bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

An oil company association has accused classification societies of undermining the International Maritime Organisation's (IMO) ship-quality assurance scheme by backing a rival programme.

  The practice was confusing the industry and could harm ship safety, OCIMF spokesman Gerhard Kurz said.

  Mr Kurz said the OCIMF was holding talks with the International Association of Classification Societies to bridge the gap between the IMO's enhanced survey programme (ESP) and the ship condition assessment programme (CAP).

  'We should not have two systems floating around which might only hurt ship safety,' he said.

  All oil tankers and single skin bulk carriers have to undergo a special ESP every five years. The programme has stringent safety checks.

  Mr Kurz said CAPs, which rate tankers in terms of structure and maintenance, varied in standard.

  About 300 tankers, less than 5 per cent of the worldwide total, had CAP ratings. It was unfortunate that these ratings were used as a yardstick of quality, he said.

  'It is confusing the industry and undermines the enhanced survey programme,' he said in a speech to the Hong Kong Shipowners Association. 'Clearly, there is only room for one ship-quality assurance system and that has to be mandatory.'   The OCIMF had rejected some ships with CAP certificates as they could not pass the ESP, he said.

   If classification societies were not satisfied with the ESP, it could be altered, Mr Kurz said.

   He added that 80-90 per cent of ship accidents were due to human error rather than the physical condition of vessels.

  It was important to look at a ship like the way the aviation industry did with aircraft and even passage planning should be included as safety had many aspects.

  Mr Kurz said the OCIMF, which groups 40 oil companies, had played an active role in the development of the ESP, which was now a part of Regulation 13G of the IMO's International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.

  He said if a vessel had passed the ESP and the International Safety Management (ISM) Code, it had everything that was needed to say it was a good ship.

  Mr Kurz said the new standardised OCIMF Ship Inspection Review (SIRE) programme, scheduled to go on-line next month, was expected to help reduce the frequency of ship inspections.

  'As of this month, SIRE has over 16,000 reports [of ship inspections] in its database, covering 6,000 different ships,' he said.

  The programme, which had a centralised database in London, had the support of independent shipowners and the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko), he added.

  The information on the database was solely based on inspections carried out on their tankers by oil companies.



Rival quality ratings could threaten safety