GRIMSBY, England — In the lobby bar of the St. James Hotel, glum-looking sailors huddled around cups of tea (or something stronger.) They were reliving the collision that days before had turned their two ships into floating infernos, killed one of their colleagues and led to charges of gross negligence manslaughter for one of the captains.
Hovering nearby — and to be found in hotel bars throughout this small port town on England’s north-east coast — were shirt-sleeved company counsels, union lawyers, salvagers and government investigators, all preparing for battle over who should pay for one of the worst maritime accidents in recent British history.
At the heart of the matter is why, last Monday, the cargo ship Solong drove smack into the Stena Immaculate, a tanker carrying 220,000 barrels of jet fuel.
The American, Russian and Filipino crew were evacuated to Grimsby. Then, not allowed to go home to recover, they spent the rest of last week being interviewed by police and government investigators.
That evidence will eventually help settle an insurance claim which could take months or even years to settle — and could stretch into the hundreds of millions of pounds.
In the meantime, the costs of the environmental damage from the collision could also be rising, after new signs of pollution emerged Monday.
The crash and the clean up
The investigation embroils three governments and the United States military.
The U.K. government’s Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) is leading, assisted by agencies from the flag states of the two ships, the U.S. and Portugal. The Pentagon is involved because the Stena Immaculate was on a U.S. military mission delivering its cargo to an aviation fuel depot in Yorkshire.
The MAIB’s initial inquiries showed the Solong “regularly used the route it took on the day of the collision” between the Scottish port of Grangemouth and Rotterdam in the Netherlands.
At 1:30 a.m. last Monday, the cargo ship altered course, traveling at 16.4 knots (around 30 kilometres per hour). A little over eight hours later, a camera on board a nearby vessel captured the Solong smashing into the side of the Stena Immaculate. There was a huge flash of light.
Investigators said they would look into the “navigational practices on board both vessels; the manning and fatigue management; the condition and maintenance of the vessels involved; and the environmental conditions at the time.”
The outcome will be highly significant to the insurers of the vessels. Like most large ships, the Stena Immaculate and Solong are covered by protection and indemnity clubs that pool insurance risk. Neither Steamship Mutual, which insures the Stena Immaculate, nor Skuld, that covers the Solong, would comment on the potential costs of the accident.
Salvagers have now boarded the ships to assess the damage. Two experts told POLITICO that, based on photographs, both vessels looked as though they may be damaged beyond repair. Credit rating agency Morningstar DBS said: “Both ships may be considered a total loss.”
Including the costs for containing and cleaning up pollution, Morningstar DBS estimated last week the hit to insurers could be between $100 million and $300 million (£77 million and £231 million.)
The marine insurance industry could absorb the costs, said the analysts. But they warned it “raises concerns about the profitability” of the sector, coming on top of the Baltimore Bridge disaster last year and ongoing attacks on vessels in the Red Sea and Suez Canal.
One of the chambers on the Stena Immaculate, containing 17,515 barrels of jet fuel, exploded on impact, setting fire to both vessels, which then burned for several days before fire crews were able to control the blaze. The U.S. owners of the tanker, Crowley, hailed the “heroic action” of the sailors who, it said, ensured cooling systems were switched on before abandoning ship, possibly saving the rest of the cargo tanks from catching alight.
On Saturday, Vladimir Motin, the 59-year-old Russian captain of the Solong, appeared in Hull magistrates court charged with gross negligence manslaughter. He did not enter a plea. The Crown Prosecution Service also released the name of Mark Angelo Pernia, the 38-year-old Filipino sailor on the Solong killed in the collision.
Beyond the damage to the vessels themselves and possible compensation for Pernia’s family, it is also not known what the cost of the environmental clean up will be. Crowley said it was “fully committed” to “environmental remediation” — but who ultimately pays for the clean up will depend on who is found to be at fault for the collision. Past MAIB investigations have taken several months, and in some cases years, before findings were published.
Motin, who is from St. Petersburg, is due to appear at the Old Bailey criminal court in London on April 14.
Pollution risk
On Monday, the U.K. coastguard said “a sheen” had been sighted on the ocean surface “that we now know to be plastic nurdles.” Nurdles are pellets of plastic used in the production of plastic products. Some had begun washing up on British shorelines, the coastguard said. They can present a risk to wildlife if eaten.
Other debris from the collision may also have begun washing up on local beaches. A bright blue barrel washed ashore at Cleethorpes, just east of Grimsby, on Friday. The coastguard cordoned off the area.
The U.K. Maritime and Coastguard Agency said last week that there did “not appear to be any pollution” from either vessel. Analysts from the NGO Skytruth confirmed no slick was evident in satellite images of the vessels — although they also said rough weather could break up any oil spill, making it harder to see.
But some on the ground told a different story.
Two people with knowledge of the operations to rescue the stricken vessels told POLITICO there had been oil in the water around the vessels. One of them, a salver who would not give his name, said there was oil in the water, but that pollution levels were under control.
In an interview on Friday, Chief Executive of the Port of Grimsby East Martyn Boyers said vessels working on the response to the accident had been forced to wash oil from their hulls before entering the port.
“When they were putting the fire out, all of the oil around the vessels was still in the water and it hadn’t dispersed or anything. So they were sat in it whilst they were trying to put the fire out. Which is some irony because it could have caught fire,” he said. The Grimsby Telegraph first reported the ships had required cleaning.
Shortly after POLITICO enquired about this on Friday, the coastguard agency shifted its language. Where earlier in the week there “did not appear to be any pollution,” the statement that afternoon instead said: “There continues to be no cause for concern from pollution.”
Unlike thick, heavy crude oil — which can cause devastating pollution, coating marine life in black scum — jet fuel is volatile, meaning most of the fuel may have burned off or evaporated.
But it is highly toxic. Reports of fuel in the water were “concerning,” said Shovonlal Roy, an environmental scientist at the University of Reading. Roy said high concentrations of toxic oil could “be very detrimental to microbial organisms” and lead to “cascading effects” through the food chain.
“A large amount of toxic jet fuel and chemical dispersants can severely harm the delicate balance of marine life in the region. This will directly affect seabirds, larger marine animals and the fish population, and may trigger fish kills,” he said.
The causes of the collision and its impact remain unclear — and those living closest to it want answers.
“There’s a lot of questions about the whole episode,” said Boyer, the Grimsby port executive. “There’s so much sophisticated equipment and gear and satellite navigational aids. How on Earth did it happen?”
Jo Shaw contributed reporting from Hull.
The post After the North Sea tanker crash, a multi-million dollar battle over who’s to blame appeared first on Politico.
