”?

3. Where is the Piracy Reporting Centre based?

4. What is the North of England’s latest news service called?

5. What organisation has recently adopted a new maritime labour convention?

6. Which meal of the day is very important?

7. What is the acronym for the international pilot’s association?

8. What charity cycle ride will take place in May 2006?

9. A new edition of which cargo code has recently been published?

10. What deficiency in SOLAS requirements has recently been highlighted?

Find the answers to the questions in the wordsearch. We have found the first one for you. GOOD LUCK!

C A K I O D R A B E G C P B

O T U B P U N S O T H O A R

N P A S S A G E P L A N S E

D I L O F E H R J I M D I M

U N A L I L O W A X A R T E

C S L U B U M L B I L M S N

T O U R P O U R L A M E R E

I B M P I E E K R O O P F W

V A P N R A T L I S S O A S

I Q U G K U A C W E S T K P

T A R F O R M E O E C I E L

Y T A M E I N V A K I R R I

A S C E C B C C O D E M B A

T O R P L E K S E G D S E T

Questions

• Signals Search is open to all readers of Signals.

• Send a photocopy of your completed search, along with your name and, if appropriate, name of ship, position on board, company and address to Denise Huddleston at the Association.

• All correct entries received by the closing date will be entered in a prize draw.

• Closing date Friday 7th June 2006.

The first correct entry drawn will receive a prizealong with a limited edition statuette of our quiz

master “Bosun Bo”. The next 5 correct entries drawnwill each receive a statuette.

Details of the winner and runners-up will appear in the next edition of Signals.

Your copy of SignalsCopies of this Signals should contain the following enclosure:

• Port State Control guidance card (Members and entered ships only)

• In this publication all references to the masculine gender are for convenience only and are also intended as a reference to the female gender. Unless the contrary is indicated, all articles are written with reference to English Law. However it should be noted that the content of thispublication does not constitute legal advice and should not be construed as such. Members with appropriate cover should contact the Association’sFD&D dept. for legal advice on particular matters. • The purpose of the Association’s loss prevention facility is to provide a source of information which is additional to that available to the maritimeindustry from regulatory, advisory, and consultative organisations. Whilst care is taken to ensure the accuracy of any information made available(whether orally or in writing and whether in the nature of guidance, advice, or direction) no warranty of accuracy is given and users of thatinformation are expected to satisfy themselves that the information is relevant and suitable for the purposes to which it is applied. In nocircumstances whatsoever shall the Association be liable to any person whatsoever for any loss or damage whensoever or howsoever arising out ofor in connection with the supply (including negligent supply) or use of information (as described above).

Signals Search 7

E News

Exercising support for seafarers

Signals Search No.6Winner: Mr Lee Bon Chew, Glory Ship Management -SingaporeRunners-up: Captain Zawar Hussain Khan, United Arab Shipping - UAE •Captain Sarat RT Pereira, Pacific InternationalLines - Singapore •Captain Richard Gavin, Arklow Shipping - Ireland •Captain Jose Cecilio D Wagas, Vroon BV - The Netherlands•Wilfredo P Tuguigui, Nimmrich & Prahm - Germany

Answers to Signals Search 61 Chemical 2 Medical3 Permit to work 4 Berth to berth5 Right angle

6 MARPOL7 BIMCO8 Ballast water9 BC Code

The Association is now distributing an electronicnews publication – E News - to North of EnglandMembers by email. E News provides a monthlysummary of recent news from the Association. Each issue will contain a digest of industry newsitems, Club Circulars and press releases from theprevious month.

E News has an electronic table of contents to allowreaders to select topics that interest them and the individual items will often contain links thatprovide access to more detailed information fromoriginal sources.

E news provides an additional information service toSignals, which will also be sent in electronic formaton a quarterly basis.

Members’ shore or sea staff who wish to be added tothe E News circulation list should send their contactdetails, including their name, position, company andemail address to the Association using the dedicatedE News email address: add.enews@nepia.com

North of England staff are taking part in twogruelling maritime sporting events in the nextcouple of months designed to raise money forseafarers’ charities.

A team from the Association including members ofthe risk management department will be jumping on their bikes to help raise £250,000 for The Missionto Seafarers in the inaugural Tour pour la MerLondon to France maritime industry bike race on 12May 2006. The two-day 200 km event starts at theCutty Sark in Greenwich and ends in Le Touquet via a Dover-Calais crossing courtesy of P&O.

On 17 June another North of England team willcompete in the Cargill/BISS Three Peaks Challenge,which is also specifically for companies linked to theshipping industry. They will aim to climb the threehighest mountains in Scotland, England and Wales –Ben Nevis, Helvellyn and Snowdon – within 24 hoursto raise money for the British & International Sailors’ Society.

If you would like to sponsor the cycling team please go towww.justgiving.com/north, or to sponsor the mountaineeringteam please emailstephen.purvis@nepia.com