Category:Response to ships in distress

In a former chapter distress situations are described. In this chapter the response options will be dealt with, there being usually only a few capable of “bringing the ship under optimal control ” and of minimising the damage sustained.

The following 16 response options will be considered:

• Ship proceeds to planned destination,
• Ship proceeds to nearest port/harbour,
• Ship proceeds to safe haven/place of refuge,
• Anchor the ship,
• Let the ship drift on current and wind,
• Keep stern or bow of ship in wind direction,
• Ship proceeds towards assistance,
• Ship proceeds towards the nearest coast,
• Ship proceeds towards a given location,
• Ship proceeds towards open waters,
• Ground the ship,
• Lightering or discharging the cargo at sea,
• Destroy cargo at sea,
• Evacuate part of the crew,
• Abandon ship,
• Controlled sinking of the vessel..

Under international law, a coastal State may require the ship’s master (or the company owning or managing the ship) to take appropriate action within a prescribed time limit with a view to halting a threat of danger. In cases of failure or urgency, the coastal State can exercise its authority by taking response action appropriate to the threat. It is therefore important that coastal States establish procedures to address these issues, even if no established damage and/or pollution has occurred, preferably through a maritime assistance service.

For each decision, maritime authorities and, where necessary, port authorities should make an objective analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the options mentioned above for a ship in need of assistance:

An assessment should analyse the following points:

• The seaworthiness of the ship concerned (buoyancy, stability, availability of means of propulsion and power generation, docking ability etc.);
• The nature and condition of cargo, stores, bunkers, and in particular of its hazardous goods;
• The distance and estimated transit time to a sheltered area /or place of refuge;
• Whether the master is still on board;
• The number of other crew and/or salvors and other persons on board,
• An assessment of human factors, including fatigue;
• The legal authority of the country concerned to require action of the ship in distress;
• Whether and how the ship concerned is insured: if the ship is insured, the identity of the insurer, and the limits of liability available;
• Whether there is agreement by the master of the ship and the company owning or managing the ship to the proposals of the coastal State/salvor to proceed, or to be brought to a certain place;
• The provisions of the financial security required;
• Any commercial salvage contracts already concluded by the master of the ship or the company owning or managing the ship;
• Information on the intention of the master and/or salvor;
• The designation of a representative of the company owning or managing the ship in the coastal State concerned;
• Any measures already taken.

In the following table the relevant response options are given for the various distress situations.Table 39 Relevant response options for the various distress situations

1

2

3

4

5

6

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Proceed voyage as planned

Enter nearest port

Enter safe haven

Anchor vessel

Let ship drift

Keep bow in wind direction

Keep stern in wind direction

proceed into direction assistance will come from

proceed towards the nearest coast,

proceed towards given location

proceed towards open waters

ground the vessel

Lightering or discharging at sea

destroy cargo at sea

Evacuate crew

abandon the ship

controlled sinking

Running aground

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Danger of explosion

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Cargo problems

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

On fire

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Sinking

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Adrift

x

x

x

x

x

Unstable deck cargo

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Leaking chemicals

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Leaking oil

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

1. Ship proceeds on voyage to planned destination

Ship proceeding toward planned destination is only allowed if the ship is completely under control e.g. no fire, no leakage and no remaining cargo problem. Sometimes permission will be given if it can be expected that the situation will be under control in short notice. Besides the authorities responsible at sea (Coast Guard), the authorities of the harbour of destination should be involved in the decision making process.

2. Ship proceeds to nearest port/harbour

Ship proceeding toward nearest port/harbour is only allowed if the ship is completely under control e.g. no fire, no leakage and no remaining cargo problem. Sometimes permission will be given if it can be expected that the situation will be under control in short notice or that the situation can be brought under control within a harbour. Besides the authorities responsible at sea (Coast Guard), the harbour authorities of the nearest port/harbour should be involved in the decision making process. On shore there are likely to be more adequate means of solving any problem. The great advantage of going to the nearest port is that it will be easier to get help. There should be no risks for the port or shipping, this having to be considered together with the possible effects on the environment.

3. Ship proceeds to safe haven

A safe haven is a specially prepared place where a ship could go even if there are still some problems on board. The intention of such a safe haven is that it may be easier to get the distress situation under control therein than at sea. Decision-making should be done in co-operation with the authorities of the safe haven and the sea authorities. They have to inspect the ship and decide on the stability of the ship and the risk they are taking. On shore there are likely to be more adequate means of solving any problems. Contingency planning for an area suitable, as a place of refuge/safe haven should include:

• Roles and responsibilities of authorities and the responders in charge,
• Response equipment needs and availability,
• Response techniques required and permitted,
• International, regional or bilateral co-operation,
• Existing logistics for emergency response, such as lightering, towage, stowage, salvage and storage,
• Customs and financial implications to be considered in response operations and the vulnerability of the area concerned.

The Contracting Parties noted that the designation and use of places of refuge could encounter local opposition and involve political decisions. Therefore, granting access to a place of refuge could involve a political decision. Such a decision can only be taken on a case-by-case basis, with due consideration given to the balance between:

• The advantages for the affected ship and for the environment resulting from bringing the ship into a place of refuge; and
• The risks to the environment resulting from that ship being near the coast.

It should be made clear to the authorities and the public involved that a well-defined place of refuge can limit the extent of coastline threatened by the scale of dangers arising from the casualty.

The analysis should include a comparison between the risks involved if the ship remains at sea and the risks that it would pose to the place of refuge / sheltered area and its environment. Such a comparison should cover the following points:

• The safeguarding of human life at sea;
• The safety of persons at the place of refuge and in its industrial and urban surroundings (risk of fire or explosion, toxic risk, etc.);
• The risk of pollution;
• If the place of refuge is a port, the risk of disruption to the port’s operation (channels, docks, equipment, other installations);

4. Anchor the vessel (remain position)

In almost all distress situations anchoring the vessel should be considered. In case of a ship adrift this will be the primarily option to get the situation under control until the emergency tugboat arrives.

In case of a leaking ship and to keep the outflow concentrated, the sensitivity of the area for pollution will be an important criterion. Also the water depth needs to be considered. The anchoring of the ship in distress should not disturb shipping traffic.

5. Let the ship drift by current and wind

Let the ship drift by current and wind could have an advantage for leaking ships, as the pollution will stay around the ship. In particular, at low wind speeds the pollution will be concentrated around the ship and less area will be polluted. In case of a ship adrift this option has to be weighed against anchoring the ship. Again, these options depend on the time for an emergency-towing vessel to be available at the distress position.

6. Keep stern or bow of ship into wind direction

Keep stern or bow of ship in wind is an option when toxic gas is involved or fire on board. In case of a fire it is to prevent the fire from reaching the cargo or the accommodation. In case of a gas clouds it is to prevent contact with the crew in the accommodation or wheelhouse.

If a ship is on fire at sea the fire fighting procedures should be followed. The captain should immediately put the ship’s bow or stern toward the wind. The choice; depending on the respective locations of the fire on board and of the accommodation. This can either be done by propulsion and/or by anchoring, though the latter can only be used to aim the bow into the wind. Either way, the aim is to keep hot fumes away from the cargo or toxic vapours/gases away from the crew.

7. Ship proceeds in the direction of assistance

The ship could proceed in the direction of assistance, in order to speed the arrival of assistance (fire fighter team, emergency tug boat, salvage team), these teams having means to get the situation under control more easily than the crew. Though the ship in distress would normally sail in the direction of assistance, the spread of leakage may increase by such movement though its intensity will decrease.

8. Ship proceeds towards the nearest coast

It is known from accidents in the past that the closer pollution takes place to the downwind coast (coast the shorter the length of coastline affected while cleaning costs tend to increase with length for uniform intensity. Again, should a distress situation run out of control external assistance and salvage are more readily available closer to shore while salvage of a sunken vessel will be less expensive and easier in shallow coastal waters than in deeper offshore waters.

9. Ship proceeds towards a dedicated location

Dedicated locations could be chosen on the basis of low sensitivity to pollution. Another reason could be a sheltered place for wind and current in order to get control over the situation more easily. This option depends on the availability of such places and the permission procedures. In case of a release of a toxic gas it is important to know where the gas plume will reach the coast. Moving the distress ship to a more favourable place where the downwind gas plume will not affect a populated area could thus be beneficial.

10. Ship proceeds towards open waters

This option is contrary to option 8 and would avoid exposure of populated areas to release of particularly dangerous substances. Toxic gas plumes could travel over large distances and the further away from the coast the source the less dangerous its effects will be as the plume progressively decreases in concentration before reaching the coast.

Again, with non-persistent liquid pollution such as volatile chemicals, light crude oils etc.) rapidly decrease in volume through the natural processes of evaporation and natural dispersion before reaching the coast while extending the response time and diminishing the task.

For persistent pollutants this option is very risky in particular when the response at sea fails, the distress situation runs out of control, the ship sinks in deeper waters, making wreck removal more expensive, and pollutes a longer length of coastline while placing, the ship and the crew in ever greater danger. Thus, moving seaward does not solve any problem of itself, while increasing the significance of many of their consequences.

11. Ground the vessel

In case of cargo problems and or the risk of sinking this option could be chosen as it prevents the ship from going completely under water. As long as the ship stays above the water it is possible to gain control over the situation and prevent spillage of the bunkers and/or cargo. Also a salvage operation may be less costly.

Grounding can be done near the coast or at sea on a sand bank, etc. Watertight compartments and watertight doors need to be closed before grounding.

12. Lightering or discharging at sea

Lightering at sea, if possible, could stabilize the leakage. Also cargo could be pumped to other tanks of the ship itself. The intention is to stop the leakage. Indeed, deliberate discharge of part of the cargo could be considered in order to save the ship and the remaining cargo.

13. Destroy cargo at sea

Sometimes the situation is so dangerous that the only option left is to destroy the cargo at sea. In particular cargo problems such as overheating, inter-cargo reactions, and/or polymerisation could easily run out of control, making destruction or jettisoning of cargo the only remaining option.

Mines inadvertently recovered by fishing vessels are for that reason thrown overboard.

14. Evacuate part of the crew

In case of a very dangerous situation that could not be brought under control e.g. explosion danger, fire, reaction in cargo etc., it is recommended to keep the crew onboard to a minimum.

15. Abandon the ship,

The next stage of option 14 “evacuate part of the crew” is to abandon the ship in case the situation gets worse and there is life-threatening danger for all of the crew.

If a fire could not be brought under control and there is no possibility of the crew and the emergency services gaining such control, the crew should abandon the ship. In addition, there are chemical scenarios that leave no other option.

16. Controlled sinking to the sea floor

The next stage of option 13 “destroy cargo” is to let the ship sink. This option is the last to be considered when the situation on board cannot be stabilized and when no harbour is willing to receive the ship because the risks are too high. This option has been taken in the case of styrene polymerization and in case of a reaction of calcium carbide with water. In such cases, if possible, the non-dangerous cargo substances are removed before the ship sinks. In particular, bunker oil needs to be removed.