1 / 25

Koch Shipping Inc.

Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Tanker Event Houston 26 March 2007. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience:. The following guidelines apply to Koch Shipping Inc.’s vetting process for tankers: To be chartered by KSI, or To carry Koch owned cargo, or

overton
Download Presentation

Koch Shipping Inc.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Koch Shipping Inc. Intertanko Vetting Presentation The Tanker Event Houston 26 March 2007

  2. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: • The following guidelines apply to Koch Shipping Inc.’s vetting process for tankers: • To be chartered by KSI, or • To carry Koch owned cargo, or • To call at a Koch company owned or term-leased terminal. • Each OCIMF member has different criteria for reviewing crew experience.

  3. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: • The first KSI vetting check for Crew Officer Experience is the total “Time in Rank” (TIR), for all officers on board – Deck + Engine. • Radio Operators and Electricians are not counted. • Koch Shipping sets the “bar” at 25 years – total or aggregate for all officers – with “reasonable” distribution. • Range of TIR experience for vessels reviewed has ranged from 5 to 143 years total TIR.

  4. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Why: • 1963: the Secretary of the Treasury's Committee on Tanker Hazards reported that "safety problems relate more to personnel than to materiel." • 1994: the U.S. Coast Guard recognized that roughly 80% of all marine-related accidents are rooted in the human element---with the majority of these caused by organizational factors.

  5. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Why? An example: A cadet and a First Assistant engineer are sitting at the control station of a steam tanker underway in confined waters. There is a sudden noise. The cadet says: “What was …..” The Engineer says: “damn!” and disappears down the ladder to the feed-pump flat.

  6. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: Or – to put it another way, we fail ships with low TIR because we think that the officers have not seen enough trouble!

  7. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: • Exceptions: • The officers with low TIR also show high numbers in years of “Time on Same Type Tankers”, and • There are few procedural errors or omissions noted as observations elsewhere in the SIRE report, and • There are no training or certification observations in the SIRE report.

  8. How Koch Shipping views tanker officer experience: • The numbers: • In the past 12 months, we have reviewed 1162 ocean-going tankers, and found • 101 of them, or 9% had, at some time, had a SIRE report showing possible time in rank issues, and • 23 of these, or 2% failed to obtain approval, often due to more than TIR issues alone. • Overall 118 ships, or 10% were not accepted.

  9. Koch Shipping and Time In Rank - some examples:

  10. Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

  11. Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

  12. Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

  13. Koch Shipping and TIR – some examples:

  14. TIR issues – drilling down: In the last previous example, the owner appealed. We asked for and received the vessel’s: • Chief Officer’s records for work and rest hours for the last 4 port calls, and • The vessel’s Statement of Facts for the same 4 port calls, which revealed:

  15. TIR issues – drilling down: • On the face of the records: 2 incidents of breach of STCW work/rest hours requirements, and • In comparison of the work hours to SOF reports: two apparent cases of under-reporting of work hours, and • No non-conformities raised as a result of work hours being exceeded.

  16. TIR issues – drilling down: After considerable discussion and advice to the owners to: “think about it and get back to us.” the owner set an “expectation” of 2 STCW non-conformities per year for his fleet for work/rest violations, compared to: an extrapolated number based on our “sample” of 4 x 12 x 30 = 1440 STCW violations/year for the company fleet.

  17. TIR issues – drilling down: Dealing with 1000+ N-C’s/year would overwhelm most management systems – so what is reasonable? • Accurately recording work/rest hours. • Setting criteria for submission of N-Cs. • Using a management of change process to address the causes of the N-Cs. One owner was noted as doing this and their vessel received vetting approval.

  18. TIR issues – drilling down: • DENIAL is not an acceptable response to the issue of STCW compliance and crew fatigue. • Demonstrating the presence of management awareness, and an active management system engaged in correcting causes of STCW non-compliance is critical – and may be sufficient to gain vetting approval.

  19. Crew number vs. the vessel trade: • Tankers engaged in STS ops need an adequate crew for mooring ops. (not 14) • Tankers engaged in short-sea trading cannot be safely operated with 2 officers. • Tankers assigned to short-voyage lightering operations need an extra deck officer and an extra engineer. • See: http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources/Bridge_watchkeeping_safety_study.pdf

  20. Crew number vs. the vessel trade:(click on the image below to start the video.)

  21. What is STCW compliance worth? • Under OPA-90, a vessel causing pollution of US waters must be in compliance with “all applicable federal safety, construction and operating laws and regulations” in order to limit its liability. • The Athos 1 grounded in Delaware Bay in November 2004. • The cost of the cleanup (to end 2006) was $164,000,000.

  22. What is STCW compliance worth? The US Coast Guard exhaustively investigated the incident and their report

  23. What is STCW compliance worth? indicated that the Master, Pilots and Navigating Officer: “had not shown any signs of fatigue and met STCW and OPA90 rest requirements.” ***************** The owners were therefore able to limit their liability to $45,000,000 under OPA90.

  24. What is STCW compliance worth? So the calculation of the value of STCW compliance in the case of the Athos 1 grounding and spill is: Cost to owners if not in compliance: $164,000,000 Cost to owners if in compliance: $ 45,000,000 Value of STCW compliance: $119,000,000 “Owners” = vessel owner & vessel P&I Club

  25. At the end of the day, it is not the ship alone that successfully gets our cargo safely from A to B, but also the crew, who are the custodians of the ship and its cargo. Each voyage is an adventure varying only in the intensity of its challenges. Each challenge is faced by a dedicated, intelligent, experienced officer who knows what to do next …. or not. The human factor remains the most important. Thank you!

More Related