NEWS

AMSA and the University of Tasmania’s Australian Maritime College have launched a resource kit to help industry and commercial vessel operators comply with new operational safety requirements.

From July 1, 2015 operators of all passenger and hire and drive vessels will be required to have a safety management system (SMS) and comply with the revised standard under the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

The requirement will also apply from July 1, 2016 for all operators of non-passenger and fishing vessels.

AMSA and AMC have worked together to develop a hands-on training workshop to help commercial vessel operators understand how to develop and implement a simple but effective SMS.

The Commercial Vessels Risk and Safety Management workshop resource kit has been designed to assist trainers to train domestic commercial vessel operators how to develop an SMS tailored to their operation.

AMSA has been working with industry and state-based maritime safety authorities to build awareness of their obligations and to assist commercial operators meet their requirements.

AMC is delivering the workshop through relevant courses at its Launceston campus.

AMSA Deputy CEO Gary Prosser said from July 1 next year safety requirements would be the same across the commercial vessel industry in every state, following the 2013 introduction of the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

“Developing an SMS is about identifying and controlling risks, and providing assurance the risk controls are effective,” Mr Prosser said.

“No-one knows the risks their operations present better than the vessel’s operator and crew.

“The workshops provide vessel operators and their crews the information they need to create an SMS that works for their vessel and their business.

While some states already have a requirement for vessels to have an SMS in place, including Tasmania, Queensland, Victoria and NSW, other states have not.

“From July 1, 2016 the rules will be the same across Australia,” Mr Prosser said.

AMC Safety and Survival Instructor Phillip Lenthall said the collaboration in developing the training resource kit would be particularly beneficial for smaller operators.

“For some vessels, with company support and infrastructure behind them there are resources to create a safety plan but for smaller operators it can be a more difficult task,” Mr Lenthall said.

“The feedback from vessel owners has guided the development of this resource kit to give them and their crews a practical, hands-on workshop to give them all the information they need to develop an SMS, to comply with national requirements.

“Including SMS requirements in our course materials helps to build a safety culture in the domestic commercial vessel industry, giving our students the skills to assess risks and develop systems to reduce risks.”

Industry bodies can nominate people interested in delivering the workshop, who then observe the workshop delivered by an AMSA or AMC staff member and participate in a train-the-trainer development session before they conduct the workshop under the supervision of AMSA or AMC.

The trainers are then able to organise and conduct workshops.

Mr Prosser said AMSA had been working with industry associations, including Southern Rocklobster Limited and Wildcatch Fisheries SA, to ensure their members are compliant with SMS requirements.

AMSA has recognised Southern Rocklobster Limited’s Clean Green program as an equivalent solution to meet requirements under the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

Wildcatch will roll out workshops, using the resource kit, to its members who operate vessels in the abalone, prawn, charter boat, scale and Lakes and Coorong fishing industries in South Australia. 

On the 23^rd April AMSA General Manager for Ship Safety Al Schwartz sent an open letter to the maritime industry reinforcing the requirements for port and ship access by AMSA inspectors.

Mr Schwartz quoted sections of the Navigation Act 2012 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Regulations 2003 which outline the powers held by AMSA inspectors to carry out inspections of vessels and gain access to other premises and structures for the purpose of carrying out their duties.

He also noted that AMSA inspectors are Commonwealth Public Officials and that it is an offence to obstruct, hinder, intimidate or resist an Inspector in the performance of their official duties.

The AIMS urges all members to read the letter and to ensure that they conduct themselves appropriately.

Download a copy of the letter here

On 16 April 1947, in the port of Texas City, Texas, the freighter GRANDCAMP, with a cargo of ammonium nitrate, small arms ammunition, machinery, and sisal twine, caught fire.

The fire quickly spread to the nearby freighter HIGH FLYER, loaded with ammonium nitrate and sulfur. When the two ships exploded, it largely flattened the harbor area.

It is estimated that over 600 people died in the explosion and fires (exact numbers were unattainable due to the extent of damage).

The US Coast Guard investigation of the casualty determined that the fire was initiated by unauthorized smoking in the cargo hold of the GRANDCAMP. It recommended, among other things, that regulations for carriage of dangerous goods be revised. Litigation ensuing from this tragedy ultimately resulted in enactment of the US Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA).

The First Explosion:

The fire on the S.S. Grandcamp produced a dense, brilliantly colored smoke that could be seen all over town. Fires around the docks were a fairly common occurrence in Texas City; it was not unusual for residents to travel down to the docks to watch the fires and the firemen working, which may explain why there were so many bystanders present — and subsequently so many casualties — at explosion of the S.S. Grandcamp.

The ammonium nitrate onboard the Grandcamp detonated at 9:12 a.m., rupturing the ship and sending the cargo of peanuts, tobacco, twine, bunker oil and the remaining bags of ammonium nitrate 2,000 to 3,000 feet into the air. Fireballs streaked across the sky and could be seen for miles across Galveston Bay as molten ship fragments erupted out of the pier. The blast caused a fifteen-foot tidal wave that crashed onto the dock and flooded the surrounding area. Windows were shattered in Houston, 40 miles to the north, and people in Louisiana felt the shock 250 miles away. Most of the buildings closest to the blast were flattened, and there were many more that had doors and roofs blown off. The Monsanto plant, only three hundred feet away, was destroyed by the blast.

Most of the Texas City Terminal Railways’ warehouses along the docks were a complete loss. Hundreds of employees, pedestrians and bystanders were killed. At the time of the Grandcamp’s explosion, only two additional vessels were docked in port: the S.S. High Flyer and the Wilson B. Keene, both American C-2 cargo ships similar to the Grandcamp.

The intensity of the blast sent shrapnel tearing into the surrounding area. Flaming debris ignited giant tanks full of oil and chemicals stored at the refineries, causing a set of secondary fires and smaller explosions. The Longhorn II, a barge anchored in port, was lifted out of the water by the sheer force of the explosion and landed 100 feet away on the shore. Buildings blazed long after the initial explosion, provoking large-scale emergency relief efforts throughout the day, that night, and into the following day.

The blast registered on a seismograph as far away as Denver, Colorado. Dockworker Pete Suderman remembers flying thirty feet as the blast carried him and several of the dock’s three-inch wooden planks across the pier.11 Nattie Morrow was in her home with her two children and sister-in-law Sadie. She watched the billowing smoke near the Monsanto plant from her back porch just prior to the blast. “Suddenly a thundering boom sounded, and seconds later the door ripped off its facing, skidded across the kitchen floor, and slammed down onto the table where I sat with the baby. The house toppled to one side and sat off its piers at a crazy angle. Broken glass filled the air, and we didn’t know what was happening.”

The chief and 27 firefighters from the Texas City Fire Department were killed in the initial blast. At the time of the explosion, phone services in Texas City were not working because of a telephone operators’ strike. When the operators learned of the accident, they quickly went back to work, but the strike caused an initial delay in coordinating rescue efforts.

Once operators began calling for help, rescue workers from all over the area began responding immediately. The U.S. Army, Navy, Coast Guard, Marine Reserve and the Texas National Guard all sent personnel, including doctors, nurses and ambulances. The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston sent doctors, nurses, and medical students. Firefighters from Galveston, Houston, Fort Crockett, Ellington Field, and surrounding towns arrived to help.

The cities of Galveston, Houston and San Antonio sent policemen to assist the Texas City Police Department in maintaining order after the explosion. The U.S. Army flew in blood plasma, gas masks, food, and other supplies, provided bull-dozers to begin clearing the wreckage, and set up temporary housing for the survivors at Camp Wallace in Hitchcock.5 The Red Cross, Salvation Army and the Boy and Girl Scouts of America sent a flood of volunteers who provided first aid, food, water and comfort to city residents. Volunteers from other local organizations — and others who were not part of any organization — felt compelled to offer what help they could.

There was no operational hospital in Texas City at the time of the disaster, so volunteers converted city hall and the chamber of commerce buildings into makeshift infirmaries. Many wounded were evacuated to John Sealy Hospital in Galveston, the hospital at Fort Crockett, and hospitals in Houston.

This blog first appeared on the Maritime Cyprus website and is published with the kind permission of the author.

The IMO has agreed to use the International Marine Contractors Association's proposals as the basis for review of IMO Guidelines for vessels with dynamic positioning systems (MSC/Circ.645).

The review will be taken forward by an IMO intersessional correspondence group that will further develop the draft, with a view to finalising it at the next meeting of the IMO Ship Systems and Equipment (SSE) sub-committee, in 2016.

“IMO’s circular 645 is the established international standard for DP systems. The guidelines have successfully provided the framework on which national regulations and classification society rules are based, and which are supplemented by a growing body of more detailed industry guidance,” explains IMCA’s Technical Director, Jane Bugler.

“Over the decades since MSC/circ.645 was first published in 1994, DP has evolved from being a tool primarily for mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs) maintaining position over offshore wells, to being employed for a wide range of position keeping operations, with systems being fitted on much larger numbers of new vessels and on an increasingly diverse set of vessels, from offshore units to shuttle tankers and passenger vessels.

“645 has been working well but needs amending slightly to reflect changes in both technology and industry practice, including performing Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs) on the DP system by identifying and analysing the consequences of any single point failure to ensure that, if a failure were to occur, it would not exceed the worst case failure design intent (WCFDI) or cause the vessel a significant loss of position by ‘drift off’ or ‘drive off’. The IMO review will also consider the inclusion of DP equipment class 0, to reflect the four equipment classes that are now recognised, and the flag state certification provisions.

 “The IMCA proposals were developed by an internal workgroup, with input from co-sponsors that include a number of governments and other industry organisations. We look forward to a highly constructive time working on MSC/circ. 645 with the correspondence group.”

 IMCA’s DP role

IMCA publishes a variety of guidance documents on DP, setting out industry good practice based on the cumulative experience of its members to help ensure safe and efficient DP operations.‘Guidelines for the design and operation of dynamically positioned vessels’ is the association’s key document. It is regularly reviewed and updated with a new version due for publication during 2015. The document contains generic guidelines for the design and operation of DP vessels, and the guidance has now been increased to include 17 differing vessel types.

Other documents address annual DP trials programmes (IMCA M 190 and IMCA M 191) for DP vessels, based on comprehensive and standard report formats for ease of use by vessel operators and their clients. IMCA also produces technical reports, aimed at helping vessel operators review, specify, maintain and use a variety of positioning systems, thrusters, power and vessel management systems and other equipment.

The IMCA database of incidents on DP vessels extends back over more than 30 years and all DP vessel operating companies are encouraged to participate in reporting incidents for mutual benefit. Each year reports received are collated and an anonymised analysis of the incidents is published. IMCA also publishes and circulates DP safety flashes.

Getting a contract right can sometimes seem like an unnecessary complicated and fruitless exercise. The reality is that most activities do not result in problems, mistakes or claims.

But some do, and it is then that the value of a rigorous approach becomes clear. Like your insurance, getting your terms right should be a key part of any risk management strategy.

A good quality control system demands nothing less. Problems typically arise in one of three ways (1) a mistake (2) a failure to marry expectations (i.e. to clearly record and agree what both parties expect of each other) and (3) unforeseen circumstances the consequences of which have not been agreed. The risk of any of these things happening, and the consequences of them happening if they do, can be minimised; any business with an eye on the future would do well to act accordingly.

This article is the first in a series of three or four. It discusses some aspects of the law relating to the appointment of marine surveyors, particularly where that appointment is subject to the Australian Consumer Law. The intention is to give particular focus to important but sometimes complex issues; the standard of performance required, the actual performance required, the use (and abuse) of indemnities and limitations of liability. The other articles in the series will have a look at:

• additional aspects of contracting for marine surveyors (e.g. force majeure, intellectual property, insurance)
  
• liabilities to third parties
  
• how professions sometimes control (as professions) liabilities for members of the profession
  
• the legislation now applying to marine surveyors and some of the issues arising in relation to that.
  

Generally the appointment or engagement of a marine surveyor is a form of consultancy agreement. By consultancy agreement is meant a contract pursuant to which a person agrees to apply a special skill to address a requirement of the other party to the contract. The key terms found in any consultancy agreement will usually include:

• the standard of performance required 
  
• the actual performance required (i.e. what is to be done for the money)
  
• payment and the terms of payment
  
• warranties
  
• indemnities
  
• limitations of liability
  
• force majeure
  
• requirements for insurance
  
• confidentiality
  
• boilerplate (a term used to describe general clauses found in most agreements, e.g. no waiver and jurisdiction clauses)
  

All and any of these require attention. Not only must the terms of the agreement be read and understood, but anyone making a serious attempt to understand where the risks really are should have an understanding of the laws that apply. The discussion that follows attempts to summarise key issues arising in relation to the standard of performance required, the actual performance required (i.e. what is to be done), indemnities and exclusion clauses. Some of these issues are practical, some are legal.

To read more click here

The Nairobi International Convention on the Removal Wrecks entered into force on 14 April 2015 following the deposit, on 14 April 2014, of an instrument of ratification by Denmark with the IMO.

Among several provisions, the Convention will place financial responsibility for the removal of certain hazardous wrecks on shipowners, making insurance, or some other form of financial security, compulsory.

Denmark became the 10th country to ratify the convention, thereby triggering its entry into force exactly 12 months later.

The Convention will fill a gap in the existing international legal framework by providing the first set of uniform international rules aimed at ensuring the prompt and effective removal of wrecks located beyond a country’s territorial sea. The Convention also contains a clause that enables States Parties to ‘opt in’ to apply certain provisions to their territory, including their territorial sea.

The Convention will provide a sound legal basis for States to remove, or have removed, shipwrecks that may have the potential to affect adversely the safety of lives, goods and property at sea, as well as the marine and coastal environment. It will make shipowners financially liable and require them to take out insurance or provide other financial security to cover the costs of wreck removal. It will also provide States with a right of direct action against insurers.

 Articles in the Convention cover:

• reporting and locating ships and wrecks - covering the reporting of casualties to the nearest coastal State; warnings to mariners and coastal States about the wreck; and action by the coastal State to locate the ship or wreck;
  
• criteria for determining the hazard posed by wrecks, including depth of water above the wreck, proximity of shipping routes, traffic density and frequency, type of traffic and vulnerability of port facilities. 
  

Environmental criteria such as damage likely to result from the release into the marine environment of cargo or oil are also included;

• measures to facilitate the removal of wrecks, including rights and obligations to remove hazardous ships and wrecks - which sets out when the shipowner is responsible for removing the wreck and when a State may intervene;
  
• liability of the owner for the costs of locating, marking and removing ships and wrecks - the registered shipowner is required to maintain compulsory insurance or other financial security to cover liability under the convention; and settlement of disputes.
  

 Although the incidence of marine casualties has decreased in recent years, mainly thanks to the work of IMO and the persistent efforts of Governments and industry to enhance safety in shipping operations, the number of abandoned wrecks has reportedly increased and, as a result, the problems they cause to coastal States and shipping in general have become more acute.

 There are a number of problems: first, and depending on its location, a wreck may constitute a hazard to navigation, potentially endangering other vessels and their crews; second, and of equal concern, depending on the nature of the cargo, is the potential for a wreck to cause substantial damage to the marine and coastal environments; third, in an age where goods and services are becoming increasingly expensive, is the issue of the costs involved in the marking and removal of hazardous wrecks; and fourth, most of the dangerous wrecks lie in shallow coastal waters, within the territorial sea, where coastal States have unrestricted rights to remove them, without engagement of the shipowner. The convention attempts to resolve all of these and other, related, issues.

 The Convention was adopted by a five-day International Conference at the United Nations Office at Nairobi (UNON), Kenya, in 2007.

The Senate Inquiry into Australia’s fuel security has heard of BP’s plans to remove the tanker British Loyalty from the Australian coastal trade to be replaced with cheap foreign shipping. 

This is despite a strong business case that the British Loyalty remains viable. Maritime Union of Australia Assistant National Secretary Ian Bray said the British Loyalty is one of the last three Australian-crewed tankers on the coast. There were six in 2011.

“BP put over 900,000 tonnes on ships, over 700,000 tonnes of which is on big east cost cargoes that could be a viable trade for the British Loyalty or another similar sized vessel,” Mr Bray said.

“There is more than enough cargo BP just want to take environmental and safety shortcuts and have the lowest paid crew they can find from anywhere in the world.

“BP has the ability to retain the British Loyalty trading on the Australian coast or replace the ship, saving Australian jobs, protecting the environment and our fuel security.

“A cost analysis shows that the cost of employing an Australian crew on a product tanker equates to around one cent per litre at the petrol pump.

“BP are slashing Australian jobs, jeopardising our environmental safety with Flag of Convenience ships of shame and showing total disregard for Australia’s fuel security to squeeze every last cent of profit out of the community.

”We’ll be meeting with BP in Melbourne next Monday to see what they’ve got to say for themselves."

Mr Bray said that the Abbott Government’s Energy White paper, released yesterday, admits that Australia’s current oil stockholdings do not meet International Energy Agency obligations.

The white paper said compliance would require “an investment of several billion dollars in stocks and storage infrastructure over a decade. A decision on how to address this compliance issue will be made by the government in 2015”.

“In the medium term, we believe there is a good case to be made for using Australian ships to carry some portion of refined petroleum international imports,” Mr Bray told the Senate Inquiry in Melbourne.

“If the government is going to allow refineries to be closed and not mandate the retention of any fuel reserves, this is the very least we can do. It is also a cost-effective solution.

“The ongoing closure of refineries around Australia means we now import 91 per cent of our petrol and diesel – up from 60 per cent in 2000 – and this number will continue to rise with two more refineries in Queensland soon to be on the chopping block.”

The MUA commissioned John Francis from Ocean Freight Management to conduct an independent evaluation of the cents per litre for employing Australian crew on fuel import tankers as promised at the previous hearing.

MUA Assistant National Secretary Warren Smith said: “The research finds that for most petrol imports, employing Australian crew would cost about 1 cent per litre per ship. If Australia decided that a portion of its import fleet should be flagged and crewed in Australia, the cost could be spread across the entire fleet of import ships.

“Former refineries are already converting berths to handle larger 80,000 tonne import tankers. On these ships, the cost of employing Australians is closer to half a cent per litre per ship.

“It is also true that the most expensive place to ship petrol in Australia is Adelaide, yet Darwin and other less populated centres continually have the highest retail price at the bowser. 

“In addition, the research finds that there were over 600 individual tankers in Australian waters in 2013 and that number will increase with any reduction in Australian-crewed vessels and increasing imports out of Asia.”

Australians are worried about our national security at a time when terrorist group Al-Qaeda has openly declared their intention is to target international fuel ships.

More than half of Australia's fuel comes through the Straits of Hormuz to Singapore and then through the narrow Straits of Malacca, an area already notorious for its piracy.

The MUA believes that a serious environmental disaster in Australian waters is inevitable - whether it is by storing large volumes of petrol in large tankers in Port Phillip Bay, Moreton Bay or Botany Bay or by moving tankers around the Great Barrier Reef - when run by those unfamiliar with Australian waters and conditions.

A stable fleet of Australian ships on long-term contract is the only way to ensure our future fuel security and proper environmental protection.

These ships could be partly on the Australian International Shipping Register and partly on the Australian General Register to provide companies with additional flexibility.

 

Member Profile: Captain James London

AIMS members share their thoughts and experiences in the industry. This edition we profile industry veteran Captain James London.

How long have you been involved in the industry?
Fifty years.

Where do you work now?
I have worked for the past twenty years in Mackay and environs.

What were you doing previously?
I was in the last intake of boy sailors to the RAN at 15 years of age after having been at boarding school since I was 7 years old.  At 16 I was apprenticed to Eastern & Australian SS Co Ltd and after serving four years on Company vessels sat & passed my 2^nd Mates FG. I then served with RW Miller Tankers until deciding I missed my American girlfriend too much and flew to the States to marry her.

We had no money after the honeymoon (in a motel opposite the San Francisco Zoo) so with some help from a friend I managed to join the US Navy on an emergency wartime basis. I served in USNS UPSHUR (a troop carrier) and USNS BRETON (an escort carrier) ferrying troops and aircraft to Saigon and Cam Rahn Bay in South Vietnam.

I returned to Australia on the SS ORIANA with my new wife in 1968 and remember well staying the first night in the Edgecliff Motel. Thieves broke into the underground garage and stole all our belongings from our parked car. All that remained was one small suitcase that we had taken up to the room the previous day.

Two weeks later we found out, my wife was pregnant with our first child.

I sued the Motel for the loss of our luggage and finally received compensation of $1200 - two years later.

I returned to the sea with Union SS Coy., and then after the birth of our child, swallowed the Anchor and came ashore. I became a Trainee Credit Manager with Goodyear Tyre Service in Sydney and soon after was transferred to Dubbo for three months and then finally to Orange (the previous Credit Manager had been tickling the till).

Within a year I started my own business, a wholesaler selling brown and white goods to retailers over a third of NSW. In 1973 I sold our business and returned to my Maritime roots.

I took a permanent position as third mate on the MV BULKNES (trading between Gladstone and Bluff in NZ). The vessel had half Australian and half New Zealand crew. This led to having thirteen different Trade Unions on board a living nightmare for all but the Kiwis, as they were being paid Australian wages! During this period I obtained both my Mates and Masters FG Certificates and became Chief Officer in 1978.

In 1983 I was absorbed into the TNT Coy as a Chief Officer. They built three specialist vessels to service the Bauxite & Alumina trade between Gladstone, Weipa, Bluff and Tasmania, namely two bulk carriers and one self-discharging bulk vessel.

In 1986 the management of the three vessels was then given to ASP which then allowed me to serve in a greater number of vessels and I became Master soon after. In 1993 I was offered a licence as a Pilot in the Great Barrier Reef by the Marine Board of Queensland which I promptly took up and joined Queensland Coastal Pilots.

In 1996 along with two other licensed GBR Pilots we formed a Company to service Hydrographers Passage from Mackay. We progressively purchased Helicopters and employed other Sea Pilots to grow the business. By 2003 the Company was employing six pilots and servicing forty vessels per month. In 2005 I was the only original partner remaining as a working pilot and I subsequently sold the Company.

In 1998 we also purchased a Marine Surveyor’s business from the ex-harbourmaster of Mackay (Red Faulkner) which was then servicing Fishing Boats and recreational vessels in the area. After selling the Pilotage Company, I continued to carry out Surveys in the Mackay area until semi- retirement.      

What made you decide to enter the profession?
My Great/Great Grandfather and my Grandfather were both Masters FG and my Father was a career soldier. I expect it is in my genes.

What do you enjoy most about the industry?
My area of Surveying is in the recreational field which entails more often than not a personal one on one experience with the client. I am fortunate in being able to meet people of all abilities from all walks of life, including the very wealthy or those with nothing but their boat (home) and the clothes they are wearing. Most of them have interesting stories to tell, where they have been or where they are going.

I have met guys who are gals, gals who would be guys and all in between. They all have the one thing in common; they love the challenge of the sea. 

How has surveying changed in the last 10 years?
The recreational Industry is controlled by the Insurance Companies and to a lesser extent the Safety Regulators. In the past they have both been relaxed about the Rules that govern their existence. However recent Cyclones and the damage that has been caused to recreational vessels, has ensured that much more stringent inspections & regulations are becoming the Norm.

In particular the larger Insurance Companies are insisting on Surveyors being properly qualified with Professional Indemnity and Quality Assurance.

Shipwrights are a dying breed and their successors Boat Builders do not generally have the same grounding which was acceptable to become a Marine Surveyor. 

What do you see as the biggest challenges the industry faces?
The Regulators in Australia are relying on the Private Surveyors in Industry to become the future AMSA/State Inspectors/Surveyors. This has taken place in the Domestic Commercial Vessel (DCV) area, whereby at last count there are now over 180 Attested AMSA Private Surveyors.

A greater proportion of these Surveyors are already in their senior years and they were attested prior to the new rules for Private Surveyors came into being on 2nd January, 2015.

Why would you at your age and with your vast experience undertake the Diploma of Marine Surveying?

Whilst I have practiced my profession in many facets of the Maritime Industry, I believe that Marine Surveyors are specialised Mariners. This is particularly true in the knowledge required in design, construction, safe operations and regulations that are relevant to both Domestic Commercial and Recreational vessels in Australia.

I am now convinced that the Diploma is the only way to expand the knowledge that I gained on my path to a Master Class 1 qualification, to a point where I can legitimately claim the title of Marine Surveyor.   

Have you learned anything new from the experience of doing study again?The Diploma is specific to a Marine Surveyor’s requirements and encourages me to learn more and indeed understand that one can never know too much about a chosen career.

I have also learnt that the Regulators have some way to go before the new DCV Regulations are pertinent to the Industry.

Are there any benefits to undertaking study and professional development?The benefits are that we can keep pace with the rest of our own Industry. The Diploma needs to be the pre-eminent qualification for the specialisation of becoming a Marine Surveyor in Australia.

As we surely will lose the experience of the Masters and Mates Certificate and the Marine Engineers qualifications due to the demise of Australian Shipping, we must ensure that there is a valid future pathway to maintain the Marine Surveyors section of the Australian Maritime Industry.

AIMS Conference confirmed for 13th and 14th August 2015 in Hobart and will be opened by the Governor of Tasmania. This year the inaugural AIMS “Awards for Excellence” will be held in conjunction with a Gala Dinner.

This Conference is OUR industry’s big show case event and we will be out there for all to see. With many esteemed guests participating this is our chance to show off our talents to the broader shipping and maritime community and the program has an excellent range of sessions designed to meet a wide range of the industry sectors.

It provides a great opportunity to meet new members and students and showcase both AIMS and our professional development schedule for 2015. 

So – big ships or small - we ask that as many members as possible make the time to attend this two day event. The topics covered at the Conference have been specifically designed to broaden members’ competencies in line with our ongoing development of the CPD program and speakers include AMSA and Government Representatives as well as International and National experts in a wide range of specialist fields.

DOWNLOAD CONFERENCE BROCHURE 

Delegate Fees:

Gold	Early Bird AUD$800	After May 30th 2015 AUD$950
Silver	Early Bird AUD$650	After May 30th 2015 AUD$800
Bronze	Early Bird AUD$400	After May 30th 2015 AUD$550
Student	Early Bird AUD$280	After May 30th 2015 AUD$300

For the early bird discount, payment must be made in full at the time of registration – NOTE this is a 2014 tax deductible event!

 For delegates other than Gold pass holders, additional events may be included at registration at additional cost:

Gala Charity Dinner & Awards	$160.00 per person
Mount Wellington Trip	$40.00 per person
3rd Stream Visits	$50.00 per person

The conference will also include the AIMS Gala Dinner and the inaugural Awards for Excellence. There will be six awards:

1. The Mike Bozier award for an outstanding contribution to the Marine Survey Industry
   
2. Excellence in Client Service
   
3. Excellence in Technology or Business Services to the Marine Survey Industry
   
4. Innovation and Excellence in the Health and Safety of Marine Surveyors
   
5. Rising Star Award
   
6. Student of the Year
   

The criteria for submissions and details of the judging panels for each category will be published on the website in April and close on 30 June 2015. Information on the Awards and the Conference will also be emailed to all members.

Members Note the AIMS AGM will be held prior to the Conference on Wednesday 12^th August at 3pm at the Grand Chancellor Hotel. Details about this event will be posted on the website in the future.

REGISTER YOUR INTEREST by emailing conferences@aimsurveyors.com.au or by downloading and returning this form: Registration Form.pdf

Port of Townsville Limited (POTL) has signed a historic Memorandum of Understanding with the Port of Huizhou in China for beef trade and containerised shipping.

The MOU is based on a two-way and direct shipping route between the two ports. The city of Huizhou is situated in the southeast of Guangdong and in the north of Pearl River Delta and only 70 kilometres from Hong Kong.

POTL General Manager Trade and Property Claudia Brumme Smith said that the establishment of the agreement with Port of Huizhou was a historic moment for the region.

“For the first time, the Port of Townsville will enter into a sister port agreement with a Chinese port,” she said.

“This agreement with Port of Huizhou will ensure long-term cooperation between our two ports to facilitate trade in quality beef products (including live cattle) from North Queensland,”

Mr Ma Chenghui, Director General of Port of Huizhou said the establishment of livestock logistics channel would vastly improve transit times between the two ports.

“This agreement with Port of Townsville Limited is great news for the Chinese consumers who have a desire for quality beef from Australia.”

The MOU will cement a sister port agreement between the two ports is part of a long term plan by the Chinese port to develop a “21st century maritime silk road” with Australia.

“Shorter transit times and lower logistics costs means that Australian producers will be able to sell their product to China at competitive prices.”