Speaking Notes: Hans Van Rooij

SPEAKING NOTES: HANS VAN ROOIJ

THE POSEIDON CHALLENGE: SINGAPORE: MARCH 31

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In accepting this invitation, on behalf of the ISU, to join the Poseidon

Challenge, I thought long and hard about what this initiative might mean to the salvor. The ISU represents salvors responsible for over 90 per cent of salvage activity worldwide. In the past decade, our members have recovered nearly 12 million tonnes of oils, chemicals and other pollutants from over 2,000 ship casualties. How does the concept of CONTINUOUS

IMPROVEMENT sit within this context?

We cannot do more salvage! After all, industry and regulators are doing their best to eradicate our workload! This leads to a rather obvious conclusion. In the context of salvage, CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT has real meaning only in terms of response efficiency. And, of course, there is

ALWAYS room for improvement in this respect.

There is, however, another complication. The salvor may be a specialist, but he doesn’t work alone. In order to maximise the chances of a

of 6 successful salvage, he needs the active cooperation of the owners, shore authorities and many other parties.

So, CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT in salvage is all about more efficiency through a more effective and fully integrated response.

With this in mind, I have identified several initiatives which can be taken forward – some with our industry partners – to enhance response efficiency. Some of these issues, if left unattended, could place the marine environment at greater risk.

Firstly, the ISU must increase industry awareness of the importance of

Lloyd's Form. This is the ideal contract for the provision of emergency assistance. We have already taken action here, by introducing a Lloyd’s

Form Levy. ISU members will contribute to this fund, on the basis of each

LOF Salvage Award received. The Levy was introduced on January 1 and, during the course of this year, decisions will be taken on the first use of this fund to promote wider understanding of the nature and function of Lloyd’s

Form – a contract which is often misunderstood.

We also want to prepare and submit a paper to the IMO, calling for the replacement of the existing Places of Refuge Guidelines with a new and

of 6 much more comprehensive set of guidelines addressing all aspects of marine casualty management. Beyond the important issue of refuge, these guidelines would also deal with command and control issues and give greater emphasis to salvage considerations in the casualty risk assessment process. The new guidelines proposed by the ISU will focus on the timely identification of the Best Environmental Option and set out a clear framework for fully integrated emergency response. We hope

INTERTANKO will partner us in the project to draft the guidelines. This has already been discussed and we would like to move forward on this front in

During this year we will also open a dialogue with industry and governments on proposals for the introduction of Environmental Awards.

The tanker industry has greatly improved its safety and environmental record in recent decades. There are now only a handful of major incidents each year. If the number of these increasingly rare incidents is to be further reduced, the only way forward is to reinforce salvage cover. It is the salvor who provides the vital last line of defence when things go wrong. We regard the introduction of Environmental Awards as an important means of reinforcing the pollution defence services provided by salvors. We have already identified ways of funding and introducing Environmental Awards.

This initiative will benefit all concerned, including Coastal States with

of 6 vulnerable coastlines. Our priority this year is to explore these options with shipowners, insurers and, of course, governmental organisations.

We also want to develop our relationships with coastal communities. We will begin with North West Europe. We will present proposals for an EU scheme for compensating coastal communities suffering damage when providing refuge for casualties. It is not enough to compensate these communities! Governments should go further and REWARD them, as they are required to accept a heavy burden of greater risk, in the national interest. We believe this initiative should attract tanker industry support, as we all have an interest in enhancing the chances of refuge being granted in tanker casualty situations. One way of doing this is to ensure that generous financial arrangements are in place, to provide relief for front line coastal communities.

We also plan to take a much closer look at special issues relating to the salvage of double hulled tankers. Today, laden VLCCs rarely feature in the salvor’s workload, but this situation may well change in future years. The

ISU has concerns about double hulled vessels. They introduce new risks and, in some circumstances, double hulled vessels could be more difficult to salve. Indeed, there are situations in which a double hull could be the primary factor in the total loss of ship and cargo. In a fire situation, perhaps

of 6 following a collision, oil can flow into the double side and spread the fire.

There are also the explosion risks. The breakdown of tank coatings may initiate corrosion and pitting in cargo tank bottoms. This process may then be accelerated by the presence of sulphuric acid and biological matter in the bottom water layer. Furthermore, high temperatures within a double hull can heat cargo and this can be aggravated by elastic deformation of the inner bottom plate and the crystalline modification of steel in the way of welding butts and seams. In cases involving ISU members, all void spaces in a 10-year-old double hulled tanker were found to be in an explosive condition. These issues warrant a very extensive study and, once again, it is our hope that we can work in cooperation with INTERTANKO’s Technical

Committee. Hopefully, a joint project can be established this year.

Finally, we will continue to cooperate closely with INTERTANKO and other members of an industry coalition seeking approval in the London High

Court, for their action on the EU’s Ship Source Pollution Directive – which member states are required to implement by March 1 2007, to be referred to the European Court for a judicial review. This is a good example of how the ISU is now forced to devote much of its resources to the struggle to maintain the salvor’s freedom to use his best endeavours to recover property and protect the environment. In our view, the new Directive and its clear threat of criminal liability will not make the salvor perform better. But it

of 6 might well convince him not to get involved in the first place! It is important that all sectors of industry maintain a united front against this Directive and other misguided regulatory measures. It is also important NOT to become pessimistic and world weary. If we give up this struggle, as an industry, we can only descend further into a state-sponsored blame culture.

It may be difficult to offer precise measurement of progress on these fronts but I look forward, in 2007, to be able to report some advances in these critical areas.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you.

---ooo---