X hits on this document

Word document

CHEMICAL TANKER COMMITTEE MEETING - page 14 / 37

98 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

14 / 37

Include additional boxes in the flow chart for inert of non-inert, as well as portable machines and fixed machines

To try and simplify the document

On completion and when the working group is content the final document should be re-circulated to the CTC/CTSCA for their approval

The committee agreed that once the CTC/CTSCA had approved the flow chart and associated document then this should be submitted to INTERTANKO Council for their endorsement in time for the annual tanker event during April 2008.

Action Point No.3: The committee agreed that the BMP VOC reduction flow chart should be amended as outlined in 6.1 to these minutes

.

Action Point No.4: The committee agreed that once the flow chart was revised and completed this should be circulated to the CTC/CTSCA for their approval and once approved it should be submitted to INTERTANKO Council for endorsement in time for the Council meeting in April 2008.

a.

6.2 INTERTANKO/FOSFA banned last cargo working group (Chairman Svend Foyn-Bruun)

The committee noted the report providing an update on this project and the written report in appendix 5 to the CTC agenda. Following due discussion the committee agreed that the project should continue. But importantly that INTERTANKO should highlight to FOSFA that only 1 company represented on the CTC had received the FOSFA letter, requesting feedback on the stainless steel issue and if these companies felt such changes would be advantageous to the trade. As a consequence of only 1 company being contacted the committee agreed that INTERTANKO should contact FOSFA and request FOSFA to re-issue this letter directly to all the major chemical tanker operators represented within the CTC.

Action Point No.5 The committee agreed that INTERTANKO should contact FOSFA and request FOSFA to re-issue this letter directly to all the major chemical tanker operators represented within the CTC.

6.2 Cleaning Standard Terminology working group (Chairman Svend Foyn-Bruun)

The committee took note of the written and verbal report. One committee member raised a question regarding wall wash test (WWT) standards, particularly that some charterers have removed the need for any WWT to be required, the committee also highlighted the fact that some Oil Companies have raised their concerns with regards to Wall wash testing as these require cargo tank entries and specific wash techniques.

The committee agreed that the working group should establish that one of its goals and objectives should be “no in tank tests required”. The committee noted in this respect that some chemical charterers have today stopped requiring WWT and are using first foot tests to establish quality control parameters of the cargo.

The committee agreed that the working group should review its TOR’s accordingly to encompass “no in tank tests” but also continue to address the TOR’s as currently defined which would continue to utilize a verification test but this should be a realistic verification test and ensure the minimum number of tank entries required to achieve that standard.

Action Point No.6 The working group should review its TOR’s accordingly to encompass “no in tank tests” but also continue to address the TOR’s as currently defined which would continue to utilize a verification test but this should be a realistic verification test and ensure the minimum number of tank entries required to achieve that standard.

Agenda for the CTC #32Page 14 of 39

To be held in Panama City on the 09 April 2008 Issue No. 1

Our Ref.: AGO­­­­-22713­­/1000003Approved by: H.N. Snaith

Document info
Document views98
Page views98
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 00:34:19 UTC 2016
Pages37
Paragraphs1009
Words13210

Comments