The Maritime Advocate is free to readers and is entirely supported by advertisers and sponsors. A banner advertisement represents excellent value so please consider using us whenever you have a commercial message to place. We have banner opportunities on our website https://themaritimeadvocate.com and are also on the lookout for new sponsors. If you wish to get a quote please email us at contactus@themaritimeadvocate.com for details.
IN THIS ISSUE
1. Personal perils of decarbonisation
2. The meaning of MAC
3 CMI deliberations
4. New DNV rules
5. Non- compliance penalties
6. Ferry operations in France
7. IMO technical committee
8. Talking tankers
9. Maritime mountain race
10. International Maritime Prize
11. IMO bravery awards
Notices & Miscellany
Readers’ responses to our articles are very welcome and, where suitable, will be reproduced. Write to: contactus@themaritimeadvocate.com
1. Personal perils of decarbonisation
By Michael Grey
Are you suffering from “technostress?” It is an interesting term, which perfectly encapsulates the mentality of modern mankind, with manifold anxieties which were unknown to our predecessors. I thought of this worrying state of mind after reading a report provided by ISWAN and the Shipowners’ Club on “The impact of maritime decarbonisation on wellbeing” which surveyed mental health and job satisfaction of the seafarers who find themselves on the front line of environmental change. Undertaken last year, the survey, which gave rise to 400 valid responses from 29 different nationalities of seafarers, may not have been large, but its responses might be considered wholly authentic. While everyone supports the principle of decarbonisation (isn’t the science settled?) and probably would not confess to a less enthusiastic reaction, there is a lot of concern about what it really means for those who will be fronting up to the regulators and officials demanding the data when a ship reaches port. There are worries about the consequences of errors made by people with a lot of other conflicting responsibilities and not enough hours in the day to do all the work. The possibilities of criminal sanctions were clearly in the minds of some, who have maybe read about or seen bad things happen to those who have broken environmental regulations, and the terrifying penalties exacted in some parts of the world.
The survey suggested that marine engineers, in particular, believe that they will be most vulnerable as the regulatory burden is rolled out. It also appeared that those in tramp shipping, with their wandering schedules, have reason to be more worried than those aboard ships on regular liner trades. Are these seafarers (and some shore managers) becoming stressed for no good reason? There will be plenty of people who will tell them that the urgency of decarbonising the maritime world needs zeal and focus and individuals just need to “crack on.” More thoughtful folk will point out that the development of regulations is invariably a lot easier than their implementation, especially when it depends upon new and untried technology, and very different ways of working. We have all sorts of new fuels, some with barely understood hazards, coming along to purify the emissions of ships. We have a lot of fanciful talk about artificial intelligence and the reality of remote technical supervision from control centres ashore. Mutterings about harnessing this clever stuff to reduce still further the number of human beings rattling around in ever bigger and more sophisticated ships. And anyone with half a brain knows that with all these new environmental requirements comes the need for more reporting, more intrusion, more inspections by more officials, stamping up the gangway looking to find something wrong.
Seafarers can scarcely be reassured by what has taken place in the past. Older engineers will probably recall equipment that was mandated by new regulations, but which was just not up to the job. They may have had experience with oily water separators that didn’t, ballast water management systems that couldn’t manage and the troubles they got into when trying, like generations of seafarers before them, to work around the problems. These include emission mitigation systems – scrubbers which were a lot of additional trouble from corrosion and poor design, provoking new regulatory restrictions in their use. Crew mustn’t discharge over the side, can’t land waste, or blow through the boilers. Also, endless surveillance of ships in port waters, windfarms stretching out into the sea in every direction, pipelines and undersea cables criss-crossing erstwhile anchorages.
It is perhaps not surprising that seafarers are apprehensive. They will also know very well that new environmental rules, like those in the past, will be subject to all sorts of imaginative interpretations with a sort of global patchwork of regulations that may differ from one port to another (sometimes even in the same country). The only common factor will be that the ship, and some wretched responsible officer aboard her, will inevitably be in the wrong. It will be surely suggested that technology will produce soothing answers to the seafarers’ concerns. But we already have machinery with a mind of its own, systems and controls that are hugely sophisticated but effectively “dis-empower” those who will be judged responsible when it goes wrong. And the reporting will grow like Topsy, because you can guarantee that whatever clever data collection systems will be in place, there will be no letting up in this particular burden, with its opportunities for making errors. Call me a cynic, but I keep thinking back many years to the picture of that hard pressed cruise ship officer desperately trying to complete the vital Garbage Reporting Form, as the minutes before the collision with the container ship ticked away. A phrase comes to mind, as we consider the joys of decarbonisation. Process before practicality … perhaps.
Michael Grey is former editor of Lloyd’s List.
2. The meaning of MAC
Brian Perrott of Holman Fenwick Willan recently considered the issue of MAC in London Calling (with a little help from Abu Dhabi):
Mingguo v Sadeghnia (Rev1) [2024] ADGMCFI 0005 (22 May 2024).
Recently the Global Market Court of First Instance in Abu Dhabi had cause to look at a material adverse change (‘MAC’) clause – a contractual mechanism that may allow a buyer to withdraw from a transaction before completion.
Factual background
The dispute arose between Mr. Mingguo (‘the Seller’) and Mr. Sadeghnia (‘the Buyer’) in relation to a Share Purchase Agreement in which the Seller was to sell and transfer 80% of the shares in his company, WCS, to the Buyer.
Legal issues
Despite the successful transfer of the shares, the Buyer withheld the second instalment payment, asserting inadequate control over the company as he had not been granted access to WCS’ bank accounts and email servers. The Buyer contended that this constituted a MAC, justifying the non-payment. The key legal issue was whether a MAC event had occurred.
Decision
The Court decided that, for there to be a MAC, the event(s) that occurred must:
1. have a significant detrimental effect on the business, assets, or profits of the entity to be acquired;
2. last over a longer period of time; and
3. affect the company’s future prospects.
This is a high threshold which was not met in this case.
Essential message
Whilst the definition of a MAC lacks precision, it is evident that it has a high threshold. Consequently, even if a contract incorporates a MAC clause, a buyer can only invoke it to withdraw from a transaction in limited circumstances.
Don’t tell half-secrets!
Brian Perrott and Gian Marco Zuccarelli also recently considered the issue of not telling half secrets.
McHale v Dunlop & Anor [2024] EWHC 1174 (KB)
When an agent discloses the existence of a commission to a principal, a failure to disclose the amount of the commission may amount to a breach of the agent’s fiduciary duties.
This case is the High Court’s latest judgment in a line of decisions on “secret” and “half secret” commissions payable to third party intermediaries.
Background
The introducer had disclosed the existence of a commission to the investor. However, since the introducer failed to disclose the amount of the commission, the investor argued that the commission amounted to a “half secret” commission. The investor claimed that the introducer had breached its duty of care as well as its fiduciary duty.
The Issue
The court was tasked to determine two key issues: (i) whether a fiduciary duty was owed by the agent; and (ii) whether such fiduciary duty was breached.
Decision
Whilst the negligence claim was dismissed, the court found in favour of the investor concluding that the introducer owed and had breached a fiduciary duty to disclose the true quantum of the commission.
In the court’s judgment, by sharing the existence of the commission, the introducer changed the nature of the investment opportunity and assumed the role of an agent. In the court’s view, this gave rise to a relationship of trust, which implied a duty of good faith. The failure to disclose the true amount of the commission represented a breach of that duty.
Notably, the court applied Hurstanger Ltd v Wilson [2007] EWCA Civ 299, where the unsophistication of the principal had played a decisive role. However, in this case, the court considered that it was not necessary for the investor to demonstrate its vulnerability and/or lack of sophistication.
The court found that the introducer was liable for the commission and interest on the same.
Commentary
Whilst this case relates to an investment opportunity, one can see the judgment’s relevance to the trading world. Advisors, introducers, or “business friends” (amongst others) should be mindful of their role and of the information they decide to disclose.
As always, those interested in hearing more detail on the judgment and its application, or on how the judgment may affect business, can get in touch, with the writers.
3. CMI deliberations
At its recent meeting in Gothenburg, whilst the Comite Maritime International (CMI) honoured the forthcoming centenary in August of The Hague Rules Convention, 1924 on the carriage of goods by sea, a compelling case was made for the urgent ratification of the Rotterdam Rules Convention to replace that earlier and no longer fit for purpose treaty.
Speakers included Michael Sturley who recounted the history of major carriage of goods liability reform and its long gestation periods and urged states to ratify. Stuart Hetherington reminded delegates of the raison d’être of the CMI being the uniformity of maritime law and the extent of the present lack of uniformity that exists. Alexander von Ziegler, pointed to the need for a Convention that recognised door to door carriage and the modern needs for supply chain efficiency and common rules relating to the effects of e-commerce.
All speakers spoke of the differences between the two Conventions, and the more extensive reach of the Rotterdam Rules, the latter being much more than a liability convention. Miriam Goldby stressed the e-commerce compatibility of the newer regime with the UNCITRAL MLETR. Tomotaka Fujita referred to the safety aspects of the Rotterdam Rules. Others spoke from regional perspectives: Manuel Alba on the benefits that Spain, which has ratified the Rotterdam Rules, found in them, Andrew Robinson on why Africa is ripe for reform and Erik Rosaeg on why Scandinavian countries have embraced the Rotterdam Rules, but await developments in the US or Europe before full ratification.
David Farrell reminded delegates that the United States is a shipper country and has a much reduced fleet of trading vessels compared with the early 20th century and urged states not to delay ratification awaiting the US, which is involved in trying to persuade port administrations why the newer regime can only benefit ports and their customers. He also confirmed that the Maritime Law Association of the US was being encouraged by the support of the American Institute of Maritime Underwriters in its endeavours. Gertjan van der Ziel advised delegates concerning recent dialogue that has been entered into on behalf of the CMI with the EU to seek to obtain wide spread ratification in that significant trading bloc.
The signs are encouraging that with the aid of Maritime Law Associations and these papers the optimism that the Convention would come into force soon after its signing by 25 States in 2009 will be revived.
4. New DNV rules
Classification society DNV has published updates to its rules for classification of ships and offshore structures. In addition to rules supporting the development and deployment of decarbonisation technologies, the new in-operation class notations seek to bring clarity to the responsibilities of class customers for notations that have a mix of design and operational requirements.
“One of the most striking aspects of the maritime industry today, is the huge diversity of challenges and opportunities where our customers are looking for classification support,” said Geir Dugstad, DNV Maritime’s Global Technical Director. “It’s not just new fuels, but ways for owners and managers to demonstrate their own efficiencies, new vessel types to unlock new markets, through to advanced technologies like on-board carbon capture.”
With the in-operation notations, DNV has developed the first classification framework with dedicated fleet in service notations that enables owners and operators to showcase how they are differentiating themselves in the market by deploying advanced procedures and reporting processes for greater safety and efficiency. The new notation clearly shows the split of responsibilities between the yards for the new building phase and the owners and operators in the operational phase of the vessel.
Designed to unlock innovation in the shipping industry while enhancing safety, the new rules also build on DNV’s leading expertise in maritime decarbonisation with the introduction of two new class notations, Gas fuelled hydrogen and OCCS (for carbon capture and storage on board vessels).
While hydrogen is a potential zero-carbon fuel for shipping it is presently not covered by international regulations. The gas fuelled hydrogen notation, sets out the requirements for the ship’s fuel system, fuel bunkering connection, and consumers, providing owners a practical path to develop hydrogen fuelled newbuildings.
Onboard carbon capture and storage (OCCS) systems are currently being trialled and offer a way for vessels to reduce emissions and contribute to greater sustainability and regulatory compliance. The OCCS notation offers a framework and requirements for these new systems, including exhaust pre-treatment, absorption, after-treatment systems, liquefaction, CO2 storage, and transfer ashore.
Some of the additional highlights of the rules include:
- The new BOG (boil-off gas) notation provides requirements for the design and installation of pressure and temperature control systems for liquefied gas tanks,
- New notation for the transport of live fish creates a new vessel type for this growing industry,New class notation for stability pontoons provides guidance and requirements for pontoons used in heavy lift operations to increase stability,
- Introduction of a new qualifier “NC” for the notation hatchcover-less, enables vessels not intending to transport combustible materials to reduce investments in fire detection and fire-fighting equipment,New service notation for floating spaceports sets requirements for units and installations intended for launch and/or recovery of spacecraft,
- New qualifier “EV” for the class notation Additional fire safety, specifically developed to target vessels transporting electrical vehicles,
- Revised rules and standards for diving systems aligned with IMO 2023 diving code.
The publication of the new rules took place on July 1st and the new rules will enter into force on January 1st, 2025. To find out more head to https://standards.dnv.com/
5. Non-compliance penalties
The financial impact of FuelEU Maritime is focusing the minds of shipping companies as they face potential penalties for non-compliance with greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity reduction targets – and OceanScore has identified those segments set to be hit hardest.
Vessels in the passenger/cruise, container, RoPax, bulker and tanker segments will have significant cost exposure from the complex regulation due to be implemented from 1 January next year, despite a relatively modest initial target of a 2% cut in GHG intensity, according to OceanScore.
The Hamburg-based maritime technology firm’s data analytics team has calculated that shipping will rack up total FuelEU penalties of €1.345 billion in 2025 through analysis of the 13,000 vessels over 5000gt trading within and into the EU/EEA that are subject to the regulation. This is based on data on trading patterns and fuel mix from 2022 – the last full year currently available.
The team has been able to determine FuelEU compliance balances and resulting penalties for each vessel using OceanScore’s proprietary data modelling incorporating AIS data, Thetis emissions data, bunker intelligence and advanced analytics/AI. It has factored in the likely fuel mix for each vessel between EU ports and to/from the EU, as well as in ports.
Vessels will be hit with a penalty of €2400 per tonne of VLSFO-equivalent for failing to meet the initial 2% reduction target relative to a 2020 baseline for average well-to-wake GHG intensity from fleet energy consumption of 91.16 gCO2e per megajoule (MJ) – or emissions per energy unit. The GHG intensity requirement applies to 100% of energy used on voyages and port calls within the EU/EEA and 50% of voyages into and out of the bloc.
As with the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), it is the container segment that will bear the brunt of FuelEU costs, accounting for 29% of gross penalties, followed by RoPax on 14% with tankers and bulkers each on 13%.
“It is critical for shipping companies to determine a baseline for expected FuelEU costs to secure proper planning and budgeting processes to compare different mitigation options, as well as to decide what to do with outstanding compliance balances,” says OceanScore Managing Director Albrecht Grell.
“This will require, to a higher degree than the EU ETS, a corporate strategy to determine how to reduce the compliance balance/deficit, how to commercialise a surplus and deal with deficits that remain.”
OceanScore has found that liabilities per vessel will differ widely across the various segments due to increasingly diversified fuel choices, including greater uptake of biofuels and LNG. Passenger vessels will be penalised the most with an average of €520,000 per vessel annually, followed by RoPax at €480,000 and RoRo at €314,000, with an average penalty for container ships of only €214,000, according to OceanScore.Grell points out there are also massive discrepancies between vessels within these segments, with a number of ships in the passenger and RoPax segments exposed to penalties of between €1.8m and €2.5m, and payment obligations for some container ships approaching €1m. This is driven by higher energy consumption simply due to vessel size and trading profile.
While penalties will arise from so-called compliance deficits for vessels using conventional fuels, surpluses totalling an estimated €669m will be generated mainly by vessels fuelled by LNG and LPG with significantly lower carbon intensity.
LNG carriers will account for 78% of the total market surplus and gas carriers 8%, while a further 8% will be generated by container ships that have seen a modest uptake in alternative fuels in recent years.
Taking into account this estimated compliance surplus, the net cost of FuelEU penalties for shipping from 2025 would be €680m, which indicates that pooling of vessels can roughly halve the gross burden for the industry.
Penalties will, in segments typically using conventional fuels with comparable carbon intensities such as HFO, LFO or MDO, be roughly proportional to the overall fuel consumption, thus correlating with the EU ETS cost.
Initial costs of FuelEU for most conventionally fuelled vessels, prior to pooling, will be around one-third of those associated with the EU ETS next year when the latter regulation will have 70% phase-in. Ultimately FuelEU is likely to prove a much more costly affair as the requirement for GHG intensity cuts rises to 6% by 2030 and then accelerates to reach 80% by 2050, according to OceanScore.
“It is therefore incumbent on shipowners to define their strategies not only towards fuel choices and the use of onshore power but also towards handling of residual compliance balances such as pooling, banking and borrowing of balances, to mitigate the financial impact of FuelEU. However, pooling will also come at a cost, while banking and borrowing will incur interest costs and only push liabilities into the future,” Grell explains.
He further points out that pooling compensations paid between different shipping companies will effectively divert cash flow away from the EU that it would otherwise have earned from FuelEU penalties – but that this effect is intended by the regulator to “reward” early adopters of clean fuels.
Another factor that will curb potential income for the EU from this regulation is that the compliance gap has been reduced to only 1.6% by 2022, as average GHG intensity from shipping has come down by 0.4% to 90.82 gCO2e per MJ, mainly due to increased LNG carrier calls to Europe after gas supplies via pipelines from Russia were halted when the latter invaded Ukraine. Given this trend and increasing adoption of biofuels, the 2% compliance gap will probably be closed before the first tightening of reduction targets in 2030.
Grell says the priority for shipping companies, especially at this early stage while cost exposure is relatively low, is to get to grips with the complexity of the regulation and tackle the risks arising from the fact the party liable for penalties – the DoC holder, or possibly shipowner – is not the one responsible for emissions, which is typically the charterer.
“As well as having costs oversight, companies require reliable monitoring and reporting mechanisms with high-quality emissions data. They must also have in place complex contractual arrangements and sound administrative processes to manage compliance and mitigate the financial consequences of the new regulation,” Grell concludes.
6. Ferry operations in France
Maritime union, RMT recently criticised the outgoing Tory government for its failure to introduce mandatory protections for seafarers, in contrast, it said, to decisive action taken by the French government.
Effective recently, new French laws will mandate ferry operators like P&O to pay their seafarers the French national minimum wage and enforce limits on seafarers’ time onboard ships.
RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch highlighted the disparity between the French and UK governments, saying: “The French government’s decision to enforce these protections stands in stark contrast to the UK government, which has failed to introduce mandatory protections for our seafarers.”
RMT has long campaigned for robust protections for UK seafarers, including a two-week on, two-week off roster pattern for ratings.
The union says this is necessary to counteract the business model imposed by some companies which requires some seafarers to work 17-week at sea.
Despite these calls, the UK government has only issued a voluntary charter and failed to support cross-party amendments to the Seafarers Wages Act that would ensure safe roster patterns and other essential protections, the union adds.
Lynch added: “The only way to ensure decent pay and conditions is through mandatory legislation and tough sanctions for non-compliance with obligations to seafarers and passengers from these multimillion pound companies.
“The new French legislation not only increases pay but will reduce seafarer fatigue and extend pension rights for agency seafarers on P&O’s and Irish Ferries’ Dover-Calais routes.
“The Tories have failed to stand up for seafarers, unlike the French, who have taken legal steps to improve pay, reduce fatigue, and extend pension rights.
“We urgently need a mandatory charter for seafarers and the closure of legal loopholes more than ever.”
7. IMO Technical Committee
The IMO Technical Cooperation Committee held its 74th session at IMO Headquarters in London from 24 to 28 June 2024. The meeting was chaired by Dwight C.R. Gardiner of Antigua and Barbuda, supported by Anays Berrocal of Panama.
TC 74 highlights:
1. Progress on the IMO Capacity-Development Strategy
2. E-learning Implementation Plan in development
3. IMO regional presence expanded
4. Global maritime training institutions
5. Capacity-development for women in maritime
6. IMO Member State Audit Scheme
7. Technical Cooperation 2023 annual report
8. Resource mobilization
9. Partnership arrangements
10. Financial contributions to technical cooperation
11. Revised approach for evaluating ITCP activities for the period 2020 – 2023
For further details see the IMO website.
8. Talking tankers
The latest MSI analysis has found that the ‘distance effect’ is among factors supporting deadweight demand for crude and product tankers.
Large scale route diversions as a consequence of the Red Sea/Suez Canal crisis have seen deadweight demand for crude and product tankers increase by 5.5% and 4.5% respectively in 2024.
In its Q2 2024 report, MSI finds that the market is currently in an unfamiliar equilibrium after two years of extreme volatility. This has been supported by wider stability in oil markets and falling vessel deliveries.
Analysis of market movements in the first half of 2024 finds that deadweight demand growth far outstrips that of oil demand and trade. At close to 5% in 2024 it is about three times higher than growth in just cargo volumes. This is partly the ‘distance effect’ adding to cargo growth, driven by disruption to the Red Sea/Suez Canal.
Vessel tracking shows that diversionary activity is not uniform across tanker segments. In the LR1/2 segment they see the most pronounced change in operating activity.
Here, vessels moving through the Suez Canal dropped by about two-thirds in the first four months of 2024, with a commensurate increase in Cape of Good Hope transits. This has translated into LR2 spot earnings being some of the best performing in Q2.
The duration of the Suez Canal disruptions remains a major uncertainty in forward analysis. MSI foresees conditions in the Red Sea normalizing in 2026, assuming a reversal in the escalation of conflict in the Middle East.
However if the conflict is not resolved, an extension of high-risk conditions will naturally drive tanker demand and earnings even higher. Under the MSI Base Case the expectation is that demand growth slows dramatically in 2025 and 2026.
Overall demand levels are being elevated. Other factors, such as long-haul crude trade from Americas to Asia are countering the ‘loss’ of the Red Sea/Suez Canal diversion effect in 2025.
“The latest MSI Base Case sees demand levels remain permanently higher, but this also contends with higher fleet levels, driven both by lower scrapping, and in the latter part of our forecast, higher deliveries as a consequence of increased ordering,” says Tim Smith, Director, MSI. “The combination of these factors pushes our employment rate higher in 2024, and though we see the utilisation rate flatten from 2025 onwards, this is at very high levels. This outlook remains very positive for the tanker sector.”
9. Maritime mountain race
Seafarer welfare charity The Mission to Seafarers has announced the launch of the first-ever Maritime Mountain Race, a unique endurance event set to take place from 13-15 September 2024.
This new challenge is designed to bring together trail hikers and runners from the maritime community and beyond, amidst the scenery of Le Bouveret, Switzerland.
The Maritime Mountain Race is more than just a physical challenge; it’s an opportunity to support the welfare of seafarers worldwide. The event will feature 20 teams of three participants each, tackling the trails of the Swiss Alps overlooking Lake Geneva. With two levels of difficulty – hiking and running – the race caters to seasoned athletes and those seeking a formidable yet achievable challenge.
Participants will journey through forests, along hidden paths, and across mountain rivers, with panoramic views of the Alps and Lake Geneva. The event includes two evenings of networking, starting with a welcome reception and culminating in a Gala Dinner. Not normally open for public use, the César Ritz Colleges Switzerland in Le Bouveret is providing exclusive use of the facilities to host participants, providing the finest hospitality.
The funds raised from the Maritime Mountain Race will directly support The Mission to Seafarers’ vital frontline work, enhancing the welfare services provided to seafarers around the globe. Each team is encouraged to raise a minimum of USD 5,000, with prizes awarded to the highest fundraising teams. Team entries will close on Wednesday 31st July.
The Mission to Seafarers offers several sponsorship packages for businesses and individuals looking to support this inaugural event. Sponsors will benefit from branding opportunities, recognition in event materials, and the chance to engage with industry leaders during the Gala Dinner. Detailed sponsorship information is available here.
For more information and to register your interest in taking part, please visit the Maritime Mountain Race website or contactevents@maritimemountainrace.org.
To find out more about sponsoring the event, please contact Jan Webber
10. International Maritime Prize
Captain Ian Finley, Permanent Representative of the Cook Islands to IMO, has been selected as the recipient of the International Maritime Prize for 2023. The decision was made by the IMO Council at its 132nd session (8 to 12 July 2024).
Captain Finley was nominated for the award by the Government of the Cook Islands. As a delegate to IMO, representing Panama and latterly the Cook Islands, he has been an active participant in the development of virtually all safety, environmental and legal legislation adopted by the Organization since 1995.
In its statement supporting his nomination for the prize, the Government of the Cook Islands cited Captain Finley’s longstanding work as a delegate to IMO for more than three decades. He is “a stalwart of Diplomatic Conferences, always striving for consensus and, when necessary, helping to facilitate the compromises required”. He is an ex-mariner with “an understanding of and empathy for the challenges that continue to be faced by seafarers and the obligations of all to ensure their training, safety and wellbeing”. He has “championed the cause of the Small Island Developing States (SIDS), promoting enhanced technical cooperation and capacity building”.
11. IMO Bravery awards
The 2024 IMO Award for Exceptional Bravery at Sea is to go to two sets of nominees: the Captain and crew of the oil tanker Marlin Luanda, for containing a fire after the ship was struck by an anti-ship missile; and the captain and crew of the tugboat Pemex Maya, for their rescue of six shipwrecked persons from four different vessels, during a hurricane.
Two individuals will receive certificates of commendation for their acts of bravery and 15 letters of commendation will be sent to their recipients.
Nominations were initially reviewed by an Assessment Panel and their recommendations were considered by a Panel of Judges, who ultimately selected the recipients of honours. The recommendations of the Panel of Judges were endorsed by the IMO Council, meeting for its 132nd session (8 to 12 July 2024).
A total of 41 nominations were received from 15 Member States and three non-governmental organizations in consultative status with IMO.
Recipients of the 2024 Exceptional Bravery at Sea Award
Captain Avhilash Rawat and the crew of the oil tanker Marlin Luanda, nominated by the Marshall Islands, for their extraordinary courage, determination and endurance demonstrated while coordinating firefighting and damage control efforts to combat the fire that broke out after an anti-ship ballistic missile struck their vessel.
On the evening of 26 January 2024, the Marlin Luanda, carrying 84,147 tons of Naphtha, was en route from Suez to Incheon when it was struck by an anti-ship ballistic missile. The explosion ignited a cargo tank, creating a significant fire hazard with flames exceeding 5 meters. Despite the damage, Captain Avhilash Rawat swiftly organized firefighting efforts, ensuring the crew’s safety and maintaining the ship’s navigability amidst the chaos. With the starboard lifeboat destroyed, the remaining crew mustered at the port lifeboat station, ready for potential evacuation. Despite the extreme danger and the constant threat of further attacks, the crew fought the fire using fixed foam monitors and portable hoses. The fire continued to spread, particularly affecting an adjacent tank, but the crew managed to contain it using seawater after foam supplies were exhausted.
After four and a half hours fighting the fire on their own, assistance arrived from the merchant tanker Achilles, and later from the French frigate FS Alsace and the United States frigate USS Carney, which provided additional firefighting foam and support, followed soon after by the Indian warship INS Visakhapatnam. Despite relentless efforts by the Marlin Luanda crew, the fire reignited multiple times. The situation remained critical, and expert consultations suggested abandoning the vessel. However, Captain Rawat and his crew persisted. The turning point came when professionally trained firefighters from the Indian Navy boarded the ship. They managed to get closer to the fire due to their superior equipment and their efforts, combined with those of the Marlin Luanda crew, finally succe eded in extinguishing the fire and sealing a significant hull breach. Twenty-four hours after the missile strike, the Marlin Luanda sailed to safety under naval escort.
Captain Jorge Fernando Galaviz Fuentes and the crew of the tugboat Pemex Maya, nominated by Mexico, for their outstanding courage, seamanship skills and resolve displayed in the rescue of six shipwrecked persons from four different vessels, in extreme weather and heavy seas caused by a hurricane.
On 25 October 2023, hurricane Otis struck Mexico’s Pacific coast as an unprecedented category 5 storm. It rapidly intensified from a tropical storm to a major hurricane in just a few hours, hitting Acapulco with winds exceeding 300 km/h and waves over 5 meters high. As the hurricane approached, the crew of the tugboat Pemex Maya, led by Captain Galaviz, prepared for the storm by securing their vessel in the Bay of Santa Lucia. The extreme conditions prompted the crew to navigate away from the coast and assist others in distress.
During the peak of the hurricane, the crew of the Pemex Maya remained vigilant, searching for survivors amidst the chaos. At 02:30 hours, they navigated towards light signals from three people in lifejackets fighting the turbulent waters and managed to rescue them carrying out complex rescue manoeuvres in darkness. Shortly after, they rescued another survivor, who was found clinging to a piece of wood without a lifejacket. Continuing their rescue efforts, two more shipwrecked persons were spotted an hour later adrift with lifejackets. The crew had to execute again risky manoeuvres to rescue them with the help of lifebuoys. All six survivors were found to be in shock, exhausted, and suffering from bruises and scratches but fortunately without life-threatening injuries. At dawn, with the worst of the hurricane over, the Pemex Maya anchored in Acapulco and the survivors were later transferred for medical attention. Hurricane Otis caused extensive damage to infrastructure and numerous fatalities in Acapulco.
The IMO Council endorsed the decision of the Panel of Judges to bestow the Award on Captain Avhilash Rawat and the crew of the oil tanker Marlin Luanda. The Panel was of the view that the exceptional bravery, leadership and determination of Captain Rawat and his crew, along with the crucial support from the assisting naval forces, were pivotal in ensuring the safety of the crew, saving the ship and preventing a potential environmental disaster.
The Council further endorsed the decision of the Panel to also bestow the Award on Captain Jorge Fernando Galaviz Fuentes and the crew of the tugboat Pemex Maya for their courageous and timely actions which ensured the survival of six shipwrecked persons, while exposing themselves to great personal risk.
Certificates of Commendation
The Council agreed to award certificates of commendation to:
Captain Jerôme Noël Mougoula Saguiliba, Master of the LCT Celeste, nominated by Gabon, for his exceptional ship-handling expertise and determination displayed in the search and rescue operation of 150 passengers and crew members of the sunken passenger ferry Esther Miracle.
Lieutenant Crépin Manfoumbi Mengara, on board the rapid patrol boat Mayumba, of the Gabonese Navy, nominated by Gabon, for the exemplary leadership and persistence during the search and rescue operation of the Esther Miracle.
Letters of Commendation
Letters of Commendation will be sent to:
Captain Eduardo Mesquita Pedroso, Master of the container ship Monte Sarmiento, nominated by Brazil, for his leadership and decisive action during a critical firefighting operation, ensuring the safety of all 30 persons onboard while protecting the environment and the vessel’s property.
Commander Yong Li of the rescue vessel Hai Xun 06838, Law Enforcement Unit, Changshu Maritime Safety Administration, nominated by China, for his professionalism and determination demonstrated in the rescue of the 22 crew members of the bulk chemical tanker New Bright, which had caught fire after its cargo hold exploded and was drifting towards a river bridge.
Captain Hao Yang of the rescue helicopter B-7328, Dong Hai Rescue Bureau, nominated by China, for his courage, exceptional skill and great resolve demonstrated during the challenging rescue operation of the 14 crew members of the oil tanker Daiyou 69, after it suffered engine failure and was drifting and moving violently amid extreme weather conditions caused by Typhoon Haikui.
Captain Lingqi Zhang of the rescue vessel Donghaijiu 112, Dong Hai Rescue Bureau, nominated by China, for his professionalism and ship-handling expertise during two consecutive rescue operations of the cargo vessels Zhenghe 9 and Huahai 601, amidst high waves and gale force winds. As a result of his critical judgment and decisive actions, all 25 crew members were successfully evacuated.
Captain Frédérick Caurant, Sub-Lieutenant Loïc Taillardat, Warrant Officer Sébastien Richard and Warrant Officer Michaël Severino, helicopter detachment of Flotilla 32F, Lanvéoc Naval Air Base, French Navy, nominated by France, for their bravery and determination during the rescue of the bulk carrier Guyana, after it caught fire and was drifting and rolling in rough seas and strong winds, ensuring that all 20 crew members were hoisted to safety.
Captain Brijesh Nambiar and the crew of the INS Visakhapatnam, Indian Navy, nominated by India, for their courage and great resolve demonstrated in joining firefighting efforts onboard the oil tanker Marlin Luanda, which was struck by an anti-ship ballistic missile whilst laden with highly hazardous cargo.
Captain Benito A. Lucio, Master of the bulk carrier African Turaco, nominated by Panama, for his professionalism and exceptional ship-handling expertise demonstrated in the rescue of seven fishermen who abandoned their vessel, which was ablaze, and who had been clinging to fishing buoys for almost seven hours in rough seas.
The crew of the patrol vessel Lee Cheongho, Coast Guard Station Seogwipo, Republic of Korea Coast Guard nominated by the Republic of Korea, for their tenacity and great resolve during the rescue of 11 crew members of the sinking cargo vessel Geumyang 6, in gale force winds and high waves, as well as for conducting a marine pollution prevention operation the following day.
The crew of the patrol vessel 522, Coast Guard Station Wando, Republic of Korea Coast Guard, nominated by the Republic of Korea, for their bravery and professionalism in rescuing 19 crew members of the oil tanker SM Jeju LNG1, as well as 43 passengers and 15 crew members of the passenger ferry KS Hermes, and for preventing a marine pollution incident, after the two vessels collided in complete darkness and were at a great risk of explosion and sinking.
Captain Lee Gil Un and the crew of the fishing vessel 1 SungBok, nominated by the Republic of Korea, for their courage and great resolve demonstrated during the night rescue of nine survivors from the fishing vessel Bobae, transferring them to safety before the vessel rapidly became engulfed in flames and sank.
Lieutenant Commander Subhasinghe Saia and the diving team of the SLNS Vijayabahu (P 627), Sri Lanka Navy, nominated by Sri Lanka, for their tenacity and expertise displayed in the underwater rescue operation of potentially trapped survivors among the 39 crew members of the capsized fishing vessel Lu Peng Yuan Yu-28. While no survivors were found, the team managed to recover the remains of two casualties.
The crew of the CGC Alex Haley (WMEC 39), United States Coast Guard, nominated by the United States, for their exceptional seamanship skills and team effort displayed during the heavy weather tow operation of the fishing vessel Aleutian No.1, which had lost propulsion and was drifting towards dangerous shoal, near an approaching cyclone. As a result of their tireless efforts over 32 hours, all eight fishermen were brought to safety.
BM2 Theodore Noah S. Kirkbridge, BM3 Christian V. Lorenzo, MK2 Anthony C. Mason and BM3 Kaleiopio E. Guth, Coast Guard Station Maui, United States Coast Guard, nominated by the United States, for their courage and professionalism displayed during the rescue of 12 persons fleeing the wildfires in Lahaina, Maui, who were trapped by the fire in the harbour area.
Lashawna J. Garnier, Emma C. Nelson and Christina A. Lovitt, co-Captains of the small passenger vessel Expeditions’ dinghy, nominated by the United States, for the bravery and decisiveness they demonstrated during the rescue of persons fleeing the wildfires in Lahaina, Maui. After rescuing two people stranded in the harbour, as well as the operator of the pleasure boat Kaulana, the co-Captains then volunteered to join forces with the United States Coast Guard and the vessel Trilogy II to assist in the evacuation of over 40 people trapped by the fire along the harbour break wall.
BM2 Joshua A. Marzilli, Coast Guard Station Maui, United States Coast Guard, and Travis DeWater, serving as rescue swimmer onboard the small passenger vessel Trilogy II, nominated by the United States, for their bravery and determination displayed during the rescue of persons fleeing the wildfires in Lahaina, Maui, directly contributing to the safety and survival of more than 40 people trapped by the fire.
Awards ceremony
The annual awards ceremony will be held at IMO Headquarters in London on 2 December 2024 during the 109th session of the Maritime Security Committee.
Notices and Miscellany
Manjit Handa, Master Mariner and Marine Surveyor/ Consultant based in Australia had the following comments on the last edition of Maritime Advocate.
“As lamented by Michael Grey, another DAY OF THE SEAFARER has come and gone, with nary a change in the basic issues confronting seafarers.
“ABANDONMENT. The IMO has not been able to conceive and construct a system to arrange quick repatriation of abandoned crew. Abandonment falls under the purview of local governments and judicial systems, which are usually slow. Sometimes very slow.
“SHORE LEAVE. The ISPS Code was written in haste. Most terminals and shipowners tend to play it safe to restrict entry of businesses onboard or deny shore leave to crew, all in the name of SECURITY. The crew are in a kind of group confinement which plays on their mental health. Further, even if the crew is permitted to go ashore, they can’t, for various reasons.
a. The terminal is far from the nearest town.
b. Ship’s port stay is short.
c. The taxi fare is rather steep.
d. The time ashore will come out of the crew rest hours.
“ALCOHOL. Prohibition never worked anywhere in the world. How do you expect it to succeed on merchant ships? The MV Wakashio is a recent example. The issue must be addressed by constructing a policy framework that should allow the crew to enjoy life just as anyone else ashore but within the limits of safety.
“WORK and REST HOURS. Why should there be two options for the Work and Rest hours regime? While the Seafarer Employment Agreement is written with MAX LIMITS of WORK HOURS, the rest hour records are written with the MINIMUM LIMITS of REST HOURS. These two options are not complementary. Further the system of enforcement and verification is weak. There is no technological application to detect actual hours worked. Moreover, fatigue is not easy to detect.
“SEAFARERS COMPLAINTS. The average seafarer will not complain. He is not Nelson Mandela. He needs a job. The complaining type of seafarer will soon find himself blacklisted by the manning agents.
“MINIMUM SAFE MANNING DOCUMENT. This document is a joke written in the form of a table. Three crew need critical reinforcements:-
a. One additional Navigational Watchkeeping Officer in the deck complement.
b. An Assistant Cook to the Chief Cook.
c. Retention of the Electrician/Electro technical Officer (if we don’t want a repeat of the MV Dali incident.)
“WAGE THEFT. It is surprising that even in this day and age, some shipowners can get away with audacious wage theft. Take a look at the AMSA Website to see the number of ships/companies banned from Australia for underpayment of crew wages.
Human factors
The Human Factors 2024 International Conference has been organised by Royal Institution of Naval Architects from 8-9 October 2024 at Wageningen, The Netherlands. See the website for details.
This year’s conference will feature keynote addresses from two prominent figures in the field: Job Brüggen, representing LVNL, and Dr. Rafet Emek Kurt, a Reader in Maritime Safety and Human Factors at the University of Strathclyde’s Department of Naval Architecture Ocean and Marine Engineering. Their insights will kick start two days of discussions and knowledge sharing.
Attendees can look forward to a diverse array of sessions, including focused tracks on Training, Design, Safety, and Collaboration. Technical presentations will be followed by interactive Q&A panel discussions, fostering in-depth exploration and exchange.
Please notify the Editor of your appointments, promotions, new office openings and other important happenings: contactus@themaritimeadvocate.com
And finally,
With thanks to Paul Dixon
THE FIVE STAGES OF SOBERING UP
Stage 1 – STUPID
As you regain consciousness and begin to enjoy the headache, the churning stomach and the cold sweats, you realize that you have lost not only several hours of your life but also the ability to concentrate on anything whatsoever. You are now STUPID and will remain so for a minimum of 12 hours.
Stage 2 – UGLY
Never entirely happy with the effects of the bathroom mirror first thing you are horrified to discover that you have now become even UGLIER than you previously thought possible. Not only have you got bloodshot eyes and a glorious collection of spots but you are shaking so much that your grandfather probably looks healthier. Unfortunately you are still too STUPID to know better than to try and shave whilst shaking.
Stage 3 – POOR
Having crawled out of bed and got dressed you are about to shamble out the door when you discover that the money that was to last you the week is now missing from your wallet. Being STUPID, you have no idea what happened to it but the traces of curry on your clothes allow the possibility that you might have treated everyone to a takeaway at some point. Alternatively your pocket could have been picked or you might have given the taxi driver a fifty pound note by mistake. Rationalising that you couldn’t possibly have been that STUPID and that you would remember being robbed, you come to believe that you were the only one who bought any food or drinks all night and start to loathe all your friends.
Stage 4 – FRAGILE
As you are now STUPID, UGLY and POOR, your consequently FRAGILE self-esteem plummets. Your already FRAGILE physical condition ensures that you feel liable to shatter if anyone even speaks to you.
Stage 5 – CONSPICUOUS
This is the final stage of sobering up. Unfortunately, everyone can spot this CONSPICUOUS condition and its cause from a great distance. Even worse, they know that they can complete your misery by making fun of you, and that you are too STUPID to retaliate, too FRAGILE to hit them, too POOR to bribe them and too UGLY to hide.
Thanks for Reading the Maritime Advocate online
Maritime Advocate Online is a fortnightly digest of news and views on the maritime industries, with particular reference to legal issues and dispute resolution. It is published to over 20,000 individual subscribers each edition and republished within firms and organisations all over the maritime world. It is the largest publication of its kind. We estimate it goes to around 60,000 readers in over 120 countries.
**
1 comment
[…] are also on the lookout for new sponsors. If you wish to get a quote please email us at contactus@themaritimeadvocate.com for […]