SOLONS REJECT TANKER ACCORD; BOYCOTT GROWS

House and Senate conferees working on comprehensive oil spill liability legislation have agreed not to have the U.S. participate in international tanker accords.

That settled one of the major disagreements that has held up the legislation for months, but it reinforced tanker owners' resolve not to be exposed to unlimited liability for spill cleanup costs. As a result, the tanker boycott of U.S. ports is picking up steam.

Conferees are to meet July 12 on two other contentious issues: whether to require tankers to have double hulls or bottoms and the amounts of civil and criminal penalties to be imposed under federal law.

Committee staff members said there is a good possibility agreement can be reached on those issues, and legislation can be passed in both houses before Congress recesses in August.

SPILL LIABILITY

House conferees wanted the U.S. to subscribe to international tanker spill protocols reached in 1984, while the Senate opposed them because they infringed on states' spill liability laws.

Conferees agreed to insert a provision declaring it is in "the best interests of the U.S." to participate in the agreements but not require them. That will enable states to enforce strict liability on tanker operators for accidents.

Conferees agreed to direct the administration to seek a change in the international protocol, raising the liability limits for tanker accidents.

Rep. Walter Jones (D-N.C.) offered the compromise. He said, "We cannot be completely protected without U.S. participation in an international regime. But that regime must complement, not weaken, our domestic laws."

Sen. George Mitchell (D-Me.) had strongly opposed the international protocols. He argued that full compensation for catastrophic spills cannot be collected from polluters under the international protocols.

The International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko) said it was disappointed the conferees did not adopt the 1984 protocols.

It said U.S. acceptance would have established a workable worldwide compensation system for oil spills.

AVOIDING U.S. PORTS

Several tanker companies are joining or considering joining Royal Dutch/Shell Group and Ste. Nationale Elf Aquitaine in barring their vessels from calling at U.S. ports for fear of unlimited liability (OGJ, July 2, Newsletter).

Here's the latest scoreboard:

A.P. Moller of Denmark, which has 40 crude and products carriers, confirmed it will no longer move crude and heavy products to the U.S. The company said when owners of oil cargoes avoid responsibility for spills by withdrawing their own ships and passing the risks to private shipowners it is time to consider whether to stay in the tanker business.
Petrofina SA, Brussels, will withdraw it tankers from U.S. trade. One of four Petrofina owned tankers is en route to the U.S. After its cargo is discharged Petrofina's boycott of U.S. ports will begin.
Clients of Teekay Shipping Co. Inc., Long Beach, Calif., which manages about 53 tankers worldwide, probably will suspend shipping to U.S. ports, a company official said last week.

"The matter is under consideration," he said. I think it is highly likely our principals will make a decision to suspend operations in the U.S. The risk is just too great."

Teekay is a ship manager that does not own tankers but represents "a number" of owners. Lloyds List, London, said Teekay action would be the biggest blow to the U.S. tanker trade so far because the company manages many ships involved in Pacific trade, using ports on the U.S. West Coast.