HELLENIC FORUMHELLENIC FORUMMARCH 6, 2007MARCH 6, 2007

OVERVIEW OF OVERVIEW OF US ISSUESUS ISSUES

JOSEPH ANGELOJOSEPH ANGELODIRECTOR, REGULATORY AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, REGULATORY AFFAIRS

AND THE AMERICASAND THE AMERICAS

LEGAL LEGAL

ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL

SECURITYSECURITY

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

LEGALLEGAL

• MASSACHUSETTS LAWSUITMASSACHUSETTS LAWSUIT

• RHODE ISLAND LAW FOR LNG RHODE ISLAND LAW FOR LNG TANKERSTANKERS

• BALLAST WATER LAWSUITBALLAST WATER LAWSUIT

• CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCE BOARD AIR EMISSION REGSBOARD AIR EMISSION REGS

MASS LAWSUITMASS LAWSUIT

• JULY 2006 - FEDERAL COURT RULES JULY 2006 - FEDERAL COURT RULES PROVISIONS OF MASS LAW INVALIDPROVISIONS OF MASS LAW INVALID

• DECISION UPHOLDS COAST GUARD DECISION UPHOLDS COAST GUARD AUTHORITY OVER VESSEL AUTHORITY OVER VESSEL OPERATIONS IN US WATERSOPERATIONS IN US WATERS

• REINFORCES UNANIMOUS US REINFORCES UNANIMOUS US SUPREME COURT DECISION IN US vs SUPREME COURT DECISION IN US vs LOCKE WHEN INTERTANKO TOOK LOCKE WHEN INTERTANKO TOOK STATE OF WASHINGTON TO COURTSTATE OF WASHINGTON TO COURT

MASS LAWSUITMASS LAWSUIT

• SEPT 2006 - MASS FILES NOTICE TO SEPT 2006 - MASS FILES NOTICE TO APPEAL FEDERAL COURT DECISIONAPPEAL FEDERAL COURT DECISION

• DECEMBER 2006 - MASS FILES APPEALDECEMBER 2006 - MASS FILES APPEAL

• FEBRUARY 2007 - FEDERAL GOVTFEBRUARY 2007 - FEDERAL GOVTAND INDUSTRY COALITION SUBMIT AND INDUSTRY COALITION SUBMIT RESPONSE TO MASS APPEALRESPONSE TO MASS APPEAL

RHODE ISLAND LAWRHODE ISLAND LAW

• RI LAW PROHIBITS LNG TANKERS FROM RI LAW PROHIBITS LNG TANKERS FROM TRANSITING NARRAGANSETT BAY UNLESS TRANSITING NARRAGANSETT BAY UNLESS OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS ARE METOPERATIONAL CONDITIONS ARE MET

• USCG INDICATES THAT THIS LAW IS USCG INDICATES THAT THIS LAW IS PREEMPTED BY THEIR REGULATIONSPREEMPTED BY THEIR REGULATIONS

• CURRENTLY NO LNG TANKERS TRANSIT CURRENTLY NO LNG TANKERS TRANSIT NARRAGANSETT BAYNARRAGANSETT BAY

• PLANS BEING CONSIDERED TO BUILD LNG PLANS BEING CONSIDERED TO BUILD LNG FACILITY AT FALLS RIVER, MASSACHUSETTSFACILITY AT FALLS RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS

• USCG MONITORING DEVELOPMENTS TO USCG MONITORING DEVELOPMENTS TO DETERMINE IF COURT ACTION IS NEEDEDDETERMINE IF COURT ACTION IS NEEDED

BALLAST WATER LAWSUITBALLAST WATER LAWSUIT

• SEPT 2006 FEDERAL COURT ORDERS SEPT 2006 FEDERAL COURT ORDERS EPA TO DEVELOP REGS FOR ALL SHIP EPA TO DEVELOP REGS FOR ALL SHIP DISCHARGES, INCLUDING BALLAST DISCHARGES, INCLUDING BALLAST WATER, UNDER NPDES PERMIT SYSTEM WATER, UNDER NPDES PERMIT SYSTEM NO LATER THAN SEPT 2008NO LATER THAN SEPT 2008

• JUDGE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT USCG JUDGE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT USCG HAS AUTHORITY UNDER CERTAIN HAS AUTHORITY UNDER CERTAIN LAWS, BUT BELIEVES CONGRESS ALSO LAWS, BUT BELIEVES CONGRESS ALSO GAVE AUTHORITY TO EPA UNDER THE GAVE AUTHORITY TO EPA UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACTCLEAN WATER ACT

BALLAST WATER LAWSUITBALLAST WATER LAWSUIT

• EPA DISAGREES WITH COURT DECISION - EPA DISAGREES WITH COURT DECISION - SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON EPA SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON EPA

• NOVEMBER 2006 – FEDERAL GOVT AND NOVEMBER 2006 – FEDERAL GOVT AND INDUSTRY COALITION FILE NOTICESINDUSTRY COALITION FILE NOTICESOF INTENT TO APPEAL COURT ORDEROF INTENT TO APPEAL COURT ORDER

• NOVEMBER 2006 – INDUSTRY COALITION NOVEMBER 2006 – INDUSTRY COALITION SENDS LETTER TO DOJ URGING THEM TO SENDS LETTER TO DOJ URGING THEM TO SUBMIT APPEALSUBMIT APPEAL

• MARCH 2007 – FEDERAL GOVT AND MARCH 2007 – FEDERAL GOVT AND INDUSTRY COALITION FILE APPEALSINDUSTRY COALITION FILE APPEALS

CARB AIR EMISSION REGSCARB AIR EMISSION REGS

• JAN 1, 2007 - REGS FOR AUX. ENGINES JAN 1, 2007 - REGS FOR AUX. ENGINES AND DIESEL ELECTRIC MAIN ENGINES AND DIESEL ELECTRIC MAIN ENGINES IN EFFECT WITHIN 24 MILES OF CALIFIN EFFECT WITHIN 24 MILES OF CALIF

• PMSA HAS GONE TO FEDERAL COURT PMSA HAS GONE TO FEDERAL COURT SEEKING INJUNCTIVE RELIEFSEEKING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

• LAWSUIT ADDRESSES LIMITED ISSUES LAWSUIT ADDRESSES LIMITED ISSUES - 24 MILE JURISDICTION- 24 MILE JURISDICTION- FAILURE TO REQUEST EPA APPROVAL- FAILURE TO REQUEST EPA APPROVAL

CARB AIR EMISSION REGSCARB AIR EMISSION REGS

• CARB AIR EMISSION REGS ISSUED CARB AIR EMISSION REGS ISSUED UNDER AUTHORITY OF CLEAN AIR ACTUNDER AUTHORITY OF CLEAN AIR ACT

• CLEAN AIR ACT SPECIFICALLY GIVES CLEAN AIR ACT SPECIFICALLY GIVES CALIFORNIA AUTHORITY TO ISSUE CALIFORNIA AUTHORITY TO ISSUE MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTSMORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS

• CARB AIR EMISSION REGS ARE CARB AIR EMISSION REGS ARE PERFORMANCE BASED, NOT PERFORMANCE BASED, NOT PRESCRIPTIVE REQUIREMENTSPRESCRIPTIVE REQUIREMENTS

CARB AIR EMISSION REGSCARB AIR EMISSION REGS

• SHIPOWNER IS GIVEN THE OPTION OF SHIPOWNER IS GIVEN THE OPTION OF HOW TO COMPLYHOW TO COMPLY- MDO WITH SULPHUR CONTENT LESS- MDO WITH SULPHUR CONTENT LESS THAN 0.5% OR MGO THAN 0.5% OR MGO- INSTALL EQUIPMENT (??)- INSTALL EQUIPMENT (??)

• ALTERNATIVE CONTROL EMISSION ALTERNATIVE CONTROL EMISSION PLAN APPROVED BY CARB (FOR PLAN APPROVED BY CARB (FOR EXAMPLE - SHORE SIDE POWER)EXAMPLE - SHORE SIDE POWER)

• PAYMENT OF NON-COMPLIANCE FEEPAYMENT OF NON-COMPLIANCE FEE

LEGALLEGAL

• INTERTANKO IS INTERTANKO IS NOTNOT SEEKING TO TAKE SEEKING TO TAKE A STATE TO FEDERAL COURTA STATE TO FEDERAL COURT

• WHEN A STATE TAKES PREEMPTIVE WHEN A STATE TAKES PREEMPTIVE ACTION, INTERTANKO ENCOURAGES ACTION, INTERTANKO ENCOURAGES THE FEDERAL GOVT TO TAKE THE THE FEDERAL GOVT TO TAKE THE STATE TO FEDERAL COURTSTATE TO FEDERAL COURT

• WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVT TAKES A WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVT TAKES A STATE TO COURT, THEY ENCOURAGE STATE TO COURT, THEY ENCOURAGE INDUSTRY TO SUPPORT THEIR ACTIONINDUSTRY TO SUPPORT THEIR ACTION

ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL

• AIR EMISSIONSAIR EMISSIONS

• BALLAST WATERBALLAST WATER

• RECEPTION FACILITIESRECEPTION FACILITIES

• ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMESENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES

• RIGHT WHALESRIGHT WHALES

AIR EMISSIONSAIR EMISSIONS

• APRIL 2006 US SENATE GIVES ITS APRIL 2006 US SENATE GIVES ITS ADVICE AND CONSENT FOR US TO ADVICE AND CONSENT FOR US TO RATIFY ANNEX VI OF MARPOLRATIFY ANNEX VI OF MARPOL

• US DOS DECIDES US WILL NOT SUBMIT US DOS DECIDES US WILL NOT SUBMIT INSTRUMENT TO IMO UNTIL NATIONAL INSTRUMENT TO IMO UNTIL NATIONAL LEGISLATION IS PASSEDLEGISLATION IS PASSED

• LEGISLATION IN FINAL STAGES IN US LEGISLATION IN FINAL STAGES IN US CONGRESS (COULD EXTEND CONGRESS (COULD EXTEND ENFORCEMENT TO EEZ)ENFORCEMENT TO EEZ)

AIR EMISSIONSAIR EMISSIONS

• FEB 2003 EPA ISSUES REGULATIONS FEB 2003 EPA ISSUES REGULATIONS FOR ENGINES INSTALLED ON US SHIPS FOR ENGINES INSTALLED ON US SHIPS THAT MIRROR ANNEX VI STANDARDSTHAT MIRROR ANNEX VI STANDARDS

• PREAMBLE STATES - EPA COMMITTING PREAMBLE STATES - EPA COMMITTING TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION FOR MARINE TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION FOR MARINE DIESEL ENGINES BY APRIL 2007 ON US DIESEL ENGINES BY APRIL 2007 ON US AND FOREIGN FLAG SHIPSAND FOREIGN FLAG SHIPS

• EPA INDICATES THEY WILL GIVE IMO EPA INDICATES THEY WILL GIVE IMO DISCUSSIONS ON REVISION OF ANNEX DISCUSSIONS ON REVISION OF ANNEX VI TIME TO MATURE BEFORE ACTINGVI TIME TO MATURE BEFORE ACTING

BALLAST WATERBALLAST WATER

• IMO BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT IMO BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT TREATY ADOPTED IN 2004TREATY ADOPTED IN 2004

• IN 2005 US SENATE COMMITTEE IN 2005 US SENATE COMMITTEE PASSED BWM BILL THAT CONTAINS PASSED BWM BILL THAT CONTAINS MANY OF THE IMO TREATY PROVISIONS, MANY OF THE IMO TREATY PROVISIONS, BUT INCLUDES BWM STANDARD THAT BUT INCLUDES BWM STANDARD THAT IS 100 TIMES GREATER THAN IMOIS 100 TIMES GREATER THAN IMO

• USCG DEVELOPING BWM STANDARD USCG DEVELOPING BWM STANDARD THAT WILL MOST LIKELY EXCEED IMO THAT WILL MOST LIKELY EXCEED IMO TREATY STANDARDTREATY STANDARD

BALLAST WATERBALLAST WATER

• INDUSTRY PRIORITIES IN US BWM INDUSTRY PRIORITIES IN US BWM LEGISLATION:LEGISLATION:

- - ESTABLISH SINGLE LAW THATESTABLISH SINGLE LAW THAT GOVERNS BALLAST WATER GOVERNS BALLAST WATER DISCHARGES IN US WATERS DISCHARGES IN US WATERS

- ESTABLISH US COAST GUARD AS - ESTABLISH US COAST GUARD AS LEAD FEDERAL AGENCY LEAD FEDERAL AGENCY

- - PREEMPT STATE REGULATIONSPREEMPT STATE REGULATIONS

- MIRROR IMO TREATY REQUIREMENTS- MIRROR IMO TREATY REQUIREMENTS

RECEPTION FACILITIESRECEPTION FACILITIES

• USCG RESPONDS TO INTERTANKO USCG RESPONDS TO INTERTANKO CONCERNS OF INADEQUATE RF IN US CONCERNS OF INADEQUATE RF IN US BY DIRECTING COTPs TO VERIFY RF BY DIRECTING COTPs TO VERIFY RF WITH CERTIFICATES OF ADEQUACYWITH CERTIFICATES OF ADEQUACY

• USCG PROVIDES UP TO DATE LIST OF USCG PROVIDES UP TO DATE LIST OF RECEPTION FACILITIES ON WEB RECEPTION FACILITIES ON WEB http://cgmix.uscg.mil/default.aspx

• USCG REQUESTS INTERTANKO HELP IN USCG REQUESTS INTERTANKO HELP IN IDENTIFYING INADEQUATE RFIDENTIFYING INADEQUATE RF

RECEPTION FACILITIESRECEPTION FACILITIES

• INTERTANKO NA PANEL REQUESTS INTERTANKO NA PANEL REQUESTS SECRETARIAT TO DEVELOP FORMATSECRETARIAT TO DEVELOP FORMAT

• USCG/INTERTANKO DEVELOP FORMAT USCG/INTERTANKO DEVELOP FORMAT TO BALANCE ANONYMITY WITH INFO TO BALANCE ANONYMITY WITH INFO FOR CG TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONFOR CG TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATION

• USCG RECOMMENDS SHIP REPORT USCG RECOMMENDS SHIP REPORT PROBLEMS TO COTP IMMEDIATELYPROBLEMS TO COTP IMMEDIATELY

• IF NOT POSSIBLE OR DESIRED, SUBMIT IF NOT POSSIBLE OR DESIRED, SUBMIT FORMAT TO SECRETARIAT (WN 2/2007)FORMAT TO SECRETARIAT (WN 2/2007)

ENVIRONMENT CRIMESENVIRONMENT CRIMES

• USCG/DOJ FOCUS IS CRIMINAL USCG/DOJ FOCUS IS CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO KNOWINGLYKNOWINGLY VIOLATE THE LAW VIOLATE THE LAW

• CONCENTRATION IS ON FLAGRANT CONCENTRATION IS ON FLAGRANT AND REPETITIVE VIOLATORS AND AND REPETITIVE VIOLATORS AND THOSE WHO ATTEMPT TO OBSTRUCT THOSE WHO ATTEMPT TO OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATIONAN INVESTIGATION

• DOJ - EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE DOJ - EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE POSTURE TOWARD PROSECUTION POSTURE TOWARD PROSECUTION

ENVIRONMENT CRIMESENVIRONMENT CRIMES

• USCG IS FINDING VIOLATIONS ON A USCG IS FINDING VIOLATIONS ON A FAIRLY FREQUENT BASISFAIRLY FREQUENT BASIS

• DOJ ALWAYS INVESTIGATES TO DOJ ALWAYS INVESTIGATES TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS A LINK TO THE DETERMINE IF THERE IS A LINK TO THE COMPANY MANAGEMENTCOMPANY MANAGEMENT

• RECENT US COURT RULING BRINGS RECENT US COURT RULING BRINGS INTO QUESTION DOJ’S ABILITY TO INTO QUESTION DOJ’S ABILITY TO PROSECUTE FOR VIOLATIONS THAT PROSECUTE FOR VIOLATIONS THAT OCCUR OUTSIDE OF US WATERSOCCUR OUTSIDE OF US WATERS

ENVIRONMENT CRIMESENVIRONMENT CRIMES

• INTERTANKO IS DEVELOPING A GUIDE INTERTANKO IS DEVELOPING A GUIDE ON ENGINE ROOM WASTE TREATMENT ON ENGINE ROOM WASTE TREATMENT ASSOCIATED SYSTEMSASSOCIATED SYSTEMS

• TANKER COALITION IN THE US (WITH TANKER COALITION IN THE US (WITH USCG AND INTERTANKO) HAS USCG AND INTERTANKO) HAS ESTABLISHED STEERING COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED STEERING COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP/SHARE BEST PRACTICESTO DEVELOP/SHARE BEST PRACTICES

• HUMAN ELEMENT COMMITTEE HUMAN ELEMENT COMMITTEE LOOKING AT COMPLIANCE ISSUESLOOKING AT COMPLIANCE ISSUES

RIGHT WHALESRIGHT WHALES

• NORTHERN ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE NORTHERN ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE PROTECTED UNDER US LAW AS PROTECTED UNDER US LAW AS ENDANGERED SPECIESENDANGERED SPECIES

• 1999 IMO ADOPTED MANDATORY 1999 IMO ADOPTED MANDATORY REPORTING SYSTEM FOR SHIPS REPORTING SYSTEM FOR SHIPS ENTERING 2 AREAS – OFF THE COAST ENTERING 2 AREAS – OFF THE COAST OF CAP COD, MASS AND N. FLORIDAOF CAP COD, MASS AND N. FLORIDA

• POPULATION HAS NOT RECOVERED POPULATION HAS NOT RECOVERED PROMPTING FURTHER ACTIONPROMPTING FURTHER ACTION

RIGHT WHALERIGHT WHALE• NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE

HAS PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING:HAS PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING:- - REVISED TSS INTO BOSTON, MASSREVISED TSS INTO BOSTON, MASS- SPEED RESTRICTION OF 10 KNOTS- SPEED RESTRICTION OF 10 KNOTS

JAN – JULY OFF CAPE CODJAN – JULY OFF CAPE CODNOV – APRIL OFF N. FLORIDANOV – APRIL OFF N. FLORIDANOV – APRIL WITHIN 30 MILES OF NOV – APRIL WITHIN 30 MILES OF

MID ATLANTIC PORTSMID ATLANTIC PORTS- - “DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT AREAS” “DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT AREAS” WITH SPEED RESTRICTIONS WHEN WITH SPEED RESTRICTIONS WHEN WHALES SEEN OUTSIDE THESE TIMES WHALES SEEN OUTSIDE THESE TIMES

SECURITYSECURITY

• LONG RANGE IDENTIFICATION LONG RANGE IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING (LRIT)AND TRACKING (LRIT)

• BOARDING POLICYBOARDING POLICY

• CREW SHORE ACCESSCREW SHORE ACCESS

LRITLRIT

• US WILL IMPLEMENT IMO LRIT US WILL IMPLEMENT IMO LRIT REQUIREMENTS TO ENHANCE THEIR REQUIREMENTS TO ENHANCE THEIR “MARITIME DOMAIN AWARENESS”“MARITIME DOMAIN AWARENESS”

• INFO TO BE TRANSMITTED:INFO TO BE TRANSMITTED:

- SHIP IDENTITY (IMO NUMBER)- SHIP IDENTITY (IMO NUMBER)

- SHIP POSITION (LONG AND LAT)- SHIP POSITION (LONG AND LAT)

- DATE AND TIME OF POSITION- DATE AND TIME OF POSITION

• GOVERNMENT SHALL BEAR COST FOR GOVERNMENT SHALL BEAR COST FOR REQUESTING/RECEIVING INFOREQUESTING/RECEIVING INFO

LRITLRIT

• SHIPS FLYING THE FLAG OF THE SHIPS FLYING THE FLAG OF THE CONTRACTING GOVT – CONTRACTING GOVT – ANYWHEREANYWHERE

• SHIPS INDICATING THEIR INTENTION TO SHIPS INDICATING THEIR INTENTION TO CALL AT A PORT OF THE CALL AT A PORT OF THE CONTRACTING GOVT – CONTRACTING GOVT – ANYWHEREANYWHERE

• SHIPS NOT INTENDING TO CALL AT A SHIPS NOT INTENDING TO CALL AT A PORT OF THE CONTRACTING GOVT – PORT OF THE CONTRACTING GOVT – WITHIN WITHIN 1000 MILES1000 MILES OF ITS COAST OF ITS COAST

LRITLRIT

SHIPBORNE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE:SHIPBORNE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE:

• CAPABLE OF AUTOMATICALLY CAPABLE OF AUTOMATICALLY TRANSMITTING SHIP’S LRIT INFO AT 6-TRANSMITTING SHIP’S LRIT INFO AT 6-HOUR INTERVALSHOUR INTERVALS

• CAPABLE OF BEING CONFIGURED CAPABLE OF BEING CONFIGURED REMOTELY TO TRANSMIT LRIT INFO AT REMOTELY TO TRANSMIT LRIT INFO AT VARIABLE INTERVALSVARIABLE INTERVALS

• CAPABLE OF TRANSMITTING LRIT INFO CAPABLE OF TRANSMITTING LRIT INFO FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF POLLING FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF POLLING COMMANDSCOMMANDS

LRITLRIT

SHIPBOARD EQUIPMENT SHALL (CON’T):SHIPBOARD EQUIPMENT SHALL (CON’T):

• INTERFACE DIRECTLY WITH INTERFACE DIRECTLY WITH SHIPBORNE NAVIGATION SATELLITE SHIPBORNE NAVIGATION SATELLITE SYSTEM EQUIPMENTSYSTEM EQUIPMENT

• BE SUPPLIED WITH ENERGY FROM THE BE SUPPLIED WITH ENERGY FROM THE MAIN AND EMERGENCY SOURCE OF MAIN AND EMERGENCY SOURCE OF ELECTRICAL POWERELECTRICAL POWER

• BE TESTED FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC BE TESTED FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (IMO RES A.813(19))COMPATIBILITY (IMO RES A.813(19))

LRITLRIT

BOARDING POLICYBOARDING POLICY

• 2004 DHS WORKING GROUP 2004 DHS WORKING GROUP STANDARDIZES PROCEDURES FOR STANDARDIZES PROCEDURES FOR BOARDING COMMERCIAL VESSELSBOARDING COMMERCIAL VESSELS- - IDENTIFY YOURSELFIDENTIFY YOURSELF- PRESENT OFFICIAL GOVT ID- PRESENT OFFICIAL GOVT ID- DO NOT SURRENDER ID- DO NOT SURRENDER ID- SIGN LOGBOOK AS VISITOR- SIGN LOGBOOK AS VISITOR- AUTHORIZED TO CARRY FIREARMS- AUTHORIZED TO CARRY FIREARMS- NOT REQUIRED TO CONSENT TO- NOT REQUIRED TO CONSENT TO BAGGAGE SEARCHBAGGAGE SEARCH

BOARDING POLICYBOARDING POLICY

• PROCEDURES DO NOT APPLY WHEN PROCEDURES DO NOT APPLY WHEN ASSESSING SHIP DURING EMERGENCYASSESSING SHIP DURING EMERGENCY

• ATTEMPTS TO TEST SHIP SECURITY ATTEMPTS TO TEST SHIP SECURITY PROCEDURES BY FABRICATING OR PROCEDURES BY FABRICATING OR REFUSING TO SHOW ID SHOULD REFUSING TO SHOW ID SHOULD NOTNOT BE UNDERTAKENBE UNDERTAKEN

• INTERTANKO RECOMMENDS THAT IF INTERTANKO RECOMMENDS THAT IF PROBLEMS OCCUR, CONTACT OUR PROBLEMS OCCUR, CONTACT OUR NORTH AMERICAN REPNORTH AMERICAN REP

CREW SHORE ACCESSCREW SHORE ACCESS

• USCG REGULATIONS FOR FACILITIES USCG REGULATIONS FOR FACILITIES HAVE GENERAL SECURITY MEASURES HAVE GENERAL SECURITY MEASURES FOR ACCESS CONTROLFOR ACCESS CONTROL

• USCG REGULATIONS FOR FACILITY USCG REGULATIONS FOR FACILITY SECURITY PLAN REQUIRES PLAN TO SECURITY PLAN REQUIRES PLAN TO ADDRESS ACCESS CONTROLADDRESS ACCESS CONTROL

• USCG DOES USCG DOES NOTNOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO HAVE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE ACCESS CONDITIONS ON IMPOSE ACCESS CONDITIONS ON PRIVATELY OWNED TERMINALSPRIVATELY OWNED TERMINALS

CREW SHORE ACCESSCREW SHORE ACCESS

CG AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 2007CG AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 2007

SEC 307. SEAMEN’S SHORESIDE ACCESSSEC 307. SEAMEN’S SHORESIDE ACCESS

EACH (APPROVED) FACILITY SECURITY EACH (APPROVED) FACILITY SECURITY PLAN SHALL PROVIDE A SYSTEM FOR PLAN SHALL PROVIDE A SYSTEM FOR SEAMEN (AND OTHERS) TO BOARD AND SEAMEN (AND OTHERS) TO BOARD AND DEPART THE VESSEL THROUGH THE DEPART THE VESSEL THROUGH THE FACILITY IN A TIMELY MANNER AT NO FACILITY IN A TIMELY MANNER AT NO COST TO THE INDIVIDUALCOST TO THE INDIVIDUAL

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

US COAST GUARD REPORT SHOWS:US COAST GUARD REPORT SHOWS:

• SAFETY DETENTIONS DOWN SAFETY DETENTIONS DOWN

176 TO 127176 TO 127

• SECURITY DETENTIONS DOWNSECURITY DETENTIONS DOWN

92 TO 5192 TO 51

• NUMBER OF SHIPS VISITING THE US NUMBER OF SHIPS VISITING THE US HAS RISEN BY 500HAS RISEN BY 500

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

SAFETY DETENTIONS - VESSEL TYPESAFETY DETENTIONS - VESSEL TYPE

BULK CARRIER BULK CARRIER - 43- 43

GENERAL DRY CARGO GENERAL DRY CARGO - 28- 28

CONTAINERSHIPCONTAINERSHIP - 20- 20

TANKSHIPTANKSHIP - 8- 8

CHEMICAL TANKSHIPCHEMICAL TANKSHIP - 5- 5

OIL TANKSHIPOIL TANKSHIP - 2- 2

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

SECURITY DETENTIONS – VSL TYPESECURITY DETENTIONS – VSL TYPE

BULK CARRIER BULK CARRIER - 16- 16

GENERAL DRY CARGO GENERAL DRY CARGO - 12- 12

CONTAINERSHIPCONTAINERSHIP - 10- 10

PASSENGER SHIPPASSENGER SHIP - 5- 5

RO/RO CARGORO/RO CARGO - 3- 3

TANKSHIPTANKSHIP - 1- 1

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

• PRIMARY SAFETY DEFICIENCIESPRIMARY SAFETY DEFICIENCIES

- FIREFIGHTING APPLIANCES- FIREFIGHTING APPLIANCES

- MARINE POLLUTION VIOLATIONS- MARINE POLLUTION VIOLATIONS

- ISM RELATED VIOLATIONS- ISM RELATED VIOLATIONS

- LIFESAVING APPLIANCES- LIFESAVING APPLIANCES

• PRIMARY SECURITY DEFICIENCIESPRIMARY SECURITY DEFICIENCIES

- ACCESS CONTROL- ACCESS CONTROL

- RESTRICTED AREAS- RESTRICTED AREAS

- SHIP SECURITY PLAN VIOLATIONS- SHIP SECURITY PLAN VIOLATIONS

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

• ALL DETENTIONS ARE ALL DETENTIONS ARE REVIEWED AT USCG HDQTSREVIEWED AT USCG HDQTS

• REVIEW IS REVIEW IS NOTNOT CURSORY CURSORY

• MANY DETENTIONS ARE MANY DETENTIONS ARE OVERTURNED BY HDQTS OVERTURNED BY HDQTS

PORT STATE CONTROLPORT STATE CONTROL

GREECEGREECE ALL ALL

NO.NO. 1 YR 1 YR 3 YR3 YR 1 YR 1 YR 3 YR3 YR

20002000 5 5 1.45 1.45 1.621.62 2.52 2.52 3.553.55

20012001 4 4 1.11 1.11 1.321.32 2.19 2.19 2.692.69

20022002 4 4 1.12 1.12 1.221.22 2.50 2.50 2.402.40

20032003 3 3 0.78 0.78 1.001.00 1.99 1.99 2.222.22

20042004 6 6 1.68 1.68 1.191.19 2.43 2.43 2.302.30

20052005 4 4 1.18 1.18 1.201.20 1.61 1.61 2.002.00

20062006 1 1 > 1 ? > 1 ? > 1 ? 1.50?> 1 ? 1.50?1.85?1.85?

THANKTHANK

YOUYOU