OCIMF Ports & Terminals Committee
APRIL 1, 2009
INTERTANKO
ISSUE
OVERVIEW
JOSEPH ANGELO
DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR
INTERTANKO
EPA NPDES VGP
RECEPTION FACILITIES
IN THE US
TERMINAL VETTING
DATABASE
INTERTANKO
MISSION
Provide Leadership
to the Tanker Industry
in serving the World with the
SAFE, ENVIRONMENTALLY
SOUND AND EFFICIENT
seaborne transportation of oil,
gas and chemical products
INTERTANKO
PRIMARY GOAL
Lead the
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
of the Tanker Industry’s Performance
in striving to achieve
the Goals of:
• ZERO FATALITIES
• ZERO POLLUTION
• ZERO DETENTIONS
INTERTANKO
• 270+ Members in
45 Countries
• 3,000+ Tankers
• 230+ Million DWT
• MORE THAN 80% OF THE
INDEPENDENT TANKER FLEET
• 350+ Associate Members
INTERTANKO
No. members/million dwt
No. tankers
275
3,500
3,000
220
2,500
165
2,000
No. members
m dwt
1,500
110
1,000
55
500
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
0
1997
0
No. ships
EPA NPDES VGP
• Sept 2006 – District Court orders EPA to develop
NPDES regulations for all ship discharges
vacating EPA exemption on Sept 30, 2008
• July 2008 - Appellate Court supports District Court
decision
• August 2008 – District Court grants EPA
requested extension until Dec 19
• Dec 18, 2008 – Final Vessel General Permit (VGP)
is published in Federal Register
• Dec 18, 2008 – Industry coalition convinces EPA
to request further extension of court vacatur
• Dec 19, 2008 – District Court grants EPA
requested extension until Feb 6, 2009
EPA NPDES VGP
APPLICABILITY
• Applies to all commercial vessels 79
feet in length or greater
• Covers US inland waters and within 3
nautical mile territorial sea
• Applies to 26 discharges incidental to
ship operations
EPA NPDES VGP
VGP COVERAGE
• Automatic coverage for all vessels calling
on the US until Sept 19, 2009
• Shipowner/operator (300 grt or more) must
submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) for ship to be
covered by the VGP by Sept 19, 2009
• EPA requires NOI to be submitted for each
ship starting June 19, 2009
• EPA developing e-NOI for electronic
submissions
EPA NPDES VGP
KEY PROVISIONS OF NPDES PROGRAM
• Discharge limits (Section 2)
- Best Management Practices for 21 of the
discharges
- Specific requirements for ballast water,
grey water, bilge water, antifouling and
underwater husbandry
• Additional requirements for tankers for inert
gas scrubber, deck seals, scuppers,
inspections and crew training (Section 5.5)
EPA NPDES VGP
KEY PROVISIONS OF NPDES PROGRAM
• Corrective Action, self-policing (Section 3)
• Inspections and monitoring (Section 4.1)
- Routine visual inspections (weekly)
- Comprehensive annual inspections
- Drydock inspections
- Quarterly sampling of discharge streams
• Recording keeping (Section 4.2 and 4.3)
• Reporting (Section 4.4)
EPA NPDES VGP
KEY PROVISIONS OF NPDES PROGRAM
• Section 6 contains specific requirements for
individual states and Indian tribes
• Industry coalition successful in convincing:
- California, Illinois, and New Jersey to
delete certain standards; and
- Oregon to be covered by NPDES VGP
• New York has used VGP as backdoor vehicle
to impose ballast water requirements which
is being challenged in court
EPA NPDES VGP
FAILURE TO COMPLY
CAN RESULT IN:
• Civil penalties
• Criminal penalties
• Citizen lawsuits
EPA NPDES VGP
INTERTANKO has issued Guidance and
Compliance Plan for VGP requirements
• Summary of requirements and compliance
dates
• Clarification of NOI requirements
• Company compliance map
• Overview of inspection, sampling,
recordkeeping and training requirements
• Model forms to record inspections, sampling
and corrective action
EPA NPDES VGP
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
• Environmental groups sue EPA stating the
VGP discharge requirements (ballast water)
are not stringent enough
• Lake Carriers Association (LCA) sues EPA
requesting the court to vacate the VGP
• LCA chose not to discuss with industry
coalition members
• Cases have been consolidated in the DC
Circuit court
RECEPTION FACILITIES
USCG Regulations issued in
early 1980s
• Are comprehensive
• Provide flexibility
• Clearly stipulate criteria
• Contain enforcement provisions
• Encourage feedback
RECEPTION FACILITIES
The problem is:
• USCG has no direct authority to require
reception facilities
• USCG only has authority to certify the
adequacy of reception facilities
• USCG “will rely on market forces to keep
reception facility usage reasonable”
• Reception facility Certificate of Adequacy
remains valid until suspended or revoked
RECEPTION FACILITIES
• In the late 1980’s and 1990’s USCG receives
sporadic reports of “inadequate reception
facilities” through reports submitted to IMO
• Main complaints
- Too expensive
- Undue delay
• For about 20 years, USCG gives reports of
inadequate reception facilities low priority
RECEPTION FACILITIES
• In the 2000’s two major issues significantly
altered the playing field:
- US Department of Justice criminal
prosecutions of ship pollution incidents
- Maritime security regulations (MTSA & ISPS Code)
• INTERTANKO and other began a more
focused campaign to bring the problems with
the availability of reception facilities in US
ports to the attention of the US Coast Guard
RECEPTION FACILITIES
Main problems included:
• Certified reception facilities unwilling to
receive wastes (discharges prohibited)
• Severe restrictions on when, where or
how the facilities would receive the
waste (undue delay)
• Inadequate capacity
• Excessive costs
• Technical difficulties
RECEPTION FACILITIES
• USCG responds directing field offices to:
- ensure compliance with COA during
facility exams
- reissue COAs with 5 year period of
validity after exam
- examine declarations of inspection
- examine waste stream logs (required
under RCRA)
• Certified reception facility information
put on internet: http://cgmix.uscg.mil/marpol
RECEPTION FACILITIES
• INTERTANKO/USCG develop standard
format for reporting inadequate reception
facilities
• USCG strongly recommends that an
inadequate reception facility should be
reported immediately to the local COTP
(33 CFR 158.167) to conduct an
investigation
• If not possible, or preferred, use
INTERTANKO format for submittal to
USCG Headquarters
RECEPTION FACILITIES
Recommended process –
• Check USCG web site to determine if
facility has CG issued COA
• Contact facility to discuss discharge of
wastes
• If problem arises, contact COTP
• If preferred, submit completed form to
INTERTANKO
• Form is reviewed and, if appropriate,
submitted to USCG Headquarters
• Form is reviewed at USCG Headquarters
and, if appropriate, forwarded to field
office for investigation
RECEPTION FACILITIES
Results thus far –
• 12 cases of reported inadequate
reception facilities
• 8 cases provided sufficient information
for USCG to conduct follow-up
investigation
• 2 investigations resulted in USCG taking
administrative action in the form of a
letter of warning issued to the facility
RECEPTION FACILITIES
• USCG regulations are comprehensive
• USCG has limited authority
• USCG enforcement was lax, but that
has changed
• Many tanker operators are reluctant
to report on charterer terminals
• INTERTANKO format provides a
vehicle to report
• Reporting can make a difference
RECEPTION FACILITIES
Recent Developments:
• Concern has been raised over state (CA)
requirements for handling of “hazardous
materials”
• USCG has tasked the Chemical
Transportation Advisory Committee to
develop “improvements to the criteria for
adequacy of port reception facilities”
• USCG holds public hearing to receive
comments from public/industry
TERMINAL VETTING
What??
• A process by which ship operators can
provide subjective assessment of terminal
conditions
• Input is fed into a database to enable
members to share experiences of terminal
conditions
• Not an approved or non-approved stamp
on individual terminals
TERMINAL VETTING
Why??
• Enhance safety at the terminals
• Improve member effectiveness in
influencing terminals to ‘fix’ problems
• Maintain/improve industry safety
record
TERMINAL VETTING
• Access to the system is controlled by
INTERTANKO and is strictly limited to
INTERTANKO members
• The Terminal Vetting Database is hosted by
www.Q88.com in partnership with
INTERTANKO
• NOT a commercial enterprise, provided at no
charge to INTERTANKO members
• Access is usually set up in one business day
TERMINAL VETTING
THE FORM IS:
- SIMPLE
- ONE PAGE
- USER FRIENDLY
The source of information is kept
confidential and although the vessel
name, voyage number and Master
are included as information
categories in the report form, this
information is for the individual
company’s and INTERTANKO’s use
only and will not be accessible on
the web site
TERMINAL VETTING
RATINGS
1 - Poor
Worse than average in all areas,
needs a lot of improvement
2 - Below Average
Worse than average in some areas,
could use some improvements
3 - Average
Fully adequate
4 - Above Average
Better than average in some regards
5 - Excellent
Of a very high quality in all regards
TERMINAL VETTING
How is it used??
• Level 1: Tanker operators can review terminals
prior to vessel’s call
• Level 2: Tanker operators are encouraged to
discuss “poor reports” directly with the Terminal
• Level 3: The INTERTANKO Vetting Committee
will assist in cases where the terminal does not
respond or responds poorly to the owner’s
requests and will be tasked to follow-up with
any terminals not responding to Owner’s
observations.
TERMINAL VETTING
• To date we have received over 7000 reports
from more than 100 companies
• Induced at least three terminals to make
extensive improvements
• Started constructive dialogue with many others
• Reached agreement to work in partnership
with BP
• Received dozens of enquiries from terminals
around the world requesting feedback on their
terminals in order for them to review and
improve (if necessary!)
TERMINAL VETTING
Terminal Satisfaction Sheet
• As part of ongoing work within the Vetting
Committee, INTERTANKO has now made
available a "Terminal Satisfaction Sheet"
• A simple one page feedback form
• The concept is to enable the ship and the
company to acquire useful feedback from the
terminal, regarding the ships performance, prior
to the ships departure, primarily pertaining to
the safety aspects of the vessel with a focus on
continual improvement.
TERMINAL VETTING
Use of the Terminal Satisfaction Sheet
• Ship requests terminal to complete the form
– Master to jetty foreman or other terminal representative
– Master submits to the company.
• To stimulate input and support (for use of the form) from the
vessel
– we encourage owners/managers to supply feedback to the vessel
on the points raised
• While we anticipate that the majority of the terminal
satisfaction sheets received will be positive what's
important will be the small amount which are not and its
these that will be effective in the seeking the goal of
continual improvement.
THANK
YOU!!
WWW.INTERTANKO.COM