Intertanko safety, Technical & Environmental Committee istec#21 Meeting

Mr. von Platen gave a brief presentation of the method adopted by his company, in co-operation with Pres-Vac to aim for retention or minimisation of the VOC releases during transportation. The new concept is to build cargo tanks with higher strengths on the deck plates and support structural elements that would safely allow vapour pressure up to 2000 mm H₂O. The new p/v valves can be set up for both an automatic opening up to 1700 to 2000 mm H₂0 and close back to pressure between 1000 and 1500 mm H₂O. This system is supposed to always avoid any VOC releases except in very special environmental conditions.

5. 
   Tank Level and Pressure Monitoring (TLPM)
   

ISTEC took note of the information provided.

6. 
   Bunker Sub-Committee Report from meeting of 28 February 2002
   

ISTEC took note of the report.

7. 
   Protection of Bunker Tanks
   

ISTEC agreed to continue to support the SNAME suggested proposal for a probabilistic methodology of calculating the oil fuel outflow in case of contact accidents which might result in damage to the bunker tanks. In principle, due to the pending regulations on use of lower sulphur content fuels in special emission control areas and in port areas, ISTEC recognised that new buildings should have more fuel tanks than in the current ships. The bunker tanks in the newbuilding should be of a smaller size and if possible, located not near the bottom or the side of the ship structure. The SNAME model would not require double hulls but rather give flexibility to the ability of the designers and ship operators to find a good solution which is suitable for the type and size of each ship to improve environmental protection but also keep the safe operation of the ship.

8. 
   CRUMECON and CRUCLEAN
   

Pending feedback from oil majors who have been approached on this issue, ISTEC decided that Tim Gunner resume the work on the CRUMECON Project.

1. 
   Coatings on cargo tanks
   

ISTEC has been informed that the INTERTANKO/OCIMF joint submission to IACS has been received by the IACS Working Group on coating and thus would supposedly address it.

1. 
   The Secretariat to contact IACS WG in due time and report back.
   
2. 
   Seek to learn whether the suggestion of issuing a Certificate of Fitness with list of acceptable cargoes for oil tankers is an option.
   
3. 
   The Secretariat should also circulate information on how to purchase the TSCF Guide.
   

2. 
   Generic versus ship specific corrosion allowances for existing ships
   

ISTEC discussed the need for improvement and harmonisation of assessment procedures of ship in service to the extent that a ship should not be accepted by a Class Society while another Society’s assessment would call for renewals.

This was the subject of Dr. Tor Svensen’s presentation which covered:

the historical reasons why tankers have been built with lighter scantlings,

the necessity of using a buckling criteria to assess the structural local strength on ships in service

concrete examples on how by adopting different profiles of the structural elements, the structure is more likely to have a longer fatigue life.

The point made is that only few Class Societies are currently using the buckling criteria in their structural assessment of ships in service. The question might be raised on whether ships not checked against buckling criteria might not necessarily be fully safe. Moreover, by using buckling criteria, the minimum acceptable thickness is higher and thus the CAP assessment is more stringent. Societies using buckling criterion would thus give a less favourable CAP assessment to ship in service and this is a detrimental commercial aspect for those applying more stringent regulations.

There is a buckling analysis model developed and made available to the LAN societies which, if implemented, would help identify ships in the risk zone and establish adequate minimum thickness criteria, thereby contributing to avoid future structural collapses.

It was earlier announced that LAN was going to introduce such harmonised structural criteria for existing ships but, at the moment they work on unifying their rules for newbuildings. These are intended to impose designs of more robust ships. These would then be MAXIMUM standards as accepted by Class. The day after delivery however, the ship is "in service" and thereafter her structural strength needs to be assessed against IACS MINIMUM standards. There are no such uniform MINIMUM standards at the moment.

A question was raised that if adequate and precise minimum thickness criteria were to be clearly defined and implemented, that this would also drive the improvement of newbuilding standards as the expected residual life of each ship and the consequent need for investment in steel replacements would become much more transparent.

There are two options of applying the forthcoming LAN “as built” criteria when assessing the fatigue life of a new building:

(1) Standard life expectancy (25 or 30 years) with fatigue analysis made for trading in North Sea or North Atlantic; or

(2) - flexibility for owners to choose their ship's life expectancy to be limited to 5, 10, 15, etc. years.

For the latter, it should be a condition that this should apply ONLY IF: (a) the fatigue analysis is also done for the same trading conditions (North Sea or North Atlantic) and (b) Class has a notation that would define what has to be done after the initial in-built life expectancy expires. However, the latter option was not considered adequate since there is always a chance that ships might continue to trade even if their initial planned life have expired.

The Committee will follow the developments of the LAN activity.

Bjorn Sødahl also presented a paper (Annex 2 to these draft minutes) with a collation of the Structural criteria for ships in service of 6 different IACS member Societies. The data presented reflects inconsistencies in Class assessment. It was suggested to approach these Societies with the request to provide their rules for minimum thickness and corrosion margins. The Committee agreed that this matter should be added to the OCIMF&INTERTANKO Aide Memoire on Class.

3. 
   Newbuilding Awareness Guide
   

The Secretariat to circulate for approval the final edited draft when available.

4. 
   Newbuildings Policy and involvement with Class: Extended Guarantee / Net-Scantlings/Corrosion Margins
   

ISTEC noted the information on the Seminar in Shanghai on 8/9 November with participation of Class Societies, shipbuilders and shipowners’ associations. The INTERTANKO delegation will raise the policy issues under this heading during the Seminar.

5. 
   Means of Access
   

ISTEC agreed that the final draft of this new IMO regulation is adequate. Few adds are needed with respect to:

• 
  solutions through design (use of current structural elements, i.e. stringers in the wing ballast tanks, as fixed staging for inspections)
  
• 
  ensure good communication through the fixed means of access from deck to the bottom of the wing tank.
  

ISTEC agreed INTERTANKO should submit a paper to MSC 76 with these suggestions.

6. 
   Discussions with ABS on ships with substantial corrosion when applying HBL or CAS
   

ISTEC noted the report.

7. 
   CASTOR and the new ABS rules
   

ISTEC expressed concerns with the new regulation passed on by ABS on annual inspection in ballast tanks for ships over 15 years even if the coating is in a FAIR condition. Also, the ABS new rule does not give any credit for anodes ships might have on these ballast tanks.

1. 
   Sulphur Emissions and Emissions Trading
   

Following a brief introduction to the current activity of INTERTANKO with the SEAaT and SSA emission trading concepts, ISTEC discussed the advantages and disadvantages of emission trading in general and the position which INTERTANKO could take.

• 
  Continue participation in the SEAaT and SSA projects to remain watchful of the developments whilst ensuring that INTERTANKO is not seen as promoting the concept.
  
• 
  ISTEC to remain briefed on the developments of the projects and the issue in general.
  
• 
  Investigate whether other shipowners associations would agree with a joint official request for delivery to ships of bunkers with a low sulphur content, i.e. 3%.
  

• 
  Ship Recycling – Assessment of costs for ‘green’ recycling
  

The Committee took note of the current liaison between the Environmental Committee and Greenpeace and encouraged this work if it meant that individual owners were not targeted as per recent protest incidents in Europe.

• 
  Ballast Water Management – Update on MARTOB Project
  

No results from MARTOB’s initial trials had been published at the time of the meeting.

• 
  Anti-fouling Systems – Update on Guidelines for Survey & Certification and report on latest regulatory developments
  

An update on the Guidelines for Survey & Certification was given to the Committee. On discussion of the change to tin-free systems a problem was highlighted in respect to yards still not accepting that tin-free systems were to become mandatory. This meant that owners would have to incur a cost for the tin-free system over and above the original yard specification.

• 
  DNA Tagging Project – Report
  

The Committee took note of the development on this project the results of which are due at the end of September.