Ports Harbors Published by - IAPH

&Ports HarborsPublished by The International Association ofPorts and HarborsNGO Consultative Status, United Nations (ECOSOC, ILO, IMO, UNCTAD, WCO, UNEP)Head Office5th fl. North Tower New Pier Takeshiba1-11-1 Kaigan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0022, Japan Tel: 81-3-5403-2770Fax: 81-3-5403-7651Website: http://www.iaphworldports.orgE-mail: [email protected]

Contents

Ports & HarborsMarch 2003Vol. 48No. 2

IAPH OfficersPresidentDr. Akio SomeyaExecutive Vice PresidentNagoya Port AuthorityJapan

First Vice-PresidentMr. Pieter StruijsExecutive DirectorRotterdam Municipal Port ManagementNetherlands

Second Vice-PresidentMr. H. Thomas KornegayExecutive DirectorPort of Houston AuthorityUSA

Third Vice-PresidentDatin Paduka O.C. PhangGeneral ManagerPort Klang Authority

Conference Vice PresidentMr. Siyabonga GamaChief Executive OfficerNational Ports Authority of South AfricaSouth Africa

Immediate Past PresidentMr. Dominic J TaddeoPresident & Chief Executive OfficerMontreal Port AuthorityCanada

Secretary GeneralDr. Satoshi InoueIAPH Head OfficeTokyoJapan

M alé CommercialHarbour (MCH) isthe only commercial port in the Maldives,

providing services to ships that mostly bring importsto the country. However, with the influx of industriesto Maldives the ship size at MCH are getting bigger,and this has influenced the Port Authority to increaseits capacity. In 2003 the management of the portwould be embarking on a project for increasing thelength of the existing berth and terminal capacitythrough reclamation. The Government is also embark-ing on a new project for the development of 2Regional Ports; one in the South and one in the Northof the country. Related article on page 33.

• Established: 1986• Average cargo throughput: 230,000 MT• Average container throughput: 19,000 TEUs per

annum• Available open storage area: 21,700 sq.meters• Total covered storage area: 2,850 sq. meters• Reefer points: 28 Nos.• Berth length: 101 meters

IAPH ANNOUNCEMENTS AND NEWS23rd IAPH World Ports Conference in Durban, South Africa ............................................................ 3Activities Report: Conference of SOLAS Contracting Governments on Maritime Security...............8Committee Report: Trade Facilitation Committee...............................................................................10Scope of Project on Cruise Shipping Terminals...................................................................................13Nominate your IAPH Coordinator........................................................................................................15New IAPH 3rd Vice President appointed.............................................................................................16Past President Jean Smagghe Retires • Mr. Hugh H.Welsh Retires • Membership Notes.................17

OPEN FORUMMaritime Safety - To Be or Not to Be Proactive - by Prof. Harilaos N. Psaraftis ..............................18

MARITIME NEWS & INFORMATIONEC: Mandate proposal to the EU’s Council of Ministers ....................................................................25PIANC: Abstract of the minutes - 17th Meeting of the PIANC Envicom..........................................26JITPS: Quality Shipping Seminar in Tokyo.........................................................................................28PEMSEA: New era of regional collaboration for the seas of East Asian waters................................29ICHCA: Launch of ICHCA International Ltd. ....................................................................................30 Upcoming Conferences:

Cruise + Ferry Conference • World Maritime Forum ....................................................................30Upcoming Seminars:

IHE Delft: 39th International Seminar on “Port Management” • IPPPM: 19th Port Planning andManagement International Training Program • CIM: Bordeaux CIM Colloquium......................31

New Publications ................................................................................................................................. 31WORLD PORT NEWSCover of the Month

Malé Commercial Harbour, Maldives ..................................................................................................33 The Americas

Canada: Announces five-year package of marine security projects up to 172.5 million ...................34Charleston: Study reveals stunning impact of S.C. ports on state • Halifax: Groundworkfor Smart Port Initiative.........................................................................................................................35Houston: Records in container volume, tonnage and operating revenue • Montreal: The Gold-Headed Cane presented to Capt. Ashwani K. Engineer.......................................................................36Montreal: Record-breaking container traffic in 2002 • NY/NJ: Work together with city of Elizabeth for critical transportation and public safety projects............................................................37Panama Canal: Begins joint dredging projects.....................................................................................38

Africa/EuropeAmsterdam: Record transshipment in 2002 .........................................................................................38Amsterdam: Ports to favour quality-verified vessels • Antwerp: Expects record year.......................39Daunkirk: 2002 traffic figure • Göteborg: Cargo record in 2002 •Kenya: EACIS – Community-based program .....................................................................................40Le Havre: Record year for containers • Le Havre: Coming-on-stream of the extension to the Ro-Ro Center • Rotterdam: Top year for Rotterdam.................................................................41

Asia/OceaniaHong Kong: Capable to handle mega-containerships • Klang: More berths for container traffic......................................................................................................................................42Kaohsiung: 57th anniversary & the opening of the Port of Kaohsiung Historical Museum •MPA: Review of 2002 performance.....................................................................................................43PAT: Bangkok port expands inland services • Townsville: Ship simulations as part of theocean terminal feasibility work.............................................................................................................44

Maldives Ports AuthorityMaldives Ports Authority

May 24 to 30, 2003Durban International Convention Center

Hosted by the National Ports Authority of South Africa

May 24 to 30, 2003Durban International Convention Center

Hosted by the National Ports Authority of South Africa

3PORTS AND HARBORS March, 2003

Ports - The Catalytic ImpactUniting World Economies through Ports and Harbours

Ports - The Catalytic ImpactUniting World Economies through Ports and Harbours

Message from the Conference Vice President

Dear DelegateOn behalf of the National Ports Authority of South Africa, it gives me great pleasure to inviteyou to attend the 23rd IAPH World Ports Conference which will be held in Durban, SouthAfrica, from 24 to 30 May 2003.The previous 22 IAPH World Ports Conferences have been held in various countries, butnever on the African Continent. This year in May it will be South Africa's turn.The academic programme is outstanding and there are full details in the brochure. Plusthere is an unforgettable social experience in Durban, South Africa's Kingdom of the Zulu.

To people from outside South Africa, we wish to say: Come visit us. We are confident thatyou will find this a fascinating country.

We look forward to a great conference and we want you to be part of it.

SIYABOGA GAMAIAPH Conference Vice President

CEO: National Ports Authority of South Africa

4 PORTS AND HARBORS March, 2003

I A P H A N N O U N C E M E N T S & N E W S

Saturday May 24 2003

07:15-09:00 Breakfast for Committee Members08:00-16:00 Registration07:30-08:30 Officers Meeting with Chair and Members of the Finance

Committee and Constitution & By-Laws Committee08:30-09:00 Nominating Committee Meeting09:00-12:00 Technical Committees Meetings12:00-14:00 Lunch for Committee Members Only14:00-15:20 Meetings of Group of Committees: Port Industry and

Research & Analysis• Cargo Operations • Ship Trends • Combined

Transport, Distribution and Logistics • Port Planning andConstruction

15:20-15:35 Coffee Break15:35-17:00 Meetings of Group of Committees on Technical Affairs

• Port Safety, Environment and Marine Operations • Dredging Task Force • Legal Protection • Trade

Facilitation

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

18:00 Early Arrivals Cocktail Reception: Mitchell Pak (Durban)

Sunday May 25 2003

07:15-09:00 Breakfast for Committee Members08:00-16:00 Registration07:30-09:00 Officers Meeting with Chairman and Members of the

Long-range Planning/Review Committee07:30-09:00 Credentials Committee09:00-10:30 Meeting of Group of Committees on Sustainment and

Growth• Membership • Communication and Networking • Human Resources Development

10:30-12:00 Special Session with IAPH/IMO Interface Group Experts 12:00-14:00 Lunch for Committee Members Only14:00-15:00 Regional Board Meetings:

• African/European Region • American Region • Asian/Oceania Region

15:00-17:00 Full Board Meeting (Coffee Break Included)

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

09:00-13:00 Durban City Orientation Tour18:00-23:00 Official Opening Ceremony and Dinner: ICC (Durban)

Monday May 26 2003

07:15-09:00 Breakfast for all08:15-16:00 Registration08:00-09:00 Officers Meeting

Honorary Membership Committee Meeting

BUSINESS PROGRAMME

09:00-12:30 OPENING CEREMONYPresiding: Conference Vice President:Mr. Siyabonga Gama, National Ports Authority of South Africa09:00-09:40 Prelude to the Opening Ceremony09:40-10:00 IAPH President: Dr Akio Someya,

Nagoya Port Authority (Japan)10:00-10:30 Keynote Speaker:

The Honourable Mr. Thabo Mbeki -

P R O V I S I O N A L P R O G R A M M E

President Republic of South Africa10:30-11:00 Official Opening of the Trade Exhibition11:00-11:30 Coffee Break11:45-12:05 The Honourable Mr Alec Erwin (MP) -

Minister for Trade and Industry, Republic of South Africa

12:10-12-30 The Honourable Mr Jeff Radebe (MP)-Minister for Public Enterprise, Republic ofSouth Africa

12:45-13:45 Lunch14:00-16:30 WORKING SESSION NO.1

Prospects and Challenges of the Global Economy and Trade Chairperson: IAPH president: Dr Akio Someya, Nagoya Port Authority (Japan) 14:00-14:20 Prof Gerhardt Muller - Professor: Marine

Transportation Department, US Merchant Marine Academy (U.S.A.) Global Trends and Perspectives of Economy and Trade

14:25-14:45 Prof Leigh Boske - Associate Dean, University of Texas (U.S.A.) Regional Perspectives of World Economy and Trade

14:45-15:15 Coffee Break15:30-15:50 Mr Allechi M'Bet - Economic Advisor to

the Presidency of Cote d'Ivoire Challenges of Emerging Economies: African Economy

15:55-16:15 Mr Carlos Gallegos -Secretary CIP, Organisation of American States (U.S.A.) Challenges of Emerging Economies: Latin American Economy

16:20-16:30 Questions and Answers

ACCOMPANYING PERSONS' PROGRAMME

09:00-16:00 Birds and Flowers Tour

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

Free Evening

Tuesday May 27 2003


Bills and Resolutions Committee Meeting

BUSINESS PROGRAMME

09:00-11:30 WORKING SESSION NO.2Emerging Trends of World Shipping and LogisticsChairperson: IAPH 2nd Vice President: Mr. Thomas Kornegay, Port of Houston Authority (U.S.A.)09:00-09:20 Dr. Alfred Baird - Professor of Transport:

Research Institute, Napier University (Scotland) Global Strategy of the Maritime Sector: Perspectives of World Shipping

09:25-9:45 Mr. Zia Rizvi - Consultant (Canada) Problems Posed by Larger Container Vessels for Ports, Innovation and Possible Solutions



09:50-10:10 Mr. Johan Engelbrecht - Logistics Manager, Daimler Chrysler (South Africa) Global Manufacturer or Distributors’ Logistics Strategies

10:15-10:35 Mr. Goon Kok Loon - President: International Business Division, PSA Corporation (Singapore) Global Terminal Operators’ Strategy

10:40-11:00 Questions and Answers11:00-11:30 Coffee Break

11:45 15:00 WORKING SESSION NO.3The Impact of IT, Logistics and Technical Innovation on PortsChairperson: IAPH 3rd Vice President: Datin Paduka O.C. PhangPort Klang Authority11:45-12:05 Mr. Robert Yap - Vice President:

Information Technology, PSA Corporation (Singapore) IT and its Impact on Global Trade and Logistics

12:10-12:30 Joint presentation:Mr. Emilio Arbos - Head of the President’s Cabinet, Port of Barcelona (Spain) Mr. Santiago Mila - International Cooperation Director, Port of Barcelona (Spain) The New Role of of Port Authorities as Innovation Promoters and the Role of New Technologies

12:45-13:45 Lunch14:0014:20 Mr. Robert Grassi - CEO, Dudula CSX

World Terminals LLC (U.S.A.) Topic to be confirmed

14:25-14:45 Prof Willy Winkelmans - President: Executive Board of ITMMA, University of Antwerp (Belgium)Port Competitiveness

14:50-15:00 Questions and Answers15:00-17:00 FIRST PLENARY SESSION

(Coffee Break Included)

ACCOMPANYING PERSONS’ PROGRAMME

08:15-16:00 Full-day game viewing at the Tala Private Game Reserve

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

18:30-23:00 African Cultural Evening: Durban Botanic Gardens

Wednesday May 28 2003



BUSINESS PROGRAMME

09:00-14:35 WORKING SESSION NO.4Port Security and Environment ManagementChairperson: IAPH 1st Vice President: Mr. Pieter Struijs, Rotterdam Municipal Port Management (The Netherlands)09:00-09:20 Mr Jouko Lempiainen - Director:

Compliance and Facilitation, World

Customs Organisation (Brussels, Belgium)Security of the Port and Maritime Sector: How is the World Customs Organisation Tackling Port Security.

09:25-09:45 Supt. Nico du Plessis - President: IAASP Africa Region; Section Head: Sea Border Units, SA Police Services (South Africa) Topic to be confirmed

09:50-10:10 Representative from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey How is the Port Authority Tackling Port Security?

10:15- 10:35 Prof John Gibson - Professor of Law, University of Cape Town (South Africa) Legal Issues Affecting Port Management

10:40-11:00 Questions and Answers11:00-11:30 Coffee Break11:45-12:05 Mr Graham Mulligan - Managing Director,

International Infrastructure Management (Pty) Ltd (Brisbane, Australia) Port Environment Management: Sustainable Development and Global Challenges

12:10-12:30 Dr. Veerle Vandeweerd - Deputy Director: Environmental Policy Implementation, United Nations Environment Programme (The Hague) Knowledge Management for Port Environment Management

12:45-13:45 Lunch14:00-14:20 Mrs Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry - Deputy

Director: Sectoral Services, International Labour Office (Geneva) A Perspective of Sustainable HR Development

14:25-14:35 Questions and Answers14:40-17:30 IAPH OPEN FORUM: FOCUSING ON THE

ACTIVITIES OF THE IAPH TECHNICAL COMMITTEES (Coffee Break Included)


10:45-15:00 Meet the Rainbow Nation: South Africa, a country of many cultures

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

18:30-23:00 Reception by the Port of Shanghai: ICC (Durban)

Thursday May 29 2003



BUSINESS PROGRAMME

09:00-12:45 WORKING SESSION NO.5Challenges for the futureChairperson: IAPH Immediate Past President: Mr. Dominic Taddeo, Montreal Port Authority (Canada)09:00-09:20 Dr. Gustaaf De Monie - International Port

Consulting, BVBA (Belgium) New Partnerships within Ports: The Future of Port Authorities



09:25-09:45 Mr. Sithembiso Mthethwa - CEO, Dudula CSX World Terminals (South Africa)Port Restructuring and Transformation

09:50-10:10 Mr. Fernand Gauze - Secretary General, PMAWCA (Nigeria) Regional Perspectives: Future Challenges of the African Ports

10:15-10:35 Mr Thomas Falknor - Senior Vice President, International Container Terminal Services (Dubai) Challenges for the Future Restructuring of the African Ports: A Private Sector Perspective

10:40-11:00 Questions and Answers11:00-11:30 Coffee Break11:45-12:05 Mr. Lu Haihu - Port Director, Shanghai

Port Authority (China)Waterfront Developments

12:10-12:30 Mr. Peter Mollema - Unit Manager: Development, Port of Rotterdom (The Netherlands)

• VenueDurban International Convention Center

• Registration and Information DeskThe main information and hospitality desk will be located at the ICC.There will be an opportunity to register on Saturday 24 May 2003before the conference.

• Business CenterA Business Center will be at the disposal of delegates during the con-ference on the ground floor level of the International ConventionCenter. Services that will be offered are: Photocopies, Word process-ing, Assembly and binding of documents, Rental of cellular telephones,Postal and messenger services. E-mails services are available in theInternet Cafe near the Business Center.

• Conference LanguageThe conference language is English with French, Spanish, Japanese andMandarin interpretation. English is understood and used throughoutSouth Africa, especially in all major centers and at tourist attractions.

Ocean Terminal

Maritime Museum

Point Yacht Club

City HallCentral Park

Durban RailwayStation

Hoy Park

INDIAN OCEAN South Beach

North BeachBay of Plenty

12

3

4

5 6

● Durban International Convention Centre ● The Hilton

● The Royal Hotel ● Holiday Inn Elangeni

● Holiday Inn Garden Court Marine Parade

● Protea Hotel Edward Durban

1 2

3 4

5

6

G E N E R A L I N F O R M A T I O N

There are eleven official languages, reflecting the various ethnic groupsand regions of the country.

• Immigration and VisasAll visitors must have a valid passport. Please consult your closestSouth African Embassy well in advance regarding visa requirements.The onus is on the delegate to ensure that he/she meets all entryrequirements. Visit the website: www.home-affairs.gov.za/visas.asp

• Temperature and Recommended ClothingDurban with its subtropical climate, makes it possibal to swim and sun-bathe all year round. May in Durban offers roughly 7 hours of sunshinewith the average temperature around 25˚C (72˚F) maximum and 13˚C(54˚F) minimum. Required clothing: Lightweight cottons and linens andrainwear.

• Registration BadgesFor security reasons, participants are requested to were their registra-tion badges at all proceedings and social functions.

• SecurityLike most cosmopolitan cities around the world, we advise tourists totake some precautions when visiting Durban.

• Do not walk alone on streets, particularly after dark.• Walk only in well-lit areas and avoid dark alleys.• Do not invite attention by carrying cameras or wearing exposed

jewellery.• When using taxis use only clearly marked taxis or those called by

hotel staff.• Store valuables, including airline tickets and passports in the safes

provided at the hotels.

As part of an ongoing strategy to ensure the safety of the delegatesattending the conference, the ICC works very closely with the CityPolice, South African Police Services (SAPS) and various other organi-zations. Updated lists of all major events coming to Durban, includingIAPH 2003, are distributed to ensure that areas such as the beachfrontand the area between the beachfront hotels and the ICC are secure.The City of Durban has closed circuit television cameras (CCTV) inplace along the beachfront and the SAPS and Metro Police monitorthem around the clock. The city also conducts a "Bobby on the Beat"programme, which includes horseback patrols, motorbike and bicyclepatrols.

Topic to be confirmed12:35-12:45 Questions and Answers

12:45-13:45 Lunch: Presentation by Capt. Bill Shewell - Port Captain: Victoria and Alfred Waterfront, Port of Cape Town (South Africa)

14:00-15:30 SECOND PLENARY SESSION(Coffee Break Included)

15:30-17:00 Start-up Board Meeting for next term/cum EXCO Meeting


09:00-16:00 Pride of Africa Fashion Show

SOCIAL PROGRAMME

18:30-23:00 Hambani Kahle Dinner: KwaShukela: Durban

Friday 30 May 2003

TECHNICAL TOURS

09:00-15:00 Technical Tour of the Port of Durban OR09:00-16:00 Technical Tour of the Port of Richards Bay



• Registration fee• IAPH Member: US$2200• IAPH Honorary Member: no charge• Non Member: US$2600• Additional Accompanying

Person: US$865

What does your registration feeinclude?

• Delegate participation• Entrance to spouses' programme for

one person• Conference material• Breakfast, coffee breaks and luncheons

S O C I A L E V E N T S

THE Social Events Committee are proud to present you with a social events programmebound to keep you talking for months to come. The social events programme will not only

introduce you to the many sights, flavours and cultures of South Africa, but will take you on ajourney, awarding you the opportunity to experience the meaning of being truly "South African".

• Early Arrivals Cocktails: Mitchell Park(Durban)

• Official Opening Ceremony and Dinner:ICC (Durban)

• African Cultural Evening: BotanicGardens

• Reception by the Port of Shanghai• Hambani Kahle Dinner: KwaShukela• Technical Tours (Port of Durban or

Port of Richards Bay)• Transport from the designated hotels to

the conference venue and social eventvenues

Early Arrivals CocktailSawubona - A hearty welcome to theAfrican skiesSaturday 24 May 2003

For those delegates arriving early, join us in aWelcome Cocktail Reception, offering manyopportunities for networking. Sample a taste ofwhat Durban has to offer.

Official Opening CeremonySunday 25 May 2003

After enjoying the sights and sounds ofDurban, the 23rd IAPH World Ports

T HE Port of Richards Bay is adynamic port city considered tobe the best planned industrial

node in the world – the gateway to Africaand the Indian Ocean rim.

Only 26 years after the first vesselentered the new port in 1976, the porthas lived up to the phrase ‘a giant hasrisen’. Rapid expansion has seen theestablishment of, on average, one newberth every 18 months – proudly fulfillingits aim of being South Africa’s leading portin terms of cargo volumes. The port’shinterland encompasses the northernKwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and theMpumalanga regions.

Initially built as a bulk port to exportcoal, the Port of Richards Bay has diversi-fied into the handling of other cargoes.Richards Bay currently handles more than80 million tones of cargo, which repre-sents approximately 57% of the totalseaborne cargo tonnage moving through

Conference will open to the sounds of Africanbeats at their best with the opening of the firstIAPH Conference on the African continent.Join us for the Opening Ceremony at the ICCauditorium, followed by dinner.

African Cultural EveningTuesday 27 May 2003

The African Cultural Evening will leave youboth breathless and enriched with song anddance from the voices of the African continent.Delegates will be treated to the traditional hos-pitality of the Zulu culture with traditional cui-

South African ports.Comprising 2.157 hectares of land sur-

face and 1.443 hectares of water surface,Richards Bay is the largest port in SouthAfrica. Only 40% of the land has beendeveloped, which clearly illustrates whatpotential the future holds.

With an entrance channel depth of 22metres and width of 300 metres, thisdeepwater port canaccommodate ves-sels with a draft of17.5 metres.

Richards Bay’sideal easternseaboard location,deepwater infra-structure, develop-ment potential, spe-cialized cargo han-dling facilities andexternal rail con-nection to the hin-terland all combine

to position it as a world leader in termsof high-speed, high-volume cargo handlingand swift vessel turnaround.

sine, music and dancing.

Shanghai ReceptionWednesday 28 May 2003

This evening belongs to your hosts for IAPH2005, Shanghai. Allow them to take you on abrief and momentous journey towards the 24thIAPH World Ports Conference.

Hambani Kahle DinnerThursday 29 May 2003

Tonight we bid farewell to IAPH 2003,Durban and South Africa. The National PortsAuthority of South Africa thanks you for partic-ipating in the 23rd IAPH World PortsConference and welcomes you to an eveningof wining, dining and dancing.

Technical ToursFriday 30 May 2003

The Social Events Committee is proud topresent you with two technical tour options,incorporating two of South Africa's mostimportant ports: The Port of Durban (09:00-15:00) and The Port of Richards Bay (09:00-16:00). (please see below)

Port of Richards Bay

Nations specialized agencies, intergov-ernmental organizations and non-gov-ernmental international organizationssuch as IAPH also sent observers to theConference.

The Conference adopted a number ofamendments to the 1974 Safety of Life atSea Convention (SOLAS), the most far-reaching of which enshrines the newInternational Ship and Port FacilitySecurity Code (ISPS Code).

The Code contains detailed security-related requirements for Governments,shipping companies and port facilities ina mandatory section (Part A), togetherwith a series of guidelines about how tomeet these requirements in a second,non-mandatory section (Part B). TheConference also adopted a series of reso-lutions.

The International Ship and PortFacility Security Code (ISPS Code)

The purpose of the Code is to providea standardized, consistent framework forevaluating risk, enabling governments tooffset changes in threat with changes invulnerability for ships and port facilities.



Introduction

A new, comprehensive securityregime for the international shipping andports industries is set to enter into forceon 1 July 2004 following the adoption bya week-long Diplomatic Conference of aseries of measures to strengthen mar-itime security and prevent and suppressacts of terrorism against shipping. TheConference was held at the Londonheadquarters of the InternationalMaritime Organization (IMO) from 9 to13 December.

The Conference and its outcome wereof crucial significance not only to theinternational maritime and port commu-nity but the world community as awhole, given the pivotal role shippingand ports play in world trade. The mea-sures represent the culmination of justover a year's intense work by IMO'sMaritime Safety Committee and itsIntersessional Working Group since theterrorist atrocities in the United States inSeptember 2001.

The Conference was attended by 108Contracting Governments to the 1974SOLAS Convention, observers from twoIMO Member States and observers fromthe two IMO Associate Members. United

Activities Report

Conference of SOLAS ContractingGovernments on Maritime Security

December 9 - 13, 2002, IMO Headquarter, London

I N introducing Mr van de Laar's Report to the IMO London Conference on MaritimeSecurity, I, jointly with him, express my hearty appreciation and thanks to IAPH Members fortheir cooperation and assistance given to him as well as the IAPH/IMO Interface Group dur-

ing the past months since the IMO took up initiatives for safer and sustainable development ofworld maritime trade, immediately after September 11, 2001. IAPH Members' voices and com-ments were the basis of the IAPH position and stance submitted to the IMO. My sincere respectsand admiration also go to the IMO Secretary General, Mr. William O'Neil, for his leadership andguidance that has culminated in the amendment of the SOLAS, organizing so successfully the com-mitment of the maritime nations gathered in IMO. Having laid down the new global frameworkfor enhanced maritime security, we at IAPH will continue to work together with all Members andalso IMO and other organizations to ensure its smooth implementation.

Satoshi InoueIAPH Secretary General

Fer van der LaarChair, Port Safety, Environment and Marine Operations Committee

In essence, the Code takes theapproach that ensuring the security ofships and port facilities is basically a riskmanagement activity and that to deter-mine what security measures are appro-priate, an assessment of the risks mustbe made in each particular case.

This risk management concept will beembodied in the Code through a numberof minimum functional security require-ments for ships and port facilities. Forships, these requirements will includeship security plans, ship security officers,company security officers and certainonboard equipment

For port facilities, the requirementswill include port facility security plans,port facility security officers and certainsecurity equipment

In addition, the requirements for shipsand for port facilities include monitoringand controlling access, monitoring theactivities of people and cargo and ensur-ing security communications are readilyavailable

Because each ship (or class of ship)and each port facility present differentrisks, the method in which they willmeet the specific requirements of thisCode will be determined and eventuallybe approved by the Administration orContracting Government, as the casemay be.

The Role of the ContractingGovernment

With regard to port facilities,Contracting Governments have variousresponsibilities, including setting theapplicable security level, determiningwhich port facilities located within theirterritory are required to designate a PortFacility Security Officer, ensuring com-pletion and approval of the Port FacilitySecurity Assessment and the PortFacility Security Plan and any subse-quent amendments; and exercising con-trol and compliance measures. It is alsoresponsible for communicating informa-tion to the International MaritimeOrganization and to the shipping andport industries.

Contracting Governments can desig-nate, or establish, DesignatedAuthorities within Government to under-take their security duties and allowRecognised Security Organisations tocarry out certain work with respect toport facilities, but the final decision onthe acceptance and approval of thiswork should be given by the ContractingGovernment or the DesignatedAuthority.

In order to communicate the threat at



Invest

Operate

Provide

Invest in and manage seaports, airports, inter-modal terminals, and other sound investments forexceptional performance

transport facilities to high standards of quality, service, performance, environmental practiceand customer-focused commerciality

its management expertise and resources to assist you to add value to your infrastructureinvestments, and outperform your competitors in quality, efficiency and innovation

Add value through investments in quality transport infrastructure around the world

For further information please contact: Mr Graham D. Mulligan - Managing DirectorIIM - Level 14 Central Plaza One, Queen Street, Brisbane, Qld 4000 AustraliaPhone: +61 7 3221 1066 - Fax: +61 7 3220 1211 - Mobile: 0409 726 233 - Email: [email protected]

Operate

Provide

www.iiml.com.auMEB0000014

WhatWhat International Infrastructure Management can do for you:

a port facility or for a ship, theContracting Government will set theappropriate security level. Security levels1, 2, and 3 correspond to normal, medi-um, and high threat situations, respec-tively. The security level creates a linkbetween the ship and the port facility,since it triggers the implementation ofappropriate security measures for theship and for the port facility.

Amendments to SOLAS

A series of Amendments to the 1974SOLAS Convention was adopted, aimedat enhancing maritime security on boardships and at ship/port interface areas inthe port facility. Among other things,these amendments create a new SOLASchapter dealing specifically with mar-itime security, which in turn contains themandatory requirement for ships to com-ply with the ISPS Code.

A new Chapter XI-2 (Special measuresto enhance maritime security) is addedafter the renumbered Chapter XI-1(Special measures to enhance maritimesafety); some regulations are highlight-ed.

Regulation XI-2/3 of the new chapterenshrines the International Ship and PortFacilities Security Code (ISPS Code). PartA of this Code will become mandatoryand part B contains guidance as to howbest to comply with the mandatoryrequirements.

Regulation XI-2/6 covers requirementsfor port facilities, providing among otherthings that Contracting Governmentsshould ensure that port facility securityassessments are carried out and thatport facility security plans are developed,implemented and reviewed in accor-dance with the ISPS Code.

Other regulations in this chapter coverthe provision of information to IMO, thecontrol of ships in port (including mea-

sures such as the delay, detention,restriction of operations including move-ment within the port, or expulsion of aship from port), and the specific respon-sibility of Companies.

The Port Facility

To begin the process, eachContracting Government will conduct orhave conducted port facility securityassessments. Security assessments willhave three essential components.

First, they must identify and evaluateimportant assets and infrastructures thatare critical to the port facility as well asthose areas or structures that, if dam-aged, could cause significant loss of lifeor damage to the port facility's economyor environment.

Second, the assessment must identifythe actual threats to those critical assetsand infrastructure in order to prioritisesecurity measures.

Finally, the assessment must addressvulnerability of the port facility by identi-fying its weaknesses in physical securi-ty, structural integrity, protection sys-tems, procedural policies, communica-tions systems, transportation infrastruc-ture, utilities, and other areas within aport facility that may be a likely target.Once this assessment has been complet-ed, the Contracting Government canaccurately evaluate risks.

On completion of the analysis, it willbe possible to produce an overall assess-ment of the level of risk. The Port FacilitySecurity Assessment will help determinewhich port facilities are required toappoint a Port Facility Security Officerand prepare a Port Facility Security Plan.

This plan should indicate the opera-tional and physical security measuresthe port facility should take to ensurethat it always operates at security level1. The plan should also indicate the addi-

tional, or intensified, security measuresthe port facility can take to move to andoperate at security level 2 when instruct-ed to do so. It should also indicate thepossible preparatory actions the portfacility could take to allow promptresponse to the instructions that may beissued at security level 3.

Port facilities will also be required toreport certain security related informa-tion to the Contracting Government con-cerned, which in turn will submit a list ofapproved port facility security plans,including location and contact details toIMO.

Ships using port facilities may be sub-ject to Port State Control inspections andadditional control measures. The rele-vant authorities may request the provi-sion of information regarding the ship,its cargo, passengers and ship's person-nel prior to the ship's entry into port.There may be circumstances in whichentry into port could be denied.

Resolutions adopted by the conference

The conference adopted 11 resolu-tions; the most important ones in relationto port facilities are outlined below:

Conference resolution 1 (Adoption ofamendments to the annex to theInternational Convention for the Safety ofLife at Sea, 1974, as amended), deter-mines that the amendments shall bedeemed to have been accepted on 1January 2004 (unless, prior to that date,more than one third of the ContractingGovernments to the Convention orContracting Governments the combinedmerchant fleets of which constitute notless than 50% of the gross tonnage of theworld's merchant fleet, have notifiedtheir objections to the amendments) andthat the amendments would then enterinto force on 1 July 2004.



Conference resolution 2 (Adoption ofthe International Ship and Port FacilitySecurity (ISPS) Code) adopts theInternational Ship and Port FacilitySecurity (ISPS) Code, and invitesContracting Governments to theConvention to note that the ISPS Codewill take effect on 1 July 2004 upon entryinto force of the new Chapter XI-2 of theConvention;

Conference resolution 3 (Further workby the international maritime organiza-tion pertaining to the enhancement ofmaritime security) invites theInternational Maritime Organization todevelop, as a matter of urgency, trainingguidance such as model courses for shipsecurity officers, company security offi-cers and port facility security officers.

Conference resolution 5 (Promotion oftechnical co-operation and assistance)strongly urges Contracting Governmentsto the Convention and Member States ofthe Organization to provide, in co-opera-tion with the Organization, assistance tothose States which have difficulty inmeeting the requirements of the adoptedamendments.

The Secretary-General of IMO isrequested to ensure that theOrganization is able to address thefuture needs of developing countries forcontinued education and training andthe improvement of their maritime andport security infrastructure and mea-sures; and invites donors, internationalorganizations and the shipping and portindustry to contribute financial, humanand/or in-kind resources to theIntegrated Technical Co-operationProgramme of the Organization for itsmaritime and port security activities.

Finally the Secretary General of IMO isinvited to give early consideration toestablishing a Maritime Security TrustFund for the purpose of providing a dedi-cated source of financial support for mar-itime security technical-co-operationactivities and, in particular, for providingsupport for national initiatives in devel-oping countries to strengthen their mar-itime security infrastructure and mea-sures.

Conference resolution 8 (Enhancementof security in co-operation with theInternational Labour Organization)invites IMO and the ILO to establish ajoint ILO/IMO Working Group to under-take more detailed work on comprehen-sive port security requirements. IAPH isrepresented on this Group.

Attendants:

• Emili ArbósPort of Barcelona Authority,Chairman

• Santiago MilàPort of Barcelona Authority, Secretary General

• Richard BiagioniPort of Marseilles Authority

• Ian FlandersPort of London Authority

• Volhard EldelbrockDAKOSY

• Jaime LuezasPuertos del Estado, Spain

• Maite RomanTFC Secretariat

• Dietmar JostWCO Senior Technical OfficerThree representatives from Marseilles Customs

Presentation on the SOFI systemby representatives from FrenchCustoms

First of all, the Chairman thanked thePort of Marseilles for hosting the meet-ing and the representatives of theFrench Customs for accepting to makethe presentation of the SOFI system.

The representatives began byexplaining the meaning of SOFI:“Systeme Ordinateurs Fret Internatio-nal” (International Freight ComputerSystem). Its main function is theautomation of processes involved in theimport and export declarations throughthe French Customs. Several processesare excluded from this system: expressfreight procedures, the “procedure dedédouanement à domicile” (PDD), tran-sit processes into the European Union,supplying operations, non-commercialgoods and postal packages.

The SOFI system calculates automati-cally the consignment value and assigns

its taxes and duties. In addition, it auto-matically informs the documentationrequired according to the different regu-lations and rapidly selects the circuit ofthe declaration. This system can beused by a PC not located at the placewhere the declaration will be presented:the declaration is prepared through theSOFI system and then delivered elec-tronically to a Customs agent that pre-sents it at the Customs offices.

There are four types of SOFI users:“main users”, “secondary users”, “UBDusers” and “UBDD users”. “Main users”have a private PC and are identified byCustoms by a special code; “Secondaryusers” use the PC of the main users aswell as their code; “UBD users” use aPC offered by a Chamber of Commerceor a Port Authority and located at theoffices of these institutions. Finally,“UBDD users” use a PC offered byCustoms and located at its offices.

The tariffs for “Main users” are 150euros per year plus a tariff per declara-tion sent through SOFI (3 euros importand 1.5 euros export and transit).“Secondary users” are requested to paythe tariff fixed by the “main user” (theone who rents its special code to thesecondary user), while the “UBD”should pay the tariff fixed by theChamber of Commerce or the PortAuthority. Finally, the “UBDD” userspay a tariff of 4.8 euros and 4.05 eurosfor export and transit.

The Chairman thanked the represen-tatives from Marseilles Customs for theirinteresting presentation and congratu-lated them on such an useful system.

Presentation on “WCO Initiativesfor supply chain security andtrade facilitation” by Mr DietmarJost, WCO Senior TechnicalOfficer (documentation attached).

At the last TFC meeting, the hardwork undertaken in the recent years bythe World Customs Organisation (WCO)was stressed. The TFC has been follow-ing up very closely the WCO projects

Committee Report

Trade FacilitationCommittee

November 14, 2002, Marseilles, France



and Mr Alan Long, TFC member fromthe Port of Felixstowe, regularly attendsthe WCO Information Management Sub-Committee and reports to theCommittee regularly.

Due to the importance of the WCOwork and its consequences for ports, itwas agreed to contact the WorldCustoms Organisation in order to beinformed directly by a WCO representa-tive of the future plans and projects ofsuch an important organisation.

Mr Dietmar Jost, WCO SeniorTechnical Officer and member of theUNCEFACT CSG, accepted the TFCinvitation of presenting the most rele-vant WCO issues to the TFC membersattending the meeting. The Chairmanthanked him for accepting the invitation,especially as he came from Brussels justfor the presentation.

Mr Jost began his presentation byexplaining the WCO Customs DataModel project. He underlined that it wasa G7 Initiative that, at the beginning of2002, was moved to the WCO. The mainobjective of this project is to provide acommon understanding of Customsinformation requirements through theestablishment of standardized and har-monized information requirements andprocedures. It supposes a first steptowards a closer integration in customsprocedures through the statement of acore data set agreement.

As Mr Jost explained, this Initiative isbased on the following principles:Business process modelling, Use of EDIand e-commerce technology, Commondata repository, Segregation of datarequirements, Seamless transaction anda Single window environment. There are161 data elements in the Data Modelversion 1 and each data set is structuredinto 7 categories: general; com-modity/shipment identifiers; duty/taxcalculation; country/place/location; per-sons/parties; transportation informationand value-commercial transaction infor-mation.

Efforts are being made to include themost needed and reliable informationand, although there is a great deal ofinformation included in it, it is still nec-essary to include information thatinvolves the whole logistics chain aswell as complementary informationregarding security issues, especiallyafter the events of 11 Sept. Mr Jostaffirmed that the WCO is working hardto fulfill these requirements and achievea flexible and reliable set of data.

Regarding security issues, Mr Jostpointed out that, at this moment, securi-ty efforts had been taken just at theimport side of a transaction and that,

the USA’ objective by its “ContainerSecurity Initiative” (CSI) is to focus itsattention on controlling the export pro-cedures.

Continuing, Mr Erdelbrock explainedhis experience when the US Customsvisited the Port of Hamburg and Mr Milàcommented that at the last UNCEFACTCSG meeting he expressed his disagree-ment regarding the selection of the “top20 ports” by the USA’s Customs withinthe CSI. This selection divides ports intotwo categories: the “USA security com-plying” ports, favoured in their tradewith the USA, and a second category ofports without this favour. This dramati-cally distorts trade and the free marketrules.

Mr Jost noted that the USA’ CSI is aconsequence of the short control ofexport procedures and goods and high-lighted the need for a further develop-ment in these kinds of measures byeach country. Mr Jost commented thatfocussing on export procedures willbecome the basis of security measuresin the near future. Therefore, in MrJost’s opinion, the security measures tobe undertaken are increasing the co-operation between Customs andexporters, who are the origin of the mostimportant part of the required securityinformation.

The attendants stated the need of aneutral institution that would certify aport as “reliable” instead of one countryunilaterally (like the USA by the CSI).This institution should monitor andmake country reports in order to studythe accomplishment of the “mutual con-fidence” requirements.

However, the members attendingagreed with Mr Jost in affirming thatsecurity measures such as the SCIwould not be very effective in increasingsecurity and that it should be achievedby risk management, co-operation andintelligence.

The next WCO initiative explained byMr Jost was the “Unique ConsignmentReference Number”. The UniqueConsignment Reference (UCR) can bedefined as a unique referring system foruse between parties as a means of refer-ring to a trade transaction and/orConsignment. Its aim is to reduce thenumber and different styles of refer-ences. It is not intended as a method ofproduct identification.

Mr Jost informed that the UCR objec-tives were to:- Define a generic and flexible mechanism to

cope with most common scenarios ininternational trade

- Make maximal use of existing supplier, cus-tomer and transport references

- Enable customs authorities to facilitatelegitimate international trade

- Provide customs with an efficient tool toexchange information between enforce-ment agencies

Furthermore, Mr Jost commented onthe benefits of the use of the UCR andstressed that it will promote safe andsecure borders by providing enhancedaccess to information at time of release,it will help to speed release, it will helpin the management of the logisticalchain and enhance just-in-time opera-tions, it will eliminate redundant andrepetitive data submitted by the carrierand the importer and it will reduce com-pliance costs.

As far as the UCR implementation isconcerned, Mr Jost explained that inFebruary 2002 a review of the UCR wasinitiated by the most important interna-tional trade organisations (ICC,IATA,…). The main conclusions from thecomments from these organisations arethat the concept is fully supported butthere should be more flexibility on howit is developed.

Mr Jost indicated that this reviewprocess showed that the concept itselfis correct but how it is developed shouldchange. Consequently, the WCO isreviewing similar existing systems inseveral industry sectors in order to takeadvantage of the best solutions and tofind common implementation rules.

To conclude, Mr Jost said that a finalagreement on UCR is expected inJanuary 2003 and reiterated that UCR isstill a valid proposal for the trade andtransport communities.

The Chairman thanked Mr Jost onbehalf of himself and the attendants forhis presentation and underlined that ithelped the attendants to better under-stand these important projects. Theattendants agreed that these kinds ofpresentations were highly valued andthat it would be quite interesting tohave the possibility of similar presenta-tions at future TFC meetings.

After these two interesting presenta-tions, the meeting continued with theproposed items of the meeting.

Agenda Item 1:AGENDA & OPENING REMARKS

The Chairman commented that, as theattendants had received the documentationbeforehand, some of the agenda items wouldbe reviewed rapidly in order to concentratethe discussions on the most important issues.

Then the agenda was approved with noamendment.



Agenda Item 2: MEMBERSHIP OF THE TFC

No amendment was made regarding thedata of the TFC members attending.

Agenda Item 3: REPORTS TO THE COMMITTEE

As the Minutes of the Barcelona meetinghad already been sent by e-mail and includedin the documentation, they were approvedwithout amendments.

Moreover, the Chairman commented thatattendants could find the documentation ofthe Chairman’s report on the latest TFCactivities included in the documentation andthe Chairman’s report on the TFC’s latestactivities that was required for the IAPHEXCO meeting held in Kobe.

In the report, and among other subjects,the chairman explained the involvement ofTFC in the UNCEFACT and the new UNCE-FACT structure adopted at the Plenary ses-sion in May 2002. The different groups wereexplained as well as their responsibilities.

As far as electronic developments are con-cerned, the document prepared by theCommittee on Governmental Affairs of theUS Senate was highlighted as a good explana-tion of the XML . It explains the importanceof XML and why XML business standards areneeded.

Regarding the XML business standards, theChairman affirmed that this is a uniqueopportunity for IAPH to take an active partin this process and become the leading portsorganisation. The Chairman explained thatthe TFC proposed to the IAPH Secretariatto contract an expert dedicated to studyingprocesses and messages at ports, so that bestpractices and XML port messages could berecommended to all IAPH members in theebXML initiative framework..

Agenda Item 4: INVOLVEMENT WITH OTHERORGANISATIONS

The Chairman commented that informa-tion regarding a two-day Symposium on thedevelopment of measures to improve securi-ty of the international trade supply chaincould be found in the dossier.Representatives of the International MaritimeOrganisation (IMO), International Council ofShipping and the IAPH attended (Mr van derKluit, as IAPH Delegate for the Security TaskForce attended representing IAPH).

As attendants could see, during theSymposium delegates expressed the need forthe WCO to take the lead in achieving co-ordination amongst the many public and pri-vate sector stakeholders involved in theinternational trade supply chain. They agreedthat a multilateral approach is necessary tomanage this global concern and that theexchange of information supported by theuse of modern information technology

should provide the core elements of newstandards to be developed by the WCO.Ultimate success will depend on the partner-ship between Customs and the trade to col-lect the necessary information to drive theseprocesses.

Another document included in the docu-mentation, as Mr Arbós pointed out, was“Data standarization approach of the WCO”.This document, prepared by the UnitedStates Customs Service, gives a goodoverview of the WCO Data Model and givessome recommendations to WCO to developit efficiently.

The WCO Data model should becomethe finite universe of elements from whicheach customs administration chooses those itrequires of traders to process their transac-tions electronically. The data elements can beimagined as words, and the data model as thedictionary containing all the words and theirdefinitions. Electronic messages for interna-tional trade transactions will use only wordsand definitions from this dictionary so thatimporters, exporters, shippers, customs andothers involved can communicate efficiently,and with the confidence that everyone elsehas the same definition for the words.

Among other recommendations, the USCustoms recommends that WCO have regu-lar consultations with the international trad-ing community and it considers that they areessential to the usefulness and success of thiseffort.

The next subject discussed was the French“Traffic 2000” project. At the last TFC meet-ing, Mr Biagioni mentioned this project forthe tracking of dangerous goods and the TFCSecretariat agreed to search for informationregarding it. The information was included inthe documentation.

Mr Biagioni explained that he had been at apresentation regarding this project around 6months before and that he would ask formore information to Mr Jean Denel, from LeHavre Port, who is leading this project, inorder to send it to TFC members.

As far as the new UNCEFACT structure isconcerned, Mr Santiago Milà commented thatthe document included in the documentationand sent previously by email to TFC mem-bers was the one approved at the MayPlenary meeting. Mr Milà underlined the rele-vance of the changes of this new structureand informed that the first UNCEFACTForum took place at the beginning ofSeptember in Geneva. The Forum is the newevent approved with this new structure,where all Groups meet at the same locationat one time in order to facilitate closer liaisonand full interaction as a single working body.

Continuing with UNCEFACT subjects, MrMilà explained that the UNCEFACTRecommendation 21 on “Codes for types ofcargo, packages and packaging materials” wasstill under review. So that the final version

could not be delivered to attendants asagreed at the last TFC meeting. Mr Milàassured us that when it was approved, itwould be sent to TFC members.

The last point of this agenda item was the“UNCTAD Questionnaire on TransportDocuments in International Trade”. MrArbós commented that the TokyoSecretariat had sent this UNCTAD question-naire regarding the problem areas of docu-mentation flow in maritime transport.

This questionnaire will be the basis for anUNCTAD study relating documentation flowin maritime transport as a consequence ofthe recommendation made by the attendantsat the “UNCTAD Expert meeting on elec-tronic commerce and international transportservices”, held in Geneva in September 2001.

Mr Arbós explained that the Port ofBarcelona had circulated it among privatecompanies that normally deal with Bills ofLading and encouraged the TFC attendantsto send it to private companies that deal withBills of lading.

Agenda Item 5: PARTICIPATION IN OTHER INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEES

The Chairman commented that attendantscould find the report on the 43rd meeting ofthe WCO Information Management Sub-Committee (IMSC) in the documentation. Asthey could see, the UCR and Data Modelprojects were discussed in depth, as Mr Josthad already informed the meeting.

Moreover, the Chairman referred to theReport on the Ship-Planning Message DesignGroup (SMDG) Working Group meeting, byMr Kenji Itoh. As attendants could see in thedocumentation, the IAPH Secretariat delegat-ed the attendance of the meeting to Mr KenjiItoh, who is from the Japan Association forSimplification of International TradeProcedures (JASTPRO) as well as UNCE-FACT Vice-Chairman.

Mr Itoh could attend only one day but hesent a complete report. As members couldsee from the documentation, very technicalsubjects were discussed at the meeting.Moreover, Mr Itoh, sent the presentationthat he made on “Single window system fortrade and port related procedures in Japan”.

Agenda Item 6: PROGRESS ON MARITIME ELECTRONIC STANDARDS

The Chairman explained that as Mr Inouehad visited the Port of Barcelona in July, hehad taken the opportunity to explain to himpersonally the TFC project of taking an activerole in the ebXML project. Mr Arbós high-lighted that the establishment of the XMLport standards must be carried out by theports themselves and conisider this a uniqueopportunity for IAPH to take the corre-sponding leading role within the port sector.



Mr Arbós stressed that it would be conve-nient if the IAPH approved it as a strategicproject at the October EXCO meeting.Moreover, the constitution of a workingteam, depending on the TFC, and the cost ofthis team was proposed.

The documentation included several moreletters exchanged between Mr Arbós and MrInoue regarding this subject.

Mr Arbós emphasised that the mostimportant issue of this proposal, as he hadstressed in his letters, is that it would changethe role that IAPH had been playing since itwas set up.

Mr Arbós informed that the EXCO meet-ing took place from 14 to 18 October andsince Mr Inoue’s answer, with the finalEXCO decision, had arrived on 5thNovember, it was not possible to include itin the documentation, as such, the Chairmandelivered a copy to the attendants.

As attendants could read, the EXCOdecided to keep the TFC current level ofinvolvement in the ebXML project within theUNCEFACT circle, but to not go further.The EXCO was of an opinion that the effec-tiveness of ebXML might vary among IAPHmember ports due to differences in businessprocedures and requirements. The EXCOsaid that IAPH could not afford the requiredbudget without “assurance of tangible bene-fits to IAPH member ports at large”. Finally,it concluded to request TFC to continue thecurrent involvement at the ebXML projectby “taking active parts in discussions atUNCEFACT and providing opinions fromthe point of view of port authorities”.

All the attendants expressed their disap-pointment and agreed with the Chairmanabout this supposed re-thinking of the TFCrole and activities.

Agenda Item 7: WORK PROGRAMME

As a consequence of the new technologiesand the possibility of sending/receiving infor-mation electronically in an easy manner, MrArbós proposed to strengthen the contactbetween TFC members and the TFCSecretariat by e-mail.

Moreover, Mr Arbós proposed that a rep-resentative from a relevant organisationdealing with electronic commerce and tradefacilitation be invited to make a presentationon the projects developed by them, follow-ing the example of the WCO and the Frenchcustoms presentations at the present meet-ing. As a conclusion, Mr Arbós summarizedhis proposal to focus TFC meetings on pre-sentations of important projects related tothe Committee, increase the member partic-ipation by mail and reduce the number ofmeetings to an annual meeting. Mr Flanderspointed out that the Committee shouldmeet at least once a year.

Mr Milà proposed that a dossier with doc-

umentation could be prepared and sent toTFC members and then the most importantissues could be discussed by mail.

These proposals were approved.Regarding the IT Award, Mr Milà invited

the ports attending the meeting to send theleaflet to organisations from theseports/countries that could take part in it.

Agenda Item 8: ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Finally, the chairman commented thatpeople present could find within the set ofdocuments several copies regarding interna-tional conferences, such as the“Convergence of Web Services, GridServices and the Semantic Web forDelivering E-Services” Conference hosted by

the European Commission; the “UNCTADExperts’ Meeting on Trade Facilitation”; theUNECE Second International Forum onTrade Facilitation “Sharing the Gains ofGlobalisation”, and the 2nd Pan AfricanPorts Conference.

Agenda Item 9: ARRANGEMENTS FOR NEXT MEETING

Following the previous discussion, Mr Jostoffered to hold a TFC meeting in conjunc-tion with to a WCO meeting. TFC membersthanked himfor the offer. Other possibilitieswere proposed, like meeting during theLogistics Exhibition in Barcelona in June, butit was agreed to discuss this by mail.

1. Objectives

A large number of cruise shippingterminals are being newly planned ordeveloped/redeveloped at the memberports. Cruise terminals need, however,especially when they are for interna-

Scope of Project on Cruise Shipping Terminals

Susumu NaruseVice Chair, Port Planning and Construction Committee

PORT Planning and Construction Committee is now considering taking up “Planning ofCruise Shipping Terminals” as a project for the next term.

Having published the revised version of “IAPH Guidelines for Port Planning and Design”with the great passion and effort of the late Mr. John Hayes, who was the chair of the com-mittee, we are now moving forward to another stimulating topic in the port industry.

We will focus on the practical side of the planning involving lots of case studies at mem-ber ports. For those who are currently managing passenger terminals at their ports, partici-pating in the project would be a great opportunity to publicize their facilities and thoughtsabout planning, and for those who are considering planning passenger terminals, it wouldbe a great learning process.

Success of the project will largely depend on the number and the contents of case stud-ies. Participation of member ports in this project is greatly encouraged. The first meetingfor the project will be held on the occasion of the Durban conference.

Susumu NaruseExecutive Vice President, Tomakomai Port Authority, Japan

E-mail : [email protected]

tional cruising, various considerationssuch as convenience and safety of pas-sengers, a security system, and smoothCIQ procedures. They involve a com-pletely different set of problems that arefaced in the development of cargo ter-minals.



Nowadays, this subject seems to beof becoming a keen interest to quite afew of our member ports, however, theplanning concept on cruise shippingterminals is not touched upon at lengthin the renewed “IAPH Guidelines forPort Planning and Design”, published in2001.

The PPCC is taking up the subject asa main work project for the next two-year term. As the nature of IAPH techni-cal committees, the PPCC will focus onthe practical aspect of the planningrather than the theoretical ones.Through review and analysis of variouscruise terminals across the world, thePPCC would like to identify what wecan learn from members’ experiences tobetter plan and develop cruise termi-nals. The outcome of the project will bea combination of concise guidelines forterminal planning and quite a few casestudies of actual terminals with lots ofreference figures and pictures.

2. Scope of Project

2-1 General Review of Cruise Shipping and Terminal Development

Based on readily available infor-mation, general trends will beanalyzed in terms of cruise ship-ping activities, vessel size, termi-nal dimension, etc.

2-2 Case StudiesAmong IAPH members, ports forthe case study will be identifiedand requested to provide basicinformation and illustrations. Acommon format for the case studywill be developed to cover mainfeatures of the terminal as well asimportant planning considera-tions such as the following:

- planning concept- site selection- function and scale of the ter

minal- quay and shore facilities - terminal facilities (viaducts,

waiting space, parking space,baggage handling system, ser-vice facilities, design consider-ations, etc.)

- CIQ procedures - safety and security - port service and port charge- management system- fund acquisition and econom-

ic and financial return

2-3 Security considerationsAfter the events of Sep 11th, the

security of cruise shipping termi-nals has been (or is planned tobe) tightened up around theglobe. Measures to be taken toupgrade the security level ofcruise shipping terminals will bespecifically discussed.

2-4 GuidelinesAll the important points when planning cruise shipping termi-nals will be concisely presentedthrough referring to the above-mentioned various case studies.

3. Tentative Schedule

The project is expected to be com-plete in two years. The step-by-stepschedule is tentatively assumed as fol-lows:

- up to April 2003 to specify ports/ter-minals for case studyto develop a casestudy format(by correspon-

dence among the members)

- May 2003 PPCC meeting (at the Conference in Durban)confirmation of the project contents, discussion of general trends

- Oct 2003 PPCC meeting (at the EXCO meeting in Rotterdam)presentation of and discussion of case studies

- May 2004 PPCC meeting (at the Board Meeting in San Diego)presentation of and discussion of case studies, discussion of guidelines for cruise shipping terminals

- Oct 2004 PPCC meeting (at the EXCO)discussion of the final results of the project

It is at your discretion how you pre-sent your illustration; however, pleasebe advised that it should at least coverthe following points:

1. Background of the projectcruise demand, tourism resources, localeconomy, etc.

2. Planning concept market demand, role of the port (homeport/port of call), competing ports, etc.

3. Site selection of a terminaldistance from downtown and airport,land traffic, etc

4. Function and scale of the terminaldemand forecast (passengers and ship calls), ship types, etc.

5. Dimensions of the berthing facilitieslength, depth, structure, land area, etc.

6. Terminal Facilitiessystems for embarkation and disembarkation, capacity of the terminal building (waiting space, parking space, service space, etc.), landscape, measures to facilitate flow of passengers, baggage handling system, etc.

7. CIQ proceduresmeasures to facilitate procedures, etc.

8. Safety systempassengers safety, baggage safety, etc.

9. Security system measures taken after Sep 11th andtheir effects (favorable and adverse),etc.

10. Port Serviceberth assignment, water supply, treatment of sewage, bilge water, oily water rom kitchen, and ballast water, etc.

11. Port Chargetariff, preferential treatment for cruieships, etc.

12. Managementmanagement body (public and private),management strategy to best employthe terminal facilities, etc.

13. Investment and returninvested fund by source, economicreturn, financial return, overall projectevaluation, etc.

14. Future development plan 15. Appendix (maps, photo pictures,

figures, etc.)

Appendix:

Suggestions for the case study(for those who prepare a case report)



José PerrotChair, Communication & Networking Committee

IAPH is a great family. The members of this family are dis-persed all around the world.To remain in good relations and maintain tight bonds, a

scattered family needs to meet from time to time and exchangeinformation quite often.

The whole IAPH family meets every two years and, in the meantime, othermeetings take place (Mid-Term Conference, EXCO meetings, TechnicalCommittee meetings…). But one cannot imagine that the links between themembers of a united family come down to occasional meetings.

Te port industry is very active and evolution is very swift. To be helpful,the world ports Association should reflect this dynamism and the exchangeof information should be a reality.

Communication tools exist : website, e-mail, fax, postal mail, phone… butdanger remains concerning the recipient of the information: do we know forcertain the right person in charge of such and such an issue?

The ports, large or small, are complex entities and each port has its ownorganization. Therefore it’s not always very easy to get an answer when it’swrongly addressed, and a lot of information does not reach the right per-son…

To help solve this problem, the Communication & Networking Committeeand the Secretariat General thought that the best way, in order to avoid thisloss of information, on the one hand, and to boost the exchange of informa-tion on the other, was to have for each member an official IAPHCorrespondent in charge of maintaining this precious link and facilitatingtheese exchanges.

Good communication is truly compulsory if we wish to get full benefit fromour mutual association. I trust that all members share this view and willadhere to this initiative.

Nominate your IAPHCoordinator

N ONE of the members would deny the vital importance of facilitating a functional (i.e.speedy and reliable) communication network among the members, particularly as thenumber of IAPH members has been increasing worldwide and the scope of our activ-

ities has been expanding and becoming interrelated as recently. Mr. José Perrot, Chair of IAPHCommunication & Networking Committee, with his serious concern over the need to establishsuch a workable means, proposed, on the occasion of the Kobe EXCO meeting last October,his idea to create a network of “IAPH Coordinators” across the whole Association.

Every member of IAPH, both Regular and Associate, has been requested to appoint an IAPHCoordinator for their organizations by the end of February. Upon nomination from members,the list of “IAPH Coordinators” will be made available to you at IAPH website and other publi-cations.

1. Objective

To better facilitate and enhancecommunication between Associationmembers and Head Office and alsoamong the members themselves, byestablishing a network of “IAPHCoordinators” where each memberorganization designates one Coor-dinator among its personnel.

2. Coordinator’s Roles

To liaise between his/her organiza-tion and Head Office and betweenhis/her organization and other mem-bers, in terms of requests for variousactions and information (such as sup-plying news for the port, updatingentry for Membership Directory, andcollecting membership dues etc.),enquiries about specific issues andrequests for opinions/advice on vari-ous matters at large.

To be responsible for all incomingand outgoing communication of theabove information and enquiriesunless otherwise stipulated.

To circulate said information andenquiries within his/her organizationand/or transfer them to the right per-son/department for action, if neces-sary.

To provide Head Office and othermembers with various informationabout his/her organization (such aspersonnel changes, port developmentsetc.). If any member has alreadyestablished routes to disseminatenews for public relations and informa-tion in general among members, suchroutes will be respected.

3. Preferred Qualifications forCoordinator

A Coordinator needs to know themember organization (activities, func-tions, key personnel etc.) in sufficient

Terms of Reference for IAPH Coordinator

depth so as to coordinate all sectionsconcerned without difficulty.

A Coordinator needs to be a personwho can expect full internal supportand respect to carry out his/her dutiesas a Coordinator.

A Coordinator needs to have enoughknowledge about IAPH activities as awhole. For this, Head Office, in coop-eration with Committee onCommunication & Networking, willprepare reference material to brief anewly appointed Coordinator aboutthe activities and organizational struc-tures of IAPH.

4. Others

To be known to all IAPH members,the name and contact information of aCoordinator are to be listed in theAssociation’s Membership Directoryas well as on the Website.

Therefore, any change concerning aCoordinator shall be communicated toHead Office immediately and HeadOffice shall make it known to othermembers without delay via its media.

Inaugural Message from the new 3rd Vice Presidnet

Datin Paduka O.C. PhangGeneral Manger, Port Klang

Seattle, London and, finally, in KualaLumpur, Malaysia in 1999. The rest is his-tory. It is during such occasions that Ilearnt about the workings of IAPH and inparticular appreciated the efforts and workof the technical committees, who we allrecognise as one of the driving forces ofIAPH.

The IAPH motto of “World Peacethrough World Trade – World Tradethrough World Ports” is an eternal flamewhose spirit lives on despite drasticchanges that are constantly taking place.Presently, world trade systems seem tohave entered a new phase where all portshave to take extra precautions to protectthemselves against new threats to ensurecontinued success in world trade.

Against this backdrop of port reforms,intense competition and shipping trendsforce all ports and related organisations tobe more vigilant than ever. Whilst IAPH isdivided into physical zones, let us contin-ue to build one bridge of collaboration anddialogue, based upon mutual respect andfriendship as the most important drivingforce for us to remain strong and to surgeforward.

Powerful forces are reshaping ourworld. Challenges are faced abroad aswell as at home. Whilst we cope withchallenges at home, we also try to seizethe opportunities of the world. We there-



New IAPH 3rd VicePresident Appointed

T HE that election process has been duly completed. Datin Paduka O.C. Phang was elect-ed as the 3rd Vice President to succeed the late Mr. John Hays for the unexpired peri-od of his term with effect from February 1, 2003.

As the result of the nomination in November/December 2002 within the region, the Boardof Directors for Asia/Oceania Region had submitted their resolution that it nominated DatinPaduka O. C. Phang as the candidate for the 3rd Vice President to be elected by the full Boardof Directors of IAPH. Immediately after that, the Secretary General, on December 17, 2002,called for the election by correspondence by the Board of Directors to be closed at the end ofJanuary 2003. In full accordance with the By-Laws, Datin Paduka O.C. Phang has been unani-mously elected by the IAPH Board of Directors.

President Someya sent his letter of official appointment, expressing his sincere congratula-tions to her.

PROFILE OFDATIN PADUKA O.C.

PHANGGENERAL MANAGER

PORT KLANG AUTHORITY

D atin Paduka O.C. Phang ispresently the GeneralManager of Port Klang

Authority, a position she has held sinceSeptember 1997. She has previouslyserved in various capacities, beginningher career in the Prime Minister’sDepartment, the Ministry of Worksand Ministry of Transport. Amongstthe key positions she has held in theMinistry of Transport were the Under-Secretary of Finance andDirector/Under-Secretary of theMaritime Division in the same Ministry.

She holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree(Honours) from the University ofMalaya and attended a ManagementDevelopment Programme in theCranfield School of Management,United Kingdom. She is a Fellow of theChartered Institute of Transport.

She has served as the Chairman ofthe Asia Pacific MOU on Port StateControl for the term from 1994 to1997. She has led many delegations toIMO meetings as well as to the Aseanmeetings. She is Chairman of theMalaysian chapter of the Asean PortsAssociation and also served asChairman of the Industry StandardCommittee (Packaging andDistribution) under the Ministry ofScience, Environment and Technologyfrom 1998 – 2001. She has been par-ticipating in IAPH since the 1991 WorldPorts Conference held in Barcelona,served as the Exco Member represent-ing Port Klang Authority in theAsia/Oceania region from 1999 andundertook the Chairmanship of theIAPH Membership Committee from1999 – 2002.

Dear IAPH Friends,

First and foremost, I would like toexpress my profound thanks to the Boardof Directors of IAPH, the regional Board ofDirectors for Asia/Oceania Region and theother members of Asia/Oceania Region fortheir support in my recent appointment. Itis with a deep sense of humility, honourand deep emotion that I take over thetorch today from the late Mr. John Hayesfrom Sydney Ports Corporation. I wish tothank you all for your confidence and forgiving me the opportunity to further thislink with the prestigious IAPH.

As the first Malaysian to be so honouredby your confidence, and gender-wise too,my objective is to continue with the excel-lent work which my predecessors havecommittedly strived for the Association. Imust thank the IAPH Secretariat for all thehard work that Dr. Inoue-san and his officehave undertaken to maintain continuityand to ensure that there is a smooth trans-fer of authority through affirming old tradi-tions and making new beginnings.

I attended my first IAPH Conference inBarcelona in 1991, at which time I wasserving as the Under-Secretary (FinanceDivision) in the Ministry of Transport. Ayear later, I headed the Maritime Divisionin the same Ministry. From then onwardsI participated in the Conferences held in

fore have to work to shape changethrough the power of our ideas. We needeach other. Let us use our creative energyto ensure IAPH move forward with deter-mination and strength and we assureIAPH of our support and commitment.

With these few words, I thank you allagain for your trust and I will do my bestto help steer the ship on course in linewith IAPH’s motto.

Thank you.

ued, “I must also tender myresignation as Chairman of theIAPH Committee of LegalCounselors, another step that Itake with the utmost sadness.I am confidant that Mr.Mongeau can and will carry onthe important work to finalizethe By-Laws of the IAPH and

the other work of the Committee”. Inclosing, he mentioned, “The manyfriendships I have made over the yearswithin the Association will forever becherished by me”.

Mr. Welsh became an IAPH LegalCounselor in November 1994 at theappointment of the Board of Directors.Mr. Welsh took over as chair of the IAPH

Port Autonome deDunkerque. He was also

Chairman of ISTED, theFrench non-profit mak-ing association, a plat-form for study anddebate, informationand action, at the ser-vice of its public andprivate members in thepublic works, transport,

planning, cities andenvironment sectors.Of course, his involve-

ment in IAPH was alsorecalled.

At the beginning Jean Smagghewas involved in the Dredging Task Force,then Chairman of the COPSEC rich of its 4subcommittees, elected 3rd VicePresident in 1991 at the BarcelonaConference, President from 1997 to 1999,Honorary Member in 1999. Jean Smaggheis fully convinced of the role IAPH canplay for the port industry, and spent muchof his precious time promoting the associ-ation, supporting internal improvementsto make it more effective, defending theinterests of world ports.

On January 8, the music was Brasilian,probably a symbol for Jean Smagghe’open mind on the international issues andperhaps a sign to IAPH to be more pre-sent in South America.

E VEN if Paris is 200kilometers from theseaside, the

atmosphere of the banksof the river Seine had asalty ocean smell onJanuary 8, the dayJean Smagghe saidgood bye to his profes-sional life.

Numerous friendsfrom the French ports,the Ministry of Transportand the famous Frenchcorps of Engineers Ponts etChaussées were present. JeanChapon, Previous Minister incharge of Seaports and Maritime Affairs,summed up the long involvement of JeanSmagghe in international transportationand in port issues.

Jean Smagghe started his long careeron different works project in Africa, wasin charge of the operations of the port ofBordeaux, managed the internationalactivities of the French EngineeringCompany (BCEOM), was the CEO of theport of Nantes-Saint Nazaire beforebecoming the CEO of the port of Le Havre.Back to Paris in 1994 he was in charge ofdifferent main studies regarding trans-portation organizations, and remained incontact with the ports as member of theBoard, Port Autonome de Bordeaux and



Past President Jean Smagghe Retires

I N his letter of December18, 2002, addressed toPresident Someya, Mr.

Hugh H. Welsh, First DeputyGeneral Counsel, the PortAuthority of New York andNew Jersey, and the Chairmanof IAPH’s Legal Counselors,wrote: “It is with great sad-ness that I must advise you of my deci-sion to retire from the Port Authority ofNew York and New Jersey. After 33years with the Authority, it was a diffi-cult decision to make but I finally con-cluded that while there would never bea perfect time to leave, this was as con-venient as any time that could be antici-pated. With my retirement”, he contin-

Mr. Hugh H. Welsh Retires from Port Authority and as Chair of

IAPH Legal Counselors

Legal Counselors in 1994, succeedingMr. P.J. Falvey, continuing in that roleuntil now. Since 1997, he has also beenchairing the Constitution and By-LawsCommittee. He was appointed to chairthe IAPH Advisory Council in 1999.During his tenure at IAPH, he attendedmost of the biennial conferences andchaired the Bills and ResolutionsCommittee, a conference committee andhelped the President and VicePresidents in the context of the proceed-ings of the Conferences. He also attend-ed many of the Exco Meetings and,recently, the Mid-Term Board Meeting in2002 in Marseilles. Of late he has exten-sively devoted his time to drafting up theConstitution and By-Laws of the IAPH,with the similarly enthusiastic support ofMr. J. Mongeau, Montreal Port Authority,as the Vice Chairman of the IAPH LegalCounselors.

Membership Notes New MembersRegular Members

Autoridad Portuaria de Bilbao (Spain)Address: Campo de Volantin No 37, 48007-

Bilbao, SPAINAttn.: Luis Gabiola Mendieta, Director,

Operations and CommercialDepartment

Phone: +34-94-4871200Fax: +34-94-4871208E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.bilbaoport.es

Autoridad Portuaria de Santa Cruz deTenerife (Spain)Address: Avda. Francisco La Roche, No 49,

38001-Santa Cruz de Tenerife (Islas Canarias-España) SPAIN

Attn.: Mr. Luis P. Suárez Trenor, PresidentePhone: +34-922605465Fax: +34-922605480E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.puertosdetenerife.org

Associate Members

Gantry Krantechnik GmbH (Germany) [A-2-3]Address: Hirzenrott 10.D-52076 Aachen, GER-MANYAttn.: Mr. Pilippe Culot, General ManagerPhone: +49-2408-955451Fax: +49-2408-945458E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.gantry.com

Cavotec Group (Sweden) [A-2-1]Address: Markörgatan 3 SE-136 44 Haninge,

SWEDENAttn.: Mr. Lars Hellman, Group Vice PresidentPhone: +46-8-556-522-20Fax: +46-8-556-522-19E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.cavotec.com

ChangesNational Company “Maritime PortsAdministration Constanza” SA (Romania)

President of the Board of Administration:Mr. Gheorghe Moldoveanu


1. Introduction

“The EU now has one of the bestregulatory arsenals in the world toguarantee maritime safety. It is essen-tial that these measures should be putinto effect with the utmost resolutionand speed. The Commission, for itspart, will continue its efforts and pro-pose follow-up measures to completethese rules and banish the spectre of anew Erika disaster.”

EU Commissioner Loyola de Palacio,commenting on the Erika I and II pack-ages.

A number of important EU policy doc-uments, of which the most important isthe White Paper “European TransportPolicy for 2010: Time to Decide”, haveput increasing emphasis on maritimesafety. These documents make it clear

that even though the maritime transportmode’s safety record is consideredacceptable, and even though this modeis considered environment - friendly,more remains to be done to increasemaritime safety even further.

This paper addresses importantissues as regards policy formulation inthe maritime safety area. As the level ofmaritime safety can be critically shapedas a result of maritime safety policies, itis clear that a critical assessment on thenature of these policies and on the waythat these are put forward is necessary.Such an assessment is attempted in

this paper, albeit qualitatively, alongwith some opinions on possible pitfallsand on what needs to be done so thatthis process can be further improved.

The rest of this paper is organized asfollows. Section 2 outlines the mainplayers in worldwide maritime safetypolicy-making, along with some of theobstacles they encounter in their task.Section 3 discusses the need for proac-tive policies. Sections 4 to 8 deal withpolicy issues in specific accident cate-gories, such as tanker groundings, shipcollisions, accidents due to bad weath-er, bulk carrier losses and Roro ferrylosses. Finally section 9 presents someconclusions and recommendations.

2. The policy-making process

To move on effectively toward thegoal of increased maritime safety, onemust have a clear picture of who devel-ops maritime safety policy and howsuch policy is developed. This is morecomplex than it may seem at firstglance. Clarifying the term “maritimesafety policy” is necessary at first. Atits broadest interpretation, one mayinclude any measure that falls into oneor more of the following categories:Laws, rules, regulations, directives,instructions, memoranda of understand-ing (MOUs), resolutions, protocols,guidelines, specifications, standards,recommendations, codes, practices, orgenerally any other measure that speci-fies, prescribes, encourages, mandates,recommends, or enforces on an on-going way specific actions that mayimpact maritime safety. For instance, anIMO rule on the strength of transversebulkheads in bulk carriers, a nationalregulation on vessel traffic separation, aregulation on the banning of alcohol useonboard, a P&I club rule on liability andcompensation, an engine maintenancepractice, and, last but not least, the USOil Pollution Act of 1990, all may beclassified under the realm of “maritime

Maritime SafetyTo Be or Not to Be Proactive

Prof. Harilaos N. PsaraftisNational Technical University of AthensFormer CEO, Piraeus Port Authority

This paper was first published in the WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, Vol. 1, pp. 3-16, October 2002. Thecatastrophic Prestige oil spill occurred a few weeks later. The events that followed included proposals by theEU to ban the transport of heavy fuel oil by single-hull tankers, as well as proposals by Spain and France thatsuch ships should sail at least 200 miles away from the coastline. Whatever the value of such policies, Ibelieve that the Prestige accident and the reaction to it reinforce the main thrust of this paper and make itmore relevant than ever.

T HE purpose of this paper is to address important issues as regards policy formula-tion in the maritime safety area. The main thesis of the paper is that there is someway to achieve a truly proactive maritime safety regime and there even seems to

be recent progress toward this end. A qualitative assessment on the nature of maritimesafety policies and on the way that these are put forward is attempted, along with someopinions on possible pitfalls and on what needs to be done so that this process can be fur-ther improved.

ABSTRACT


safety policy”.The main player in the international

maritime safety regulatory regime is theInternational Maritime Organization(IMO), and specifically the InternationalConvention on Safety of Life at Sea (alsoknown as SOLAS), which is IMO’s basicforum dealing with maritime safety. Inaddition to SOLAS, the IMO adopts alsoother measures that may impact mar-itime safety, either directly or indirectly.Examples are the Convention onStandards of Training, Certification andWatchkeeping of Seafarers (also knownas the STCW Convention) and the HighSpeed Craft Code (HSC Code). The IMOdoes not implement or enforce regula-tions, that being the responsibility ofmember states.

IMO’s policy is also to bridge the gapbetween new and existing ship stan-dards, emphasize the role of the humanelement, shift the emphasis from thedevelopment of new to the implementa-tion of existing standards, and general-ly promote a safety culture in all mar-itime activities. To promote a scientificapproach to maritime safety, the FormalSafety Assessment (FSA) methodologyhas been proposed and the IMO’sMaritime Safety Committee (MSC) istasked to implement this methodologyin the years ahead.

The International Safety Management(ISM) Code is seen as one of the instru-ments that would enhance safety forships that are certified to comply withit. Classification societies and IACS (theInternational Association ofClassification Societies) are expected toplay a critical role in that regard.Quality shipping campaigns regard theimplementation of the ISM Code astheir central pillar. In parallel to theIMO, IACS is influential in the develop-ment of standards that pertain to safe-ty.

In addition to the above, a number ofother important players have key rolesin the development, implementationand enforcement of maritime safety reg-ulations. These players include flagstates, port states, international bodiessuch as the European Union (EU), labororganizations such as the InternationalLabour Organisation (ILO), the shippingcompanies themselves, and other mar-itime-related industries (ports, shippers,shipyards, P&I clubs, environmentgroups, etc).

Collectively, maritime safety policiesadvanced by the above players can besaid to be classified into categories thatinclude training requirements for sea-farers, certification of seafarers, fitnessfor work, use of alcohol and drugs,

fatigue, working and living conditionsonboard, common working languagebetween crew members, ship equip-ment and human-machine interface,ship-to-ship and ship-to-shore commu-nication, vessel traffic services and ves-sel traffic management information ser-vices, global maritime distress and safe-ty systems, ship reporting systems, portand harbor safety regulations, naviga-tion and pilotage, loading, stowage anddischarging, fire-fighting, search andrescue, environmental protection,design of ships, construction of ships,maintenance of ships, survival capabili-ty of ships, and emergency and evacua-tion procedures. Some of the above cat-egories are further classified accordingto the type of ship in question (e.g.,design of bulk carriers, Roro ferries,tankers, etc).

It does not take too much thought torealize that just the sheer number ofplayers and the vast array of topicsinvolved in the formulation of maritimesafety policy may lead to some or all ofthe following situations:

• Over-regulation • Overlaps in regulation• Inconsistencies in regulation• Gaps in regulation

Such situations have been widelycriticized by the shipping industry ascontributing to both a reduction in com-petitiveness within the industrybecause of excessive regulation, and, toa lack of a comprehensive safety regimebecause of possible gaps in such regu-lation. Many industry circles feel thatexisting safety rules are more than ade-quate, but lack of enforcement or unifor-mity of such rules is the main factor thatcauses accidents. This also causes anon-level playing field that discrimi-nates against those who play by therules versus those who do not. Thus,these circles profess that instead ofdeveloping new policies, the focusshould be on how to best enforce exist-ing ones.

3. The need to be proactive

Policies currently developed and pur-sued in the maritime safety area areoften purported to be “proactive”.Proactive means an early stage identifi-cation of factors that may adverselyaffect maritime safety and immediatedevelopment of regulatory action to pre-vent undesirable events, as opposed tojust an after-the-fact ad-hoc reaction toa single accident. Methodologies such

as FSA are considered as prime instru-ments for the development of proactivepolicies.

Among many other researchers,Psaraftis et al (1998a,b) present someanalyses of database accidents that canlead to some conclusions on possibledetermining factors that are importantfrom a statistical significance view-point. Annex A shows some 77 distinctcasualty cause codes, taken from DetNorske Veritas’s “DAMA” accidentdatabase structure.

However, FSA and other sophisticat-ed tools are often difficult to use, and infact are used rather seldom, particularlyin cases action is needed fast.Determining the factors that are mostimportant in a specific accident is noeasy task, and may involve some non-trivial scientific analysis that can taketime and effort to be carried out effec-tively. It is actually conceivable that theprecise cause of certain accidents maytake many years or may even never beascertained precisely, as is sometimesthe case in airline accidents.

So in spite of the availability of sys-tematic tools, it is no surprise that thegoal of proactive policy-making has notbeen followed to date as much as itshould. People involved in top-level pol-icy-making are often under pressurefrom political constituencies, environ-ment groups and especially from themedia to act decisively with swift andbold moves that signal their determina-tion to improve safety “here and now”. Ibelieve that such an environment doeslittle justice not only to methods suchas FSA, but also to the very policy-mak-ing process, and, in the final analysis, tomaritime safety itself.

In fact, despite the stated proactivepolicy goal, it is no secret that most ofthe past and recent regulatory activityon maritime safety has been driven bymajor maritime disasters. These includethe capsizing of the Herald of FreeEnterprise in 1987 (193 lives lost), thegrounding of the Exxon Valdez in 1989(major pollution), the fire onboard theScandinavian Star in 1990 (158 liveslost), the sinking of the Estonia in 1994(852 lives lost), as well as several majorbulk carrier losses (e.g. Derbyshire in1980- 44 lives lost). The Erika accidentin 1999 has spurred two major regulato-ry packages by the EU, the so-calledErika I and Erika II packages.

In that sense, maritime safety policy-making has been very much “reactive”.In principle there is nothing wrong withsuch an approach, and in fact it wouldbe a major mistake not to draw lessonsfrom major catastrophes such as the


above. However, a fundamental provisois that the policy that is ultimatelyadopted correctly identifies and assess-es the most important contributing fac-tors of such accidents and is formulatedin such a way so as to prevent such fac-tors to appear again, or alleviate theirconsequences in case they do.

It is precisely this point that consti-tutes, in my opinion, a significant con-troversy on the approach to maritimesafety regulatory policy: Much of thepolicies that have been adopted in theaftermath of major accidents focus on“engineering” or “design” solutions.

In fact, such solutions include:

• Tanker design (double hulls, double bottoms).

• Roro/ Ferry design (internal subdivisions,evacuation procedures).

• Bulk carrier design (transverse bulkheads,double hulls).

However, there has been ample evi-dence, including a number of quantita-tive analyses, that support the basicpremise that most maritime accidents(and most notably the very accidentsthat have driven recent regulatory activ-ity) are mainly due to failures in thehuman element link of the maritimesafety chain. This means that unlessthis link is unambiguously strength-ened, strengthening any other link(such as the one on design) is likely toproduce questionable results.

The operational and economic conse-quences of measures such as the aboveare obviously non-trivial. Entire fleets ofships not complying with these policiesare rendered obsolete. Ship owners areforced either to make very expensiveconversions, or purchase new shipsaltogether. The operational capacity ofships involved is seriously affected,although benefits may accrue to unem-ployed seafarers, as more ships will benecessary to carry the same cargo.Shipyards have to radically alter theirdesigns to adapt to the new rules,although obviously they will benefitfrom increased sales of new ships.Demand for ship scrapping capacitygoes at high levels. However, the fun-damental question of what are the ben-efits of such policies to maritime safety,(and, by extension, to the marine envi-ronment), and at what cost these bene-fits will come about, remains largelyunanswered.

More light on these matters is shed inthe sections that follow.

4. Tanker groundings

Torrey Canyon, 1967. Amoco Cadiz,1978. Exxon Valdez, 1989. Erika, 1999.Every about 10 years, a catastrophic oilspill captures the world’s headlines, notcounting many other spills that happenin between. As far as relevant policygoes, the turning point came in 1989.Producing one of the worst oil spills inU.S. history, the tanker Exxon Valdez,later renamed Sea River Mediterraneanand forever banned by federal law fromrevisiting Alaskan waters, is responsi-ble for one of the most far-reachingpieces of maritime legislation. The OilPollution Act of 1990 (OPA’ 90) stipu-lates, among other things, drasticchanges in the design and constructionof tanker vessels allowed into U.S. terri-torial waters, double hulls and doublebottoms being the most significantrequired feature.

OPA’90, even though a piece ofnational legislation, has had worldwideimplications. These implications havehad drastic ramifications on the design,operation, and economics of waterbornepetroleum transport, not just in the U.S.,but worldwide. The central questionhowever is, what benefits has this poli-cy eventually produced, and at whatcost?

Although it is still premature, a simi-lar question can be asked vis-à-vis theErika I package, which is similar in spir-it as regards phasing out single-hulltankers in European waters. This pack-age was formulated in the aftermath ofthe Erika oil spill, and has been alreadywritten into EU law. In addition tophasing out single-hull tankers, it alsocalls upon a greater control of the activi-ties of classification societies and astepped up port state control system.

I know of no analysis that hasanswered the above “cost-benefit”questions, which are admittedly diffi-cult. In a sense, only time may provideanswers, although it is fair to speculatethat even after a long time this will bedifficult to ascertain. The benefits inquestion will have to be calculated interms of environmental and other eco-nomic damages averted because of thenew tanker designs, for those caseswhere it can be documented that thesedesigns had a tangible effect (ground-ing but no spill because of it). The costswill have to be calculated in terms ofboth additional construction cost andreduced revenues due to lower cargocarrying capacity. No estimate of eitherthese benefits or these costs is current-ly available.

Whatever these costs and benefitsmight be, it is widely accepted that themain reason behind both accidents wasa failure in the human element part ofthe equation. In the Exxon Valdez case,the US National Transportation SafetyBoard (NTSB) determined as probablecauses the use of alcohol by the ship’smaster, the failure of the third mate toproperly manoeuvre the vessel becauseof fatigue, and the failure of the vesseltraffic service because of inadequatemanning levels, among other factors. Inthe Erika case, faulty inspection proce-dures by Italian classification societyRINA and faulty maintenance proce-dures were speculated as probablecauses.

Given the above, one cannot resistasking the obligatory question: Since nocost-benefit analysis that supported theformulation of these policies prior totheir adoption is known, were OPA’90and the Erika I package more of a‘knee-jerk’ reaction to a pair of bad acci-dents, and as such, perhaps theymissed the chance to include other ele-ments that would really make a differ-ence?

There is no easy answer to this ques-tion, which may be considered unfair bymaritime policy-makers. One could saythat both pieces of legislation tackle theproblem mainly in an indirect way, byproviding the human element with bet-ter technology (less prone to hull rup-ture) in case a tanker grounding occurs.Looking at more direct ways to solvethe problem, in 1993 the US NTSB pro-posed uniform alcohol regulations for alltransport professionals, a zero bloodalcohol level while on duty, and randomalcohol testing as a deterrent. However,these proposals have not been accept-ed, leaving the old (1987) US CoastGuard alcohol regulations operational.These regulations apply to all US flagvessels and those sailing US territorialwaters, and stipulate allowable alcohollevels more stringent than those recom-mended by the IMO STCW Convention.

Note that the EU still has not includ-ed the STCW alcohol recommendationsinto the training legislation that trans-lates the STCW Convention into EUlaw, so it is up to each individual EUmember state to decide to implementthe IMO alcohol rules or not. Note alsothat the use of alcohol by ExxonValdez’s Captain Hazelwood (who isrumored to still have his license) hasnot been proven in court. The ExxonValdez litigation battle was particularlycomplex and lasted many years, andthe same is speculated to happen in theErika case.


In all fairness, the Erika I packageincludes also other, more direct provi-sions, such as tighter inspections byclassification societies and by port statecontrol, that might significantly reducethe risk of such accidents. The samecan be said about the Erika II package(which is not as yet officially adopted),which includes provisions for the estab-lishment of a European Maritime SafetyAgency, better information and moni-toring procedures, and a compensationscheme for oil spill victims. Still, thecost-benefit issue is equally valid formost of these proposed measures. Tomy knowledge, there has been no suchanalysis to evaluate their impact priorto their adoption.

5. Ship collisions

Many ship collisions are due to non-observance of rules pertaining to colli-sion avoidance, as much as many oth-ers are due to technical malfunctions orother failures (for instance, radar mal-functions, rudder or propeller malfunc-tions, etc, which may lead to a colli-sion).

Extending the same type of OPA’90 -Erika I rationale to ship collisions, onecould conceivably speculate that manyships involved in collisions (not neces-sarily tankers) would have a better colli-sion survivability if they had a doublehull. This means that one could conceiv-ably devise a policy or regulation thatwould require selected types of ships(e.g., bulk carriers, container ships, oreven passenger ships) to be designedor “armored” in such a way, with therationale that this would make the con-sequences of collisions less severe.

Damage stability rules notwithstand-ing, some people might raise eyebrowsto such a policy alternative, for it couldhave very adverse cost implications,whereas its potential benefits mightremain dubious at best. Note howeverthat it is precisely this type of rationalethat finally prevailed in the OPA ’90 andin Erika I, by forcing construction andoperation of double-hulled and double-skinned tankers so as to prevent pollu-tion.

For ship collisions, even thoughcrash-worthiness could be very impor-tant, and in spite of important R&Dbeing conducted on this topic, the ques-tion is how distant is this issue in termsof becoming part of the maritime safetypolicy-making process. Note that thissame issue is already part of thisprocess in other transport modes (mostnotably the automotive one, where

there are very comprehensive rules onbumpers, stiffeners, and voluntary other“passive” safety means such aspadding and airbags). Therefore itcould, at some appropriate point intime, be introduced to the maritime sec-tor as well, hopefully after it has beenthoroughly assessed.

One could also conceivably examinepolicies that would better protect pas-sengers in case a ship collision occurs.For instance, this might include wear-ing life-vests until the ship is in theopen sea. Although such a policy lookssimilar to the “fasten seat belts” policyduring aircraft takeoffs and landings,the concern is that it could be too cum-bersome to implement on passengerships, particularly on cruise ships. But ifa cumbersome policy saves lives, it can-not be rejected outright. Application ofsuch a policy to High Speed Craft mayalso be warranted. Better passengerprotection in case of a collision mightalso entail requiring passenger ships(especially High Speed Craft) to havespecially padded interiors and furniture,to alleviate the likelihood of somebodybeing wounded in case of a collision.

Among “active” safety measures,policies that increase safety via vesseltraffic management information sys-tems (VTMIS) should be carefully recon-sidered. The fundamental differencebetween such systems at sea and theequivalent systems in other transportmodes (most notably in air, but also inrail transport) is the degree of freedomenjoyed by a ship’s master as comparedto that of an aircraft pilot or a locomo-tive driver. Whereas the latter two areinvariably subject to extremely strictcentralized traffic control schemes-which leave very little freedom to act ontheir own, the former has significantleeway in controlling the movement ofhis vessel, provided some establishedrules for collision avoidance are fol-lowed.

The fundamental policy question hereis this: Given that the rules for collisionavoidance are sometimes not followed-with catastrophic results at times,would it be perhaps better to switch toa system similar to that used in airtransport? After all, the air traffic con-trol system is considered one of themain factors that have contributed tothe legendary safety record of aviation.In the maritime equivalent of such asystem, the ship’s master would beobliged to obey the instructions of ashore-based maritime traffic controller,with little or no freedom to act on hisown. Such a system would be based ona VTMIS, but there would be specific

rules on what is to be decided by theshore controller and what by the ship’smaster.

To some maritime circles, even pos-ing such a question might be consid-ered blasphemous, on the ground ofgoing against the sacred “freedom ofthe seas” tradition. However, one can-not simply dismiss such an idea on thisground alone. It should be carefullystudied and assessed, and appliedselectively to areas of high traffic densi-ty under the appropriate circumstances.The performance of the system mightthen be compared to a system that doesnot implement such a policy.

6. Accidents in which badweather is a factor

Clearly, many ship accidents thatoccur in severe weather would havebeen averted if the ship’s master hadtaken some or all of a number of precau-tionary measures, so as to avoid expos-ing the ship to the additional riskimplied by such weather. The questionis if such measures would be easier totake if an appropriate “weather-relat-ed” safety policy were in place.

A policy that is currently in place forcoastal passenger ships in Greece is toban sailings in case of very adverseweather conditions. The ban is imposedby the Greek Coast Guard as a functionof the Beaufort scale, and is observedseparately for Roro ferries and for small-er ships (hydrofoils, catamarans, etc).This policy was implemented after theloss of coastal passenger ship Heraklionin 1966, which claimed at least 264 lives(the ship sunk because a truck wentloose and forced a side door open). As aresult of this policy, casualties attrib-uted to bad weather were virtuallyeliminated in Greek passenger shipping(interestingly enough, the ExpressSamina ferry accident which claimed 81lives in 2000 occurred in weather belowthe ban limit).

The conceivable extension of such apolicy to cargo vessels, and/or to ves-sels engaged in international tradesmight be considered as out of questionby many circles, as again infringing onthe master’s freedom to command theship (a.k.a. his status as being only“second to God” on the fortune of theship), and because of the obvious diffi-culties of implementing such a policyacross vast stretches of internationalwaters. However, in view of several cat-astrophic losses that occurred in badweather (the most notable of which hasbeen the Estonia accident in 1994), a


reexamination of this issue from a policyperspective is warranted, at least forsome classes of vessels and for sometrades. In air travel, statistical evidencehas suggested some researchers in theUS to recommend shutting down air-ports at times of thunderstorms as away to limit the risk of air crashes, butthe measure is still under discussion(Barnett, 1987, Machol and Barnett,1988).

It is interesting that the EuropeanCommission has taken up this matter inthe Erika II package, even though theprecise way such a policy would beimplemented (if at all) is still unclear.

If banning ship sailings altogether isconsidered too drastic, intermediate“market-driven” solutions could be con-sidered. If for instance P&I clubs adjusttheir premiums or their compensationschemes for those ship owners whodeliberately avoid sailing in extremelybad weather conditions, this could pro-vide a serious economic incentivetoward this end.

Hopefully, some analysis would pre-cede the decision to adopt such policies(or not to adopt them).

7. Bulk carrier losses

The Derbyshire accident in 1980,along with a number of other seriousbulk carrier losses, have been responsi-ble for the comprehensive overhaul ofthe IMO/IACS regulations on bulk carri-er design, construction, and mainte-nance. These rules will have monumen-tal consequences in bulk carrier design,operation, and economics. However, itis far from clear whether the Derbyshireloss would be averted had the shipbeen built and maintained according tothese regulations. More relevant in thiscase is, in my opinion, the decision ofthe master to sail the ship the way hedid under such adverse weather condi-tions. This is true not only in this case,but also in the Estonia case, and in anumber of other cases as well.

The recent thesis by leading classifi-cation societies that FSA shows thatdouble hulls should be introduced inbulk carriers too, even as a voluntarymeasure, suggests that one may seesimilar measures eventually advancedto a broader variety of ship types in thefuture.

In my opinion, a policy that specifiesa ship to de designed in such a way sothat it can sustain damage and stayintact even if operated in a question-able or even reckless fashion is a dubi-

ous policy on at least two counts. First,it does not discourage such way ofoperation, and it may actually encour-age it at times. Second, there is no seri-ous documentation of its benefits, vis-à-vis the costs entailed in implementingit, which are also unknown.

Yet, there seems to exist, at least inmy opinion, a proliferation of such poli-cies for maritime safety matters thesedays. Many of them refer to “passive”safety, that is, making the ship less vul-nerable given an accident occurs, asopposed to “active” safety, that is, mak-ing the ship less prone to accidents.

8. Roro ferry losses

The Herald of Free Enterprise acci-dent in 1987, together with the muchmore catastrophic Estonia accident thatoccurred in 1994, have been clearly theevents that have critically shaped thedevelopment of international regula-tions for Roro ferry design and operationfor year 2000 and beyond. It is fair tosay that most of such regulations focuson technological solutions that enhancethe survivability of the vessel and thepeople onboard in case of flooding,rather than prevent the circumstancesfor the latter to occur. Along with ferrydesign, they include rules for the evacu-ation of passengers onboard ferries incase of a serious accident, which arerules that again deal with the mitiga-tion of damage (material and human)once the undesirable event happens.

The new rules for Roro ferry designare more stringent in those Europeancountries that ratified the so-called“Stockholm Agreement”, which speci-fies a flotation capability with 50 cm ofwater on the deck. The EU countriesthat ratified the agreement wereDenmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland,Sweden and the UK, and they werejoined by Norway. The rest of EU coun-tries (and most notably theMediterranean countries) fiercelyopposed this rule as too drastic. It isclear that the new rules will radicallychange the composition of theEuropean ferry fleet in the years ahead,because it would be too expensive toretrofit old ferries so that they becomecompliant. The economic consequencesof such a change are unknown, but arespeculated to be significant. With manyshipping companies heavily in debt andstruggling to survive, fleet renewal isnot an easy proposition.

Be that as it may, it remains to beseen to what extent these rules, in andof themselves, will actually enhance the

safety of Roro ferries. Both the Herald ofFree Enterprise and Estonia investiga-tions trace at least part of the reason forthese accidents to questionable actionson the part of the master and/or thecrew. If these actions had not hap-pened, it is not clear at all that theseaccidents would have taken place allthe same. This sheds some doubt, in myopinion, on the very rationale for thepolicies that were formulated subse-quent to these accidents.

Fires are also a serious risk factor forRoro ferries and all other passengerships (particularly cruise ships), giventhe high number of potential fatalities.All known evidence to date suggeststhe human element as being responsi-ble for most of such accidents, becauseof negligence, faulty maintenance, andso on. “Passive”, after-the-fact mea-sures, including smoke detectors, firesensors, sprinklers, fire doors, and firecontrol procedures should really com-plement “active” before-the-fact mea-sures that are put in place so that firesare less likely to occur in the first place.Investigation as to which are the bestsuch measures should be undertaken.

9. Conclusions andrecommendations

I believe that the issues discussed inthis paper can support the followinggeneral conclusions that are relevantfrom a maritime safety policy perspec-tive:

1) Maritime safety policy can be character-ized by an impressive array of regulationsdealing with this subject on many dimen-sions.

2) If these regulations are responsible for thegenerally acceptable safety record of mar-itime transport, they must also be heldresponsible for the fact that this recordneeds further improvement.

3) By and large, the sheer number of playersdeveloping policy and the sheer number ofpolicy topics have contributed to a “patch-work” picture that may result in over-reg-ulation, overlaps in regulation, inconsisten-cies in regulation and gaps in regulation.

4) Even though maritime safety policy isclaimed to be “proactive”, most seriousregulatory activities developed recentlyhave been driven by major accidents.

5) Whereas there is very strong evidencethat the human element is the main rea-son for many major accidents, most poli-cies that came in the aftermath of suchaccidents focus more on technological anddesign solutions.

6) The bulk of the rules and regulations in


this area concerns passive safety and after-the-fact vessel survivability, as opposed topreventive rules reducing the likelihood ofaccidents.

7) Even though the impact on maritime trans-port of many recent policies is monumen-tal, both benefits and costs of such policiesas regards safety remain by and largeundocumented.

8) The use of the scientific method in mar-itime safety is growing, but is still significant-ly under-developed and so far has had verylittle impact on policy formulation.

I realize that some or all of these con-clusions may be provocative. However, Ibelieve that this is legitimate in order tofurther stimulate the debate for possibleimprovements in the maritime safetyarea.

Specifics aside, to the best of myknowledge, no policy in maritime safetyhas had a clear target on what explicitimprovement in safety it aims to achieve,and this adds to the difficulty of reachingthe target. “How safe is safe enough” isthe relevant question. If for instance thetarget was “reduce the frequency of shipcollisions by a factor of 10 over the next 5years”, or “reduce the frequency oftanker spills by 5 in 10 years”, or what-ever other target is set, one would beable to assess the merits (or lack thereof)of the specific measures that were setforth to achieve that target. It would alsofacilitate very much the comparisonamong alternative policies for theachievement of this goal.

Central in all this is that nobodyknows explicitly society’s willingness topay to achieve safety improvements, andwho should be made to pay for theseimprovements. Questions such as “whatprice safety”, or “who pays for safety”are very commonly asked, but very rarelyanalyzed in depth. Achieving specific,well-defined safety improvements willcertainly come at a price, as there is no“free lunch” in maritime safety. If thepolicy-maker who will ultimately decideon Policy A versus Policy B has little orno idea of either what the benefits or thecosts of these policies might be, then hisor her choice of policy will be by defini-tion arbitrary and, as such, subject toerror and criticism, particularly if some-thing goes wrong afterwards.

It is my opinion that this very seriousissue should be the subject of researchthat would specify how these factorsshould be used for policy-making pur-poses. To that end, R&D projects in themaritime safety area should be launchedwith the explicit purpose of answeringquestions that remain unanswered andevaluating policy alternatives in this

area. These policy alternatives should becarefully assessed and compared vis-à-vis well defined criteria, so that the poli-cy-maker is aware of the implications ofeach alternative before making a choice.

Alongside with this, there should bemore effort to analyze results of past orongoing maritime safety R&D from a pol-icy perspective. For instance, the resultsof all EU safety-related waterbornetransport projects could be carefullyassessed in terms of possible policy ram-ifications. This could establish a betterlink between EU R&D and EU policydevelopment, and guide the former so asto better assist the latter. It could alsomove maritime safety policy closer tobeing proactive than it currently is.

10. References

• Barnett, A., 1987. Lightning StrikesTwice. Interfaces 17, pp. 21-26.

• Machol, R., A. Barnett, 1988.Thunderstorms and Aviation Safety: ADialogue. Interfaces 18, pp. 20-27.

• Psaraftis, H.N., G. Panagakos, N.Desypris, N. Ventikos, 1998a. AnAnalysis of Maritime TransportationRisk Factors. ISOPE Conference,Montreal, Canada, May 1998.

• Psaraftis, H.N., P. Caridis, N. Desypris,G. Panagakos, N. Ventikos, 1998b.The Human Element as a Factor inMarine Accidents. IMLA -10Conference, St. Malo, France, October1998.

ANNEX ADAMA - Casualty cause codes

(source: Det Norske Veritas)

Acknowledgments

Much of the analysis that led to the opinions expressed in this paper was carried out inthe context of EU-funded R&D projects SAFECO, SAFECO II, and CASMET, in which theNational Technical University of Athens participated. Of course, I am solely responsiblefor these opinions. I thank Erik Styhr Petersen and Guenther Zade for their comments ona previous version of this paper.

Code Description

A Circumstances not related to th shipA01 Very heavy weather, natural disaster

etc.A02 Current, wind etc. led to strong drift

or other maneuver difficulties.A03 Collided with floating objects, could

not be discovered/avoided in time.A04 Fault with navigation systems: lights,

external electronic systems etc.A05 Fault with charts or publications.A06 Technical fault with other ship (also

includes towboats and the like).A07 Operational fault with other ship

(wrong maneuver/poor seamanshipetc.).

A08 Technical fault with load/unload/bunkerconstruction/quay/sluice, outside theship.

A09 Wrong handling ofload/unload/bunkerconstruction/quay/sluice, outside theship.

A10 Blowout or other extern conditionsin connection with oil drilling.

A11 Other conditions outside the ship.

B Construction of the ship and locationof equipment on boardB01 The ship’s structural strength not

sufficient.B02 The structural strength weakened by

later welding jobs, corrosion etc.B03 Stability failure caused by the con-

struction of the ship.B04 The ship had too poor maneuver

qualities.B05 The arrangement of the engine

room/location of equipment withdanger of leakage/setting on fire.

B06 Unfortunate arrangement or locationof load- or storage room.

B07 Unfortunate location/arrangement ofother rooms on board (not bridge).

B08 Difficult access for cleaning, mainte-nance and inspection.

B09 Other conditions concerning theconstruction and maintenance of theship.

C Technical conditions concerningequipment on boardC01 Technical fault with navigation equip-

ment.C02 Technical fault with steering systems.


C03 Technical fault with propulsion sys-tems.

C04 Technical fault with auxiliary engine.C05 Technical fault with anchorage equip-

ment/deck machinery (notload/unload equipment).

C06 Technical fault with control/remotecontrol/automatic controls/warningequipment.

C07 Technical fault with loading orunloading device.

C08 Technical fault withpreparedness/safeguarding/inertgas/halogen equipment.

C09 Technical fault with equipment.C10 Other technical conditions concern-

ing equipment on board.

D Conditions concerning use anddesign of equipmentD01 Unfortunate design of the bridge,

lacking or wrong location of equip-ment.

D02 Illogical/wrong design of controls,steering systems etc.

D03 The equipment was not placedwhere it was natural to use it.

D04 Illogical/inappropriate/poor/worn outequipment. More easily accessible.

D05 Other conditions concerninguse/design of equipment. Man/engineproblems.

E Cargo, safeguarding and treatmentof cargo and bunkersE01 Self-ignition in cargo/bunker, also by

«sloshing» in tanks.E02 Lacked inert gas installation or other

safeguarding against explosion/fire.E03 Stability not according to regulations

(wrong placing of cargo/lacking bal-last etc.).

E04 The cargo was not sufficiently safe-guarded against shifting.

E05 Leakage of liquid cargo in casks, con-tainers, tanks, etc.

E06 Breaks in loading or bunker pipes.E07 Other conditions concerning cargo

and safeguarding cargo and bunkers.

F Communication, organization, procedures and routinesF01 Routines for average control were

lacking/were not sufficient.F02 Existing routines for average control

were not properly known/drilled.F03 Routines for safety control

lacked/were not sufficient.F04 Existing routines for safety control

known, but not followed.F05 Did not follow the safety regulations

for welding.F06 Welding led to accident even though

the safety regulations were followed.F07 Not taken measures concerning test-

ing of rescue instruments etc.F08 Did not use protective equipment.F09 The general level of

organization/routines/qualificationspoor.

F10 Failure of routines for inspection andmaintenance on board.

F11 Stability not known, approved stabili-ty calculations were not available.

F12 Unfortunate management, personalantagonisms or suchlike.

F13 Too small crew, generally or for thetask e.g. helmsman/look-out.

F14 Command or distribution of respon-sibility was or was perceived asunclear.

F15 Not established safety routines inconnection with navigation/maneu-vering (bridge watch).

F16 Safety routines in connection withnavigation/maneuvering known, butnot followed.

F17 Charts/other documents for the voy-age were not amended.

F18 Failure of procedure/co-operationbetween vessel/towboat, organiza-tion from the shore or suchlike.

F19 Other conditions concerning rou-tines, procedures, communication ororganization.

G Individual on board, situation judgment, reactionsG01 Insufficient formal competence for

the task (courses, exams etc.).G02 Insufficient real competence (prac-

tice from occupation, waters, withequipment or suchlike).

G03 Task not well planned (cargo, nightvoyage, maneuvering, anchoring etc.).

G04 Available means of warning not sufficiently used.

G05 Alternative navigation systems notused misjudged lanterns etc.

G06 Available navigation aids not used(Norwegian Pilot etc.).

G07 Not adequate observation of ownposition/not plotted on charts.

G08 Misjudgment of other vessel’s move-ment or intention.

G09 Misjudgment of own vessel’s move-ments (current, wind etc.).

G10 Tried to go through with the opera-tion even though the conditionswere not favorable.

G11 Did not keep to the starboard in thewaters.

G12 Kept up a faster than safe pace.G13 Special conditions (illness, little sleep,

a lot of work etc.).G14 Fell asleep on watch.G15 Alcohol or other intoxicant.G16 Other conditions concerning individ-

uals.


W O R L D P O R T N E W S


M A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O N

M A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O NM A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O NM A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O NM A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O N




M A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O N

EC: Mandate proposal to the

EU’s Council of Ministers

T HE European Commission hasproposed to the EU’s Council ofMinisters a mandate to negotiate

with the United States on behalf of theEU the establishment of mutually accept-able Customs controls of goods, particu-larly of goods transported in containers,so as to address the threat of terroristattacks. The proposal complements USinitiatives launched after the attacks of11th September 2001 and its aim is to co-operate with the US to integrate securitychecks in normal Customs controls beforegoods leave a country. The Commissionfully shares the concerns of the UnitedStates about improving security and con-siders that the most effective means tomeet these concerns is by cooperation atthe EU level with the US. This communi-ty-level approach also avoids differentialtreatment of Member States and tradediversion within the EU. Another objec-tive of the negotiations would be toensure that legitimate transatlantic tradeis not hindered by the increased securityarrangements and that controls stan-dards are equalised for US and EU opera-tors. Negotiations with EU MemberStates on the mandate will begin in earlyFebruary at the latest.

“This proposal demonstrates the com-mitment of the European Commission tomaximising security and to counteringterrorist threats,” said Frits Bolkestein,European Commissioner for Customs.“The Commission fully shares the UnitedStates’ concerns and wants to integratethe United States’ preliminary unilateralmeasures into a set of commonly agreedactions which balance security needswith trade facilitation.”

The proposal

Under the proposal, the Council wouldgive the Commission a mandate to nego-tiate an amendment to the 1997 EU/USCustoms co-operation agreement so asensure a more co-ordinated approach tocontrols on the movement of goods.Areas where co-ordination could beestablished would include:

★

★

★

★★

★★

★★★

★★

- the definition of key information for theidentification of high-risk consignments andon how to collect and exchange it betweencompetent authorities so as to ensure theeffective application of risk managementtechniques,

- the establishment of common definitions forcontrols and agreement on how these defin-itions could be used to identify high-riskmovement of goods,

- the co-ordination of positions to be takenon these issues in multilateral discussions,

- the development of a common approach tothe carrying out of practical actions in thisdomain in conformity with internationalcommitments.

The objective would be to strengthensecurity while facilitating legitimate tradein conformity with international commit-ments and the principle of reciprocity.Another objective would be to equaliselevels and standards of control for EU andUS operators.

The amendment to the existing agree-ment should supersede the bilateral dec-larations of principle and bilateral agree-ments concluded between EU MemberStates and the US insofar as thosearrangements address matters which arethe exclusive competence of the EU.

Container Security Initiative

The Container Security Initiative (CSI)was launched by US Customs after theterrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Amajor concern of the US is the possibilityof containers being used for terroristattacks, be it through weapons of massdestruction directed to ports of the UnitedStates or to the maritime transport chainitself. In a first step, the US has invitedabout twenty 'megaports’ world-wide tojoin this initiative.

The European Commission fully sharesthe US objective of improving maritimetransport security and protecting tradeagainst any threat of a terrorist attack.However, it is concerned about the poten-tial consequences of the US approach ofselecting, at least initially, only a fewlarge European ports to join the CSI. Sofar the US Customs Administration hassigned declarations of principle withseven Member States (the Netherlands,Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spainand the United Kingdom) which allowsthe stationing of US Customs officials in a

number of ports with major container traf-fic to the United States. The Commissionfeels that security concerns would beaddressed in a more effective manner bya pan-European measure. Furthermore,the Commission is of the view that thebilateral approach adopted by the USthus far is likely to cause diversion oftrade and create competitive distortionsbetween EU ports.

The European Commission has helddiscussion with the US Administration(see MEMO/02/220) on a pan-Europeanmeasure, during which the US seemed toagree to the principle of EU-wide co-oper-ation with the US to ensure both bettersecurity and facilitation of legitimatetrade. However, US Customs Commiss-ioner, Robert Bonner, has suggestedrecently that the United States may pro-ceed unilaterally on transport security ini-tiatives.

24-hour rule

At the end of August 2002, the USCustoms Service announced a proposalfor an amendment to US Customs regula-tions which would require carriers to pro-vide US Customs with cargo manifestinformation 24 hours before the relatedcargo is loaded on board a vessel, des-tined for the United States, at the foreignport. The US has recently announced itsintention to enforce this rule fromFebruary 2 on a unilateral basis. TheCommission has already pointed out itsserious concerns over the extra-territorialnature of this proposal and the difficultiesit will create for the Community and inter-national trade in general. Enforcement ofthe proposal in the manner now proposedis likely to cause serious disruption to EUtransport operations without necessarilygiving the US the security assurances itseeks. The proposal to extend advancenotice requirements to air traffic couldhave an even more disturbing effect onthe EU and US economies.

The Recommendation for a CouncilDecision authorising the Commission tonegotiate with the United States anamendment to the EC/US Agreement onCustoms co-operation and mutual assis-tance in Customs matters is available onthe Europa Internet site:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_customs/whatsnew.htm


PIANC: Abstract of the

Minutesthe 17th meeting of the

PIANC EnviCom

September 22, 2002, Sydney Australia

Participants:• R. Engler (USA) - chairman• T. Vellinga (Netherlands) - vice chair-

man and secretary• J. Brooke (U.K.)• P. Hamburger (IADC)• A. Khan (Canada)• P. Laboyrie (Netherlands)• T. Okumura (Japan)• J. Reche (Germany)• J. Rytkönen (Finland)• Q. Vann (USA)• H. Vlieger (Belgium)• P. Whitehead (UK)• A. Wilske (Sweden)• E. van den Eede (Belgium) – PIANC

presi dent / partly

Apologies from:• N. Burt (CEDA)• A. Csiti (CEDA)• M. Gentilomo (Italy)• K. Iwataki (Japan)• P. van der Kluit (IAPH)• B. Malherbe (Belgium)• A. Navarro (Spain)

• Report on existing working groups

Wg 2 (Wildlife habitat and portactivities): JB reports. The report stillneeds to be finalized. Since the chairman ofthe working group Paul de Rache (PR) isunable to do the necessary integration andediting. BE will try to push things forwardwith the internal support of the Corps ofEngineers.

Action 17-2: BE contacts R for thistask; PR and JB should then forwardthe pieces to R.

Wg 5 (Guidelines confined disposalfacilities): PL reports. The report is final-ized and distributed. The abstract and mes-sage for the general public will be finalizedsoon.

Action 17-3: BE will write a thankyou note to the members of workinggroup 5. They, together with their chair-man PL, have done an excellent job. JRadvices that working group members aftertheir work during the finalization shouldstay informed on the progress and receive acopy as soon as the report is available andready for distribution to the PIANC mem-bers.

Wg 6 (Sustainable river manage-ment as related to navigation infra-

structure): JR reports. The report wasready in May. It is expected that the finalprint will be available through the PIANCwebsite from November. Only later,January 2003, the report will be distributedto the PIANC members, with the next bul-letin.

Wg 7 (Wetlands restoration asrelated to navigation infrastructure):BE reports. The report has been completedand can be forwarded to PIANCHeadquarters for the final editing. PWnotes the fact that possibly the review hasnot yet taken place.

Action 17-4: BE will inform the Wg7 chairman on the EnviCom reviewthrough PW and others, as agreedduring the 16th meeting( w w w . p l a z a 2 2 . m b n . o r . j p / ~ w e t-lands/report.htm)

Wg 8 (Generic biological assess-ment guidance for dredged material):BE reports. The working group is in goodprogress. A (PIANC) framework is beingdeveloped for biological testing of dredgedmaterial. It was well received at thePelston Experts Meeting in Bute Montanaearlier this year. Although a link betweenthe work in this group and the develop-ments in the EU-Water DirectiveFramework (WFD) should be expected tobe present, the EnviCom strongly advisesthe importance thereoff.

Action 17-5: BE will put this for-ward to the chairman of this workinggroup, Todd Bridges, and will alsodistribute the Pelston UK presenta-tion on the EU-WFD to EnviCom.

Wg 9 (Environmental impacts ofarctic marine navigation): JRy report.Information is collected and reported on themain themes as explained in previousEnviCom meetings. New chapters will beadded on the relevant international instru-ments (polar code), arctic organizations andpotential international cooperating partnerorganizations.

The report will be published on a CD-ROM, including a number of appendixes.There appears to be a boom for new oil ter-minals in Russia, leading to booming, alsomaritime, transport of oil. This may concernnations adjacent to the maritime transportroutes. The report being prepared couldplay an important role facilitating the dis-cussion on the conditions for the increasingartic maritime navigation. The 3rd meetingis planned fall 2002. A draft should beready for EnviCom review, spring 2003.Final report is foreseen, June 2003.

Wg 12 (SRN/EnviCom joint wg onrecreation and nature): The report has

been published.

Wg 13 (SRN/EnviCom joint wg ondredging marinas): TV reports. Areview-ready draft now has been pre-pared. Action 17-6: TV will obtaincopies from Mr. Gunst, acting chair-man of the group, and for review dis-tribute to BE, JR, HV and TV.

• Implementation of new EnviComworking groups

Wg 10 – Environmental Risk Assessmentin Dredging and Dredged MaterialDisposal

The response to the call for membershas been small but of good quality. Thetopic covers a specialized area. It is moreimportant that the experts participate thenthat there will be a broad representation.

Participants have been nominated fromUSA, Germany, Japan, UK, TheNetherlands and CEDA. They all are wel-comed in wg 10. The first meeting of wg 10will take place combined with the EnviComspring meeting in February. Mr. Cure fromthe USA, a respected expert in this fieldwill become the chairman of wg 10. BE willbe the EnviCom mentor of the group.

Action 17-7: TV will inform thenew members and will forward theCV’s to BE for the further implemen-tation of wg 10. Additional memberswould be welcomed. A second call will bedone at the EnviCom special session at theSydney congress.

Wg 11 – Management re-use and transfor-mation of existing CDF’s

There has been a broad interest in thisnew working group. Members have beennominated by Japan, USA, France, UK,Netherlands, CEDA (2x) and IAPH. They allare welcomed in wg 11. The first meetingwill as well take place next February. It hasbeen decided that Mr. Gijs Berger of theNetherlands will become the chairman ofwg. 11. Dr. Mike Palermo will represent theU.S. TV will serve as the EnviCom mentorfor this group.

Action 17-8: TV will inform thenew members of wg 11 and forwardthe member CV’s to Mr. Berger, forhim to start the group. Also for thisgroup an additional membership call willbe done during the congress. Upon a sug-gestion of AK, action 17-9: BE will for-ward to the ExCom the suggestion todiscuss the possibilities of how toenable representatives from develop-ing PIANC member nations to partic-ipate in working groups like this.

• Seminar on EU water frameworkdirective


Stakeholders participationDue to a mis-communication within

PIANC Headquarters the call was notadvertised. A new call will be out soon.Already during the congress the call will beannounced and BE will contact GeraldineKnatz of the IAPH Dredging Taskforce, topromote their participation.

Action 17-10: JB will as agreedduring the previous meeting coordi-nate the results of the call for expertsand the proposal for a chairman ofthe group.

Awareness Training Package forDeveloping Countries

AK reports on the progress. The keyproblem remains to be the sponsorship. Itis expected that 30,000 USD would be suffi-cient for the development of the coursewhich then would be adopted by theappropriate organizations. Most targeted inthat respect is the IMO. As soon as theawareness training is developed, theCoCom will have the lead in its marketingand distribution. With the presentation ofthe proposals at the congress it will betried to move things forward.

PIANC Young ProfessionalsJB reports that there was a good

response on the questionnaire and initialbrainstorming, however part of the initialcommitment tends to fade away. Reasonmight be the lack of a face-to-face meeting.During this congress there will be an addi-tional appeal to young members and it isaimed to organize a special meeting withthe PIANC management. A pushing strate-gy could be to invite a number of the con-tributing young members to the Februarymeetings in Brussels.

EU Habitats DirectiveInitiated by the EUDA and PIANC a sec-

ond seminar as a follow-up of the seminarsin January this year will take place inBrussels, on March 20th, 2003. Paralia willbe a co-organizing party and the seminar issupported by ESPO (European Sea PortsOrganization) and BirdLife International.The aim of the seminar is to provide guid-ance on the implementation of the Directivefor ports with development plans in or neardesignated special protection areas in estu-aries or coastal zones. Also further implica-tions of the implementation will be dis-cussed. All stakeholders will present theirviews as well as the EU Transport andEnvironment Directorates. The firstannouncement will be handed out duringthe Sydney congress.

EU Water Framework DirectiveThere is a strong feeling that the

Directive as now being detailed by a selectgroup of persons mainly representing envi-ronmental ministries, may have a big andquite unrealistic impact on dredging andport activities and therefore on shipping.Reference was made to a very interestingand revealing seminar on the WFD orga-nized in London recently by the BritishInstitution of Civil Engineers, supported byCEDA and PIANC. Although the generalsetup of the Directive is transparent (EU-website, etc.), the way the details areworked out is rather non-transparent.PIANC, CEDA, IAPH members and relatedare advised to find their way to the nationalauthorities responsible for the WFD to max-imize the possibilities for their expertise tobe included in the process. The seminarthat was cancelled this year is nowplanned for the later part of 2003.

Action 17-11: JR will take the leadagain in the organization of thePIANC EU-WDF seminar. It may bewise to seek co-organizing with parties likeCEDA and INE (Inland Navigation Europe).A possible shift to an earlier date (June2003) will be examined.

Guidelines for Environmental Impact ofVessels

The call for members of this InCom work-ing group in which EnviCom will be part-ner is out. JRy will be the EnviCom repre-sentative in the wg. EnviCom would advisethe group not to go into too detailed consid-erations. It should highlight the issues, therelevant experiences, and the needed guid-ance and leave room for a balanced ecolo-gy-economy approach. It is suggested tochange the title to: Impact of VesselOperations (or Operating Vessels). Also it isimportant that things are coordinated withother working groups within PIANC thatdeals with related issues.

Action 17-12: BE will informSandra Knight (SK) of InCom on theEnviCom advice and proposed repre-sentation. Also BE will invite SK forthe February meeting in Brussels topresent the plan of the new workinggroup that she will chair.

• Proposals for new workinggroups, expert- or taskforces

Minimizing Harbour SituationThe call for members for a MarCom-

InCom combined working group on“Minimization Harbour Situation” is out. Itis decided that there will be a link with theEnviCom.

Action 17-13: TV will serve as thislink and will report on the progressof the new working group the nextEnviCom meeting.

Environmental benefits of shippingPW addresses the draft TOR he drew up

for a group on Environmental Benefits ofWaterborne Transport. Although EnviComagrees on the need to rationalize andemphasize the environmental benefits ofwaterborn transport compared to othertransport modes it also recognizes the needfor the next step: that is to materializethose benefits at large. Therefore it isdecided to set up a small expert group todo the first, that in a later stage should leadto a working group, commissioned todesign a strategy to materialize the bene-fits. With recommendations on how identi-fied barniers (technical, economical, social)can be overcome. This working groupshould be set up in close co-orporation withInCom.

Proposals EnviCom working group 7Working group 7 drafted 3 proposals for

future EnviCom activities. EnviCom appre-ciates the initiatives taken and discussedthe submitted drafts.

• EnviCom concludes that the development of aknowledge systems for environmental impactassessment is far broader than navigation. Alsothere are serious doubts on the feasibility ofsuch an initiative. Therefore EnviCom decidesnegative on this proposal.

• Regarding the proposal for the developmentof guidelines for assessing the environmentalimpacts during planning and implementation ofnavigation projects, EnviCom feels that itwould not add much to the available guidance.And if needed, EnviCom regards this primaryto be the task of the IAIA (InternationalAssociation for Impact Assessment).Therefore EnviCom has no interest to adoptthis proposal.

• The proposal to establish guidelines, of quanti-fying impacts of Nationale EconomicDevelopment (NED) in the riverine water-shed on coastal areas, deals with a very com-plex issue, at the moment in debate in theUSA. Also in some European countries socialcost-benefit assessments are applied. WithinPIANC it is the task of EnviCom to take initia-tive to quantify environmental externalities, asis stated in the strategic PIANC Action Plan.However overlooking the scene the EnviComdecides that a working group to establish theguidelines on NED related impacts is at themoment not appropriate. The proposal will belined up with initiaves in the pipeline to quanti-fy environmental externalities. For this it isalso waited on the results of the ICOLD(International Commission On Large Dams)initiative on this topic.Action 17-14: JB will inform with ICOLDon the progress and available information.Action 17-15: BE will distribute toEnviCom the so-called US-IWD report on


economic risk.Action 17-16: BE will inform RusselTheriot, the chairman of wg 7 and MarianGeense as one of the submitters on theresults of the discussion and the EnviComdecision on the wg 7 proposals.

Navigation around CoralPH adresses the draft TOR for a pro-

posed working group on navigation aroundcoral. The initiative is based on the experi-enced contraints on dredging and naviga-tion around coral. When contraints tend toincrease it is important to safeguard thenavigation interest. Discussion in theEnviCom leads to the conclusion that ismay be wise to maintain the present lowprofile of these activities. Potential impactsof other activities on the coral are muchhigher on the agenda.

It is decided to proceed with the propos-al in this respect that first two experts, Mr.Jeff Stevens of the USA Corps of Engineersand Mr. Reneé Koenen of the IMO-adminis-tration, will be consulted. And it will betried to make an inventory of other groupsalready involved in or related to coral con-servation activities. The experts opinionshould further determine the next step, beit, a more extensive experts group, a work-ing group or a participation in other groupsand initiatives.

Action 17-17 : PH will proceed todevelop the proposal with the help ofthe experts

JITPS: Quality Shipping

Seminar in Tokyo

O N January 9, 2003 in Tokyo, underthe auspices of the JapanInstitute for Transport Policy

Studies (JITPS, Tokyo), with support fromthe Ship & Ocean Foundation (SOF,Tokyo), a seminar on Quality Shipping washeld attended by some 300 people repre-senting the various sectors of the shippingindustry, public and private.

Amongs other speakers/lectures wereMr. Hans de Goeij, Managing Director, andMr. Jan Fransen, Deputy ManagingDirector of the Green Award Foundation,Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The GreenAward delegation visited the ports ofChiba, Kawasaki, Nagoya, Osaka andYokohama, in addition to the visits to thevarious shipping institutions, governmen-tal, public and private, to promote theunderlying concepts of the Green AwardFoundation and their services.

Hereunder are some highlights of theincentives provided by the Green Award

Foundation, prepared based mainly on theannual reports.of the Green AwardFoundation

1. Brief notes - Which vesselscan apply for a Green Award?Inspections and certification areapplicable for crude oil tankers,product tankers and bulk carrierswith a minimum deadweight of20,000 tons. Currently (January 2003)about 166 vessels have a GreenAward Certificate. Worldwide about

1,500 tankers and 1,500 bulk carriers,in the categories for which in princi-ple the Green Award is available,are operational. The Green AwardFoundation challenges the ship own-ers and managers of all these ves-sels to reflect on the question: aremy vessels, my crews and my proce-dures good enough to be consideredfor a Green Award? Besides, it isinteresting to note that charterersare asking more and more: “does thevessel have a Green Award?”

LocationEU

Finland/Mariehamn

Germany/Hamburg

Japan

Korea

Norway

Sweden

The Netherlands

USA

NameDouble hull/segregated ballast

Mariehamn incentive

Hamburg Incentive

Tax preference

Double hull/ segregated ballast

Environmental Indexing system

Sweden incentive

Green Award

Rankling System

Qualship 21

ScopeTankers

All vessels

All vessels

Double hull tankers

Tankers

All Vessels

All vessels

Crude, product tankers, dry bulk vessels

Dutch-flagged ship owners

All non-US flaggedvessels

AreaIncentive (reduction on port- and in some instances pilot fees) based on quality recordsMariehamn incentive (differentiated port fees) based on quality records (Nox & Low Sulphur fuel)Port of Hamburg incentive (differentiated port fees based on quality records (ISO 14001, Green Award, low sulphur fuel, TBT-free anti-fouling exhaust gassesIncentive (differentiation of tonnage tax) based on quality recordsIncentive (reduction on port- and in some instances pilot fees) based on quality recordsIncentive (differentiation of tonnage tax) based on quality records (environmental)Incentive (differentiated fairway dues and port fees) based on quality recordsInspections worldwide, incentives (differentiated port- and service provider fees in South Africa & EuropeThe Netherlands, reduced inspection burden on vessels, based on quality recordsUSA: reduced inspection burden based on quality records

InspectionNo

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

1.1 Quality Shipping Incentives Systems in Operation

CountryGermanyLithuania

Portugal

South Africa

Spain

The Netherlands

UK

PortPort of HamburgKlaipeda Port

Port of SinesPort of LisbonNational Ports Authority of SA

Puertos de Estado Ports of Bilbao, Santander, A Coruña, Huelva, Bahia de Cádiz, Bahia de Algeciras, Malága, Cartagena, Valencia, Castellón, Tarragona, Barcelona, S.C. de Tenerife and other portsMoerdijk Port AuthorityPort of AmsterdamPort of DordrechtPort of RotterdamZeeland Seaports (Vlissingen, Terneuzen)Port of Suoom Voe (Shetlands)

Description6% premium on the port feesVessels receive 5% premium incentive based on vessel dues5% discount on tariff of port use (TUP)3% discount on tariff on port use (TUP)5 % port dues rebate in all South African Portnet ports if not enjoying a 5% rebate in terms of doubled-hulled/ SBT schemeVessel will be charged 93% on the T1 tariff

6% premium on the port fees6% premium on the port fees6% premium on the port fees6% premium on the port fees6% premium on the port fees5% reduction on the payable harbour dues

1.2 Green Award Ports and Harbours


CountryThe Netherlands

UK

PortAVR Industrie

Dirkzwager’s Coastal & Deepsea PilotageDutch Pilotage Organisation

Euroshore International

Hotug – Tug Board CompanyMarineSafety Rotterdam (MSR)

Royal Boatmen Association Eendracht

Smit International

van Esch International

Hammond Marine Services

Description5% discount on the disposal costs of slopsin the Port of Rotterdam 5% premium on published tariffPossibility of personnel transfer during helicopter pilot transfer at no charge, if operations allow this.All Members in the following countires provide a 5% discount: Belgium, Germany UN, France, Spain, Greece, The Netherlands2% reduction on net harbour towage fees5% reduction on all MSR training program standard feesFor vessles of LoA of 200 mtrs and above: free assisance in (un) mooring by two qualified boatmen, on at bow, one at stern; no charge for transport, waiting time, and tavelling time for boatmen required on deck for assistance in (un) mooringFree places on the Managing Marine Emergencies course Van Esch International7.5% rebate on the invoiced port services with Crane-barge5% rebate of the pilotage element of the tariff of Hammond Deepsea Pilots

1.3 Green Award Incentive Providers

2. Future aspects: GreenAward for new vessel categoriesSo far the Green Award is onlyavailable for crude oil tankers,product tankers and bulk carriersof 20,000-ton DWT and above.With that a vital part of the inter-national shipping industry is con-sidered for certification. Butincreasing the level of safety andenvironmental awareness of thetotal shipping industry is the ulti-mate goal of the Green AwardFoundation. The next step on this

PEMSEA: New era of regionalcollaboration for the seas of

East Asian waters

P REPARATIONS are underway forthe Ministerial Forum andInternational Conference on the

Sustainable Development of the Seas ofEast Asia: Towards a New Era ofRegional Collaboration andPartnerships, which will be held fromDecember 8 to 12, 2003 in KualaLumpur, Malaysia. The GEF/UNDP/IMORegional Program on Partnerships inEnvironmental Management for theSeas of East Asia (PEMSEA) is organiz-ing the events aimed at paving the wayfor a new level of collaboration in theEast Asian region.

The Ministerial Forum will provide avenue for concerned ministers and offi-cials from the host country, Brunei, Dares Salam, Cambodia, People’s Republic

of China, DPR Korea, Indonesia, Japan,Philippines, Republic of Korea,Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, toadopt the Sustainable DevelopmentStrategy of the Seas of East Asia (SDS-SEA). The SDS-SEA provides the frame-work for developing linkages amongprograms concerning poverty allevia-tion, sustainable livelihood, reduction ofvulnerability to natural hazards, long-term security, economic growth and thehealth of human beings, ecosystemsand the natural resource base—allwithin the purview of the calls made atthe United Nations Conference onEnvironment and Development(UNCED) and the World Summit onSustainable Development (WSSD), aswell as in other international meetingswhich called for more concerted effortsat regional and international levels tocurb environmental degradation and tosafeguard the world’s remaining natur-

long road to the extension of theGreen Award would be to con-tainer carriers.

3. For more information writeto:Bureau Green AwardVeerkade 2, 3016 DE Rotterdam, The NetherlandsP.O. Box 23107, 3001 KC Rotterdam, The NetherlandsTel.: + 31 10 2170200Fax: + 31 10 2829762E-mail: [email protected], URL: http://www.greenaward.org

al coastal and marine resources.The Ministerial Forum would consid-

er innovative and sustainable regionalcollaborative arrangements and financ-ing mechanisms for strengthening andsustaining regional coastal and oceangovernance as obligated under theAgenda 21 of UNCED, and in responseto the recommendations of the WSSDand other related instruments. Thishigh-level gathering, scheduled on 12December to immediately follow theInternational Conference, is expected tofoster stronger partnerships betweenand among nations and to give rise tostrengthened commitments to environ-mental management and protection inthe region.

Meanwhile, the InternationalConference from December 8 to 11 willbring together concerned stakehold-ers— policymakers, economists, envi-ronment and natural resource man-agers, NGO representatives, mediapractitioners, the academe and othermembers of civil society and the privatesector— to discuss the ways andmeans to strengthen regional collabora-tion, promote synergies and linkagesamong existing regional and global pro-grams, and work towards achievingsustainable coastal and ocean develop-ment in the East Asian region. Hence, itwill be particularly relevant to the cur-rent global focus on sustainable devel-opment and the emphasis on the needto chart future courses of action.

According to Dr. Chua Thia-Eng,PEMSEA Regional Program Directorand Secretary General of the events, theInternational Conference will consist ofplenary and workshop sessions focus-ing on two themes: 1) Review of inter-national and national efforts towardsand progress in addressing the mainsectoral concerns regarding the Seas ofEast Asia; and 2) Essential cross-sec-toral approaches and processes:Towards achieving sustainable devel-opment. The conference would focusdiscussions on the progress in jointefforts to address key regional con-cerns, especially pertaining to theimplementation of international instru-ments and the recommendations ofworld summits on the environment andsustainable development. Best prac-tices and lessons learned in the applica-tion of integrated approaches to themanagement of coastal and ocean-relat-ed ecosystems and natural resourceswould also be presented and discussed.The obstacles to the effective manage-ment of shared waters and the actionsneeded to overcome governance,finance, scientific, communication, and


capacity barriers would also be present-ed, while regional mechanisms for col-laboration and partnerships in develop-ing effective and sustainable regionaland subregional mechanisms for envi-ronmental and natural resource gover-nance would be highlighted.

“The forum and conference are timelyconsidering that for many years, envi-ronmental issues of national concernshave been the sovereign responsibilityof the nations and the respective sec-tors while transnational/transboundaryissues are relegated to internationalbodies,” Dr. Chua added. “A multi-tiered, multisectoral, integratedapproach at the regional, national andlocal levels synchronizes well with theadvent of globalization and regionaleconomic realignment, while effectivelyaddressing the worsening environmen-tal crises of our times,” he said.

*PEMSEA is a regional program supported by theGlobal Environment Facility with Brunei Darussalam,Cambodia, People’s Republic of China, DPR Korea,Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Republic ofKorea, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam as partici-pating countries. Its implementing agency is theUnited Nations Development Program, with theInternational Maritime Organization as the execut-ing agency.

ICHCA: Launch of ICHCA

International Ltd.

T HE International Cargo HandlingCoordination Association(ICHCA), which was founded in

1952, decided in April of last year totake a decisive step in its future organi-sation. Following considerations span-ning two years, and after noting thatcertain other international bodies hadalso taken the same step as well as oneof ICHCA’s own National Sections, itwas decided that the organisationshould become incorporated. This stepwas taken for sound business reasons.As a consequence, ICHCA InternationalLtd was formed in May last year and itcommenced operations by invitinginterested parties to join it and becomemembers on 1 January 2003. It is run bya Board which currently has sevenDirectors and a President. FumioOkuyama, who is Chairman of ICHCAJapan, has agreed to become the firstPresident of IIL and James H Hartung,President of the Toledo-Lucas County

Port Authority in USA, has become theChairman. The other Directors areDavid Bendall of Maritrade in Australia(Deputy Chairman), Paul Auston, CEOof Checkmate Avon, UK, PeterBosmans of Port Centre Lilo, Belgium,Philip Kimball who is Chairman ofICHCA USA, John Nicholls, Director ofLoss Prevention at TT Club, UK andMike Compton, Principal of CirclechiefAP, UK. It is likely that further interna-tional Directors will be appointed as thecompany develops. The new organisa-tion has been accorded NonGovernmental Organisation (NGO) sta-tus at IMO, ILO and ISO and hasalready taken up this role. It has beenincorporated in UK and its offices are inUK, within reasonable distance of IMO.Its aims are to represent its membersand cargo handling generally, to informabout actions and decisions beingtaken at international level, to consultmembers on topical issues, to develop

and publish authoritative documents ontopical issues and to offer technicaladvice to its members. It has alreadyannounced the publication of five newdocuments from the International SafetyPanel, together with a new publicationCARGO WORLD. Its email address [email protected]. ICHCAas an Association has now ceased totrade.

ICHCA International is the only inter-national organisation dedicated tocargo handling matters and IAPH hasenjoyed good relations with its prede-cessor over the years. In particular,IAPH and the International Safety Panelhave worked closely together on a num-ber of issues and both parties have saidthat they intend that this cooperationwill continue, indeed even increase, inthe future.

IAPH wishes the new organisationwell for the future and looks forward toworking with it.

Upcoming ConferencesUpcoming ConferencesCruise + Ferry

Conference

May 13-15, 2003, London, U.K.

Conference Highlights:• An overview of the cruise, ferry & fast ferry

markets• Debate the latest security and safety issues• Learn about financing and new business

opportunities• Find out about the latest technology avail-

able to cruise ships• Discuss health & safety issues on board

vessels• Gain an update on manning systems• Meet and network with senior representa-

tives and experts in the cruise and feryindustries

PLUS: One and a half-dayseminarPassenger claims in the Maritime IndustryThursday May 15, 2003Grand Hall Olympia, London& Friday May 16, 2003Regency Hotel South Kensington, London

• Review personal injury claims • Understand the implications for changes of

itinerary and the law of agency• Examine P&I cover and deviation

• Analyse maritime security and the duties ofa carrier

Participation fee: UK£998.75

For further information:Lloyd’s List eventsTel: +44(0)870 429 4496URL: http://www.cruiseferryex.com

World Maritime Forum

June 23-25, 2003

St. Petersburg, Russia

THE aim is to provide a platform for worldmaritime leaders to share and debate

strategic views of the industry.

Provisional Programme

• Keynote viewsPresented by invited speakers representing theglobal maritime industry, subjects will include:world demand for ships and offshore struc-tures, world benchmarks in ship building andship repairing, new challenges for classificationand professional societies, state of the art worldshipping business

• Discussion forums• Networking• Opening of the Maritime Defense Show• Receptions hosted by the Government of

St Petersburg and the Government of theRussian Federation

• Visits to leading ship yards in St Petersburg• Receptions and banquets hosted in the

most famous and historical palaces of StPetersburg


• Exclusive sightseeing in the midst of cele-brations of the Tercentenary of the glori-ous maritime capital of RussiaCoverage by international media

For further information:Enquiries to St Petersburg Branch (TheInstitute of Marin Engineering, Science andTechnology)Prof. Kirill V. Rozhdestvensky, HonorarySecretary, Saint-Petersburg Branch3 Lotsmanskaya, St Petersburg 190008,Russia, SMTUTel: 00 7 812 114 2923Fax: 00 7 812 318 5227Email: [email protected] and [email protected]

Upcoming SeminarsUpcoming SeminarsIHE Delft:

39th International Seminar on

“Port Management”

May 6-31, Delft

The Netherlands

T HE International Seminar on PortManagement (or ‘Port Seminar’),organized annually since 1964 in close

co-operation with the Municipal PortManagement of Rotterdam and Amsterdam,provides a comprehensive overview of theorganizational and managerial aspects of mod-ern ports.

This year the seminar focuses on PortReform, whereby the ‘World Bank PortReform Tool Kit’, published last year, is used.Various aspects of the handling of containersand ‘state-of-the-art’ of modern container ter-minals are being extensively dealt withthrough lectures and terminal visits. Lectureson Port Management, Port and ShippingLogistics, Port Master Planning, PortPerformance, Port Strategy, Port Tariffs, PortReform, Port Privatisation, HinterlandConnections, Information Logistics, TrackingSystems, Environmental Aspects, etc. are partof the programme. A workshop on ResourceControl Management provides the partici-pants with hands-on experience.

After the 3-weeks seminar a one-weekstudy tour of ports in France (Calais) and theUnited Kingdom (Southampton, Bristol,Felixstowe, London) is scheduled as anoptional activity.

For further information:IHE Delft P.O. Box 3015, 2601 DA Delft, The NetherlandsTel: +31 15 215 17 15Fax: +31 15 212 29 21E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.ine.nl

IPPPM: 19th Port Planningand Management International

Training Program

May 19-30, New Orleans

Louisiana, U.S.A.

T HE International Program for PortPlanning and Management (IPPPM) isan intensive, two-week management

training program for foreign and domesticmaritime industry officials in all facets of portplanning and management.

Tuition: US$2100

For further information: Director, IPPPM; CUPA/LUTAC; University of New Orleans; LA 70148; U.S.A. Tel: (504)280-6519 Fax: (504)280-6272 E-mail: [email protected]. URL: www.uno.edu/cupa/ipppm.html

New PublicationsNew Publications

CIM: Bordeaux CIM

Colloquium

June 10-13, Bordeaux, France

• Trade and transport law in theelectronic age

• Transport law• Developments in international

maritime law

• Registration fees:From January 16, 2003: 6200 eurosAs of April 16, 2003: 700 euros

Included:• Attendance to the conferences and simulta-

neous translation French/English• The coffee breaks• The working lunches on Wednesday 11th

and Friday 13th• The welcome reception on Tuesday 10th• The cocktail reception on Wednesday 11th• The excursion around the Bordeaux

vineyard on Tuesday 12th (lunch included)

For further information:BP 55-33030 Bordeaux Cedex, FranceTel: +33 (0)5 56 11 88 65Fax: +33 (0)5 56 11 88 22E-mail:[email protected]

“The Handbook of Maritime

Economics and Business”

I T covers a vast number of topics in thebroad areas of maritime economics andbusiness, including: Shipping Economics;

International Seaborne Trade; MaritimeSafety; Shipping and Maritime Policies;Management and Operations; ShippingFinance and Risk Management; PortEconomics and Management; InternationalLogistics; and IT in Logistics and MaritimeTransportation;

Price: £135/US$230/euros236/HK$1794

For further information:Sarah John, Informa ProfessionalInforma House, 30-32 Mortimer Street, London, W1W 7RE, UKTel: +44(0)20 7017 5179 Fax: +44(0)20 7017 5221E-mail: [email protected]

Informa:“International Maritime and

Commercial Law Yearbook

2002”

• Contents• Australian Maritime Law Decisions -

Martin Davies, Tulane Law School• Canadian Maritime Legislation and

Decisions - Professor William Tetley QC, McGill University

• English Arbitration Law-ClareAmbrose, Barrister at 20 Essex Streetand Fellow of Somerville College,Oxford

• English Insurance Law-MargaretHemsworth, University of Exeter

• English Maritime Law, Stephen Irvin,National University of Singapore, andHoward Bannett, University ofNottingham

• United States Maritime Law, RobertForce and Martin Davies both of theTulane Law School

Price: £95/US$162/euros166/HK$1260

For further information:Sarah John, Informa ProfessionalInforma House, 30-32 Mortimer Street, London, W1W 7RE, UKTel: +44(0)20 7017 5179 Fax: +44(0)20 7017 5221E-mail: [email protected]


SELVIG Publishing A/S:“Yearbook of ScandinavianShipowners and ShipManagement Companies™2003” - 67th edition

THE yearbook lists each company withcommercial information on about 440

shipowing and management companies inNorway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Icelandand Faroe Islands, key personnel and fleetlist.

Tokyo News Service's WebsiteTokyo News Service, Ltd. has posted its website “S&TN OnLine” on the Internet. Provided on this homepage for easy reference are liner shipping schedules and related

data extracted from Shipping and Trade News and Sea Sprite.With use of the website initially being offered free of charge, we would like to invite you to sign up to access the latest

updates on the homepage by first entering the information requested on the registration page.

URL: http://www.tokyonews.co.jp/marineInformation posted: 1. Sailing schedules a. Liner shipping schedules (export/import) to and from Japan b. Liner schedules (export)

from Asian countries other than Japan c. Feeder schedules to and from Singapore 2. Ship details 3. Telephone and fax numbers of shipping firms and agents 4. Surcharges 5. News (in preparation)

S & TN OnLine

Tokyo News Service, Ltd.

PIANC: “Guidelines forSustainable Inland

Waterways and Navigation”

I N the face of expanding economiesand an increased demand for trans-port facilities throughout the world,

Inland Water Transport (IWT) is oftenshown to be the preferred alternative fromnot only an economic standpoint, but alsoin terms of environmental conservation.However, in many countries, this alterna-tive is contested in the name of environ-mentalism.

Current development methods includethe necessary measures for reconcilingthe requirements of different uses. Theoverriding aim has become planning forthe future with a strict regard for sustain-able development. Within the context ofthese new methods, it is important thatnew projects be assessed taking into con-sideration the main natural functions ofriver systems; in other words, that theyensure maintenance of the key functionsand ecological functions, including:

• Morphological processes (erosion, transportand sedimentation)

• Maintenance of hydrological balance (e.g.,flood pulse)

• Maintenance of the sediment balance• Provision of habitat (ecological continuum)• Maintenance of biological and chemical

processes (nutrient cycles)

An overall assessment must be carriedout for the river basin as a whole.

Vessels can be adapted to the condi-tions of particular rivers, rather than thewaterway adapted to common standardsand designs. Measures to achieve neededdepth, clearance, width, or velocity can beselected to minimize impacts upon impor-tant waterway functions. These measurescan even be modified to provide environ-

mental enhancements.Financing institutions and governments

need to ensure that the full environmentaland social costs and the long-term effectsof proposed waterway schemes areincluded in cost-benefit analyses.Affected parties must fully participate inthe decision-making process regardingany waterway. Case studies presented inthe Appendices illustrate lessons to belearned on different steps in the proposedprocedure.

This new report of the PIANC EnvironmentalCommission (EnviCom) can be ordered online: http://www.pianc-aipcn.org

The book is sold together with a CD-ROM containing all the same information.The database is easy to use for search, selec-tion, export, address labelling, documentmerging and printing.

In addition the book contains a sectionwith Tanker Index, Freight Indicies andInternational review of world Ocean-goingtonnage, a section with ClassificationSocieties and Associations and a section list-ing main specifications on all vessels.

Book including CD-ROM: NOK 750Book only: NOK 600

For further informatiom:Selvig Publishing A/SP.O. Box 384, N-1301 SANDVIKANorwayTel: +47 67 80 80 26Fax: +47 67 56 47 62E-mail: [email protected]/[email protected]: http://www.selvig.no/English.htm


M A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O NM A R I T I M E N E W S & I N F O R M A T I O N

W O R L D P O R T N E W SW O R L D P O R T N E W SW O R L D P O R T N E W SW O R L D P O R T N E W S

Cover of the Month

Mr. Ismail ShafeeqManaging Director

Maldives Ports Authority

M alé Commercial Harbour(MCH) is the onlyInternational Port in the

Maldives, and is situated in the Capitalisland Malé. Because of the strategiclocation of Maldives, in the middle ofthe Indian Ocean straddling the equa-tor, MCH pivoted at the crossroads ofworld trade for centuries. Today theport plays an important role in shippingand commercial activities of Maldives.

Covering an area of 21,700 sq meters,all international cargo to Maldives ishandled at Malé Commercial Harbour,except bulk cargo, which is unloaded atoffshore islands for reasons of safetyand storage. The Harbour can accom-modate ships with 3.5 meters draught

Malé Commercial

Harbour, Maldives

at the inner berths and larger vessels ofany size at midstream. The newly con-structed 101-meter alongside berth offi-cially known as “Magathufaalan” wentinto operation in 1997. Ever since, ves-sels with maximum draughts of 9.5meters, displacement 15,000 tons andLOA of 150 meters have been able tocome alongside, thus expediting thecargo handling process and facilitatinga quicker turnaround of ships. Otherfacilities within the terminal include a17,420-sq. meter storage area for con-tainers and oversized cargo, a 2850-sq.-meter warehouse, a mechanical work-shop and a vessel repair yard for therepair of smaller vessels. Containers arehandled at the port by reach stackersand other assisting equipment likefront-end loaders and prime movers.Mobile cranes are used primarily for theunloading of general cargo.

Regular cargo services are providedfrom Europe, the Middle East, Far Eastand East Africa. Ships from neighboringcountries like India and Sri Lanka callmost frequently. The East AfricanExpress Service calls at MCH every fort-night. This service is jointly operated byP & O Nedlloyd, MOL and DELMAS.Almost 29% of cargo ships calling at the

Indian Ocean

Colombo

Malé

MumbaiChannai

Sri Lanka

Bangladesh

India

Maldives

port are container ships. On average,42% of ships calling at MCH are of 1000GT and above. The cargo throughputhas increased from 227,504 mt in 2001to 232,683 mt in 2002. This increase incargo throughput highlights a growthtrend, and management has decided toinvest in additional terminal facilitiesand handling equipment. In addition,cruise ships, pleasure craft and yachtsalso call at MCH on a regular basis fromall over the world.

The container throughput at MCHhas increased from 279 TEUs in 1988 to19,249 TEUs in 2002. This trend is likelyto increase and hence management hastaken into consideration other portinvestment projects to ease congestionthat might impact the operations atMCH.

The establishment of MCH has con-tributed significantly to the growth ofinternational trade in the Maldives bypromoting increased efficiency of port

Cargo Vessels426 (59.4%)

Yachts76 (10.6%)

Fishing Vessels123 (17.2%)

Oil Tankers61 (8.5%)

Others23 (3.2%)

PassengerLiners8 (1.1%)

VESSEL CALLS 2002

activities. Port Management has setitself the goal of establishing lower portcosts to customers since this wouldbenefit both the carriers and contributeto the local economy.

the world,” saidMr. Collenette.“These initia-tives demon-strate the Government of Canada’scommitment to enhancing marine secu-rity since the events of September 11,2001.”

The Government of Canada isannouncing marine security projects tobe carried out by six federal govern-ment departments and agencies. Theprojects focus on safeguarding and pro-tecting our marine infrastructure, sur-veillance of Canadian waters andimproving our emergency responsecapabilities.

Specific projects include:

• increasing surveillance and tracking ofmarine traffic, including “near real-time”identification and tracking of vessels inCanadian waters;

• screening of passengers and crew onboard vessels;

• installing new detection equipment inports to screen containers for radiation;

• new funding for the enhancement of theRCMP Emergency Response Teams andthe establishment of permanent investiga-tor positions at major ports;

• enhancing collaboration and coordination


Canada: Announces five-yearpackage of marine securityprojects up to 172.5 million

O N January 22, TransportMinister David Collenette, onbehalf of the Government of

Canada at an event at Pier 21,announced a five-year package of ini-tiatives of up to $172.5 million designedto further enhance the security ofCanada’s marine transportation systemand maritime borders. MinisterCollenette was joined by SolicitorGeneral Wayne Easter, Fisheries andOceans Minister Robert Thibault andMinister of National Revenue ElinorCaplan.

The Government of Canada alsounveiled new gamma ray technologythat will be installed at strategic loca-tions to enhance marine security acrossthe country.

“Canada has one of the safest andmost secure transportation systems in

347.518319.77

254.88227.504 232.683

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Met

ric To

nnes

(’0

00)

CARGO THROUGHPUT1998 - 2002

14375

25000

20000

15000

10000

5000

0

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

TE

U’s

16531

19081 18598 19249

CONTAINER THROUGHPUT1998 - 2002

Future Developments

Maldives Ports Authority, the ownerand operator of MCH, is contemplatingembarking on major capital investmentprograms in other nearby islands tofacilitate and enhance efficient portoperations. Immediate plans for MPAinclude:

- The development of two new regionalports – one in the South of Maldives, onthe island of Hithadhoo in Seenu Atoll andone in the North, at Haa Dhaalu Atoll onKulhudhuffushi island. These ports wouldbe located on the roads for internationalshipping.

- The construction of another terminal atHulhumale’ island which is being devel-oped as a new metropolitan city adjoiningMale’ International Airport.

- The construction of a Vessel Repair Yard

Maldives Ports Authority Head Office

at Thilafushi Island. In addition,Management also intends to continue toinvest in Male’ Commercial Harbour toupgrade its facilities and offer newer,state-of-the-art, high-performance equip-ment and storage facilities.

Maldives Ports Authority, while try-ing to upgrade its activities to providebetter services to its customers, seeksto assist the nation’s trade and com-merce to make Maldives a business andfinancial center. In the future, MaldivesPorts Authority will continue to takeadvantage of the location of Maldivesand work to expand links to other majorindustrial cities of the world.


among government departments andagencies;

• making further improvements to portsecurity by establishing restricted areasand requiring people working within theseareas to undergo thorough backgroundchecks; and

• developing and implementing new securityrequirements in line with recent recom-mendations of the International MaritimeOrganization.

A number of the projects stem fromongoing analysis by the Interdepar-tmental Marine Security WorkingGroup that was formed by theGovernment of Canada following theattacks of September 11, 2001. Thisgroup, with broad representation fromfederal government departments andagencies, has already undertaken anumber of initiatives to improve marinesecurity, including:

• increasing the requirement for advancenotice by vessels entering Canadianwaters to 96 hours;

• introducing new boarding protocols toimprove the response to any threatsbefore ships arrive in Canadian ports;

• in partnership with the United States,establishing enhanced security screeningprocedures for ships entering the GreatLakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system; and

• working with international partners todevelop new international marine securityrequirements.

These projects build on theGovernment of Canada’s overallresponse to the September 11, 2001attacks and to the global threat of ter-rorism. The hallmark of Canada’sapproach to national security is collabo-ration among departments and agen-cies at all levels of government, andwith industry stakeholders and theinternational community.

At the announcement in Halifax,Minister of National Revenue, ElinorCaplan unveiled one of the first newmobile Vehicle and Cargo InspectionSystems (VACISTM) purchased by theCanada Customs and Revenue Agencyto enhance shipping container security.The Agency has purchased 11VACISTM units, which are truck-mounted mobile scanning systems thatscan an image of contents in a marinecontainer, rail car or truck.

This new state-of-the-art technologyprovides operators of the equipmentwith an image similar in many ways toan X-ray. It will further assist Customsofficers to examine densely loaded con-tainers and detect suspected contra-

band, weapons, and other potentiallydangerous goods.

“This is the latest in a series of inno-vative technologies that we are invest-ing in order to increase public safety,”said Minister Caplan. “These mobileVACISTM units will allow Customsinspectors to better protectCanadians.”

Charleston: Study revealsstunning impact of S.C.

ports on state

Halifax: Groundwork for

Smart Port Initiative

O N January 10, the Halifax PortAuthority (HPA) announced thedetails of its new Smart Port

Initiative. Smart Port is a stakeholder-driven initiative, facilitated by HPA anddesigned to enhance the Port’s compet-itiveness, exchange information andbring together key port and businessstakeholders.

“We are encouraged by the responseand interest in the Smart Port Initiative,which we introduced to the Port com-munity in the fall,” said Ms. KarenOldfield, HPA President & CEO. “ThePort of Halifax is a key economic asset.The ability to bring the business lead-ers and port stakeholders together tosolidify a common vision for the Portbodes well for a strong future.”

The Halifax Port Authority identifieda need for a forum to discuss andresolve common stakeholder issues.The initiative will also identify portbusiness opportunities and facilitatedevelopment of these opportunities.Five key focus areas have been identi-fied:

1. Marketing and Strategy2. Competitiveness and Productivity3. Value-Added Opportunities4. Information Technology5. Port Security

“We’re pleased to see this initiative,”said Mr. Russell Herder, Chairman,Halifax Shipping Association. “The Portof Halifax has tremendous potential andwe believe that Smart Port will providea forum for the port community to worktogether and maintain Halifax’s com-petitiveness. We will be a very activeparticipant.”

“We are moving forward on a numberof issues and are actively holding dis-cussions with key stakeholders to pressfor solutions. For example, trucking andrail concerns are being discussed attwo meetings of the Competitivenessand Productivity Working Group nextweek. These meetings will be attendedby a broad cross section of port andcommunity stakeholders,” explainedMs. Patricia McDermott, Vice President- Marketing, HPA. “Opening the lines ofcommunication and engaging membersto work together for results is a keyobjective of Smart Port.”

I F South Carolina’s ports were todisappear, the impact on the statewould be enormous and far-reach-

ing, according to a new study by theCenter for Economic Forecasting atCharleston Southern University.

South Carolina would lose 281,660jobs paying $9.4 billion, along with $2.5billin in state and local taxes. Accordingto the study, the Ports Authority’s totalimpact on the state was $23 billion in2002. “No matter how it is measured,the impact of the South Carolina StatePorts Authority on every region of ourstate is tremendous,” said Dr. Parish.

Every region of the state has a lot atstake when it comes to Port operations.The study defined six regions and pro-duced results for each. The total region-al economic impact ranged from $2 bil-lion in the Beaufort region to $144 bil-lion in the Upstate.

The report was conducted to providean unbiased and conservative measureof the Ports Authority’s role as a cata-lyst for development of the state’s econ-omy. “But it also should serve as animportant tool in planning for SouthCarolina’s future,” said Dr. Parish.

The full report, including regionalimpacts, can be accessed through theSouth Carolina State Ports Authority’swebsite at http://www.scspa.com.


Houston: Records incontainer volume,

tonnage and operatingrevenue

T HE Port of Houston Authority(PHA) Commission reviewed2002 year-end results during its

monthly meeting on January 27. The PortAuthority’s total container volume andtotal tonnage surged to record levels in2002. Total container volume reached1,159,789 TEUs (twenty-foot equivalentunits), a 10 percent increase over the1,057,869 TEUs recorded in the previousyear. The Barbours Cut ContainerTerminal (BCT) accounted for most of thecontainer volume – 1,063,076 TEUs in2002 compared to 911,903 TEUs duringthe previous year. The PHA’s total con-tainer tonnage in 2002 was 10,858,068short tons compared to 10,119,938 shorttons in 2001. BCT’s 2002 portion totaled9,992,136 short tons, up from 8,833,183short tons in 2001. Additionally during2002, the PHA’s Bulk Materials HandlingPlant handled a record total of 3,846,720short tons compared to 2,979,139 shorttons in 2001.

“These results show that despite ris-ing costs and a weak economy, the PortAuthority’s operations are efficient, ourfacilities are in excellent shape, and ourpeople remain committed to our cus-tomers,” stated Chairman Mr. James T.Edmonds. “Still, despite the increasedcontainer volume and tonnage, the rateof growth in the Port Authority’s contain-er traffic is actually slowing because weare running out of space. We simply donot have the capacity to serve everyonewho wants to come to the Port. The needfor the proposed Bayport Container andCruise Terminal is abundantly clear,” he

Montreal: The Gold-HeadedCane presented to Capt.

Ashwani K. Engineer

T HE President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the MontrealPort Authority, Mr. Dominic J.

Taddeo, officially marked the beginningof a new year of activity at the Port ofMontreal on January 3 by presenting theGold-Headed Cane to Captain AshwaniK. Engineer, master of the containershipCanmar Courage, the first ocean-goingvessel in port in 2003.

Captain Engineer became the firstIndian captain ever to claim the covetedtrophy when his ship crossed the Port of

noted.The Bayport project remains under

review by the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, which is expected to issue afinal environmental impact statement(FEIS) in March 2003. Built-out over sev-eral years, the Bayport facility is expect-ed to triple the Port Authority’s containerhandling capacity and create more than39,000 new jobs.

During 2002, the Port Authority contin-ued to feel the impact of U.S. trade sanc-tions on steel imports, which declined tojust under 1.94 million short tons, an 18percent drop from the nearly 2.37 millionshort tons the PHA recorded in the previ-ous year. In a move to help offset theeffect of the sanctions, the PortCommissioners voted last summer tolower the wharfage rate on all importediron and steel products by approximately29 percent to $1.65 per short ton from$2.32 per short ton (steel slabs remainsubject to a wharfage rate of $1.16 pershort ton). The temporary reduction wasoriginally scheduled to expire onDecember 31, 2002, but the Port

Montreal’s downstream limits at Sorel at11:04 a.m. on January 1st, 2003. TheBermuda-flagged Canmar Courage has acapacity of 2,300 twenty-foot containersor the equivalent, and arrived fromAntwerp, in Belgium, and is operated byCanada Maritime. The shipping line isrepresented in Montreal by CanadaMaritime Agencies Ltd. Both companiesare members of the CP Ships group.

The tradition of the Gold-HeadedCane dates back to 1840. A spring cus-tom for many years, it became a NewYear’s tradition when the Danish vesselHelga Dan inaugurated year-round navi-gation at the Port of Montreal on January4, 1964.

”The Montreal Port Authority has atleast three good reasons for perpetuat-ing the tradition of the Gold-HeadedCane,” Mr. Taddeo said. ”In addition tohonoring the captain of the first ocean-going vessel of the year, it serves as areminder to exporters, importers, manu-facturers and distributors here andabroad that the Port of Montreal is activeall year long, despite Montreal’s reputa-tion for harsh winters. It also provides anopportunity for the entire shipping com-munity to celebrate the beginning of anew year of port activity – activity thatcreates more than 17,600 direct and indi-rect jobs and generates revenues ofapproximately $2 billion annually.”

Commissioners voted in November toextend it through December 31, 2003. Atthat time, they also implemented a threepercent tariff increase (effective January1, 2003) to cover rising expenses relatedto operations at the Turning Basin andBarbours Cut terminals.

Citing the volume and tonnageincreases in bulk materials, generalcargo, auto imports and exports, andbagged goods, the PHA posted record-level operating revenue of nearly $108.5million in 2002, an increase of one per-cent from operating revenue of $106.9million in 2001. BCT contributed $66.01million to PHA’s operating revenue, arecord amount reflecting a 13 percentincrease over BCT’s operating revenue of$58.476 million in 2001. The PHA’s 2002net income totaled $ 6.98 million, a 70percent decline from the previous year’s$23.46 million net income attributedlargely to lower returns on the PHA’sportfolio of bonds and other marketinvestments as well as a mix ofincreased health care premiums, proper-ty insurance rates, and legal fees.


NY/NJ: Work together withcity of Elizabeth for criticaltransportation and public

safety projects

T HE Port Authority and the City ofElizabeth announced that theyhave identified the resources

needed to support critical transportationand public safety projects in Elizabeth,including a rail connection that will

improve the shipment of goods in theregion, and an emergency response facili-ty to serve Elizabeth, including the airportand seaport. The announcement wasmade by Port Authority Deputy ExecutiveDirector, Mr. Michael R. DeCotiis andElizabeth Mayor, Mr. J. ChristianBollwage.

Under the agreement, the City ofElizabeth will provide the Port Authoritywith necessary permits to facilitate theconstruction of a rail connection that willlink the Staten Island Railroad to theChemical Coast Line in Elizabeth, a majornational freight line used by NorfolkSouthern and CSX.

The connection will help relieve trafficcongestion by allowing cargo to be trans-ported by rail between the Howland HookMarine Terminal on Staten Island anddestinations throughout the Northeast.Currently, all of Howland Hook’s cargo istransported by truck.

These projects will reduce the depen-dence on trucks to move cargo in theregion, reducing highway congestion andimproving air quality.

To help support emergency responseefforts in the area, the Port Authority andElizabeth agreed to reallocate $15 millionof already committed funds to buy landand build a new emergency responsefacility closer to Elizabeth’s waterfront.The facility will provide additionalresources to respond to emergencies atthe Port Authority-Elizabeth MarineTerminal and Newark LibertyInternational Airport, as well as else-where in the city.

In addition, the Port Authority will pro-vide $35 million of previously committedfunds to the city and Union County forcritical transportation infrastructure pro-jects that support port-related activities.

Port Authority Deputy ExecutiveDirector, Mr. DeCotiis said, “The PortAuthority is committed to working with

Montreal: Record-breaking

container traffic in 2002

T HE Port of Montreal’s containertraffic hit an unprecedented highlast year, but failed to offset a

decrease in total traffic. A sharp decline ingrain traffic was the result of a severedrought in Western Canada in 2002, whilea mild Montreal winter sapped demandfor petroleum products, bringing downthe port’s traffic in liquid bulk. As a result,total traffic decreased by 2.1 per cent, to18.7 million tonnes.

The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) alsoreported net earnings for the 23rd year ina row. The MPA is an autonomous federalagency that finances its own projectswithout receiving any subsidies.

“Last year was an excellent one for thePort of Montreal, in terms of containers,”said MPA President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer Mr. Dominic J. Taddeo. “It shouldbe noted that our container traffic brokerecords for eight consecutive years beforethe economic slowdown in 2001. Lastyear, it posted an increase of 8.3%, ormore than 700,000 tonnes – reaching anall-time record of 9.4 million tonnes.”

The port broke another record in han-dling 1,054,603 TEU (twenty-foot-equiva-lent unit) containers, which was 65,176more than in 2001. It was also 40,455more than the number handled in 2000 –the first year the Port of Montreal beat themark of one million TEUs handled in oneyear.

“Montreal has renewed its membershipin that select club of ports that handleone million containers or more annually,”said Mr. Taddeo. “According to the mostrecent market statistics available (firstnine months of 2002), the Port of Montrealfared better on the North Atlantic marketthan any of its competitors on the NorthAmerican Eastern Seaboard. It also post-ed container increases in both exportsand imports last year.

“Knowing that container traffic gener-ates more economic spin-offs than anyother cargo category, these results arevery good news.”

The port’s traffic in containerized andnon-containerized general cargo totalled9.8 million tonnes in 2002, an increase of7.8% compared with last year. Traffic innon-containerized general cargo came tosome 400,000 tonnes in 2002, down 3.8per cent due to fewer deliveries of steelproducts.

“Although 2002 was an excellent yearfor the Port of Montreal’s container traffic,we cannot say the same for liquid and drybulk,” said Mr. Taddeo. “Mother Naturewas hard on those two sectors.”

One of Alberta and Saskatchewan’s

worst droughts ever caused Canadiangrain exports to fall to their lowest levelsince 1954-55. As a result, the Port ofMontreal’s grain traffic came to just under1.4 million tonnes, down some 500,000tonnes, or 26.6%, compared with 2001.

As for dry bulk other than grain, itdecreased by some 200,000 tonnes, or5.1%, to total 3.7 million tonnes. This wasdue to fewer deliveries of fertilizer, copperore and cement.

An exceptionally-mild winter in 2002also affected demand for petroleum prod-ucts in the Greater Montreal Region. As aresult, traffic in petroleum products at theport was down 12.8%, or some 450,000tonnes, to 3 million tonnes. Traffic in otherliquid bulk came to some 800,000 tonnes,an increase of 4.2%, or slightly more than30,000 tonnes, in part due to more deliver-ies of hydrocarbons.

Finally, the Port of Montreal welcomed37,867 cruise passengers last year, com-pared with 23,829 the year before. Thisremarkable surge in passenger traffic canbe explained by the growing popularity ofthe St. Lawrence River/North AmericanEast Coast, considered a safe destinationfollowing the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

size andloading capacity.

In 2003 Amsterdam will furtherstrengthen its international logisticsactivities. The development of logisticsservices at the Atlas Park, on the newAfrikahaven, is getting underwaythrough cooperation with AmsterdamSchiphol Airport. Amsterdam needs thisgrowth to maintain its competitive posi-tion, mainly for the industry in the NorthSea Canal area, which is stronglydependent on movement in and out bysea.

Reaction from Executive DirectorHans Gerson

Executive Director of the AmsterdamPort Authority, Hans Gerson reported:“We have reason to be satisfied acrossthe board. Rotterdam and Antwerphave picked up again after a slow peri-od. Fortunately, Amsterdam Ports neverquite faced the decline they did and hasproved able to maintain its upward lineafter the strong growth of the pastyears.”

“It is interesting to look at whatcaused this growth. Some ports man-aged this through container transship-ment, which is for us only a modestcontributor. Containers are the future.In 2002, 15% percent more containersbeing transhipped world-wide than inthe previous year. Now that the hugeJapanese shipping company and inter-national service provider, NYK hasacquired the revolutionary CeresParagon Terminal, I expect a healthystart in container transshipment inAmsterdam during the course of the


Amsterdam: Record

transshipment in 2002

I N 2002 Amsterdam Ports againachieved record transshipments ofan estimated 70 million tons. With

their 2.4% growth the four-port complexreached fourth position in northwestEurope, a spot previously held by LeHavre.

Oil products showed the largestincrease at 9%. Increasing demand inEurope and the United States, and theuncertain situation in the Middle Easthelped increase the world trade in oil.Amsterdam improved its position byexpanding its storage and mixingcapacity, and finally transshipped atotal of 14.4 million tons.

Growth was also achieved in animalfeeds (+1%), ores and scrap (+4%), andfertilisers (+64%). The largest transship-ment category, coal, dropped 3% due toeconomic developments and increasingcompetition.

After Hamburg, Amsterdam is thefastes growing port complex in north-west Europe, having increased its mar-ket share in 2003 to 8%. OnlyRotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg nowtransship more. Amsterdam is currently17th in world rankings.

The seaport is also of ever greaterimportance to the national economy. Itstotal added-value has risen by 33% inthe last five years, from 3.8 to 5.02 bil-lion euros; equivalent to a 6%+ annualrise. This resulted in 15% growth indirect and indirect employment: from60,500 to 69,700 jobs in the five years.

A striking trend is that fewer sea ves-sels (a drop of 780 to 8849 in total) havebrought in this greater amount of cargo.Arriving vessels therefore are gaining in

the City of Elizabeth on important issuesthat will strengthen the economy andbuild a better quality of life for its resi-dents and the entire region.

“This agency shares the City’s concernabout taking the necessary steps to planmore effectively for future needs in trans-portation and in public safety,” He added.“By working together, we have been ableto identify ways to help the City betterprotect the safety and security of its resi-dents and to provide for critical trans-portation projects that will relieve conges-tion and allow for more efficient move-ment of goods throughout the region.”

Mr. DeCotiis also recognized the City’sefforts in providing standby emergencyservices for the airport and seaport. Lastyear, the Port Authority Board ofCommissioners increased its annual con-tribution to the Elizabeth CommunityDevelopment Fund to $3 million to helpoffset the cost of these vital services.

Elizabeth Mayor, Mr. Bollwage said,“Working in conjunction with the PortAuthority, we are assuring the safety ofour residents and improving the methodof transporting cargo throughout theregion. We are going to build a state-of-the-art facility capable of housing addi-tional emergency personnel, trained in thelatest techniques and procedures, andaccommodate the most up-to-date equip-ment available to effectively respond toany situation in the Elizabeth port area.We will also put into place plans that willalleviate truck congestion and pollutionwithin our city and region. This agree-ment is a promise kept and a guarantee ofa collaborative relationship between thePort Authority and the City of Elizabeth.”

The Port Authority also is working withthe City to improve safety and securityefforts in the area. Initiatives includeemergency planning and mutual aid drills;reviewing and updating emergency notifi-cation and response protocols; facilitatingdelivery of hazardous materials responsetraining for city personnel; ongoingassessment of local, county, state andPort Authority first responder capabilitiesand needs and supporting the City’s pur-suit of federal grants or other funding toaddress the City’s public safety needs.

In addition to the rail connection, thePort Authority will build a new ship-to-railtransfer terminal at Howland Hook on theformer Procter and Gamble property pur-chased by the Port Authority in 2000.Construction will begin this year and becompleted by mid-2005.

An expanded ship-to-rail facility also isunder construction at the Port AuthorityElizabeth Marine Terminal to replace asmaller rail facility that has reached itscapacity.

Panama Canal: Begins

joint dredging projects

T HE Port of Panama City and theU. S. Corps of Engineers havebegun a joint dredging project to

deepen Panama City’s entrance channeland turning basin from 32 feet to 36 feet.

Inland Dredging Company ofDyersburg, Tennessee will begin work

in the channel in January. The PanamaCity Port Authority is in the process ofbidding the dredging work in theberthing areas. The entire project willcost approximately $8.5 million dollarsand be completed by the end of May,2003.

The channel deepening is the first of aseries of major improvements underwayat the Port of Panama City.


year.”“Coupled to Amsterdam's strong

position in other markets I predict asizeable growth for 2003. Even with the

current estimates for a weak economicdevelopment,” according to HansGerson.

Appendix

Main climbers and sliders by sector 2001 >>> 2002 in million tons

Climbers Transshipment In % Sliders Transshipment In %

Oil products 14,37 + 9 Coal 18,63 - 3Agri bulk 11,07 + 1 Ro/ro/ 0,59 - 19Fertilisers 1,42 + 64 Crude oil 0,22 - 34Ores/scrap 9,02 + 4

Amsterdam: Ports tofavor quality-verified

vessels

A S of January 1, 2003,Amsterdam’s Municipal PortAuthority is offering a 6% dis-

count on port charges to vessels carry-ing the Green Award certificate. Theseare ships which have been investigatedand proven to be in good technical con-dition, to have a well trained crew andgood ownership support and land man-agement at their disposal. The discountsystem should encourage ship ownersto apply for and obtain the GreenAward certificate and so to upgradesafety and environment at sea and inthe port.

“With this discount systemAmsterdam wants to help reduce thenumbers of ‘unsafe’ ships. Accidentscaused by badly maintained vessels orunprofessional actions of crews duringcalamities must be prevented.Accidents such as that in Spain(“Prestige”) must not be allowed to hap-pen,” says Mark van der Horst(Amsterdam Port Alderman).Considering that since recently crude oiland oil product carriers and dry bulkvessels also qualify for the Green Awardcertificate, the Municipal Port Authorityhas also decided to make tankers andbulk carriers eligible. Amsterdam is thefirst seaport to acknowledge the certifi-cate for dry bulk ships.

The Green Award certificate wasintroduced in 1994 and is issued by theGreen Award Foundation that nowincludes 44 international ports in sevencountries. To encourage ship owners toapply for the certificate, participatingports offer discounts on their portcharges. Many pilots, crew organisa-tions, tugboat companies and similaroperations in participating countries

also maintain favourable regulations forships that hold such certificates.

The Green Award Foundation, inassociation with the Municipal PortAuthority, will soon approach other nau-tical service providers in the North SeaCanal region to convince them to applyfavorable terms to holders of the GreenAward certificate. The investigation toobtain the certificate is paid by theowner, is submitted to annual inspec-tions and updated every three years.

On January 28 the Foundation issuedthe Green Award to Port AldermanMark van der Horst.

Antwerp: Expectsrecord year

F OR the third year in succession,the port of Antwerp closes theyear with a total maritime goods

traffic of more than 130 million tons. Antwerp looks set to achieve a trans-

shipment of 131 million tons and so forthe moment it seems likely to improveupon the all-time record of 130.5 milliontons it achieved in the year 2000.

Container traffic: hub of thegrowth

Container traffic again went into dou-ble growth figures (+13%) to reachapproximately 52 million tons. In TEUthe counter is just above the 4.7 millionmark. By comparison with the competi-tion, Antwerp has fared as well asHamburg, slightly better than Le Havreand Zeebrugge and much better thanRotterdam and Bremen.

Other general cargoThe transshipment of non-container-

ized general cargo fell: conventionalgeneral cargo by approximately 9%,ro/ro traffic by over 2%.

The focus of the decline was in steeland forest products. Incoming ship-ments of steel products fell by a quar-ter. The dwindling demand for steel inEurope is a result of the mediocre topoor economic climate.

Shipments of paper and wood cellu-lose fell by 10%. This can be put downpartly to the general market conditionsand partly to the fact that in 2002Antwerp lost some of its market shareto Zeeland Seaports.

After several years of limited growth,the transhipment of fruit recovered by4% to almost 1.4 million tons.

The most striking growth was record-ed in the transshipment of rolling stockand vehicles. After the 11% growth oflast year, this year has brought 14%growth, so that the total traffic amountsto more than 2 million tons. The numberof private cars handled rose to some860,000 units.

Bulk cargoThe final result for liquid bulk

amounts to almost 32 million tons orapproximately 8% lower than in 2001.Two refineries that import their crudeoil by ship have closed temporarilywhilst maintenance and alteration workwas carried out in 2002 and thisaccounts for a drop in the shipment offuels.

Maritime cargo turnover in the port of Antwerp

(tonnes) 2001 2002* change

Total 130.050.413 131.000.000 +0%Containers 46.409.921 52.650.000 +13%Roll-on/Roll-off 5.992.897 5.850.000 -2%Conventional general cargo 15.931.817 14.600.000 -9%Liquid bulk 34.443.708 31.700.000 -8%Dry bulk 27.272.070 26.200.000 -4%

* Provisional figures


The transshipment of chemicals inbulk, on the other hand, rose by 12% to6.2 million tons. These growth figuresshow that Antwerp’s tank storage facil-ities are highly attractive. In fact, lastyear, Antwerp managed to attract threenew customers.

The storage of dry bulk fell by approx-imately 4% to 26 million tons. In particu-lar, the transshipment of ores fellsharply (-26%) as a result of a change inthe supply pattern of Wallonia‘s steelindustry to the advantage of Rotterdam.

The number of sea-going vessels call-ing at Antwerp fell slightly to 15,500.The total gross registered tons of theseships continued to rise to some 218 mil-lion GT. Consequently, the average sizeof the sea-going ships in the port roseby almost 5% to some 14,100 GT.

Antwerp, December 30th 2002

Dunkirk: 2002 traffic

figure

W ITH a traffic in excess of 47.5million tons, the Port ofDunkirk reached a new record

in 2002, with a tonnage increase of 6.8%over 2001. General cargoes (+16%), coal(+14%) and ores (+10%) were the high-lights of the progression. This 6.8% leapforward was the largest traffic increaseof all the major Western Range portsfrom Bordeaux to Amsterdam.

The overall traffic via the Port ofDunkirk exceeded 47.5 million tons in2002, an increase of 6.8% over 2001 (in2001 traffic was 1.9% down for conjunc-tional reasons, after a very highincrease in 2000).

Imports, up by 8%, set a new recordwith 35.6 million tons, and so didexports which reached nearly 12 milliontons by the year’s end, a 4% increase.

General cargoes progressed strongly,exceeding 9.5 million tons. Their 16%increase was driven by an excellentactivity in the roll-on-roll-off and con-tainer traffic. Dunkirk is firmly re-estab-lished in the UK ro-ro traffic with 6.1million tons, a whopping 29% increase.Those very encouraging results arelargely due to a healthy traffic on theNorfolkline (10 calls a day from and toDover) and the Dart Line (1 or 2 sailingsa day to Dartford). They are also encour-aged by new logistical installationsright next the terminal. The containertraffic also sustained its growth, up by

7%, reaching 161,000 TEU.The coal traffic also registered very

good results. Increasing by 14% andreaching 8.07 million tons, it reachedthe same level as the best years in thepast: the previous record for that traffic,8.4 million tons, was in 1981 when itwas driven by massive imports for theEDF thermal power stations.

Owing to the good activity of SollacAtlantique, ores progressed by 10%,reaching 13.04 million tons.

The economic slow-down conjunctionhas however made its effect felt on thepetroleum products traffic which, at12.05 million tons, is down by 3%. A lateupsurge in December offset in part thesluggishness earlier in the year.

The restart of the grain traffic, whichwas confirmed in December, limited theyear’s drop to 16%, the first three-quar-ters having been badly affected by EUagricultural policy decisions. The graintraffic neared 1 million tons in 2002.

In 2002 there were 5,725 ship calls atDunkirk, compared to 5,350 in 2001 (+7%).

Dunkirk’s overall traffic increase of6.8% is the highest of all the major portsof the Western Range from Bordeaux toAmsterdam.

The Port Authority's forecast for 2003is for a total traffic of around 50 milliontons, a progression of 5%.

Göteborg: Cargo record

in 2002

P ORT of Göteborg had a recordyear in 2002: container trafficincreased by eight percent (com-

parison year 2001) and reached 756,000twenty-foot equivalent units, the high-est box turn-over recorded at the portfor a single year.

The container increase of eight per-cent goes for tonnage as well as num-ber. A total of 14.3 million tons was car-

ried in 756,000 boxes. The unit-load total for the port

reached 1.2 million units. This figureincludes containers, flats, cassettes,trucks, trailers, semi-trailers and railwaggons. This was a six-percentincrease on the figure of 2001.

Oil (crude and refined) is a majorcommodity at Port of Göteborg. After alow refining and trading activity duringthe first part of the year, oil shipmentspicked up during the later part of theyear. Oil reached 93 percent of its 2001volumes, so 17.9 million tons of oil andoil products were recorded for 2002.

The low oil and high general cargolevels produced a total cargo turnoverfigure in 2002 of 33.4 million tons, equalto that of the preceding year.

Kenya: EACIS –Community-based

program

K ENYA Ports Authority, KenyaRevenue Authority, Community-based program providers, and

major stakeholders, have ended a meet-ing which took place at a Mombasahotel.

In his opening speech, theCommissioner general of Kenya RevenueAuthority Mr. John P. Munge, said thatthe idea to establish a community-basedsystem was mooted six years ago andhas now come of age due to changedglobal patterns in business, which haseffected maritime and shipping trade thatcarries over 70% of world trade. He saidthat a platform that will enable a fasterand free flow of authorized informationbetween the Port of Mombasa, KRA andhinterland port users will enable the Portto compete favorably internationally.

In information technology (IT) develop-ment, Kenya Ports Authority has madesignificant strides, its four phases of ITdevelopment include: implementation ofEnterprise Resource Planning - (ERP)System, an Automated WaterfrontSystem, Container Tracing System andCommunity-based System. This strategyis driven by KPA's vision of being ratedamong the top 20 Ports in the world bythe year 2005, he said.

Kenya Revenue Authority has alsodeveloped comprehensive informationsystems architecture to integrate andautomate all business functions includingcargo and clearance process. Most otherPort users and stakeholders have also


installed modern automation systems.Given the above scenario, a common

cargo information platform or network,will automate the exchange of informa-tion and cargo documentation seamless-ly, securely and efficiently between allthe players. This will transform cargotransactions to a “paperless” environ-ment. The platform will connect all theelectronic systems and offer real-timeinformation.

After a year of meetings, stakeholdershave recommended a community-basedsystem of sharing information, that isautomated and allow secure exchange ofauthorized data. The name of the con-ceived system will be East African CargoInformation System - EACIS.

It is envisaged that when EACIS willbe set up, it will run as a joint ventureentity owned by Port users and the com-munity, with KPA and KRA as twoanchors or key stakeholders. Once com-pleted the project is expected to have adirect positive impact on regionaleconomies.

The proposed scope of the platform forthe Community-Based System (CBS) willinclude documents related to: imports,exports, and transit as used by KenyaPorts Authority (KPA). Kenya RevenueAuthority (KRA), clearing and forwardingagents, ships’ agents, road and rail cargotransporters, Warehouse operators, andregional Customs authorities.

The parameters of the proposed sys-tem include accessibility to the publicthrough the Internet, high volume/highsecurity data traffic to be accessedthrough the Intranet (i.e., sharingbetween those in agreement), should beuser- friendly, should be a 24-hour facilityand able to interface with other systems,should allow the use of Electronic DataInterchange (EDI) international stan-dards.

KPA Managing Director Mr. Brown M.Ondego (MBS), who graced the occasion,also co-hosted the event with KPA. Heexpressed hope that the system whichwill improve port services, may come tosee the light.

★★★

★★

★ ★ ★★★

★★

Le Havre: Record year

for containers

A S for port traffic results, theyear 2002 was marked by ageneral cargo traffic reaching a

record level and exceeding the mark of20 million tons (20.1 MT), that is morethan 2 million additional tons comparedwith 2001. This good figure is mainlydue to container trade whose tonnagereached 16.8 Mt, that is a 15.1% rise,which is one of the best growth ratesnot only in France but also among themajor ports of the North of Europe. Forthe record, containers beat their month-ly record figure on three occasions in2002 (March, July, November).

The increase will have been about200,000 TEU (Twenty-foot EquivalentUnits) more than in 2001 (1.72 millionTEU against 1.52).

Like general cargo traffic, dry bulktrades (5.6 Mt) were also on the rise (+28.9 %) compared with 2001, especiallywith coal (2.5 MT +7.5 %), grain (+ 36.1%), cattle food (+ 27.9 %), cement (+ 6.8%) as well as miscellaneous dry bulks inparticular owing to the trade of materi-als and rock-fills for the Port 2000 con-struction site which increased verymuch (+74.9 %).

On the contrary, the economic condi-tions and the maintenance work per-formed at the Normandy Refinery havecontributed to the slowing-down of theoil business of the port of Le Havre,which especially meant a 11.4 % dropfor crude oil (32.2 MT), and – 5.5 % forrefined products (7.7 MT).

Consequently, the overall cargo traf-fic, including bunkering and ship sup-plies, which amounted to 68 MT against69.4 MT in 2001, underwent a slight 2%decrease.

As for passengers on board P&O fer-ries (859,000), they increased by 5.5 %against 2001.

Le Havre: Coming-on-stream of the extension

to the Ro-Ro Center

I N late December, the ro-ro vessel“Glorious Ace” from Durban inSouth Africa was the first ship to

call at the new berth of the Ro-Ro-Center. She unloaded about thirty“Nissan” cars while 443 “Peugeot” and66 “Renault” motor vehicles werereloaded bound for Vera Cruz in Mexico.

In order to meet the increase indemand from ro-ro traffic and providean irreproachable level of service quali-ty, the Port of Le Havre Authority hadactually decided to develop the facili-

ties of the Ro-Ro Center. A wharf 380mlong east of the present berths wasdeveloped as well as quayside with asurface area of 1.7 hectares. In addition,13 hectares of storage area reserved forthe parking of light vehicles were com-pleted. The corresponding investmentamounts to 15 million euros.

Rotterdam: Top year for

Rotterdam

T HIS year, 322 million (metric)tons of cargo were handled inthe port of Rotterdam, an

increase of 2.3% compared to 2001. Theresults almost equaled those of therecord year 2000. This has becomeapparent from provisional figures pre-sented by Mr. Willem Scholten, CEO ofthe Municipal Port Management. Hementioned a windfall. “Halfway thisyear, the economic prognosis becamemore pessimistic and the port is areflection of the economy. A stabilisa-tion of transhipment therefore seemedlogical, but the second half of the yearturned out to be very good indeed.Looking at containers and oil products,these are even our best results ever.”

The increase is attributable to thetranshipment of ores and scrap metal(+7.1%), petrochemical products andpet cokes (+27.1%), roll-on/roll-off(+8.3%) and containers (5.8%). Thenumber of containers handled increasedby 7% from 6.1 million TEU in 2000 to6.5 mln TEU in 2002. The supply ofcrude oil was down slightly (-1.8%).Both the transshipment of coal and ofother liquid bulk goods (chemicals, oilsand fats) decreased by 3.2%. Clearlyalso down are agribulk (-19.3%), otherdry bulk goods (minerals, phosphates,building materials) (-9.4%) and othergeneral cargo (-11.2%). Total inboundtraffic increased slightly by 0.8%, or 2million tons. Outgoing traffic was upconsiderably with 7.7%, or 5 milliontons.

Mr Willem Scholten, CEO of theRotterdam Municipal Port Management(RMPM) said “In the current economicsituation, stability makes more sensethan growth. This can be an indicationthat the “tangible economy,” physicalproduction and consumption, is moreresilient than anticipated. The steelindustry and the chemical sector arestill doing fairly well and European con-tainer transshipment is even doing


study alsoassessed globaldevelopment of thecontainer trade, current trend of worldfleet of container vessels and theirimplications for Hong Kong up to 2011as well as the latest distribution in con-tainership sizes visiting Hong Kong.

The study also revealed that thetrend towards larger containerships toachieve better economies of scale andto lower operating costs would contin-ue, with indications that a sizeable fleetof 10,000 to 12,000 TEU (20-ft equivalentunit) ships would come on streambetween 2005 and 2010, but was“uncertain at present” regarding theadvent of ships of 15,000 TEUs or more.

The study expected that future mega-containerships would continue to visitHong Kong so long as the territory wasable to maintain its high efficiency incontainer handling operations. It recom-mended Hong Kong maintain waterdepth of 15.5 metres in the approachchannels and alongside berth to meetfuture requirements up to 2005, with aneed for regular review to keep itsobjectives in line with future develop-ment of five-digit containerships.

The study reflected that the arrival ordeparture drafts of the largest contain-erships calling in Hong Kong range from10 to 13 metres and that the draft offive-digit containerships was unlikely togo beyond 15 metres in the next five tosix years.

Presently, CT9 is being built at KwaiChung and its quayside draft will be up

extremely well. Mind you, I am referringto the volumes now, because nobody ispleased with the margins. The goodresults also have to do with our interna-tional position. We benefit from favor-able developments in England (highconsumption, China (high production),Russia (export oil products) and thesteal industry in Germany, Belgium andAustria.” Container handling inRotterdam has picked up again. “Boththe RMPM and various companies haveinvested a lot of energy into realizing

this. Things are getting better, butthere is still room for improvement. Wewant to a remain market leader, andtherefore we must reclaim lost terrain.”

The continuing growth of (inter-European) ‘short sea’ traffic is striking.“I sense some feeling of euro-scepticismin society. This is quite understandableand sometimes even justified; butEurope is the present and the future.Here in the port, we are confronted withthat every day. On balance, Europe hasa positive effect.” Mr. Scholten said.

Hong Kong:Capable to handle mega-

containerships

H ONG KONG Port is capable ofreceiving the next-generationof container vessels and Kwai

Chung’s alongside water depths arecurrently adequate to meet navigationalrequirements of large containerships, aspokesman for the Marine Departmentsaid.

The above conclusion was reflectedin a study, namely, “Yeaterday Eveningand Tomorrow Morning of ContainerFleet” conducted by the MarineDepartment earlier.

“The study confirms that Kwai Chungis able to serve not only large container-ships currently in service, but also thoseexpected to be in operation within thenext few years. As for future five-digitcontainerships, given their draft is stilluncertain, there is a need to regularlyreview their development in terms ofphysical dimensions so that dredgingcan be planned in good time to meettheir operational conditions,” thespokesman said. “The proportion offuture five-digit containerships isexpected to account for a small percent-age of the total containerships calling atHong Kong, based on the current distri-bution of large containerships visitingHong Kong,” he added.

The study was initiated with a viewto finding out exactly whether HongKong could handle containerships,which were increasingly becoming larg-er, the spokesman noted. Besides, the

to 15.5 metres to enable its berths tohandle containerships that are evenbigger than the 7,500 TEU container-ships now being handled in Hong Kong.

Klang: More berths for

container traffic

T HREE more berths - Berths 14, 15and 16-in Northport have beenproposed for conversion or refur-

bishment for multipurpose use capableof handling container as well as breakbulk cargo. The project is scheduled forcompletion within five years.

Berth 14 will be converted for contain-er operations by 2005 while Berths 15and 16 will be refurbished to receivePanamax and post-Panamax vessels by2007.

The conversion of Berth 14 willincrease Northport’s total berth lengthto 2,914 metres and annual installedcapacity to 3.55 million TEU.

The refurbishment of Berth 15 and 16will increase the terminal’s quay line to3,240 metres and boost container han-dling capacity by an additional 550,000TEU for a total installed annual capacityof 4.1 million TEU.

Northport now has a 2,379-metrequay line with an annual handlingcapacity of about 2.8 million TEU. Thiscapacity has to be increased to meet aprojected container throughput of fourmillion TEU by 2010.

Northport has already begun conver-sion of Berths 12 and 13 into multipur-pose berths. The terminal’s annual han-dling capacity will increase by an addi-tional 500,000 TEU when conversionworks are fully completed in 2003. Thetotal quay line will then be increased to2,736 metres while the annual handlingcapacity will rise to 3.3 million TEU. Thiscapacity will be sufficient to accommo-date demand for up to 2006.

Port Klang Authority (PKA), which is


Kaohsiung: 57thAnniversary & the openingof the Port of Kaohsiung

Historical Museum

K AOHSIUNG Harbor Bureau helda celebration for its 57thanniversary on Nov. 28, 2002,

chaired by Director Huang. Administra-tive Vice Minister Yu of the Ministry ofMOTC, Kaohsiung Deputy Mayor Ho andothers from the shipping industry partici-pated in the celebration. During the cere-mony, KHB recognized certain staffmembers of KHB and shipping operatorsfor their outstanding performance. Thoseshipping operators commended for theirexcellent container business included:Evergreen Lines, Taiwan MaerskSealand, American President Line,Yangming Line, China Steel Corporation.In addition, KHB received its certificationfor ISO 14001 EnvironmentalManagement System. following the cele-

bration, the unveiling ceremony forKaoport Historical Museum took place,presided over joinly by AdministrativeVice Minister Yu and Director Huang ofKHB.

Director Huang noted that the contin-ued growth of Kaohsiung Port relies onthe support of the shipping operators.Hard-earned experience and sugges-tions from customers enable Kaoport to

considering Northport's proposal, is alsostudying the impact of the conversionon break bulk cargo capacity. In 2001,Northport handled nearly three millionfreightweight tons (fwt) of break bulkcargo. This volume is expected toincrease to four million fwt by 2010.With the conversion of Berths 12, 13, 14,15 and 16, break bulk cargo capacitywill be reduced from the current fivemillion fwt to four million fwt from 2007onwards.

However, Northport is confident ofhandling the projected break bulk vol-ume by pursuing various options.

Optimising the usage of the existingcontainer berths at Northport as andwhen available for break bulk cargo car-

riers and proposed upgrading of Berths24 and 25 at the Dry Bulk Terminal formultipurpose operations will assist toprovide the required capacity for breakbulk. The redevelopment of Southpointwill also enable Northport to optimizethe use of the break bulk facilities there.

Northport handled 2.3 million TEU (32per cent of Malaysia's container volume)in 2001. Form 1998 2001. From 1998 to2001, the average annual growth ratewas 14.7 per cent. The terminal expectsto achieve a throughput of 2.4 millionTEU this year.

In the first six months of this year,Northport handled nearly 1.2 millionTEU. It expects to handle four millionTEU by 2010.

complete with other international ports.Despite the global recession, Kaoportmanaged a growth rate above 10%. Thiscreditable achievement stems from theefforts of both the staff of KHB and ship-ping operators. In the near future, incompliance with the country's trade poli-cies, KHB will be devoted to the follow-ing measures:1. Transform KHB into a Public Trust

Corporation.2. Encourage private investment on a BOT

basis to establish partnerships and create awin-win situation.

3. Adopt flexibility on port charges toenhance competitiveness.

4. Develop and integrate information systemsto provide customers with better services.

5. Expand logistics business to make Kaoportthe premier transshipment center in theAsia-Pacific region

6. Set up a Free Trade Zone to develop glob-al transportation business

7. Open some berths for waterfront recre-ational use. Berth Nos. 1~3 are scheduledto fully open to the public by the end of2003.

8. Construct dedicated roads in the port areafor container traffic. Abolish the containerescort system to save shipping operators'costs.

9. Provide container operation facilities onthe ground of global container distribution.And conduct the project of ContainerTerminal No. 6 as well as the expansion ofoffshore deep-water terminals.

The Administrative Vice Minister Yumade an address in which he applaudedKHB's acquirement of ISO-14001 certifi-cation as proof of Kaohsiung HarborBureau's new commitment to environ-mental protection. He added that theMOTC is dedicated to providing theports and shipping companies with abetter operating environment and morebusiness opportunities through liberal-ization and internationalization.

M P AS I N G A P O R E

MPA: Review of 2002

peformance

Shipping tonnage and

vessel calls

The Singapore port achieved a newrecord of 971.7 million gross tons (GT) forshipping tonnage in 2002, surpassingthe 960.1 million GT achieved in 2001.This marked a 1.2 per cent rise year-on-year. The new benchmark is set to keep


Singapore in the lead as the world’sbusiest port for shipping tonnage.

Container ships contributed the lion’sshare with 347.3 million GT or 35.7 percent of the total shipping tonnage. Nexthighest were tankers with 313.3 millionGT (32.2 per cent of total shipping ton-nage). Bulk carriers came in third at173.1 million GT (17.8 per cent of totaltonnage).

Vessel arrivals at the port dipped to atotal of 142,745 calls in 2002, down 2.4per cent from 146,265 calls in 2001.

Cargo Throughput

Container traffic through theSingapore port was 16.94 million TEUs(twenty-foot equivalent unit) last year,an increase of 8.8 per cent from 15.57million TEUs handled in 2001.

The total cargo handled for 2002 was335.12 million tons, up 6.9 per cent from313.49 million tons in 2001.

Bunker Sales

For bunker sales, a total of 20.10 mil-lion tons of bunkers were sold last year,slipping 1.3 per cent from the 20.35 mil-lion tons sold in 2001.

Over the years, the Maritime and PortAuthority of Singapore (MPA) has intro-duced various incentives to enhance thecompetitiveness of the Singapore port.For instance, the MPA has extended theport dues concession of 20 per cent forcontainer ships until June 30, 2004. As ofDecember 31, 2002, about S$33.4 millionin rebates have been granted since theconcession was introduced in May 1996.More recently, the MPA announced sev-eral new bunkering initiatives to attractmore ships to take bunkers in Singapore.These measures included the introduc-tion of an Accreditation Scheme forBunker Suppliers, intensifying bunkerquality checks and adopting the“Improved Bunker Sampling Method.”

PAT: Bangkok Port

expands inland services

M R. Surajit Petyim, ManagingDirector of Bangkok Portrevealed recently the various

projects currently being undertaken atthe Port intended to increase satisfac-tion of port clients, optimize utilizationof the port’s resources and increasethroughputs. These projects cover thedevelopment of the bonded warehousesto be a logistics center, development of

a complete container depot and conver-sion of idle space in the conventionalterminal for alternative purposes.

According to Director Petyim, bondedwarehouse’s services have beenexpanded to serve an increasING vari-ety of cargoes. The available space hasbeen increased by 3,120 sq. meters toaccommodate heavy lift shipments suchas raw materials and equipment. A 258-sq. meter cold storage room has beenopened for storage of products requir-ing certain controlled temperature. ThePort is also expanding the bonded areato the open area adjacent to the jute,cotton and kapok warehouse to receivenonded goods in FCL containers andreefers.

Bangkok Port selected the 15-acreplot of land near the Koh Lao area asthe proposed site for a container depot.The depot is designed to support con-tainer services at the container termi-nals as well as provide new services,such a cleaning, repairing, pre-coolingand stuffing reefer containers.Currently, the details of the project areunder consideration by the Customs

Townsville: Ship simulationsas part of the Ocean Terminal

feasibility work

P LANS to develop the OceanTerminal on the WesternBreakwater received a boost

today with consultants conducting shipsimulations to prove that cruise andnavy vessels can safely moor at the pro-

Department. The depot is programmedto be operational by next year.

To address the persistent demand forservices, the Port has also dedicated asection in the export operation zone forthe initial container cleaning, repairingand pre-cooling services. Starting in themiddle of June, the Port has switchedthe operational areas between theempty container stacking area and thestuffing area in anticipation of the con-version of the 2,100-sq. meter vacantarea close to Koh Lao for the containercleaning activity.

In support of the expansion program,the Port Authority of Thailand has sim-plified operating procedures whichinclude waiving the Bank Guaranteerequirements for depositing goods intothe bonded warehouses. It has pro-cured modern handling equipment,racks, pallets, and software for invento-ry management.

Details for the management and oper-ation of the inland services are present-ly under consideration. Bangkok Port isalso selecting the stevedors who willundertake the stripping of containers.

posed new terminal and that other ves-sels can safely navigate in and out ofthe Port while the new terminal is occu-pied.

According to Townsville PortAuthority Chairman, Mr. Ron McLean,the study is another essential step inachieving the facility for Townsville.“Townsville Port Authority hasengaged Lawson and Treloar,Consulting Engineers to simulate ship-ping manoeuvres with the Pilots ofMaritime Safety Queensland and tugmasters. Lawson and Treloar use state-of-the-art simulation technology withnetworked PCs to provide a realisticdepiction of Townsville Harbor and sur-roundings. The simulation model willtest navigation into the Harbour for var-ious ship types under different condi-tions of wind, current and tides” “Thesimulations will also determine whetheror not we have to indent the existingbreakwater by 50 metres as was previ-ously thought. Finding an alternativesolution could save this project up to $6million so it is an important part of thefeasibility process in developing theOcean Terminal,” Mr. McLean said.

The Department of StateDevelopment is funding 50% of the$55,000 cost of the simulations.